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

[Aepsilons]

DF-21D/HGV/HN-2000 has already neutralized US Naval dominance in the South China Sea. You won't find China's best weapons at Zhuhai Air Show. The CX-1 is for export and for trolling the Brahmos.

Neutralized?

US Navy ‘Shaping Events’ in South China Sea

Has anyone ever wondered why the USN and USAF don't use supersonic cruise and anti-ship missiles? It isn't that they can't build them, they most certainly can, but that there are downsides to supersonic speeds. Yes, the kinetic energy of a high speed object is enough to defeat many ships without the need for a warhead and their speed complicates and shortens countermeasure responses, but the range and maneuverability of supersonic systems compromises their overall effectiveness. Subsonic systems such as the HN-2000 and its US counterpart the Tomahawk have long-ranges, can be reprogrammed for different targets or have their flights terminated, they can loiter and look for targets, and they can carry massive payloads. Supersonic missiles have smaller payloads, but this tends to be offset by their kinetic energy, shorter ranges and shorter flight times which means that the missile cannot be reprogrammed for a different target. The Russians, seeing the limitations of supersonic missiles, have even begun to use subsonic systems with a last minute high-speed dash (the Klub system) instead of true supersonic missiles. Both have their limitations and each can be easily defeated. The CX-1 and similar systems are not the boogeyman that people claim they are either.

Hm. This might anger the supporters of DF-21 SCMs. lol

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Neutralized?

US Navy ‘Shaping Events’ in South China Sea

If by neutralized he means "growing" then yes the US has been neutralized. We are adding capabilities, not only to our naval, but our ground, air, space and electronic assets in the region and upping our political, economic and military coordination with regional nations. Our entrenchment is growing deeper each day. Neutralized must have a different meaning in the various Chinese dialects.

 

[cnleio]

Has anyone ever wondered why the USN and USAF don't use supersonic cruise and anti-ship missiles? It isn't that they can't build them, they most certainly can, but that there are downsides to supersonic speeds. Yes, the kinetic energy of a high speed object is enough to defeat many ships without the need for a warhead and their speed complicates and shortens countermeasure responses, but the range and maneuverability of supersonic systems compromises their overall effectiveness. Subsonic systems such as the HN-2000 and its US counterpart the Tomahawk have long-ranges, can be reprogrammed for different targets or have their flights terminated, they can loiter and look for targets, and they can carry massive payloads. Supersonic missiles have smaller payloads, but this tends to be offset by their kinetic energy, shorter ranges and shorter flight times which means that the missile cannot be reprogrammed for a different target. The Russians, seeing the limitations of supersonic missiles, have even begun to use subsonic systems with a last minute high-speed dash (the Klub system) instead of true supersonic missiles. Both have their limitations and each can be easily defeated. The CX-1 and similar systems are not the boogeyman that people claim they are either.

I told them the supersonic missile is a good target to intercept by modern air-defense system, high heat & high flight trajectory is the weakness. All Top5 mainly developing the stealth subsonic anti-ship missile, long range & very low flight trajectroy to avoid radar search & supersonic attack at the end of flight ... especially Indian members only talk about "Brahmos", so i give it up.

CX-1 is China export missile, PLA never equip it. This is China future subsonic anti-ship missile looks like:

CX-1 or Brahmos supersonice anti-ship missile, all have high flight trajectory, that like a Mig-21. It's no any problem for Top5 to hit down a supersonic Mig-21.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Neutralized?

US Navy ‘Shaping Events’ in South China Sea



Hm. This might anger the supporters of DF-21 SCMs. lol

To be fair though the concept of the DF-21D is neither new nor untested. The US Pershing II of the late 80s and early 90s was both the inspiration of the DF-21D and the world's first ASBM... prior to several arms limitation treaties with the Russians which ended its operational usage (it still is used in the Hera MRBM target along with parts of the retired Minuteman II). In practice though, there are too many opportunities to disrupt such a complicated system for it to be practical. Over the horizen radars and satellites, the missile's body, its guidance package, its launchers, the ships movement and defenses, too many variables that have to go right. In war nothing goes right.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Last night I heard and they were still debating racism and blacks on mainstream media channels, didn't know that was the secret to leap frogging 200 years ahead of everyone. Good for you guys.

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.

 

[Penguin]

Similar but not a copy.

 

[AgentOrange]

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.

What do you mean "we"? You're indian. All you've got is a crack team of DRDO scientists that are adept at painting Russian weapons in Indian colors and then claiming they were "jointly developed."

 

[Penguin]

Has anyone ever wondered why the USN and USAF don't use supersonic cruise and anti-ship missiles? It isn't that they can't build them, they most certainly can, but that there are downsides to supersonic speeds. Yes, the kinetic energy of a high speed object is enough to defeat many ships without the need for a warhead and their speed complicates and shortens countermeasure responses, but the range and maneuverability of supersonic systems compromises their overall effectiveness. Subsonic systems such as the HN-2000 and its US counterpart the Tomahawk have long-ranges, can be reprogrammed for different targets or have their flights terminated, they can loiter and look for targets, and they can carry massive payloads. Supersonic missiles have smaller payloads, but this tends to be offset by their kinetic energy, shorter ranges and shorter flight times which means that the missile cannot be reprogrammed for a different target. The Russians, seeing the limitations of supersonic missiles, have even begun to use subsonic systems with a last minute high-speed dash (the Klub system) instead of true supersonic missiles. Both have their limitations and each can be easily defeated. The CX-1 and similar systems are not the boogeyman that people claim they are either.

Multi-Stage Supersonic Target (MSST).
www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010targets/Stuart.pdf

MSST is being developed to meet the USN's requirement for a two-stage target surrogate representative of the Russian 3M-54 Kalibr/3M-54E Klub anti-ship cruise missile (NATO designation SS-N-27A/B 'Sizzler', with the E/B version being the export model).
NAVAIR and ATK seek to put Multi-Stage Supersonic Target programme back on course - IHS Jane's 360

GQM-163A Coyote
Supersonic Sea Skimming Target
http://www.orbital.com/LaunchSystems/Publications/Coyote_factsheet.pdf

It stands to reason that IF you can make a supersonic target, THEN it should be possible to make a supersonic attack missile.... provided you're willing to spend on developing it.

In 2009, Lockheed’s LRASM-A and the LRASM-B variants won a DARPA competition to fund what it hoped would be the U.S. Navy’s new air-and-sea launched long-range anti-surface missiles. Based on their success in Phase 1, in 2010 DARPA green lighted Phase-2 development of both the LRASM variants, although it later axed the LRASM-B, which was technically much more complicated, at least for the time being.By consolidating investments to focus solely on advancing LRASM-A technologies, DARPA aims to reduce risk and expedite delivery of cutting-edge capability to the fleet.

The LRASM programme is initially focused on the development of two variants, the LRASM-A and LRASM-B. LRASM-A is a 500 nmi (930 km) subsonic cruise missile based on Lockheed Martin's 500 nm-range AGM-158 JASSM-ER The LRASM-B was designed for high-altitude and supersonic speed over stealthy penetration. The LRASM-B development was, however, cancelled by DARPA in 2012.

And then there's LMCO's RATTLRS (Revolutionary Approach To Time Critical Long Range Strike). RATTLRS is a technology demonstration program supported by the US Navy (Office of Naval Research ONR), USAF, NASA and other US government agencies. The prime contractor for the demonstration phase is Lockheed Martin.(RATTLRS) represents a new supersonic cruise missile concept.One of the main advantages of RATTLRS is its ability to cruise at variable speeds, including supersonic speed (Mach 3 – 4), using a high-speed turbine engine without a booster (afterburner). In supersonic mode, the turbine engine used in RATTLRS will be most efficient.The missile will have a range exceeding 500 miles, flying at supersonic speed, at an altitude of 70,000 feet.

 

[j20blackdragon]

and the HN-2000 I've never heard of.

Now you've heard of it.

 

[Penguin]

Now you've heard of it.

Tone the font size DOWN!

 

[j20blackdragon]

Here's the Russian Kh-101/102 stealth cruise missile. Notice that they don't export this one. They keep the good stuff for themselves.

The Brahmos is used for MAKING MONEY from Indians. The Russians don't care about using it themselves.

 

[Steakhouse]

Here's the Russian Kh-101/102 stealth cruise missile. Notice that they don't export this one. They keep the good stuff for themselves.

The Brahmos is used for MAKING MONEY from Indians. The Russians don't care about using it themselves.

No nation will export top of the line weaponry to other nation for their own protection with their top secret weapon.

 

[Zarvan]

Zhuhai Surprise: China’s Third “Russian” Supersonic ASCM

China’s 10th Zhuhai Airshow does not start until next Tuesday, but it already has one new rock-star on the Chinese military-blogosphere, the new CX-1 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) from the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT). Already, scores of images of its full-size display mock-up show an uncanny resemblance to another famous supersonic ASCM, the Mach 2.8-3.0 speed Russian-Indian BrahMos. Both share the distinctive cone-inlet air intake, a two-stage structure and similar dimensions.
There is so far no official data yet on CX-1 and it is not clear if there is a version bound for Chinese service. Chinese reports do say its range is between 50km and 280km. This means it is likely an export model to comply with the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). It is initially being marketed as a ground-launched anti-ship cruise missile that can be used in concert with other CALT products like the M-20 short-range ballistic missile and several artillery rockets, cued by unmanned aerial vehicles. Later versions are expected to be vertically-launched from ships and perhaps submarines.

While there is no confirmation that Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyenia sold CALT the technology from its Yakhont supersonic ASCM as it did to India to provide the basis for BrahMos, this should not be surprising. India and Russia have Russian-made NPO Mashinostroyenia 3M-54 Club supersonic terminal-stage ASCMs and Zvezda Kh-31 supersonic anti-radar/ship missiles. But China has also purchased or otherwise acquired the technology to produce its own versions, the larger and longer-range YJ-12, now in Chinese service, is based on Zvezda technology and the YJ-18 is believed to be a shorter range version of the 3M-54. So CALT’s CX-1 is likely China’s third “Russian” supersonic ASCM.

Can any Chinese member please find details and specs of this missile. Looks like China is focusing more and more on neutralizing US Naval dominance in the South China Sea .. Hope Pakistan gets a chance to buy few to increase deterrence.

One chinese member claimed that one counter is already looking to buy any idea which one ?

 

[Akasa]

As always, it's annoying to see these articles jump to conclusions without giving forethought to evidence, or in this case, the lack thereof.

Let's start off with this missile. The article makes it so certain that this missile is somehow a pirated contraption of a Russian equivalent, but yet insufficient amounts are known regarding either systems to make such an assertion. We don't know the specifications of this missile, which company builds it, or what configuration it adopts. That is not to mention the glaring differences, even in aesthetics, that this system exhibits: the pointed nosecone, the larger body, smaller intake, and the diameter-to-length ratio. Even if these differences are to be ignored, most of these commonalities can be easily attributed to form following function.

Then, to the YJ-12. The article once again claims that it is based off the Russian missile system. The YJ-12, first of all, looks nothing like any other Russian anti-ship system. The former uses four ramjet engines with a clearly supersonic profile, diverging greatly from the subsonic Russian missile. Hopefully authors would do the due diligence and engage in more accurate research before writing similar pieces.

Lastly, the YJ-18. The author claims that this is a copy of a Russian system when there is no concrete evidence as to suggest what the YJ-18 even is.

 

[Kompromat]

Has anyone ever wondered why the USN and USAF don't use supersonic cruise and anti-ship missiles? It isn't that they can't build them, they most certainly can, but that there are downsides to supersonic speeds. Yes, the kinetic energy of a high speed object is enough to defeat many ships without the need for a warhead and their speed complicates and shortens countermeasure responses, but the range and maneuverability of supersonic systems compromises their overall effectiveness. Subsonic systems such as the HN-2000 and its US counterpart the Tomahawk have long-ranges, can be reprogrammed for different targets mid-flight or have their flights terminated, they can loiter and look for targets, and they can carry massive payloads. Supersonic missiles have smaller payloads, but this tends to be offset by their kinetic energy, shorter ranges and shorter flight times which means that the missile cannot be reprogrammed for a different target. The Russians, seeing the limitations of supersonic missiles, have even begun to use subsonic systems with a last minute high-speed dash (the Klub system) instead of true supersonic missiles. Both have their limitations and each can be easily defeated. The CX-1 and similar systems are not the boogeyman that people claim they are either.

Having this in mind, Pakistan has following arsenal of cruise and high speed missiles.

* Babur LACM
* Harpoon AShMs (Sub,Ground,Air, Surface launched)
* C-602A Coastal Defense System
* C-802A/AK - AShMs (Air, Surface launched)
* Exocest AShMs (Air, Sub launched)
* CM-400AKG (Air Launched - High speed)

If we for the sake of argument add CX-1 to our arsenal, how does it impact our naval defense in the context of 'Area Sea Denial' which is the primary role of Pakistan's Naval doctrine?

Thanks in advance.