CM-400AKG: Pakistan's supersonic carrier killer

[t-birds]

 

[Ammyy]

In this video CM400 compared with brahmos, video of brahmos launch there but what about video of CM400 test launch ??

 

[Penguin]

You have a source for the weight of the warhead?

also, carrier killer seems to be something too far fetched. This missile seems close to Kh15 in performance, wouldn't you agree?

Combat aircraft monthly artikel at post 231
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...supersonic-carrier-killer-16.html#post3684164

Similar to both Russian Kh15 and US SRAM
Boeing AGM-69 SRAM
Boeing AGM-131 SRAM II


Looking back in this thread, some sources talk of a 900kg missile others of a 400kg missile. And some speak of a missile with a 400kg warhead. Safe to say details a fuzzy at this time.

 

[nomi007]

any report when pakistan will test this missile

 

[Dazzler]

any report when pakistan will test this missile

nothing on that but 10 missiles already in service as of 2012

 

[Dazzler]

you do understand that its moronic to think that a 900 kg missile can have a 400 kg warhead. warhead weight must probably be around 100 kg.

was this necessary?

Unless figures are released, its all but fuzzy

 

[Manindra]

nothing on that but 10 missiles already in service as of 2012

Pakistan commissioned a new develop missile without test launch? interesting

 

[Secur]

Pakistan commissioned a new develop missile without test launch? interesting

Did we develop it ourselves or did we buy it from the Chinese ?

So , what is the need to test launch it again ?

missiles are not in service

Its ' operational ' and thus in service , not just delivered .

thanks for agreeing with me that it is similar to kh 15. your pakistani compatriots think that i am a fool when i tell them that the technology of the missile is from 70s.

Do you understand the word ' similar ' ? How does similarity to any missile mean that even the technology of the said missile is from that era ?

 

[Secur]

@Secur

Anyways what i am interested is its seeker, the jane article mentioned many options seeker, so are we saying IR for low value targets and RF for high value, or does it uses both seekers simultaneously, like R27?

No , it doesn't use both seekers simultaneously , from the data at hand .

 

[Secur]

Show me the proof of "operational".

Are you saying that the missile performance is of 70s but its technology is of 2013?
That statement doesn't make sense, the world has moved away from ballistic anti ship missiles.

Can you please explain " missile can be pre-programmed with digital imagery in the TR mode"?

Did you bother to look at the statement of the JFT's deputy project director saying that its ' operational on the JFT ' ? I posted the Jane's article for a reason . The same is available from different sources but I think that would suffice for now .

Prove to me that the missile's performance is of the 70's and do classify the different generation of missile technologies as per you . Go ahead . Neither it is purely ballistic nor it is a pure anti-ship missile . You , of all people , eager to debate on the topic , but knowing little , must know that an aircraft carrier is relatively slow moving .

Terrain Matching by the seeker with pre programmed maps . Used usually by the cruise missiles . Google TERCOM .

 

[notorious_eagle]

So, a new gem, Pakistan buys a foreign new developed system without trail

Are you stupid or pretending to be one?

Whenever a new Weapon System is introduced in any Air Force, feasibility studies are conducted. Its monetary, technical, utility and integration aspects are studied extensively to determine whether the Weapon System will add teeth to the existing platform. After this, test rounds are ordered from the Manufacturer and integrated on the platform from where they will launched. Parameters are set and than the test rounds are fired to evaluate the results. After these tests are conducted, an extensive report is prepared whether the tests met the parameters or not. All these studies are than presented to the Committee, based on this literature, they decide whether funds should be allocated to procure this Weapons System or not.

In a nut shell, what i am trying to say is that PAF did not induct this Weapons System without conducting its tests and feasibility studies.

Oh and btw, its spelled 'Trial' and not 'Trail'.

 

[Secur]

So, a new gem, Pakistan buys a foreign new developed system without trail

Nay , we get the ' trails ' done in China . Pretty common for weapon sellers to demonstrate the capabilities of the system in their own country . Thought the world's largest buyer of weapon * even basic ammunition * would know that . After all , CAC does the majority of work on the JFT and carries most of the new developments in Chengdu .

Are you stupid or pretending to be one?

No , just pretending to be stupid and then trolling/flaming around . Check the last single digit IQ comments made throughout the thread .

The missile technology is of the 70's .
The missile isn't operational .
The missile's a ghost missile .
The missile doesn't exist .
Show me the proof that it exists .
Where are the exact perimeters of its test launch .

 

[Secur]

@notorious_eagle

What does the SIPRI database tells us about the orders and delivery of the said missile ? Too slow to check it out by myself .

 

[notorious_eagle]

@notorious_eagle

What does the SIPRI database tells us about the orders and delivery of the said missile ? Too slow to check it out by myself .

If i remember correctly, it was 50 rounds. Honestly, it depends on the perception. If PAF feels they need more, they will order more.

 

[Secur]

So, manufacturer tests certified by buyers instead of self testing. This is a logical question neither stupid nor funny.

This isn't a logical question . Because the answer to that question lies in the answer given in the last two post . Read it carefully again . The AHQ doesn't need to learn the procurements procedures from us nor will they accept any data/results presented by any weapon selling country . This was the essence of notorious_eagle post .