CM-400AKG: Pakistan's supersonic carrier killer

[Dazzler]

But I don't think in a declared war India can deploy closer to Pakistani shores. India will try to stay out of the range of Harbah or babur. Getting with in 700 km of Pakistani shores is a death for Indian Navy. They will become easy picking with land batteries and India will not risk any such thing.

Any naval war between India and Pakistan will happen beyond 700 km from Pakistani shore in that case jf-17 with 2 fuel tanks and one C-400 strike package will come handy.

This gives Pakistan a good attack and return back survival chance.

So ja yar kal discuss kar lena.

 

[SQ8]

Against a kh-32 system that employs a similar flight profile..Mig-31 interceptors utilizing R-33s had an extremely tough time bringing it down.. expect similar results with this.

 

[Army research]

Thank you for bringing up the point that is what I wanted to discuss. The reason I mentioned SA'AR 5 was because it is a fairly stealthy ship better than Indian ships which are of somewhat of Russian bloodline in design and give away much bigger RCS for radar to track and lock. Now a carrier group has good defences agreed but no carrier group is able to look beyond horizon and for that purpose they use AWAC. Indian carrier group has a helicopter as AWAC. Taking out that AWAC before attacking any carrier group is crutial as that will increase the chance of successful missile attack.



Okay let's say Indian carrier group is some where 900 km from Pakistani shores and is moving towards Karachi to attack. The war has already been declared so now from a distance of 900 km Indian carrier group cannot attack Pakistani shores with missiles that don't have capability. Moving beyond 900 km brings Indian carrier group in range of Pakistani land based missile systems like harba and babur which will sink the carrier as a salvo of such system cannot be defended.
Indian has only one option that is mig-29k intiate a bombing attack from carrier but that will face Pakistani anti air systems and fighter jets. Which being F-16 and JF-17 have superior weapons in terms of range.

Now if Pakistan decides to attack the carrier group at 900 km range Pakistani jets will have to fly low to stay below horizon and evade radar to sink the carrier group to achieve this Pakistan will have to use Agusta 90 b to take out AWAC which has received new Radar. So Indian carrier group is sinkable with resources Pakistan has. It is not a big issue. C-400 has range of 400 km and none of Indian ship based anti-air has that much range.

Pakistani oil shipment are well secure as they all pass under the cover of Pakistani land based anti ship missiles rage. The distance between Oman and Pakistani shore is less than 800 km.

Dude ship based anti air don't take out a missile or the air craft at 400km range , they shoot the missile down in the final 10-4 km a long with CIWS ,
Theoretically Pakistan can yes , but it would be a behemoth of an operation, like I said before watch the series I mentioned ( total time only 50 minutes) and you will get an idea

 

[ziaulislam]

But I don't think in a declared war India can deploy closer to Pakistani shores. India will try to stay out of the range of Harbah or babur. Getting with in 700 km of Pakistani shores is a death for Indian Navy. They will become easy picking with land batteries and India will not risk any such thing.

Any naval war between India and Pakistan will happen beyond 700 km from Pakistani shore in that case jf-17 with 2 fuel tanks and one C-400 strike package will come handy.

This gives Pakistan a good attack and return back survival chance.

Than there will be no naval war..india will aim to do a blockade which isnt possible if it stays beyond 200km..a total blockade isnt possible due to gawadar strategic location now any way

 

[BHarwana]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1140932695293403136

 

[The Accountant]

You have to understand that Carrier doesnt operate as one ship but all the ships work as single group which offers high to low end protection, and modern carrier are much harder to sink from a single missile even if has a bigger warhead or high kinetic energy i wont sink the it and to increase its striking chances Pakistan will have to deploy a swarm and make sure enemy defences are busy so this can increase the hit rate.

Even if it is cripple its a big deal ...

 

[Darth Vader]

Even if it is cripple its a big deal ...

Can they cripple it ?
Will be more with luck and incompetence of Indian Navy.
If you think a single Thunder will take our carrier on its own.
Drones Swarms is the future.
Pakistan can build smaller drone swarms with low yield and deploy through multiple torpedos
For that they can use subs at close range.
It will cause massive confusion and chaos on enemy.

Future of Warframe is changing Pakistan needs to catch up if they want to stay relevant.
Build Protected networks & AIs which can run simulation and control multiple drones can do much better job and at faster race and i still dont see a concrete step taking by Pakistani Armed forces

 

[The Accountant]

Can they cripple it ?
Will be more with luck and incompetence of Indian Navy.
If you think a single Thunder will take our carrier on its own.
Drones Swarms is the future.
Pakistan can build smaller drone swarms with low yield and deploy through multiple torpedos
For that they can use subs at close range.
It will cause massive confusion and chaos on enemy.

Future of Warframe is changing Pakistan needs to catch up if they want to stay relevant.
Build Protected networks & AIs which can run simulation and control multiple drones can do much better job and at faster race and i still dont see a concrete step taking by Pakistani Armed forces

If you think a single thunder will go against a whole CBG then its stupidity. In normal circumtances it will be strike group with a formation of atleast 3 to four aircrafts in one strike group and there could be multiple strike groups in a single attack. The attack aircraft must be fitted with 2 CM-400 AKG with only centerline fuel tank and his job will be to execute the strike and get back as he will be low on fuel.

On the other hand the escort aircrafts of the formation will provide the protection ...

Once the deck is clear then and CBG is far away from its base then you can put all your concentration on taking down the big elephant as taking down one single CBG means you have taken down 10% of the air power of the enemy and atleast 20% of the naval power ...

War is game of economics. For example to take down a single aircraft worth Rs. 50 million you can use a Rs. 1 million missile but you can use a Dollar 4 lac missile to take down a spy dron of Dollar 1,000 (unless you are IAF).

Accordingly if you have a reward of 3 to 4 billion dollars and 10% to 20% fir power of enemy then you would not mind putting some 3 to 4 thunders on the risks.

So yes it will be high risk mission but in case of war PAF will try this if IN bring in the CBG within 500 km range of our any air base ...

Do you really think an AC carrier can defend against a swarm of 6 to 10 Mach 5 plus missile launched by 3 to 5 thunders? As far as I know the current air defenses of Indian Aircraft carrier are effective against sub-sonic missile and not against high speed super sonic missiles ...

 

[Pakistani Fighter]

Why use CM 400AKG When You have C-802??

 

[Crystal-Clear]

That don't explains the actual thing I am looking for.

What I want to ask is JF-17 can carry 2 of these missile. Now if the missiles are fired at suppose a carrier group what will be chance of success.
Like if you remember flakland islands war. Exocet did a good damage.
Then the land based version of this missile has also proven it's self in Mediterranean when Lebanon blew Israeli ship. So this means the missile is quite deadly as SA'AR 5 class corvet has good counter measures but still Lebanon achieved 100% kill rate cause they only fired one missile and target was hit.

Now coming to Pakistan inducting it is a debatable issue as Pakistan has it own anti ship missile like harpoon but harpoon will not go on JF-17s and exocet are available on Mirages. JF-17 has RA'AD which will or already has an anti ship role and will have much higher range and payload.
C-400 is available for JF-17 as it is in the name of C-400AKG as it is export variant of YJ-12. That is why it is being shown with JF-17. So point which needs to be understood here is that in moderan age only C-802 is the missile that has been battle proven against modern war ships.

dear to be war proven there must be a war . SD-10 wasnt war proven until 27th FEB 2019 .
.
plus CM-400AKG is the only supersonic weapon in the inventory of PAKISTAN.

 

[The Accountant]

That don't explains the actual thing I am looking for.

What I want to ask is JF-17 can carry 2 of these missile. Now if the missiles are fired at suppose a carrier group what will be chance of success.
Like if you remember flakland islands war. Exocet did a good damage.
Then the land based version of this missile has also proven it's self in Mediterranean when Lebanon blew Israeli ship. So this means the missile is quite deadly as SA'AR 5 class corvet has good counter measures but still Lebanon achieved 100% kill rate cause they only fired one missile and target was hit.

Now coming to Pakistan inducting it is a debatable issue as Pakistan has it own anti ship missile like harpoon but harpoon will not go on JF-17s and exocet are available on Mirages. JF-17 has RA'AD which will or already has an anti ship role and will have much higher range and payload.
C-400 is available for JF-17 as it is in the name of C-400AKG as it is export variant of YJ-12. That is why it is being shown with JF-17. So point which needs to be understood here is that in moderan age only C-802 is the missile that has been battle proven against modern war ships.

By this definition even brahmos is not war proven ...

C400 is atleast generation ahead of c802 ... c802 can take down a single ship but it is suerly no match for CBG ... CBG has too many sensors and too many defenses ... it is highly unlikely that sub sonic missile can take down defences of CBG

 

[Thorough Pro]

Looking at the recent events across LOC, if PAF/PN do decide to go after IN ACC, they will not send one or four or 8 planes with a half-hearted attempt.

If you think a single thunder will go against a whole CBG then its stupidity. In normal circumtances it will be strike group with a formation of atleast 3 to four aircrafts in one strike group and there could be multiple strike groups in a single attack. The attack aircraft must be fitted with 2 CM-400 AKG with only centerline fuel tank and his job will be to execute the strike and get back as he will be low on fuel.

On the other hand the escort aircrafts of the formation will provide the protection ...

Once the deck is clear then and CBG is far away from its base then you can put all your concentration on taking down the big elephant as taking down one single CBG means you have taken down 10% of the air power of the enemy and atleast 20% of the naval power ...

War is game of economics. For example to take down a single aircraft worth Rs. 50 million you can use a Rs. 1 million missile but you can use a Dollar 4 lac missile to take down a spy dron of Dollar 1,000 (unless you are IAF).

Accordingly if you have a reward of 3 to 4 billion dollars and 10% to 20% fir power of enemy then you would not mind putting some 3 to 4 thunders on the risks.

So yes it will be high risk mission but in case of war PAF will try this if IN bring in the CBG within 500 km range of our any air base ...

Do you really think an AC carrier can defend against a swarm of 6 to 10 Mach 5 plus missile launched by 3 to 5 thunders? As far as I know the current air defenses of Indian Aircraft carrier are effective against sub-sonic missile and not against high speed super sonic missiles ...

 

[LeGenD]

That don't explains the actual thing I am looking for.

What I want to ask is JF-17 can carry 2 of these missile. Now if the missiles are fired at suppose a carrier group what will be chance of success.
Like if you remember flakland islands war. Exocet did a good damage.
Then the land based version of this missile has also proven it's self in Mediterranean when Lebanon blew Israeli ship. So this means the missile is quite deadly as SA'AR 5 class corvet has good counter measures but still Lebanon achieved 100% kill rate cause they only fired one missile and target was hit.

Now coming to Pakistan inducting it is a debatable issue as Pakistan has it own anti ship missile like harpoon but harpoon will not go on JF-17s and exocet are available on Mirages. JF-17 has RA'AD which will or already has an anti ship role and will have much higher range and payload.
C-400 is available for JF-17 as it is in the name of C-400AKG as it is export variant of YJ-12. That is why it is being shown with JF-17. So point which needs to be understood here is that in moderan age only C-802 is the missile that has been battle proven against modern war ships.

Depend upon numerous factors, and particularly how massive and sophisticated the CSG (in question) is. Attacking a well-equipped CSG is never easy (operational constraints; opposing elements; expect your enemy to be dynamic), and I wouldn't count upon a 'single strike platform' to achieve breakthrough. See my explanation below (as naked as possible ).

---

If you are considering an American CSG then chances of BREAKTHROUGH with CM-400AKG supersonic AShM are virtually non-existent (1%).

In order to strike at the Nimitz class aircraft carrier of an American CSG, PAF must be in the position to track its movements in real-time. Towards this end, airborne surveillance (AWACS) and satellite feeds are necessary.

1. Expect Americans to disrupt PAF's access to satellite feeds from GPS and Beidou with different techniques.

https://www.quora.com/Did-the-US-re...roops-during-Kargil-War-Can-it-really-be-done

https://www.quora.com/Does-the-US-m...from-being-used-against-the-US-and-its-allies

2. Expect American CSG to subject infrastructure of Pakistani armed forces across the country to a calculated barrage of cutting-edge Tomahawk Block IV LACM (degrading C&C aspects of infrastructure and disrupting activities in the bases of PAF and PN on top) while scores of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and EA-18G Growlers (taking cues from each other, and also from cutting-edge airborne surveillance platforms such as E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and P8-A Poseidon), will enforce a massive no-fly-zone around Pakistani coasts to attack/eliminate coastal defenses, assets of PN, and to deter PAF from attacking the CSG in force. Bear in mind that American fighter aircraft completely outclass and outgun anything in the inventory of PAF including F-16 Block 52+ (significant SEE FIRST; SHOOT FIRST possibilities for USN in clashes with PAF accordingly).

For the sake of argument # 1:-

Let us assume that PAF is able to make numerous fighter aircraft airborne in a short span (50+) and somehow make it possible for a strike formation of 4 JF-17A Block II (each armed with two CM-400AKG) to slip through the aforementioned, and search for the Nimitz class aircraft carrier (taking cues from each other).

CM-400AKG = export version of YJ-12 (240 KM range)

The problem is that at intermediate and medium ranges, fire-and-forget performance is abysmal. If the target is not where the missile thought it would be, within a limited cone of the sky, it's a miss. - Tyler Rogoway

NOTE: CM-400AKG probably need satellite feeds from Beidou for course-correction measures to engage a 'moving target' from afar.

It is very likely for the escorts of the Nimitz class aircraft carrier to notice and track movements of incoming JF-17A Block II in real-time from afar, try to subject them to potent bouts of EW (jamming/spoofing activities), and eventually engage them with incredibly maneuverable and sophisticated class of LR-SAM such as SM-2 Block IV (240+ KM range) and SM-6 (240+ KM range). Have a look at USS Mason for instance: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/nava...sits-karachi-port.622982/page-2#post-11547671

- most formidable guided missile destroyers in the world (Arleigh Burke DDG Flight IIA class). Even a volley of advanced sea-skimming C-802 ASCM could not breach the defenses of American warships (USS Mason most notably) near Yemeni coasts in 2016 when the Houthi decided to target maritime activities of GCC: http://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/alert/12685/

Taking cues from the incredibly sophisticated AEGIS Combat System(s) from surface, from cutting-edge airborne surveillance platforms such as E-2D advanced Hawkeye, and with their own onboard guidance mechanisms, these interceptors will have 99% hit probability = Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)

For the sake of argument # 2:-

Let us assume that 2 F-17A Block II are able to notice the Nimitz class aircraft carrier and release 4 CM-400AKG to engage it, before being neutralized by the escorts with the remainder of the strike formation.

ENDGAME SCENARIO: 4 x CM-400AKG cruising towards the Nimitz class aircraft carrier. With Beidou navigation disrupted (hinted above), these AShM would have to rely upon onboard guidance mechanisms to engage a moving target but 'hit probability' will be reduced in this situation (probability of miss increases).

Nevertheless, LR-SAM such as SM-2 Block IV and SM-6 are optimized for 'missile defense' applications, and the escorts can utilize these to intercept/defeat CM-400AKG as well.

Case in point: http://www.navyrecognition.com/inde...-supersonic-target-from-over-the-horizon.html

SM-2 Block IV and SM-6 can also neutralize sea-skimming subsonic cruise missiles such as C-802 and Babur variants (refer back to the case of USS Mason above), and subsonic ALCM such as Ra'ad variants; multi-mission capabilities in the nutshell.

---

If you are considering an Indian CSG then I see the possibility of BREAKTHROUGH; if Indians fight really well (20%), if not (40%).

• Indian Navy (IN) is a branch of Indian armed forces which WE should not underestimate.
• Only INS Vikramaditya is operational at present.

1. Indian CSG does not have an operational LACM yet. Therefore, it is not in the position to degrade C&C aspects of the infrastructure of Pakistani armed forces and/or disrupt activities in the bases of PAF and PN from a safe distance.

Indian Nirbhay LACM is undergoing trials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirbhay

However, Indian guided missile destroyers are equipped with Brahmos supersonic cruise missiles which can be utilized to target Pakistani coastal defenses and assets of PN.

2. Indian CSG can commit scores of MiG-29K (30+) to establish a no-fly-zone around the CSG, and deter PAF from attacking the CSG in force.

Inventory of JF-17 variants at a glance:-

JF-17A Block I = 50 delivered
JF-17A Block II = 59 delivered, 3 on order (to be complete soon)
JF-17B Block II = 1 delivered, 25 on order

Let us assume that almost 50% of these aircraft can be made airborne in a short span.

For the sake of argument # 1:-

In the light of the above, about 50 JF-17 variants are made airborne in a short span. Among these, 46 JF-17 variants are dispatched to confront Indian MiG-29K (30+) and more (taking cues from each other, and also from advanced airborne surveillance platforms such as SAAB ERIEYE 2000 and Shaanxi ZDK-03), and a strike formation of 4 JF-17A Block II (each armed with two CM-400AKG) manage to slip through the aforementioned, and search for the INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier (taking cues from each other).

Biggest threat to the strike formation of 4 JF-17A Block II would be from the Kolkata class destroyers as potential escorts of INS Vikramaditya. Learn much about the Kolkata class destroyers from the following link.

These destroyers can notice and track movements of incoming JF-17 in real-time from afar, try to subject them to potent bouts of EW (jamming/spoofing activities), and eventually engage them with incredibly maneuverable and sophisticated Barak-8 LR-SAM (100 KM range).

Case in point: https://defense-update.com/20141110_barak-8-test.html

However, Barak-8 have a much lower range than that of American LR-SAM, therefore JF-17A have a reasonable shot at releasing their payload of CM-400AKG for INS Vikramaditya aircraft carrier when they notice it, before being shot down.

ENDGAME SCENARIO: several CM-400AKG cruising towards INS Vikramaditya.

Barak-8 LR-SAM is also optimized for 'missile defense' applications, and the escorts of INS Vikramaditya can utilize these to intercept/defeat CM-400AKG. Barak-8 was reportedly designed by Israel to intercept Russian Yakhont supersonic anti ship missiles (deployed by Syria).

Possibilities of intercepting a barrage of CM-400AKG would depend upon the proximity of the Kolkata class destroyers to INS Vikramaditya (India have only 3 Kolkata class in total), and the initial barrage might fail in this situation.

The other 42 JF-17 variants might succeed in neutralizing all MiG-29K (expect casualties on our side as well) but these might be called back (fuel consumption factor), but PAF can dispatch a fresh batch of JF-17 variants with an air-refueling tanker and AWACS in the mix to attack Indian CSG once again while F-16 variants are committed to counter IAF in other spaces and PN also preoccupy IN in other spaces. The fresh batch of JF-17 variants might succeed in sinking INS Vikramaditya while stressing its escorts.

PAF have 50 CM-400AKG in its inventory in total (possibly more).