By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Satellite imagery confirms North Korea has successfully righted its capsized Choe Hyun-class destroyer at the Chongjin Shipyard following a failed launch ceremony. The ship’s recovery, seemingly achieved through a manual process involving buoys and tethers, was completed faster than initially anticipated. However, significant damage remains, particularly to the bow, raising doubts about the feasibility of Kim Jong Un’s repair deadline. The Chongjin Shipyard’s lack of experience with vessels of this size may have contributed to both the accident and the challenges in completing repairs.
Read the original article here
North Korea’s recent feat of righting a capsized destroyer is certainly… noteworthy. The whole incident, from the initial mishap to the subsequent salvage operation, presents a fascinating case study in the intersection of engineering, propaganda, and sheer determination. The initial launch, apparently attempted from a less-than-ideal location, ended in a spectacular, if embarrassing, failure. It seems the destroyer, a vessel weighing thousands of tons, was launched sideways, a decision that clearly didn’t take into account basic physics or the limitations of the launch site. Eyewitnesses, or at least those sharing commentary online, suggest the scene was far from the meticulously choreographed spectacle intended.
The subsequent salvage operation, however, is where things become even more intriguing. Lifting a capsized destroyer, especially one partially submerged and possibly damaged, is a monumental undertaking, requiring sophisticated equipment and a highly skilled workforce. Yet, remarkably, North Korea apparently managed this feat. The lack of readily available photographic or video evidence adds to the mystery, fueling speculation about the true scale of the operation. Some have questioned the feasibility of raising a 5,000-ton vessel without the aid of significant equipment, such as large cranes and tugs, pointing to a potential lack of transparency.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of this whole affair is the underlying political pressure. The comments strongly suggest a tight deadline imposed by Kim Jong Un, making propaganda triumphs more important than thorough engineering and a proper launch. This pressure likely resulted in a rushed launch procedure, ignoring important safety precautions and pre-launch checks. The “seems fine to me” email exchange highlights a systemic problem, a disregard for thoroughness in favor of meeting an arbitrary schedule. It seems clear there was a lack of effective communication and oversight, contributing significantly to the disaster.
It’s likely the damage extends beyond simple cosmetic issues. Saltwater intrusion, especially into electrical and electronic systems, is a severe problem. Repairing the substantial damage would be immensely complex and time-consuming, even under ideal circumstances. The warped keel, caused by the uneven stress during the capsize, presents a particularly daunting challenge. Fixing this would likely require extensive structural work, far exceeding a simple patch job.
The comparison to Pearl Harbor salvage efforts, while tempting, is flawed. While the US Navy successfully salvaged and repaired several damaged battleships, the situations are vastly different. The Pearl Harbor ships suffered damage from battle, primarily concentrated holes in the hull. The North Korean destroyer’s damage is more structural, due to the asymmetrical stresses during the capsize itself. The technology and repair techniques used in the 1940s, even with sophisticated electrical systems onboard, differ greatly from modern requirements. The sheer scale of potential electronic and mechanical system failures in the North Korean vessel further complicates matters. The sheer speed with which they have ostensibly ‘repaired’ the damage is remarkable, and points to a potential downplaying of the extent of damage in order to fit the propaganda narrative.
The comments contain a mixture of amusement, disbelief, and a grudging respect for North Korea’s apparent persistence. The whole situation feels both absurd and dramatic. The initial launch clearly wasn’t a success but the subsequent salvage operation, regardless of its details, showcases an unexpected resilience. This incident highlights not only the engineering challenges but also the pressures of a regime prioritizing propaganda over safety and methodical procedure. Even if the ship is a hastily-constructed, near-empty hull intended for the photo op, the sheer audacity of the salvage operation has a certain appeal. The ‘for sale’ ad envisioned by one commenter encapsulates the whole affair perfectly: A grand, almost tragicomedy, where the most pressing concerns appear to be political face-saving, rather than proper engineering practices. It’s a story that blends humor and tension, reminding us that sometimes, reality surpasses even the wildest satire.