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

[帅的一匹]

it somehow reminds me of about a year ago when the head of DRDO was so over the moon about this brahmos that he asked the ruskies buy some, and insisted even after the polar bear's diplomatic answer of "NO, thanks but NO!!!!!! " . just to see how deluded DRDO was.

Russians won't buy waterdown version of export products.

 

[帅的一匹]

We will cut Brahmos out in the weapon market for sure, its not some Alien weapon.

 

[帅的一匹]

We easily build up a weapon that Indians are pround of with no difficulty at all.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

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.

The CX-1 would be a great compliment to the existing systems in the Pakistani inventory. The acquiring of the CX-1 would be similar in many ways to Vietnam's acquiring of the Bastion-P system. This is to say that the system in of itself isn't too much of a deterrent to a larger neighbor, but when combined with other networked systems, it becomes one hell of an A2/AD type system. Pakistan seems to have a glut of land-based missiles for coastal and anti-ship duties however. The CX-1 is far too big for anything short of a large aircraft such as a heavy bomber to carry, unless you want to go the route of the SU-27 and carry one weapon only (the SU-27 can carry the SS-N-22 in its air-launched variant, but its so large that nothing else can be carried at the same time). In my option, Pakistan doesn't need the CX-1, but it would be a nice addition. More air and better ship launched missiles would be my preferred route. The C-802 and Exocet are pretty much the same, serviceable, but easy to deal with for modern ship-mounted defense. Even large supersonic missiles such as the CX-1 lack the maneuverability to evade such defense, rather they use their speed to limit the countermeasures effectiveness and response time. What Pakistan should opt for is smaller, longer-range and stealthier systems that can surprise an enemy. Pakistan has enough air, sea and land launched systems to tackle anything that comes too close to its shores, now it needs a system that can tackle a threat far beyond 300-400 Km. If the Babur can be turned into an anti-ship weapon, similar to the Tomahawk (a role that is never used though) than I would support this move more-so then I would the acquiring of the CX-1. More air and sea launched systems with greater range, less land based systems. Pakistan has enough land-based anti-ship cruise missiles.

 

[Kompromat]

The CX-1 would be a great compliment to the existing systems in the Pakistani inventory. The acquiring of the CX-1 would be similar in many ways to Vietnam's acquiring of the Bastion-P system. This is to say that the system in of itself isn't too much of a deterrent to a larger neighbor, but when combined with other networked systems, it becomes one hell of an A2/AD type system. Pakistan seems to have a glut of land-based missiles for coastal and anti-ship duties however. The CX-1 is far too big for anything short of a large aircraft such as a heavy bomber to carry, unless you want to go the route of the SU-27 and carry one weapon only (the SU-27 can carry the SS-N-22 in its air-launched variant, but its so large that nothing else can be carried at the same time). In my option, Pakistan doesn't need the CX-1, but it would be a nice addition. More air and better ship launched missiles would be my preferred route. The C-802 and Exocet are pretty much the same, serviceable, but easy to deal with for modern ship-mounted defense. Even large supersonic missiles such as the CX-1 lack the maneuverability to evade such defense, rather they use their speed to limit the countermeasures effectiveness and response time. What Pakistan should opt for is smaller, longer-range and stealthier systems that can surprise an enemy. Pakistan has enough air, sea and land launched systems to tackle anything that comes too close to its shores, now it needs a system that can tackle a threat far beyond 300-400 Km. If the Babur can be turned into an anti-ship weapon, similar to the Tomahawk (a role that is never used though) than I would support this move more-so then I would the acquiring of the CX-1. More air and sea launched systems with greater range, less land based systems. Pakistan has enough land-based anti-ship cruise missiles.

Any contemporaries which are capable of defeating the Ship mounted defenses of lets say Indian Navy?

 

[cirr]

Ok，so we all agree that the Brahmos is a piece of crap。

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Any contemporaries which are capable of defeating the Ship mounted defenses of lets say Indian Navy?

Sure, but the best route is a networked attack. From the air you have the P-3 and JF-17, plus Z-9ECs, with upgrades the Harpoon can become very resistant to electronic countermeasures, from the sea the PN can provide a good offensive or defensive punch and land based systems can join in to. Overwhelm your enemy with a combined and networked attack that sees all assets working as one, and not individual parts. This concept seems like a no-brainer, but actually its rather complicated to put into practice. Once even the USAF and USN fought over who does what, now are they only developing a joint strategy called air-sea battle. It's not the system or sensor that matters, its how its used that makes all the difference. The Navy, Air Force and Land force must work together and in concert without disruption or arguments. This alone would give Pakistan an edge over many of its neighbors.

As for systems that can defeat the IN, Pakistan's current inventory goes along way to fulfilling that requirement. The Harpoon is old, as is the Exocet and its Chinese counterpart the C-802, but these systems, being small, agile, resistant to electronic countermeasures and possessing a flight profile that makes them harder to detect are still great systems. Age doesn't matter too much if care is taken to upgrade a weapon. The CM-400 has enough kinetic energy alone to put any IN ship (minus the aircraft carriers) out of action with a single hit, the explosive just makes sure it will never be salvaged. This is a very deadly weapon and one that will be a great item to add in further numbers. My recommendation to the PN is too add the Klub series, or its Chinese counterpart the YJ-18. Its a smart system that flies an erratic flight profile making it difficult to detect, track and target with offensive countermeasures. Very resistant to electronic defense, and capable of a high-speed dash to its target in the final moments of flight, this would be a massive increase in Pakistan's capabilities. It's air, surface (land and sea) and sub-surface launched making it versatile as well. India uses the Klub-S and Klub-N variants, Pakistan should not let India get ahead in this race.

 

[Kompromat]

Sure, but the best route is a networked attack. From the air you have the P-3 and JF-17, plus Z-9ECs, with upgrades the Harpoon can become very resistant to electronic countermeasures, from the sea the PN can provide a good offensive or defensive punch and land based systems can join in to. Overwhelm your enemy with a combined and networked attack that sees all assets working as one, and not individual parts. This concept seems like a no-brainer, but actually its rather complicated to put into practice. Once even the USAF and USN fought over who does what, now are they only developing a joint strategy called air-sea battle. It's not the system or sensor that matters, its how its used that makes all the difference. The Navy, Air Force and Land force must work together and in concert without disruption or arguments. This alone would give Pakistan an edge over many of its neighbors.

As for systems that can defeat the IN, Pakistan's current inventory goes along way to fulfilling that requirement. The Harpoon is old, as is the Exocet and its Chinese counterpart the C-802, but these systems, being small, agile, resistant to electronic countermeasures and possessing a flight profile that makes them harder to detect are still great systems. Age doesn't matter too much if care is taken to upgrade a weapon. The CM-400 has enough kinetic energy alone to put any IN ship (minus the aircraft carriers) out of action with a single hit, the explosive just makes sure it will never be salvaged. This is a very deadly weapon and one that will be a great item to add in further numbers. My recommendation to the PN is too add the Klub series, or its Chinese counterpart the YJ-18. Its a smart system that flies an erratic flight profile making it difficult to detect, track and target with offensive countermeasures. Very resistant to electronic defense, and capable of a high-speed dash to its target in the final moments of flight, this would be a massive increase in Pakistan's capabilities. It's air, surface (land and sea) and sub-surface launched making it versatile as well. India uses the Klub-S and Klub-N variants, Pakistan should not let India get ahead in this race.

Very enlightening analysis.

Here are a few points.

• Pakistan Navy's primary role is to protect our shore line from a blockade. (Area Sea Denial)
• Another role which is being added is to host Pakistan's 2nd strike capability.
• We are negotiating six to eight AIP subs, possibally with a Cell VLS to launch multiple Babur-N for conventional or nuclear strike.
• Next goal is to induct upto ~ 30 (unreliable source) JF-17 Block-II aircrafts with CM-400AKG, C-802AK etc into Navy, a dimension it hasn't had before to this level. The Navy's Zarrar Squadron operates Mirage-V aircraft optimised for MA. So we maybe looking for a little Air Sea Battle concept being applied here.
• Next step is to replace surface fleet with better Ships i.e Ex USN OHPs or upgraded F-22Ps.

In this context, how do you see YJ-18 fitting in? - What platforms can PN use in a Netcentric setting to utilize all of its assets in coordination for Area Sea Denial? - Btw the chances of Pakistan getting Klub-N/S etc are zero.

 

[cirr]

A few details about CX-1

（1） basic technology taken from the DF-21D(never Chinese official designation but so named by our foreign friends nonetheless）
（2）launchable from ship or land vehicle
（3）three kinds of warheads（semi armor piercing、combustion and explosion fragmented、penetrating explosion，all integrated）
（4）booster rocket same as the M20‘s solid rocket motor
（5）sea skimming flight ability

 

[Asian.Century]

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."

We will cut Brahmos out in the weapon market for sure, its not some Alien weapon.

Of course Indian Brahmos, the future of the JV is assured, without Russian MOS India would be selling Bra (s) instead!

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Very enlightening analysis.

Here are a few points.

• Pakistan Navy's primary role is to protect our shore line from a blockade. (Area Sea Denial)
• Another role which is being added is to host Pakistan's 2nd strike capability.
• We are negotiating six to eight AIP subs, possibally with a Cell VLS to launch multiple Babur-N for conventional or nuclear strike.
• Next goal is to induct upto ~ 30 (unreliable source) JF-17 Block-II aircrafts with CM-400AKG, C-802AK etc into Navy, a dimension it hasn't had before to this level. The Navy's Zarrar Squadron operates Mirage-V aircraft optimised for MA. So we maybe looking for a little Air Sea Battle concept being applied here.
• Next step is to replace surface fleet with better Ships i.e Ex USN OHPs or upgraded F-22Ps.

In this context, how do you see YJ-18 fitting in? - What platforms can PN use in a Netcentric setting to utilize all of its assets in coordination for Area Sea Denial? - Btw the chances of Pakistan getting Klub-N/S etc are zero.

I'll start with the last question posed and work backwards from there. Netcentric battlefields require a lot of electronic support assets, so gathering more AWACS aircraft and ground communication systems is a must, but the most important aspect is simply to train as thought there are no branches of the military, just one giant unit. This is a problem for many nations, the air force, navy and land forces all have their areas of responsibility and stick to them without cross coordination. Seeing more JF-17s being added, and to the PN no less is a very, very important step forwards and one that will only increase the PN's ability to engage threats from multiple points simultaneously, thus overwhelming the enemies defense by sheer volume. But the Navy has to include the air force and ground forces into its plans if it wants success. Not just attacking ships at sea will do. Work with the air and land forces to demolish and degrade enemy trade-shipping, support facilities and port infrastructure. All branches should be working in concert. I have seen that Pakistan is in the process of acquiring more AWACS systems, this is awesome, but needs to provide C3I to not only the air-force but also the navy and the two must train together. The OHPs are still reliable and great for coastal defense, they have a long-range patrol capability too, but I wouldn't rely on them too much for anything that isn't close to shore. The F-22P would be a better choice to go arm-to-arm with an enemy. However its the Type 039A's are the punch that the PN needs badly and I am very glad to see they are being required to supplement the Agostas. Forget nuke boats, they might have the range, size, endurance, but they are noisier than AIP and DE subs every-time you compare the two. 6 Type 039A are being aquired and this alone makes the PN a deadly threat to an enemy that doesn't have much practical experience with sub-hunting, and who's anti-sub forces would be constantly harassed by a determined foe.

As far as second strike or land attack is concerned, if the PNs role is to protect the shores of the motherland then these are wasted capabilities. Nuclear weapons are fine, but they are a weapon of last resort and if carried on a ship would be more likely to end up at the bottom of the ocean then in the middle of a hostile city. The Babur for land attack should be left to the air and land forces, unless total sea dominance is achieved. If it is to be put to sea it should be converted into an anti-ship missile with a massive range that would keep all but the most stupid or determined ships away from Pakistani waters.

My recommendation above all is to train to fight as one. But as far as procurement is concerned, more warships will help massively, but recon and intelligence assets are equally important. Don't scrap old ships, convert them into ISR platforms and let them do this job whenever the opportunity to learn a thing or two about your enemy presents itself.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Ok，so we all agree that the Brahmos is a piece of crap。

How exactly?
Half on IN's modern warships are equipped with the klub 'sizzler' and half with the brahmos.IN had choice to get any of these but chose the brahmos for its future warships-so that tells me that the evaluation of the In seems to different than ur 'opinion'.
What is being said here by some members is brahmos is easy to intercept because its'a high-flying missile'.This is not really true.Another accusation is its heavy and non-manueverable-this is false.



Brahmos seems to be able to use two types of trajectory a high profile launch followed by a dive and final flight at around 120 kms as sea skimmer.Or a pure sea skimming mode in which its range is reduced.



Here brahmos following sea skimming mode doing a s-manuever to defeat countermeasures.This disproves 'its bad at manuevering'.Also we know india inducted land based block-3 brahmos speciafically modified for use in arunachal pradesh mountains in china border.They are capable of avoiding any mountain terrain obstacle by manuevering and then hitting fortified targets.

Secondly what is forgotten is brahmos is not meant to be launched singly but in salvoes -acc to russian doctrine.I read somewhere that the soviets calculated that between tu-22 backfire bombers and the oscar class SSGNs they would need a salvo of 18-24 supersonic cruise missiles to overwhelm the defenses of an AEGIS CBG by brute volume of firepower.(each oscar class carrying 24 p-700 granit-the predecessor to the yakhont).Now this was a 80s concept-defenses have improved ,but so have the missiles and their guidance systems.In salvo mode a supersonic missile like brahmos is worth 3 subsonic missiles due to the reaction time factor.
Also we don't have to deal with a US CBG,potentially at best 1-2 chinese CBGs coming in through the malacca straits(and that too not before another 10 yrs at least).I seriously doubt chinese CBG is anywhere near us battlegroup .Also we will have our unsinkable carrier the andaman and nicobar islands directly sitting on the route.Just one squadron(18) of su-30 mkis each armed with 3 brahmos(the new brahmos mini about to enter service-mig-29k and su-30 mki will be able to carry 3 instead of 1 will be able to release salvoes of upto 54 missiles.This is to discount the brahmos on surface ships and subs(we have klubs and exocets on subs for now).
I would say brahmos gives our mig-29ks on the 2 carriers and naval air arm immense flexibility.Each able to launch upto 3 brahmos each.This gives our mig-29ks immense mobile firepower available from the carrier that can i daresay match anything in the anti ship department .
As for PN,its not a boast to say its more or less defenceless against the missile with its archaic air defense systems on board its ships.

So i would argue no it's not a piece of crap.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Secondly what is forgotten is brahmos is not meant to be launched singly but in salvoes -acc to russian doctrine.I read somewhere that the soviets calculated that between tu-22 backfire bombers and the oscar class SSGNs they would need a salvo of 18-24 supersonic cruise missiles to overwhelm the defenses of an AEGIS CBG by brute volume of firepower.(each oscar class carrying 24 p-700 granit-the predecessor to the yakhont).Now this was a 80s concept-defenses have improved ,but so have the missiles and their guidance systems.In salvo mode a supersonic missile like brahmos is worth 3 subsonic missiles due to the reaction time factor.

A 'missile saturation' attack using a non-stealth missile (like Brahmos) will no longer work very well in the future.

SM-6 has an active radar seeker.

ESSM Block 2 has an active radar seeker.

The Chinese FM-3000 (currently at Zhuhai Air Show) has active radar.

http://i.imgur.com/lmwsVi6.jpg

None of these missiles will require the launch ship’s target illumination radars for terminal guidance.

 

[AgentOrange]

How exactly?
Half on IN's modern warships are equipped with the klub 'sizzler' and half with the brahmos.IN had choice to get any of these but chose the brahmos for its future warships-so that tells me that the evaluation of the In seems to different than ur 'opinion'.
What is being said here by some members is brahmos is easy to intercept because its'a high-flying missile'.This is not really true.Another accusation is its heavy and non-manueverable-this is false.



Brahmos seems to be able to use two types of trajectory a high profile launch followed by a dive and final flight at around 120 kms as sea skimmer.Or a pure sea skimming mode in which its range is reduced.



Here brahmos following sea skimming mode doing a s-manuever to defeat countermeasures.This disproves 'its bad at manuevering'.Also we know india inducted land based block-3 brahmos speciafically modified for use in arunachal pradesh mountains in china border.They are capable of avoiding any mountain terrain obstacle by manuevering and then hitting fortified targets.

Secondly what is forgotten is brahmos is not meant to be launched singly but in salvoes -acc to russian doctrine.I read somewhere that the soviets calculated that between tu-22 backfire bombers and the oscar class SSGNs they would need a salvo of 18-24 supersonic cruise missiles to overwhelm the defenses of an AEGIS CBG by brute volume of firepower.(each oscar class carrying 24 p-700 granit-the predecessor to the yakhont).Now this was a 80s concept-defenses have improved ,but so have the missiles and their guidance systems.In salvo mode a supersonic missile like brahmos is worth 3 subsonic missiles due to the reaction time factor.
Also we don't have to deal with a US CBG,potentially at best 1-2 chinese CBGs coming in through the malacca straits(and that too not before another 10 yrs at least).I seriously doubt chinese CBG is anywhere near us battlegroup .Also we will have our unsinkable carrier the andaman and nicobar islands directly sitting on the route.Just one squadron(18) of su-30 mkis each armed with 3 brahmos(the new brahmos mini about to enter service-mig-29k and su-30 mki will be able to carry 3 instead of 1 will be able to release salvoes of upto 54 missiles.This is to discount the brahmos on surface ships and subs(we have klubs and exocets on subs for now).
I would say brahmos gives our mig-29ks on the 2 carriers and naval air arm immense flexibility.Each able to launch upto 3 brahmos each.This gives our mig-29ks immense mobile firepower available from the carrier that can i daresay match anything in the anti ship department .
As for PN,its not a boast to say its more or less defenceless against the missile with its archaic air defense systems on board its ships.

So i would argue no it's not a piece of crap.

You are correct - A hypothetical Chinese CBG would be nowhere close to a USN CBG in capabilities. However, I also think there's little to no chance of a Chinese carrier battlegroup fighting in India's backyard either. What would be the ultimate goal of something like that? China has declared core interests and the Indian Ocean is decidedly not on that list. Frankly, I think a Chinese/Indian clash at sea is highly unlikely unless it took place in the SCS. China simply has no interest in the Indian Ocean in which case it would be an Indian CBG versus a Chinese CBG plus Chinese assets from Hainan and whatever Chinese airfields existed in the Spratley's at that time.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

A 'missile saturation' attack using a non-stealth missile (like Brahmos) will no longer work very well in the future.

SM-6 has an active radar seeker.

ESSM Block 2 has an active radar seeker.

The Chinese FM-3000 (currently at Zhuhai Air Show) has active radar.

http://i.imgur.com/lmwsVi6.jpg

None of these missiles will require the launch ship’s target illumination radars for terminal guidance.

So?You still have to intercept a manuevering mach 3 target in sea skimming mode-thats easier said than done.
Also the chinese ship area defense missile systems are based on russian s-300 series and are particularly vulnerable to sea skimmers.They have high range against aircraft (120 km+) but very low against cruise missiles(15-20kms).Even if u detect the missile ur still going to have to physically intercept it at the last phase .

What i'm wondering about is if klub sizzler is indeed the best option because it offers the best of both worlds-apparently subsonic approach with final supersonic sprint why IN chose brahmos for its future ships when it has easy access to klub.For example first batch of talwar class had klubs,but second batch was specified to be employed with brahmos.