Aircraft carrier Liaoning vs Vikramaditya

Hi Beast, better if you point out which is not true from the quoted article ...
We want to hear from your point

Beast said:

Lol.. Clearly this Indian knows nothing about carrier ops. tractor is never suitable for carrier ops. Using tractor on carrier deck is clearly a joke and demonstrated the ignorance of the top level of IN. China maybe late but I bet its has more knowledge on operating a carrier than India. At least , china did not use farm land equipment for it carrier. Those tractor are big and tall, occupy precious carrier deck. Due to the tall height of the tractor, longer tow is needed. Therefore even complicating the whole carrier ops procedure and create potential hazard and danger on deck.

Indian are master? Master in farming on carrier deck?

Click to expand...

哈哈哈 典型的印度人。
记住 牛是神圣的 ^_^

Type 052D said:

哈哈哈 典型的印度人。
记住 牛是神圣的 ^_^

Click to expand...

You are so rude to call a typical Indian as a sacred cow

Type 052D said:

哈哈哈 典型的印度人。
记住 牛是神圣的 ^_^

Click to expand...

വെച്ചിട്ട് പോടാ ചൈനീസ് തല്ലുകൊള്ളി

kurup said:

വെച്ചിട്ട് പോടാ ചൈനീസ് തല്ലുകൊള്ളി

Click to expand...

moron doesnt know we can retaliate in 50 languages

Shinigami said:

moron doesnt know we can retaliate in 50 languages

Click to expand...

Which includes scripts that are not recognized by google translate

kurup said:

വെച്ചിട്ട് പോടാ ചൈനീസ് തല്ലുകൊള്ളി

Click to expand...

What does it mean ?

Beast said:

Delusion is with you. Type1130 is not even copy of goalkeeper. It's performance has even surpassed it. 11000rounds per minute. From chief designer that admit, it has tested against Mach 4 drone. You Indian properly can't accept Chinese advancement due to your impotent.

Then may I know what Indian CWIS can made besides using money to buy? None.

Click to expand...

Beast said:

Since like you have not much knowledge on Chinese CWIS. Type1130 are complex with huge system underneath the deck that only the new huge hull of Type055 and CV is able to mount it. For your info, even the new Type052D destroyer despite being new still stuck with the old Type730 CWIS due to its limited hull size. Can corvetter and fast attack craft mount it? Of cos, no.

Type 1130 are latest Chinese state of art CWIS using powerful sensor and armed with 11 rotating barrels, consuming 11,000 rounds per minute. You can imagine the need to house a massive ammunition drum below deck in order to feed the high consuming rate of fire to create an impenetrable wall against supersonic missile.

Of cos, its a last ditch effort to block attacking missile. But a highly effective one too,during the trial test. It has a intercepting rate of 98% against Mach 4 incoming missile.

Click to expand...

Anony said:

Do you have link for your tall claims And moreover what drone PLA/N/AF has which can fly at Mach 4.

Click to expand...

Beast said:

CM-400AKG

Click to expand...

First, CM-400AKG is an anti-ship missile, not a drone.

Second, unlike Brahmos, CM-400AKG is not a sea-skimming anti-ship missile. It does a high-altitude climb after launch with a high-speed dive onto the target.
Though China have C-802A and CM-802AKG sea-skimming anti-ship missiles, but these are subsonic.

So, is your CIWS system capable of neutralizing supersonic/hypersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles?
And how would you test that?

BoQ77 said:

What does it mean ?

Click to expand...

A befitting response to him in my language .

DRAY said:

First, CM-400AKG is an anti-ship missile, not a drone.

Second, unlike Brahmos, CM-400AKG is not a sea-skimming anti-ship missile. It does a high-altitude climb after launch with a high-speed dive onto the target.
Though China have C-802A and CM-802AKG sea-skimming anti-ship missiles, but these are subsonic.

So, is your CIWS system capable of neutralizing supersonic/hypersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles?
And how would you test that?

Click to expand...

Actually, BrahMos can NOT fly at 2.8 mach at low altitudes -- 2.8 mach is the max speed attained at higher altitudes -- what would it be at sea level? well,near mach 2

Side-Winder said:

Actually, BrahMos can NOT fly at 2.8 mach at low altitudes -- 2.8 mach is the max speed attained at higher altitudes -- what would it be at sea level? well,near mach 2

Click to expand...

BrahMos is the fastest cruise missile, and a 2nd version is coming with hypersonic speed. However, my question was about the capabilities of the Chinese CIWS systems. Intercepting a BM and a cruise missile are two different ball games. So, probable success against a ballistic type supersonic anti-ship missile doesn't automatically translate into success against a supersonic sea-skimming one.

DRAY said:

BrahMos is the fastest cruise missile, and a 2nd version is coming with hypersonic speed. However, my question was about the capabilities of the Chinese CIWS systems. Intercepting a BM and a cruise missile are two different ball games. So, probable success against a ballistic type supersonic anti-ship missile doesn't automatically translate into success against a supersonic sea-skimming one.

Click to expand...

yeah i know brahMos seems to have an edge over sub-sonic ones i was just stating the fact that brahMos's speed comes down to mach 2 when flying at low altitudes --

Title of thread: AC vs AC
Thread content: Tractors!

DRAY said:

BrahMos is the fastest cruise missile, and a 2nd version is coming with hypersonic speed. However, my question was about the capabilities of the Chinese CIWS systems. Intercepting a BM and a cruise missile are two different ball games. So, probable success against a ballistic type supersonic anti-ship missile doesn't automatically translate into success against a supersonic sea-skimming one.

Click to expand...

The excessively fast speed of the BrahMos is ironically its greatest weakness vs a modern AEGIS or PAAMS equipped warship.

Consider: BrahMos is non-stealthy, flies hot and high (in comparison to other sea-skimmers) and is more susceptible to soft-kill (I.e ship countermeasures etc) due to its high speeds limiting the ability of BrahMos to react. There is also the fact that the BrahMos' sea-skimming capabilities are severely impaired in adverse sea states! BrahMos is also useless in the littoral zones or high traffic sea lanes, again due to its high speed and lack of intelligence (I.e High risk of engaging neutral/civilian shipping target).

Scenario: An AEGIS or PAAMs system with its powerful long-range AESA radars will see the 'high-flying' BrahMos with its HUGE thermal signature at great distances, most likely before BrahMos has even had time to reach max velocity (est. 1.8 Mach). This would be an easy hard-kill for an AEGIS/Standard combo or a PAAMS/Aster combo. For arguments sake, lets say that the impossible happened and the AEGIS/PAAMS failed to prosecute BrahMos during its initial engagement, and continued to so, what then? Well, the AEGIS/PAAMS warship would deploy countermeasures, decoys etc in-order to lure/trick BrahMos away from the target. As I have said before, the speed of BrahMos denies it sufficient reaction time - therefore if the ships countermeasures succeed, we can pretty much guarantee a soft-kill. Beyond soft-kill we have CIWS as final defense, and western CIWS are tested and proven.

We also have to remember that no matter how fast BrahMos is, or how agile it is during its terminal phase, western missiles such as Standard or Aster etc are even faster, significantly more intelligent and much more maneuverable (in excess of 60Gs, TVing etc etc). Additionally, if third party targeting data is available, AEGIS/PAAMS will spot BrahMos at launch, and if it is within their engagement envelope (I.e 120 km), then they can engage BrahMos while its at high-subsonic or low-supersonic speeds.

Conclusion: BrahMos is just fast, but not really a great anti-ship missile. All the latest in-production anti-ship missiles in the west are intelligent, stealthy subsonic missile such as the Naval Strike Missile/Joint Strike Missile. The United States also favors a new stealthy subsonic anti-ship missile to replace its Harpoon missiles.

Nonetheless, navies like China, Russia, India, Brazil etc are currently not-capable of defending against missiles like BrahMos - we do not operate naval air-defense systems as sophisticated and advanced as AEGIS/PAAMS. While destroyers such as the Kolkata-class and the Type 052D will improve the situation, they will still be vulnerable.

EDIT: Can I also mention this; There is nothing particularly impressive about about BrahMos, it isn't a revolutionary design and it isn't a great feat of technological engineering by military standards. Western countries have had the technology to design and produce supersonic anti-ship missiles since the 1960s (at-least).

Side-Winder said:

yeah i know brahMos seems to have an edge over sub-sonic ones i was just stating the fact that brahMos's speed comes down to mach 2 when flying at low altitudes --

Click to expand...

No, BrahMos is inferior to modern subsonic anti-ship missiles. Do not be mislead by the awe inspired by its speed, nor Indian rhetoric.

Read my post above.