hankyoreh

500 ton Tongyeong naval rescue ship is covered at Okpo Shipyard in Geoje Island to prevent paint from nearby ongoing shipbuilding projects from spilling onto it

In May, in the heat of a debate about why the Tongyeong naval rescue vessel hadn’t been dispatched after the sinking of the Sewol ferry, it belatedly came to light that the sonar on the Tongyeong had been replaced with an upgraded version of the kind of fish-finding sonar used on salmon fishing ships.

This is leading to suspicions that after the navy refused to buy the Tongyeong (ATS-31) because of the poor performance of its sonar - crucial equipment for a ship of the sort - the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) attached equipment that was inappropriate for military use without inspecting it properly and tried to pass this off to the navy. The Tongyeong project cost 159 billion won (US$150.7 million).

According to a document acquired from DAPA by the office of Jin Seong-joon, a lawmaker for the New Politics Alliance for Democracy (NPAD), the amphibious vessel project team at DAPA, the agency responsible for preparing the Tongyeong for deployment, organized a meeting about the sonar equipment attached to the hull of the Tongyeong and the Sohae, another vessel, on June 25. The meeting was reportedly attended by 18 people, including members of DAPA’s second testing and evaluation division, the information and electronic technology division at the Naval Headquarters, and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering.

The meeting was held in order to determine what to do about the issue of the unsatisfactory sonar performance of the Tongyeong and Sohae, an issue that had been uncovered by a special probe carried out by the Board of Audit and Inspection (BAI).

“The SH90, which is currently installed on the Tongyeong, is understood to be a fish finder,” representatives of the information and electronic technology division of the Naval Headquarters said in the meeting, explaining that it could not be used for naval purposes.

Earlier, military supplier Hakenko had agreed to equip the Tongyeong and the Sohae with the MS3850 sonar, which is worth US$62.19 million. But when the equipment in question failed to meet performance requirements, the navy refused to purchase the vessel.

Thus it was that when the Sewol sinking occurred on Apr. 16, the military and DAPA received a drubbing from the public about the Tongyeong, which was still docked at the construction yard, unable to be deployed to the scene.

It was around this time in May, that Hakenko, with the permission of DAPA, installed the SH90 commercial fish finder on the Tongyeong. According to a description found on the website of the SH90’s manufacturer, the product is a “fish finding sonar” used to track schools of salmon and other marine life.

“The objectives of military sonar and fish-finding sonar are completely different. The main use of a fish finder is observing what is below the ship. It’s inevitable that its performance will be worse and its range narrower than military sonar, which must be able to monitor a wide area and detect rapidly moving objects. Commercial products cannot satisfy the specific requirements of the military. Even upgrading such products cannot overcome their limitations,” said a source at a maritime equipment company.

Some argue that the very act of installing a fish-finding sonar - something used on fishing boats - on the Tongyeong was a violation of regulations.

“The defect/flaw repair plan must involve the same model (MS3850). According to defense industry regulations and the contract, a different model may not be used,” said a member of DAPA’s international equipment contract team during the second meeting held on June 27, according to the meeting records made public by Jin, the NPAD lawmaker. The comments suggest that it was illegal even to install a fish finder on the Tongyeong, equipment not found in the original agreement.

But in April, DAPA‘s amphibious vessel project team contacted Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, which was in possession of the Tongyeong. The team sent an official letter informing Daewoo that the sonar equipment had been upgraded to improve performance and asking the company to install it.

When the new equipment reached the warehouse at the end of April, DAPA inspected it to make sure the product that had been delivered was the one they had ordered.

In other words, the fish-finding sonar was installed on the Tongyeong - a military vessel - on DAPA’s instructions.

There is another aspect of the case that is raising suspicions. Hakenko said that it would submit a defect correction plan “taking into account the technical specifications and installation” for the Sohae, which was equipped with the same MS3850 sonar that was on the Tongyeong. But the fish finder was only installed on the Tongyeong, immediately after the Sewol sinking.

Responding to this, DAPA spokesperson Kim Si-cheol said, "We didn’t install the SH90 on the Tongyeong in order to quickly pass it on to the navy. We just installed the equipment on the ship because we needed to test its performance. Procedurally speaking, I don’t think there was a big problem.”

“The new sonar isn’t usable, since it doesn’t have any testing and assessment documentation and since it can’t satisfy any of the navy’s requirements,” Kim added.

Hakenko President Kang Deok-won, 43, who signed the contract to provide the sonar in question, and two former DAPA employees were arrested and charged with supplying the ships with 200 million won worth of equipment for 4.1 billion won (US$3.73 million).

The third special division at the Seoul Central Office of the Prosecutors (directed by Moon Hong-seong) is currently carrying out a follow-up investigation.

The government is also considering the idea of launching a joint team involving the prosecutors, the police, the Ministry of National Defense, and the BAI to investigate corruption in the defense industry.

South Gyeongsang Province

By Jung Hwan-bong, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]