[Report File] Decision-making on 'KF-21 Missile' fluctuates, and the procedures come and go

▲ Flight virtual diagram of Korean fighter KF-21

Amidst the jumbled decision-making over the selection of the agency to develop the long-distance air-to-surface missile for the 'poison' of the Korean fighter KF-21, the situation in which the pre-development procedure goes beyond regulations is being revealed one by one.

As the long-range air-to-ground is the weapon that will determine the success or failure of the KF-21, it is necessary to carefully decide the development agency and push forward silently, but every process is not common sense.

After discussing head-to-head with companies since 2019, the Defense Agency and ADD (Defense Science Research Institute) have agreed to switch from ADD to a company in charge of development of long-distance engineering sites for KF-21.

After an extensive explanation to reporters, the DAPA officially reported to the Defense Project Promotion Committee of the Ministry of National Defense in June 2020, and the purpose was also included in the Defense White Paper.

However, after a few months, without saying anything, I changed my mind to entrust development to ADD again.

Last year, for 10 months, KIDA (Korea Institute of Defense) re-verified the project feasibility related to long-distance air-to-ground system development.

The ambiguous Sata re-verification report that is legally valid has been distributed to the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, the Ministry of National Defense, and government review bodies, and government officials have not raised any issues.

I can't understand why the DAPA and ADD are doing this.

When the policy is changed 180 degrees, there must be a good reason, but the DAPA, ADD, and the Ministry of National Defense are all keeping their mouths shut.

The failure to properly comply with the policy change procedure is raising doubts whether there is a hidden intention or whether the air-to-surface missile will come out properly.

Sata like this, have you ever done it?

The Defense Agency and ADD reported to the Defense Project Promotion Committee in June 2020 on the plan to convert the system development agency for KF-21 long-distance engineering land from ADD to a company, and then re-verified the business feasibility with KIDA from February to November 2021. I entrusted it.

Earlier, when ADD decided to develop the system, SATA verification, which assumed ADD development, was already done a few years ago.

It also skipped the establishment of a basic business strategy that had to go through prior to the re-verification of Satan, which is close to aegyo compared to the events that followed.

First, during the Sata re-verification of system development led by the company, the thoughts of the DAPA and the ADD changed abruptly.

A key official at KIDA said, "The decision to develop by the ADD, not the company, has changed rapidly, so the development satanic by the company has stopped."

Whatever the reason, if you leave the development to ADD as it is, there will be no increase or decrease in the project cost.

There is no reason to re-verify Sata.

A key official at KIDA explained, "Therefore, the basic requirement of Sata has disappeared and Sata has ended."

Sata re-verification has been stopped, but the DAPA claims that it is "completed" as if it was a normal procedure.

Has there ever been a case where the target of sata was changed during sata like this time?

I inquired at the Radiation Administration, but there was no answer for several days.

An aide in the National Assembly said, "I know that there is no regulation that prohibits or allows the change of the target during the SAAT."

The SATA revalidation process looked like this, but the SATA revalidation report came out.

This report cannot contain the company-led development plan rejected by the DAPA, nor can it contain the ADD-led development plan a few years ago.

This is a weird report.

Also, the 11 months that KIDA invested in Sata became a piece of paper.

Park Jin-ho, a member of the Defense Acquisition Program Promotion Committee, pointed out, "If the target of the SATA re-verification changes, the SATA re-verification process should be completely stopped."

What Happened Before Sata...

There has been a movement for a long time to convert the main body of general weapon system development, such as long-range air-to-ground missiles, from ADD to a company.

Then, the DAPA, ADD, and companies held dozens of meetings intensively from 2019 and decided to develop a long-distance engineering site by the company.

The cause is ADD reform, which focuses on cutting-edge technology and confidentiality, and entrusts general weapon systems to companies.

Following the report of the Defense Project Promotion Committee of the Ministry of National Defense, the development plan of the general weapon system was listed in the 2020 Defense White Paper and the report data of the National Inspection of the Defense Agency and the ADD.

It was also mentioned in several speeches by the Minister of Defense, the Director of the Defense Agency, and the ADD Director.

Conversely, the DAPA countered by filing a complaint with the Media Arbitration Committee against articles and reporters claiming that important weapons such as long-distance air-to-ground weapons were developed by ADD to save money and meet the timing of electrification.

However, starting in late spring from 2021, the DAPA has been promoting ADD-led development by secretly disguising the logic of the article they sued for fake news as if it were theirs.

It seems that the Sata re-verification was conducted with an unprecedented anomaly because of the sudden change of pace.

The Ministry of Finance and Defense officials, who received the Sata re-verification report, noticed that something was going wrong, but there was no response.

Three days later, on March 3, a government body related to weapons development called the Business Subcommittee convened.

Following on from the 17th, we are planning to discuss the system development plan for long-distance air-to-ground sites again.

I hope that the subcommittee members will take a closer look to see if there is any illegality in the SATA re-verification report in front of them and why the development agency keeps changing.