CM-400AKG: A tough job for the Indian Navy

[The Deterrent]

Are bhai, Sy-400 is a ballistic missile with just 150km-200km range with 150kg warhead. You mean to say, based on ballistic missile technology, China has developed cruise missile CM-400.

For your information, SY-400 is a decade old technology. India has Dhanush missile for its Navy having range of 350km with 1000 kg payload or 600 km with 500kg payload.

And China don't have any weapon of this type for their own Navy or Airforce, but they have build it for PAF.

You still don't get the design of the weapon, do you?

CM-400 AKG is an aircraft launched maneuverable rocket, possessing modern targeting systems. It is neither a cruise missile nor a purely ballistic one. It follows a somewhat arced trajectory towards its target at supersonic speeds (terminally hypersonic), thats it.

Dhanush is a pure ballistic missile (with a modified terminal trajectory), and payload for it does not matters since it is the anti-ship capability which is the point of discussion here. If you really want to compare, then considering how fat Dhanush is, one could put a quadruple SY-400 launcher in place of a single Dhanush.

The Chinese are known for keeping the latest developments under covers, one does not need to remind about all the recent military tech. that China introduced.


It would be better if you all hold your horses till more details are released about this weapon.

 

[Anony]

You still don't get the design of the weapon, do you?

CM-400 AKG is an aircraft launched maneuverable rocket, possessing modern targeting systems. It is neither a cruise missile nor a purely ballistic one. It follows a somewhat arced trajectory towards its target at supersonic speeds (terminally hypersonic), thats it.

Dhanush is a pure ballistic missile (with a modified terminal trajectory), and payload for it does not matters since it is the anti-ship capability which is the point of discussion here. If you really want to compare, then considering how fat Dhanush is, one could put a quadruple SY-400 launcher in place of a single Dhanush.

The Chinese are known for keeping the latest developments under covers, one does not need to remind about all the recent military tech. that China introduced.


It would be better if you all hold your horses till more details are released about this weapon.

If CM-400AKG really exists, then give source about its specification and some official source about its tests and jf-17 videos, flying with this missile under its belly.

And don't come with the answer that it is classified data, because if it is really classified then from the hell you came to know about it.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Naval Blockades aren't enforced by getting a dozen aircraft in air ever , something I explained earlier to an other member here . Search the ' loiter time ' thing and the fuel spent when flying low or roaming an area and the need for constant refueling . Doesn't work that way , at all . Honestly , if it was that , much could have been done against Pakistan . The other country too possesses an airforce which is something you all are very keen to not mention . The anti-submarine warfare is carried out by P3C's and Z9 EC for Pakistan Navy , what is the big deal ? Any submarine coming close to the coastline will be detected by those assets . You cant stay close to your shores , say Jamnagar , and enforce a blockade from there .

Trust me , the Mig29K's will meet opposition if they come close to the shores , besides we do not only field just the JFT , there are other aircraft the maritime squadron of PN for one . You know the specifications and capabilities of the JFT to declare it like ' hey but what is coming against them ' when even the Mikoyan Bureau chief puts the aircraft very close to Mig29K's and asked the Russian Govt to block the sales of RD-93 ? . Search it or ask me for a link . Half knowledge is dangerous . If the whole assumption has now shifted to the carriers remaining close to the shores , then we have no need to take it out since it cant block our SLOC's from there . The geography favors us in this case with the area where most of world's oil supply passes , being just too close .

neither am is I saying that naval blockade is done by mig's, but their primary task is to perform combat air patrol to protect aerial threats like your fighters and p3C Orions etc, so you can't send your anti sub warfare planes because they are extremely vulnerable against our fighter jets so they can only target surface ships, they can only operate on a secured air(like our p8i, Tu142, operate within the air cover of CBG), same is the case with your awac, they have to keep distance. I also see no reasons to believe migs can't operate from 500 km distance by utilizing it's drop tanks to extend range/loiter time. our frigates and destroyers will be keeping a 100 km distance from carrier and each other.so jf17 have to come a long way to reach our carrier.

lets see the numbers also -
pak navy frigates and destroyers total =11
submarines = 8
Indian navy =8 destroyers +15 frigates = 23
submarines = 14
Indian can bring in a good number of missile boats,submarines, frigates and destroyers (apart from CBG which will spread between 500 to 300 km from shore ) close to your shore, say 200 km distance.
About other jet in paf like mirage etc, we too have 8 harriers in service,I believe we have a jaguar squadron also for maritime strike.
Now about jf17 statement of mig chief, if you see the context he was was making his case strong and alarming by saying jf17 is closely matched with mig 29 so if govt did not stop the rd engine sale Russia will loose business.I am sure in a different if asked he will say mig is superior.Any one who look at the spec of both jets will know that mig 29k is way better than jf17.

 

[surya kiran]

Why cant this one on its way ? Why do you assume that it needs guidance when it relies on active seekers and visual matches to locate its target ? It will be not that accurate compared to when guided from a carrier's superior radar in cases and released ' close ' to the target , I agree , but how is it ' not true ' ? I do not think that it necessarily needs such guidance , the sources imply otherwise that it can even fly ' autonomously ' under all weather conditions .

Why reserve the ' missile's seeker ' for the terminal part ? Why cant it get active in the early part of its launch ? Not that precise , but still capable of . I do not think that it needs such continuous guidance from any carrier upto 70 KMs as you put it . That would , ruin the whole purpose .

Fine, let us assume you are right. And have a scenario.
1. A target is detected.
2. Fighter is scrambled from a base. Approximate area of target is known.

Now, let's work on this. And maybe, I am wrong, so more informed posters can correct me/us/
3. The missile needs to be targeted with one its guidance systems. The CM-400AKG is a fire and forget missile and is not known to have a data link (again feel free to correct me here). Available guidance is GPS, on-board radar and digital imaging.

a. If you are going to program it based on GPS - based system. Then you are dependent on the.. Then your launch could be at max range. Of-course, for this you need to know the co-ordinates of the target. The active radar could then be switched on when it is closer to the target. Pilot safe, launch accomplished?

b. On-board radar- Supposed to have an active radar. Now, the radar of the Jf-17 is approx 135-150 kms for ground targets. Take in the added clutter when you are flying over sea. (Hence, I would be skeptical in your assumption of saying the missile being launched has a better radar capability than the aircraft launching it. Hence, my assumption that the missile seeker will kick in only for terminal phase. Ofcourse, this is my assumption.) Now, my question here is simple. What will be the launch distance for the pilot to be successful? About the guidance part from the aircraft. Whatever, I could find, it keeps saying fire and forget. I have not been able to find anything which says the missile has a data link, unlike 2 other variants of the YJ-12 which are supposed to exist.

c. Digital imagery - This can be used for terminal guidance, but, I fail to see how this will be useful for a launch scenario.

With the above scenarios, the only way to succeed is to use the gps based guidance with the active radar kicking in for the terminal phase or the imagery. Again, hope I am not being a pest. I am plainly playing out scenario to understand better. Let us not get into whether the anti-missile defence will defeat or not defeat the missile. Let's only look at launch and how it will get a successful lock and guidance to target.

cheers!

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

C'mon everyone knows it so secret, it done have any fire launch or test launched till now and moreover in the war it will never used because it is so secret if they use secret will be out.

Nothing better then having fantasy figure and fantasy weapons.

 

[The Deterrent]

If CM-400AKG really exists, then give source about its specification and some official source about its tests and jf-17 videos, flying with this missile under its belly.

And don't come with the answer that it is classified data, because if it is really classified then from the hell you came to know about it.

I really don't think that my insistence on the existence of the system would have anything to do with the implications it will cause in the future. What we know is from the internet based sources (referred to by fellow members). After all, nobody saw the J-20 until it made its first taxi runs, did they?

So please, feel free to dismiss any provided information. I was clarifying that the missile is not a cruise one.

c. Digital imagery - This can be used for terminal guidance, but, I fail to see how this will be useful for a launch scenario.

Err...the Iranian Khalij-e-Fars ASBM uses an electro-optical seeker for terminal guidance, so electro-optical guidance is a viable guidance system for the missile, specially when the target is as big as an Aircraft Carrier.

 

[surya kiran]

I really don't think that my insistence on the existence of the system would have anything to do with the implications it will cause in the future. What we know is from the internet based sources (referred to by fellow members). After all, nobody saw the J-20 until it made its first taxi runs, did they?

So please, feel free to dismiss any provided information. I was clarifying that the missile is not a cruise one.



Err...the Iranian Khalij-e-Fars ASBM uses an electro-optical seeker for terminal guidance, so electro-optical guidance is a viable guidance system for the missile, specially when the target is as big as an Aircraft Carrier.

I am asking how will the missile be guided to the target after launch. And what will be the launch distance. Are you suggesting that the missile will be launched based on an imagery for guidance throughout the distance of it launch range?

Again, I fail to see how without inertial guidance you can achieve this or without a data link. Also, are you suggesting that the missile is guided purely by electro-optical sensors over sea?

 

[The Deterrent]

I am asking how will the missile be guided to the target after launch. And what will be the launch distance. Are you suggesting that the missile will be launched based on an imagery for guidance throughout the distance of it launch range?

No no, I'm talking about terminal guidance only.

Again, I fail to see how without inertial guidance you can achieve this or without a data link. Also, are you suggesting that the missile is guided purely by electro-optical sensors over sea?

Without inertial guidance? Of course the missile will have inertial guidance (as it is based on SY-400). And IMO that is enough...after all, how far can a CBG move in approx 6-7 minutes?

I'm just saying that one cannot rule out the possibility that terminal guidance can be provided by electro-optical seeker.

 

[surya kiran]

No no, I'm talking about terminal guidance only.


Without inertial guidance? Of course the missile will have inertial guidance (as it is based on SY-400). And IMO that is enough...after all, how far can a CBG move in approx 6-7 minutes?

I'm just saying that one cannot rule out the possibility that terminal guidance can be provided by electro-optical seeker.

I agree on the terminal guidance part. I also, agree on the part where you say inertial guidance is required. My question was more so, because , have not been able to find literature which says inertial guidance is present. Hence, the query on how the initial guidance will work and range for launch. While discussing with @Secur he mentioned the active radar on the missile will takeover on launch and will work through full guidance, which is what I felt difficult to believe. And hence my query. Thanks for your reply.

 

[The Deterrent]

I agree on the terminal guidance part. I also, agree on the part where you say inertial guidance is required. My question was more so, because , have not been able to find literature which says inertial guidance is present. Hence, the query on how the initial guidance will work and range for launch. While discussing with @Secur he mentioned the active radar on the missile will takeover on launch and will work through full guidance, which is what I felt difficult to believe. And hence my query. Thanks for your reply.

Inertial Guidance is not a hi-tech thing anymore, it is being featured even in MBRLs. One should expect it to be a part of the missile specially when it is based on a guided rocket (SY-400) and there are no weight/technology restrictions. Besides, all modern guided missile systems have INS for basic guidance, further enhanced by other guidance systems.

Active radar might be for the same terminal guidance only, it can't guide throughout the flight.

 

[Secur]

Nothing better then having fantasy figure and fantasy weapons.

How do you kids dismiss an official statement confirming the status of the missile to believe in your fantasy denial theories ?

 

[Safriz]

Inertial Guidance is not a hi-tech thing anymore, it is being featured even in MBRLs. One should expect it to be a part of the missile specially when it is based on a guided rocket (SY-400) and there are no weight/technology restrictions. Besides, all modern guided missile systems have INS for basic guidance, further enhanced by other guidance systems.

Active radar might be for the same terminal guidance only, it can't guide throughout the flight.

A very important feature of the missile is passive seeker.
In this configuration the missile can be used against SAM and ABM batteries as both have to keep their radars on and in passive seeker mode CM-400 can home into a transmitting radar.

 

[Secur]

Dude, don't read a single line and start trolling. Read the entire post where I just asked for very nominal proof. No technical and classified information. Just logical one.

Off topic that was . Had there been anything of substance in your post , I sure would have quoted it and answered it but since there was none , I quoted a specific part and chose to debunk the claim of a ' ghost missile ' . Did you expect me to engage in cheap banters and rhetoric ? Do you want CAC/PAF/ISPR to post a launch video for every missile that is being tested from the JFT knowing their MO of operating largely in radio silence ? You have statements , you have pictures , you have the insider information and there's that .

Where does this trolling occur except in your post bringing '65 war and what-not ? . I read the entire post based on denialism and conspiracy theories . Didn't interest me at all . Because you have the Chinese confirming it , you have the Pakistanis confirming it . Whether you believe it or not , it hardly matters . After all , you aren't being forced to do so , right ? Logic dictates that the word of the people managing the entire project are more credible than people debating on an Internet defense forum , doesn't it ?

 

[The Deterrent]

A very important feature of the missile is passive seeker.
In this configuration the missile can be used against SAM and ABM batteries as both have to keep their radars on and in passive seeker mode CM-400 can home into a transmitting radar.

Exactly! The other potential applications are being totally ignored here (A2G/SEAD).

And then we also have a potential nuclear weapons delivery application too.

 

[Secur]

This is what I want to know ... Why India need aircraft carrier to attack Pakistan.If we talk about complete naval blockage then it’s a different thing and I think even after 500-600 KM distance we can easily achieve it. And that distance will make both JF17 and that missile useless because non of them come close to our carrier.

Ask your dear countrymen who are sticking on the theory since the first page of the thread . I , for one do no think a naval blockade is anything limited to a Aircraft Carrier which is to put simply , a floating base but can be enforced through different means and isn't a walk-in-the-park as people assume . We aren't that far away to need that to fight wars with CBG's . What exactly should I understand by ' complete naval blockade ' ? Is there a partial one too ? This distance needs to be within 300 KMs of the Pakistani coastline seeing how our main SLOC's are close enough to the Makran coast and the geography of the Persian Gulf , not some 500-600 KMs away . So , either come close to try to block the Sea Lines of Communication and become vulnerable like everything else ( assuming people's persistence on using the carriers ) or remain in your shores or International sea and make no difference to Pakistan Navy who still would be getting supplies from the Arab countries .