CM-400AKG: Pakistan's supersonic carrier killer

[Capt.Popeye]

Low level attacks, escorts , diversions.. quite a few. At the end it is still similar to going into a well defended airspace with interceptors and SAMs.



Not range per-se but rather warhead size and speed.


Which is why the most effective way to crippe and sink any ship remains the good old torpedo

About the underlined parts:
1. Yes, the punch will decide the size of the "dent" or the "hole" which may or may not allow ingress of water; which in turn, may or may not sink the ship.
2. Yes again. Because the 'torp' is more likely to hit 'below the water-line' which is the most inportant ingredient required in the recipe to sink a ship. I am still bemused as to how a BMplowing into a Carrier's deck will sink it.

 

[Dillinger]

Low level attacks, escorts , diversions.. quite a few. At the end it is still similar to going into a well defended airspace with interceptors and SAMs.



Not range per-se but rather warhead size and speed.



Which is why the most effective way to crippe and sink any ship remains the good old torpedo

True, the BARCAP can be drawn out by employing a flight as a diversion, but that is going to be a little difficult given the Kamov AEW&C and ship based sensors scanning the airspace creating a rather sensor dense environment. Either way a large number of resources will have to be diverted to execute such an operation, no?

 

[nomi007]

may be pak-china secretly tested it

 

[SQ8]

True, the BARCAP can be drawn out by employing a flight as a diversion, but that is going to be a little difficult given the Kamov AEW&C and ship based sensors scanning the airspace creating a rather sensor dense environment. Either way a large number of resources will have to be diverted to execute such an operation, no?

Possibly a flight of 4 could pull it off. After all, even with the AKG on board there is still a fuel tank, two BVR missiles and a WVR system to engage. So a flight of 4 could both break the BARCAP and also engage the CBG.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Yes sir, nothing like a sub underneath and a torpedo up the carriers @ss.

There have been numerous successes of subs taking down US carriers in many war excercises.

It would need multiple Torpedo hits to sink the Carrier; even by a Sub.
So that last sentence may be a misnomer to that extent. A single sighting of a Carrier by a sub shown on its periscope (during exercises) will hardly translate into that in reality. It just may indicate that the Sub managed to creep up undetected.

However the "Torp" is more lethal than the much-hyped "Carrier Killers" that are being fired around on this thread.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Possibly a flight of 4 could pull it off. After all, even with the AKG on board there is still a fuel tank, two BVR missiles and a WVR system to engage. So a flight of 4 could both break the BARCAP and also engage the CBG.

But the BARCAP is not the only defense layer around the CBG. Assuming that the Aggressors manage to evade all the sensors.

 

[SQ8]

But the BARCAP is not the only defense layer around the CBG. Assuming that the Aggressors manage to evade all the sensors.

It isnt, but it is one layer..
After all, this was able to happen a few years ago.. so I am sure certain aspects may be replicated.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/124858-pafs-exercises-around-world-2.html

 

[Glitcher]

we dont realy need carrier killer if CM-400Akg can put INS A/C out of service for even a week that would do the job Coz of limited duration of Indo Pak war soo it can do the job

 

[Penguin]

Maybe just a "Carrier Denter"
Carriers are not gunboats in terms of survivability. How many hits did the USS Yorktown take at the Battle of Midway.
Then did she get 'killed'? Poor Adm. Chuichi Nagumo; nobody had told him about "Carrier Killers".



Maybe just a "Carrier Denter"
Carriers are not gunboats in terms of survivability. How many hits did the USS Yorktown take at the Battle of Midway.
Then did she get 'killed'? Poor Adm. Chuichi Nagumo; nobody had told him about "Carrier Killers".

LOLLL. When 'Hype' becomes 'Hypersonic'.

Uhm, the question was why a large warhead. That's the answer. I you bother to consider my previous posts, you know I am very sceptical about the ability of a single weapon to sink a carrier or even disable it for a significant amount of time. So, the lecture above is uncalled for, thank you.

 

[Penguin]

About the underlined parts:
1. Yes, the punch will decide the size of the "dent" or the "hole" which may or may not allow ingress of water; which in turn, may or may not sink the ship.
2. Yes again. Because the 'torp' is more likely to hit 'below the water-line' which is the most inportant ingredient required in the recipe to sink a ship. I am still bemused as to how a BMplowing into a Carrier's deck will sink it.

A torp would not actually hit the hull rather explode underneath the keel, to break the back of a ship (not to punch a hole).

It would need multiple Torpedo hits to sink the Carrier; even by a Sub.
So that last sentence may be a misnomer to that extent. A single sighting of a Carrier by a sub shown on its periscope (during exercises) will hardly translate into that in reality. It just may indicate that the Sub managed to creep up undetected.

However the "Torp" is more lethal than the much-hyped "Carrier Killers" that are being fired around on this thread.

Again, see my earlier posts, thank you.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Uhm, the question was why a large warhead. That's the answer. I you bother to consider my previous posts, you know I am very sceptical about the ability of a single weapon to sink a carrier or even disable it for a significant amount of time. So, the lecture above is uncalled for, thank you.

No please. The lecture (if any) was not meant for you. You'd be one of the last persons (in my book) that I'd direct a lecture towards. Neither are you the kind of person to subscribe to the "fanciful notion" of one missile being able to sink a Carrier. That suits the asstd. Fan-Boys here ; not you.

If I gave that impression to you; my regrets. As a matter of fact, you do bring some sanity to the absurd level of discussions that are frequent on this forum.

Thank you.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

A torp would not actually hit the hull rather explode underneath the keel, to break the back of a ship (not to punch a hole).

Again, see my earlier posts, thank you.

A Torp may or may not 'break the back of a ship'. That would be predicated on many factors. Just as whether it may 'punch a hole' in the hull (to simply use a colloquialism). History of ships hit by torpedoes indicate that.

 

[Penguin]

A Torp may or may not 'break the back of a ship'. That would be predicated on many factors. Just as whether it may 'punch a hole' in the hull (to simply use a colloquialism). History of ships hit by torpedoes indicate that.

I didn't say WILL break. Read my statement as 'in order to'. A small ship (e.g. frigate) may actually be torn in half (see Torrens video or pics). Here, a series of 11 pics with explanation.
Exploding Destroyer: Warship Sunk By a Torpedo in Pictures

The Mark 48 Mod Torpedo that caused the damage to Torrens had a warhead packed with 650 pounds (295 kg) of high explosives. So, it is a matter of where you place the punch of that amount of explosive, that makes a difference.

This is vid for Torrens: Australian Torpedo Test - YouTube
Here's a much bigger Spruance undergoing the same fate: HMAS Waller fires MK 48 Mod 7 (CBASS) torpedo - YouTube

By comparison, USS Mullinex (larger than Torren, but smaller than Waller) being hit by missile USS Mullinnix DD944 - My last duty station. - YouTube

Old IN Petya class corvette (smaller than Torrens) undergoing test firing with Brahmos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl48bwYBDfA

 

[Gessler]

Possibly a flight of 4 could pull it off. After all, even with the AKG on board there is still a fuel tank, two BVR missiles and a WVR system to engage. So a flight of 4 could both break the BARCAP and also engage the CBG.

And they will need a Saab AEW plane as well.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

I didn't say WILL break. Read my statement as 'in order to'. A small ship (e.g. frigate) may actually be torn in half (see Torrens video or pics). Here, a series of 11 pics with explanation.
Exploding Destroyer: Warship Sunk By a Torpedo in Pictures

The Mark 48 Mod Torpedo that caused the damage to Torrens had a warhead packed with 650 pounds (295 kg) of high explosives. So, it is a matter of where you place the punch of that amount of explosive, that makes a difference.

This is vid for Torrens: Australian Torpedo Test - YouTube
Here's a much bigger Spruance undergoing the same fate: HMAS Waller fires MK 48 Mod 7 (CBASS) torpedo - YouTube

By comparison, USS Mullinex (larger than Torren, but smaller than Waller) being hit by missile USS Mullinnix DD944 - My last duty station. - YouTube

Old IN Petya class corvette (smaller than Torrens) undergoing test firing with Brahmos BRAHMOS INDO-RUSSIAN SUPERSONIC CRUISE MISSILE TEST VIDEO - YouTube

So that does bear out my point, anyway.