North Korea's missile threat: Is it credible?

North Korea have detailed plans to attack the waters surrounding Guam in a show of power against the United States of America. They have also vowed to continue their weapons programme, and to defy America's repeated threats.

Ignoring the geopolitical issues surrounding the debate, the question arises, how credible is the Korean threat? There is no doubt that Korea does have missiles capable of reaching the United States in theory, but in practice, the accuracy of Korea's system is in severe doubt, and this along with the defensive capabilities of the US means that any direct damage to the US from North Korea is highly unlikely

Where North Korea do have an edge though is that they have the potential to cause immense damage to South Korea. With Seoul being a highly populated capital close to the border, the artillery of North Korea has potential to cause immense damage. However, once again, the lack of reliability of the North Korean weapons means there is a huge possibility that the damage may not be as great as feared. Yet even a conservative estimate of about 1-2 million losses in Seoul is enough to deter an attack.

With Trump on the warpath, the unthinkable could happen. But even with this, the chances of North Korea being able to launch a full scale assault and causing immense damage is unlikely. Especially if the US attacks first on North Korean positions close to the border.

F-35A operating costs to exceed F-16, official says

Operating costs for the conventional take-off and landing version of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are expected to be roughly 10% greater than those of the Lockheed F-16.

According to the Pentagon's F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO), Lt Gen Christopher Bogdan, who leads the tri-service effort, provided some preliminary numbers to the Dutch parliament comparing costs per flying hour between the two aircraft on 18 April.

"In his statement, Bogdan indicated that the cost per flying hour of an F-35A is estimated to be $24,000 per hour; roughly 10% higher than F-16 cost per flying hour," the JPO says. "This data was derived in co-operation with the US Air Force and the Department of Defense Cost Assessment & Program Evaluation Office. Comparable baseline assumptions were used to evaluate relative operational costs between F-35 and legacy aircraft."

Lockheed Martin

The final cost figures are due to be released in the Pentagon's 2012 selected acquisitions report for the F-35, which is set to be published during May.

Earlier this year, USAF chief of staff Gen Mark Welsh told reporters that the JPO was attempting to reconcile two different sets of cost estimates: one from the USAF and another from Lockheed. The cost numbers diverged because of differing underlying assumptions from which each side based its estimates.