What's new

Induction of CM-400 AKG Confirmed

The place from where we have found Rd-93.
According to deagel cost of Al-31F was 3.5 million USD at same time when RD unit was around 3 million.
Who says that,JFT is on credit?
wow, even RD93 scared us at that time..we almost didnt get rd93 and you expect Russia to release al 31 their most advance engine???..what if Russia said no, (well they almost certainly said no)..in case of rd93 back up plan was french and britian..than what?
no one has asked this question before because it so obvious..
 
.
wow, even RD93 scared us at that time..we almost didnt get rd93 and you expect Russia to release al 31 their most advance engine???..what if Russia said no, (well they almost certainly said no)..in case of rd93 back up plan was french and britian..than what?
no one has asked this question before because it so obvious..
PRC was using same for J-10 which we were going to induct under name of FC-20.
PRC would have made it possible.We were getting these engines from middle man already till few years back.
RD and AL series differ in thrust,otherwise are from same era,though as of today AL series have improved a lot.
 
.
But still I am holding my point, Even US thinks the same and that is why they are holding back our Zulus until India gets their Apache.
@James David

Dude I have no knowledge of this except for what is known to everybody. I will refer you to @gambit who has the expertise. If it was up to me I'll give you all the bells and whistles but that will seriously undo the balance of power in the subcontinent. Imagine if you dudes have F-35's? They'd be shitting their pants. :woot:o_O
 
. .
@HRK @Path-Finder @Signalian @Inception-06 @Khafee @Tps43 @khanasifm

Several articles till date have mentioned CM-400AKG as PAF's "carrier killer" implying its anti-ship role. However, the OEM (1) and MoDP (before censoring it) have both specified it as an air-to-ground missile.





From flightglobal.com:

News reports have indicated the CM-400 has entered service with the Pakistan air force. The AVIC video notes vaguely that the 910kg (2,000lb) weapon “can be carried by JF-17, etc”. It is usually compared with the Indian/Russian Brahmos high-speed cruise missile.

For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.

The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.

AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.

A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.

A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.





Recently, former PAF pilot Kaiser Tufail noted in a Defense News article that:

“Speed confers not only a higher kill probability on an anti-ship missile due to greater momentum on impact; it also enhances its own survivability against close-in weapons that are fired against it. Thus, a supersonic missile like the CM-400AKG is definitely an improvement over the subsonic predecessors.”

He added that “A flight of JF-17s configured with a single missile each, along with underwing drop tanks, offer sufficient range to keep any hostile surface task force at bay.”





1x CM-400AKG per JF-17 + drop tanks appears to be a big compromise on part of PAF in absence of a twin-engine fighter platform.
How does an IR/TV seeker fare against sea targets compared to ARH?

52633051_1074970592707032_2403877128098545664_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
@HRK @Path-Finder @Signalian @Inception-06 @Khafee @Tps43 @khanasifm

Several articles till date have mentioned CM-400AKG as PAF's "carrier killer" implying its anti-ship role. However, the OEM (1) and MoDP (before censoring it) have both specified it as an air-to-ground missile.





From flightglobal.com:

News reports have indicated the CM-400 has entered service with the Pakistan air force. The AVIC video notes vaguely that the 910kg (2,000lb) weapon “can be carried by JF-17, etc”. It is usually compared with the Indian/Russian Brahmos high-speed cruise missile.

For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.

The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.

AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.

A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.

A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.





Recently, former PAF pilot Kaiser Tufail noted in a Defense News article that:

“Speed confers not only a higher kill probability on an anti-ship missile due to greater momentum on impact; it also enhances its own survivability against close-in weapons that are fired against it. Thus, a supersonic missile like the CM-400AKG is definitely an improvement over the subsonic predecessors.”

He added that “A flight of JF-17s configured with a single missile each, along with underwing drop tanks, offer sufficient range to keep any hostile surface task force at bay.”





1x CM-400AKG per JF-17 + drop tanks appears to be a big compromise on part of PAF in absence of a twin-engine fighter platform.
How does an IR/TV seeker fare against sea targets compared to ARH?

52633051_1074970592707032_2403877128098545664_n.jpg
They acquired a few to vary the AShW capability, but the goal is to get a supersonic cruising AShM. They may trial the HD-1A, assuming they can get it to fit on the JF-17.
 
.
They acquired a few to vary the AShW capability, but the goal is to get a supersonic cruising AShM. They may trial the HD-1A, assuming they can get it to fit on the JF-17.

If ASuW is the intention, then an order for 60x CM-400AKG missiles isn't small considering there is only one JF-17 squadron (Masroor based No. 2) deployed in the maritime strike role.
 
.
If ASuW is the intention, then an order for 60x CM-400AKG missiles isn't small considering there is only one JF-17 squadron (Masroor based No. 2) deployed in the maritime strike role.

Eventually all mirages at masroor will be replaced by jf so you will have 4 to cover the coast and sea unless one or more are moved and assigned to new wing at new base in sindh
 
.
@HRK @Path-Finder @Signalian @Inception-06 @Khafee @Tps43 @khanasifm

Several articles till date have mentioned CM-400AKG as PAF's "carrier killer" implying its anti-ship role. However, the OEM (1) and MoDP (before censoring it) have both specified it as an air-to-ground missile.





From flightglobal.com:

News reports have indicated the CM-400 has entered service with the Pakistan air force. The AVIC video notes vaguely that the 910kg (2,000lb) weapon “can be carried by JF-17, etc”. It is usually compared with the Indian/Russian Brahmos high-speed cruise missile.

For the first time, the AVIC video details claims for the accuracy of each of the CM-400’s three major guidance systems, starting with a 50m (164ft) circular error probable (CEP) for an inertial navigation system coupled with satellite positioning. A weapon's CEP is defined as the 50% probability that it will hit within a given radius of the target’s position.

The accuracy of the CM-400 improves by an order of magnitude - to a CEP of 5m - when an onboard infrared (IR)/TV seeker activates to provide terminal guidance. The list also claims that the CEP of the weapon actually worsens to 5-10m when an IR/TV seeker is supplemented by a passive radar during the terminal phase. It is not clear why the passive radar – identified as occupying the L, S and X bands of the electromagnetic spectrum – would not improve the CM-400’s accuracy.

AVIC lists the 0.4m-diameter missile as having a range of between 54-130nm (100-240km), while carrying either a 150kg blast warhead or 200kg penetration warhead.

A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.

A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.





Recently, former PAF pilot Kaiser Tufail noted in a Defense News article that:

“Speed confers not only a higher kill probability on an anti-ship missile due to greater momentum on impact; it also enhances its own survivability against close-in weapons that are fired against it. Thus, a supersonic missile like the CM-400AKG is definitely an improvement over the subsonic predecessors.”

He added that “A flight of JF-17s configured with a single missile each, along with underwing drop tanks, offer sufficient range to keep any hostile surface task force at bay.”





1x CM-400AKG per JF-17 + drop tanks appears to be a big compromise on part of PAF in absence of a twin-engine fighter platform.
How does an IR/TV seeker fare against sea targets compared to ARH?

52633051_1074970592707032_2403877128098545664_n.jpg

Carrier killer is the name enthusiast online community of China and Pakistan gave which later adopted by International mainstream defence publishing groups, but it from day one could be used against ground targets .....

How does an IR/TV seeker fare against sea targets compared to ARH?
difficult to say but IR/TV seeker give advantage against EW package in comparison of ARH
1x CM-400AKG per JF-17 + drop tanks appears to be a big compromise on part of PAF in absence of a twin-engine fighter platform.
This configuration was quoted when JF-17 was not integrated with IFR, so to achieve the respectable range ACM Khalid Mehmood in one of his interview mention that JF-17 will carry one centre line fuel tank and 1,200 ltr fuel tank on one wing CM-400AKG on the other but now I am sure it will be able to achieve desire range with 2 CM-400AKG and one centre line 800-ltr fuel tank and refuel after take off at suitable distance .....
 
Last edited:
. . .
Reminds me about the one under development for Navy. Is it possible to adopt the same in a sense for JF-17 of Naval Missions?

Surface launched supersonic ASCMs are usually in the 2-2.5 ton range, however, lighter version (1-1.2 ton) can be developed for air-launched application.
As @Gryphon said, air launched is in the 1-1.5 ton range. Not sure of development (re air launch), but getting the capability is a priority.
 
.
As @Gryphon said, air launched is in the 1-1.5 ton range. Not sure of development (re air launch), but getting the capability is a priority.

IMO, they will continue with C-802AK (and possibly CM-400AKG) for Block I/II (No. 2 sqn) and introduce a supersonic missile (like HD-1A) with the JF-17B/Block III. The latter got more payload and may take 2x HD-1A on the under-wing pylons (in place of CM-400AKG).
 
.
As @Gryphon said, air launched is in the 1-1.5 ton range. Not sure of development (re air launch), but getting the capability is a priority.

Indeed. I was in-fact about the idea to have a solution in view of an air launched version of same missile but as said, it is merely an idea.
 
.
IMG_4572.JPG


Cm-400 long range air to surface missiles

Also we know about pl-5e and now listed as Pl-5DE some thing new

the seeker type looks different not sure if dummy model or actual missile training version with live seeker
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom