CM-400AKG: A tough job for the Indian Navy

[S.Y.A]

while Cm-400 AKG(though some source still claims that it is under development) has range around 240 km,but integration with JF-17 is a bad move as JF-17's radar is much inferior and max range(though still not published clearly) is around 120 km(some pakistani member might want to clear this doubt as some members suggested that look down mode generally has lesser range than A2A mode).so,whatever it is,if JF-17 has to take shot,it'll have to be dangerously close to fire that missile,well within CBG's Air Defence as well as Fighter escorts.and as for deploying Aircraft carrier against Pakistan,we don't have to as mostly Airforce will be used to do that job.

jf-17 will be linked with AEW&C aircrafs as well as P3s, this will make it an effective weapon

Agree with you, I am definitely sure that "look down mode" is lesser than A2A mode... To kill a carrier in carrier battle group is tough job (though not impossible)
1. First point of defense is Patroling aircraft (F18/Rafael/MiG29K)
2. second layer of defence is Air defense ships (usually frigates) with 3 layer of security, LRSAM, MR-SAM, SR-SAM
3. 3rd layer of security is Carrier itself, the SAM on carrier
4. 4th layer of security is gatelling gun, it create a wall of bullets in front of invader...

Finally, if missile hit Carrier the massive size of carrier itself is defense , It will be unusable but not destroyed...



Welcome Carrier Killer...

a missile this fast will be v.hard for defences to counter

 

[rcrmj]

For bigger target , detection range is much larger than 80KM. Bigger target like AC can be detected by an Aircraft form 200-300 KM. But the big question is , can that aircraft have lock on AC from that far????


Carrier killer is old dream, but yet its not easy to have a carrier killer..

you are quite right, indeed conventional anti-ship missiles need midcourse guide to ensure the target will be within the missiles' seekers scan radius (mostly around 10-20KM maximum), in order to achieve that other guiding platforms like shore based radar, carrier radar, AWACs, satellite and data links are crucial for their midcourse guidance.

so the question of whether CM-400AKG is a potent threat to Indian Navy or not is heavily dependent on its midcourse guidance system. otherwise, its range, speed and warhead is not quite relevant

 

[S.Y.A]

it is, but the delivery system (AC) has to come close to 50-80- km range at least for a lock on target to launch the missile.

Counter measures will already be in air much before it comes near that range.

like i said jf-17 will be linked with AWACS and P3s, so no need to go that near, and even if the detection range is 70km, your ships dont have SAMs of that much range to take out the launching platform

 

[rcrmj]

however the problem with Indian navy is that is seriously lack of LRsam, MRsam and sophisticated CIWs and sea RAMs, besides they don't even have Agies system and fixed wing sea born AWACs, so a venture near PA water can be very dangerous for IN

 

[confound thinker]

bt brahmos is too heavy and too costly...

i was talking abt a lighter kind of missile like dis one...we can have a large no of dis..on a single aircraft..
also it's speed of mach 5 seems much more than brahmos...so it will be harder to intercept..
nd we wont have to use waste brahmos for smaller ships which are less defended...

 

[anonymus]

Guys,

I did a google search and was not able to find a credible reference for this missile?

Does this missile even exist? It has not been reported by newspapers also and Hypersonic cruise missiles are only in development, none has been tested yet.

 

[truthseer]

bt brahmos is too heavy and too costly...

i was talking abt a lighter kind of missile like dis one...we can have a large no of dis..on a single aircraft..
also it's speed of mach 5 seems much more than brahmos...so it will be harder to intercept..
nd we wont have to use waste brahmos for smaller ships which are less defended...

It's this not dis. Sincerely, I know you know how it is spelled but it would take a second, at most, to write an extra letter. Makes it much easier to read, especially as you'll soon have lots of posts (Welcome to PDF, by the way)

Guys,

I did a google search and was not able to find a credible reference for this missile?

Does this missile even exist? It has not been reported by newspapers also and Hypersonic cruise missiles are only in development, none has been tested yet.

Actually, we've had a previous thread about it on defence
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/221101-cm-400akg-pakistans-supersonic-carrier-killer.html

 

[GR!FF!N]

however the problem with Indian navy is that is seriously lack of LRsam, MRsam and sophisticated CIWs and sea RAMs, besides they don't even have Agies system and fixed wing sea born AWACs, so a venture near PA water can be very dangerous for IN

you seems to forget one thing..The possible battle with PN will happen right under our very nose.so,ship borne awacs is not needed as IAF's AWACS can detect them while remaining well within Indian boundary.and India is developing LRSAM,MRSAM with Israel.until then,Shtil(range around 30 km) will be used as well as Barak point defence missiles will be used,alongside CIWS.and for Aegis system,very few country posses that kind of system and USA offered us Aegis system for our next gen frigates that India is building.but Barak-8 will be enough to counter that kind of missiles..and IAF will neutralise any kind of threat even before entering within the threat scenario.then again,for PN,we don't have to deploy carrier,do we??

 

[Markus]

The K-100 Novator missile when ready will be a game changer.

 

[GR!FF!N]

jf-17 will be linked with AEW&C aircrafs as well as P3s, this will make it an effective weapon



a missile this fast will be v.hard for defences to counter

can you provide a source for the first part buddy???

The K-100 Novator missile when ready will be a game changer.

for AWACS,yes..but we need Barak-8 to counter this kind of missile..

 

[Nisha]

Great post. I hope this smacks some seirous sense into those Indianposters who bend over backwards whenever they read some BS CHinese post that talks about "friendship".....keep your eyes wide open and your hearts tucked away morons.

 

[S.Y.A]

can you provide a source for the first part buddy???



for AWACS,yes..but we need Barak-8 to counter this kind of missile..

logic brother, if the aircrafts were not to have data linking, why would they be replacing almost all of PAF's fleet , and why would they be integrated with BVR, and why would PAF induct AWACS? man seriously use your brain

 

[confound thinker]

It's this not dis. Sincerely, I know you know how it is spelled but it would take a second, at most, to write an extra letter. Makes it much easier to read, especially as you'll soon have lots of posts (Welcome to PDF, by the way)

Thanks
will take care from now on...

 

[GR!FF!N]

logic brother, if the aircrafts were not to have data linking, why would they be replacing almost all of PAF's fleet , and why would they be integrated with BVR, and why would PAF induct AWACS? man seriously use your brain

I'm using my brain and I know that most of the country generally follows that route,but you forgot one thing.the aircraft is from China wile you're using american P3c and another Nato Awacs.you'll going to have a heck of a trouble for that.Might be integration with Erieye possible,but P3c???thats where doubt remains..vy the way,not everytime,applying your brain,you can reached the right conclusion..see,we use various frech a2a missiles,as well as we use russian jets.but to integrate french missiles to russian jets,it needs permission as well as change in HW..and what you're suggesting is that JF-17 will fire the missile,but it'll be guided by AWACS,just like USA is working on F-22 and B-1 integration..that needs extensive integration.do China and Sweden will agree for that kind of integration??

 

[Markus]

for AWACS,yes..but we need Barak-8 to counter this kind of missile..

Taking out AWACS will limit detecting range of the enemy.