All new CX-1 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) - Chinese Answer to Brahmos

[Penguin]

You don't see my points do you?

The points are simples:

1. without MOS, there's nothing in India's arsenal

2. even these MOS are mostly not full TOT. Ruskies keep the core tech. India pays and does the paint job. ( the fault of the matter does not entirely rest on the Ruskies as Indian DRDO , HAL-alike claim - also see cases of Rafale or GSLV etc, because one needs industrial capability to produce the tech after all even are given for free and India is not an industrial country but an agricultural one that is at least 200 years out of date)


3. if you seriously think that apart from the Ruskies, the other 2 world's super missile powers, China and the US, can not easily re-produce, if they think necessary, the downgraded MOS versions of Ruskies' 1990's era missiles exported to India, a country that up to now does not possess 101 industrial expertise and 101 manufacturing capabilities on even designing and mass-manufactoring a basic level of a rifle and bullets that go with it, then you're in for a quite rude wakening.

I don't (and will never) agree with such simpleminded representations.
Why is it so important to you to convince everyone India can't do shizzle? (as if reality is that simple)

 

[Mitro]

I always enjoy your post can you please tell me why india is taking long time to develop air version of brahmos which will be more potent weapon then land version and will be game changer in sub continent.
I think russian dont wont to buy brahmos bcoz of joint venture and 50% profit will be going back to india or may be it will be downgrade version of their missile.
and CX-1 is developed by a country which is very good in electronic and have more experience with advance radar seeker for missile like A0A /A0S/S0A and so on.

1. Because a JV is a business agreement, not a product.
2. Whether I am pro or contra anything is irrelevant here. (To put it bluntly: I am Dutch, I don't care about your internal Asian squabbles).
3. You don't know jack shizzle. The Russian ships use the same VLS as the Indian vessels use for firing Brahmos. Therefore they can use Brahmos, should the Russian navy so decide. I have at no point suggested Brahmos is in use with RUssian navy. But, you can't very well claim Brahmos is not a development, a progression over P-800 Onyx and at the same time say Brahmos is not in service with Russia when it operates P-800 Onyx. Those two are mutually exclusive.

 

[Penguin]

I always enjoy your post can you please tell me why india is taking long time to develop air version of brahmos which will be more potent weapon then land version and will be game changer in sub continent.

Because it is a challenge getting it in such a shape and weight so that the SU-27/30 can handle it. The BrahMos airlaunched missile with the length of nine metres (due to caps) and diameter 70 cm carries a 200-300 kg warhead. Size, weight reductions on an existing design. + Brahmos-M is essentially a new missile. The mass of the air-launched version of the missile is by 500 kg less and length - by 1.5 metres less.

 

[Mitro]

Do you think reduction in weight and size will effect the range .

Because it is a challenge getting it in such a shape and weight so that the SU-27/30 can handle it. The BrahMos airlaunched missile with the length of nine metres (due to caps) and diameter 70 cm carries a 200-300 kg warhead. Size, weight reductions on an existing design. + Brahmos-M is essentially a new missile. The mass of the air-launched version of the missile is by 500 kg less and length - by 1.5 metres less.

 

[Penguin]

Do you think reduction in weight and size will effect the range .

Well, that maybe one of the challenges: how to maintain range at reduced size. This goes to propulsion efficiency.

 

[Speeder 2]

1. Because a JV is a business agreement, not a product.
2. Whether I am pro or contra anything is irrelevant here. (To put it bluntly: I am Dutch, I don't care about your internal Asian squabbles).
3. You don't know jack shizzle. The Russian ships use the same VLS as the Indian vessels use for firing Brahmos. Therefore they can use Brahmos, should the Russian navy so decide. I have at no point suggested Brahmos is in use with RUssian navy. But, you can't very well claim Brahmos is not a development, a progression over P-800 Onyx and at the same time say Brahmos is not in service with Russia when it operates P-800 Onyx. Those two are mutually exclusive.

1. wrong. JV is a biz agreement to facilitate a product, particularly in India's case when most if not all JVs are just another glorified name for ToT or simple straight purchasing programmes under which India puts up the dole and gets the finished product in return, together with whatever residual scrap value it entails and/or what Indian DRDO/HAL could get their hands on.

2. Dutch you are? So am I. But I do care about internal Asian squabbles, very much so, thank you!

3. No, they are NOT mutually exclusive per se as you insist: Russia's still using P-800 Onyx(a) and Brahmos being even perhaps a further development on top of P-800 Onyx (b) DO NOT prove

either that Brahmos is the best the Russians can come up with,

or that Brahmos is the best candidate for the replacement of P-800 Onyn in the future.

In fact we all know it's ridiculous to assume such given Russia is one of the missile superpowers. China still has J-6, J-7 in service. So in your logic the more modern JF-17 should be the best ( and only) thing China could produce, and it must also be the next in the line to replace J-7 in eyes of PLAAF, huh?

 

[Penguin]

1. wrong. JV is a biz agreement to facilitate a product, particularly in India's case when most if not all JVs are just another glorified name for ToT or simple straight purchasing programmes under which India puts up the dole and gets the finished product in return, together with whatever residual scrap value it entails and/or what Indian DRDO/HAL could get their hands on.

Show me (excerpts of) the contract. Otherwise, just supposition

2. Dutch you are? So am I. But I do care about internal Asian squabbles, very much so, thank you!

The point was that I don't choose sides in Pak/India or Pak/Chine discussions: I have no motivation or interest in doing so. May be you do. That's fine. It's a free forum after all.

3. No, they are NOT mutually exclusive per se as you insist: Russia's still using P-800 Onyx(a) and Brahmos being even perhaps a further development on top of P-800 Onyx (b) DO NOT prove

On cannot on the one hand claim Brahmos is a mere repainted copy of P-800 Onyx and at the same time on the other hand say Russia doesn't operate Brahmos because if Brahmos is a P-800 copy then P-800=Brahmos but for the paint job. Mind you, I did not state Brahmos is in Russian service. Nor have I claimed anothing about the exact relation between P-800 and Brahmos.

In fact we all know it's ridiculous to assume such given Russia is one of the missile superpowers. China still has J-6, J-7 in service. So in your logic the more modern JF-17 should be the best ( and only) thing China could produce, and it must also be the next in the line to replace J-7 in eyes of PLAAF, huh?

Uhm no, that is not at all what I said or suggested.
Perhaps smoke a little less, my dear Dutch friend?

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

The Chinese members present here should perhaps read this forum. Here the American members are talking about CX 1 and the threat etc. I would highly appreciate your reactions. Please ignore some stupid things that may have been said there, though, it is largely quite logical. I would like to know your views.

 

[Shinigami]

i will repeat this again. why are the morons here comparing a chinese copy that cant fly with what is believed to be the best anti ship cruise missile that has been tested several times for 8 years?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

i will repeat this again. why are the morons here comparing a chinese copy that cant fly with what is believed to be the best anti ship cruise missile that has been tested several times for 8 years?

I more impressed with this video:

No offense to the Brahmos cause my country's navy have shown interest to buy them sometime soon, but most in the military forum agree that Brahmos is just an up-version of the Yakhont. Which begs the pardon why the hell don't we just buy the Yakhont or the Chinese CX-1?

 

[Shinigami]

Which begs the pardon why the hell don't we just buy the Yakhont or the Chinese CX-1?

the same reason you would buy an F/A-18 super hornet instead of an F/A-18 Hornet
OR an F35 instead of a J31

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

the same reason you would buy an F/A-18 super hornet instead of an F/A-18 Hornet

Totally different comparison. In matter of missiles most country tend to upgrade it than buy a completely new one.

 

[rockstar08]

oooooooooo
1 and 2 are strapped too ballistic missles
and the HN-2000 I've never heard of.

don't you know we got alien technology in Area 51 we are 200 years of ahead of everybody.

you have autobots too

 

[drunken-monke]

JF-17 is purely develop for PAF to replace entire fleet of Mirage3,5 and F-7, F-7PG, if china have better option so why they induct JF-17 to replace SU-30MKK.Now stick to the topic, its comparing b/w chiese latest CX-1 and your crapy Brahmouse

Oops.. Did @trident2010 pressed right button.. His @$$ went on fire...

Lets have the data of CX 1 first... Then we would decide which one is better.. I doubt that it can even fly!!!

 

[drunken-monke]

That is a huge missile, and unquestionably an air breather. And from what we can see by the size, this has to be ground or shiplaunched, it is simply to big for aircraft launching.

This is likely born out by the booster stage on the back, which is likely in keeping with the design of the P-800, and a solid fuel rocket. This is what will give it the initial boost, to push it to the speed that the ramjet can take over and provide the propulsion until it hits it's target.

However, like most of the weapons of China, it is probably only a mock-up. And as most people who watch know, China has a great ability to create mock-ups and prototypes, but much less of an ability to actually deliver a complete and workable system.

However, we should withholding any real opinion until we actually see this thing operate. Until then, all we have is a mock-up and nothing else.

My two cents..