Now that is a surprise, If I ever saw one. Chinese "Moskit"

[Najam Khan]

The way Chinese are coming up with new weapons systems and electronics, in just few 5-7 years time these systems will get more mature. These all are linking to paradigm shift in doctries of all major powers in the region and West incoming future. Mocking attitude towards such systems development will not help their adversaries, R&D and mature systems development will.

 

[SQ8]

The way Chinese are coming up with new weapons systems and electronics, in just few 5-7 years time these systems will get more mature. These all are linking to paradigm shift in doctries of all major powers in the region and West incoming future. Mocking attitude towards such systems development will not help their adversaries, R&D and mature systems development will.

Zhuhai is probably going to have more than a few surprises in store.

 

[Dazzler]

@sandy_3126 @Chinese-Dragon @Horus @Donatello @sancho @SpArK @Najam Khan @Dazzler

If that is not rubbing it in.. I dont know what is. Im guessing there is a chance to start thinking of a "Yangdus" missile system?

Chinese CX-1 Cruise Missile.

yep, saw it in zhuhai air show thread, thats some defense troll by china as it has the potential of killing many egos

 

[Dazzler]

Yangdus?

Yang = Yangsi river
Dus = ?

yangsi+indus

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

Chinese copy is much late. Brahmos was inducted in 2005 while it is still uncertain if the Chinese missile is a working copy or will it take another 3-5 years before it hits the export market.

This Chinese missile is a copy of the 20 -year old Russian Onyx which law -biding China obtained from Syria which again proves the fact that China with a much larger economy can still not match what a much smaller economy Russia produced in 1994. Butt I will not draw the outlandish conclusion that China will forever remain so backward as some low life tolls here love to say about other countries. Trolls are just so easily forgettable.

What you know more about Cx-1 beside the apperance? CX-1 in 2014 is not Brahmos in 2005, even both concept as air breathing missile, you don't have any evident to support your claim that CX-1 is a copy of Brahmos.

And for your information, no object has an expiration day if it's still be usefull such as wheel that was invented thousand years ago and still copied by every nation today and tomorrow. Same for this air breathing missile, even if it's 20 year old concept but useful and viable in modern warfare than we Chinese have no hesitation to reuse it regardless if China's economy is much large than Russia.

 

[SQ8]

And for your information, no object has an expiration day if it's still be usefull such as wheel that was invented thousand years ago and still copied by every nation today and tomorrow. Same for this air breathing missile, even if it's 20 year old concept but useful and viable in modern warfare than we Chinese have no hesitation to reuse it regardless if China's economy is much large than Russia.

Whatever critique can be applied to the CX-1 is equally applicable to the Brahmos. That is the dual edged sword there.

 

[sancho]

If that is not rubbing it in.. I dont know what is. Im guessing there is a chance to start thinking of a "Yangdus" missile system?

Chinese CX-1 Cruise Missile.

Saw that yesterday too, if I'm not wrong advertised as anti ship missile, but what does it tell us about the hype around
CM-400AKG?

 

[sancho]

Mocking attitude towards such systems development will not help their adversaries

True, it doesn't help to say this or that is a copy, one simply has to admit that it's amazing what Chinas industrial power can achieve. BUT, that the constant copy approach also tells us something about Chinas actual development and design capability doesn't it?

 

[SQ8]

Saw that yesterday too, if I'm not wrong advertised as anti ship missile, but what does it tell us about the hype around
CM-400AKG?

Tell us nothing. Both weapons systems are built for very different performance parameters. That is like saying that the IAF should not purchase the Harpoon because its purchasing the Brahmos. Each weapon system has its own niche and operational targets. The CM-400 is a lighter system designed around higher kinematics and air deploy-ability.. while the CX-1 looks more to be surface launched and towards the mid range supersonic attack.

 

[SQ8]

True, it doesn't help to say this or that is a copy, one simply has to admit that it's amazing what Chinas industrial power can achieve. BUT, that the constant copy approach also tells us something about Chinas actual development and design capability doesn't it?

Yes it does. The Chinese have University departments and degrees that focus on reverse engineering. Which as I have mentioned countless times, looks to the idea of finding shortcuts to achieve technological equivalence.. this comes at the cost of the knowhow on developing the design but the Chinese have now started to correct that via leverage their ability to "read" designs and understanding underlying ideas via acquired blueprints and knowhow.

Essentially, what it tells you is that the Chinese have decided its not foolish to try and match a weapon by spending a billion developing another one from scratch and instead spend a quarter of that copying that system and adapting it.. .. because if it works for the other side it will work for them.. why waste money to achieve the same result just for some misplaced sense of "national pride".

 

[sancho]

Tell us nothing. Both weapons systems are built for very different performance parameters. That is like saying that the IAF should not purchase the Harpoon because its purchasing the Brahmos. Each weapon system has its own niche and operational targets.

Exactly, so it does tell us that CM-400 is not comparable to a Supersonic cruise missile since it reaches high speeds only in the terminal stage. That's why China might went for P800 version, to get similar performance in similar roles, otherwise there would be no need for this.

Essentially, what it tells you is that the Chinese have decided its not foolish to try and match a weapon by spending a billion developing another one from scratch and instead spend a quarter of that copying that system and adapting it.. .. because if it works for the other side it will work for them.. why waste money to achieve the same result just for some misplaced sense of "national pride".

That would imply that they wouldn't spend billions into weapon development and reseach, but that isn't the case. Their defence spending is very high too, only the production costs are low and the development pace extreemly fast. But is it really a choice they took or is it a necessity? China has very limited options of technological cooperation and that is limiting their R&D too. Why does a nation with this industrial and finacial potential need to copy designs, if they could develop own alone?
It's one thing to develop something from scratch based on specific requirements and development goals and it's another to copy designs to just for the sake of having a similar weapon or aircraft. China might be no 1 in the world when it comes to industrial capability, but in R&D they still lack behind, although I have no doubt that they will catch up faster than many believe.

 

[SQ8]

Exactly, so it does tell us that CM-400 is not comparable to a Supersonic cruise missile since it reaches high speeds only in the terminal stage. That's why China might went for P800 version, to get similar performance in similar roles, otherwise there would be no need for this.



That would imply that they wouldn't spend billions into weapon development and reseach, but that isn't the case. Their defence spending is very high too, only the production costs are low and the development pace extreemly fast. But is it really a choice they took or is it a necessity? China has very limited options of technological cooperation and that is limiting their R&D too. Why does a nation with this industrial and finacial potential need to copy designs, if they could develop own alone?
It's one thing to develop something from scratch based on specific requirements and development goals and it's another to copy designs to just for the sake of having a similar weapon or aircraft. China might be no 1 in the world when it comes to industrial capability, but in R&D they still lack behind, although I have no doubt that they will catch up faster than many believe.

Not really. Again, my first example about the Harpoon and the Brahmos should have explained it clearly. The Development of the Brahmos or the presence of other weapons systems have little to do with the purchase of the Harpoon. Each is designed for a different usage and deployment tactic. The High terminal speed of the CM-400 is NOT matched by any weapons system operational .. but that is also on the attack profile of the CM-400. If it was the perfect weapon for usage everywhere.. there would have been no purchase of the C-802K.. which is built for a very different attack profile.
The Chinese operate the YJ-12(from where the CM-400 stems) in fairly large numbers... and the KH-15 Raduga which also follows a similar flight profile has been purchased in earnest and still operated by the Russians...who also operate the Kh-59 subsonic system? Are we to assume that one weapon system is inferior to the other? Or perhaps there are different performance levels required that lead to the deployment of these systems.
The CX-1 is a rather neat solution to the need for a terra firma launched supersonic system...


The need to copy designs stems back to the 40's and 50's. Nearly every American and Russian design had German input and knowhow that went into it. Von braun is the father of the US space program.. yet you dont see any issues over Nazi copyright or lack of US development capability. Those actions allowed the Americans to get to the moon and the Soviets to build the Mig-15. the R&D learnt from those years provided the impetus for homegrown R&D efforts later.
The same way, the chinese "copying" provides the impetus for leaping ahead and advancing faster than their contemporaries through their own ideals and information. The Mobile firm Xiaomi is an excellent example of this doctrine.

 

[OrionHunter]

Looks very similar to brahmos in aerodynamic configuration.

You mean this one's been copied too? Oh damn! Not again!

 

[farhan_9909]

But indian consider brahmos as space tech.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

But indian consider brahmos as space tech.

Worlds fastest,supa dupa anti ship missile nothing can stop..