Malaysia eyes Air Launched BrahMos?

[BDforever]

A 250 Km range missile hitting with 5+ mac speed is lethal... dnt you agree?

but bro a aircraft carrier is surrounded and protected long range early warning system which is more than 250km. i am still not sure its effectiveness against aircraft carrier but it is certainly a lethal weapon against frigate type ships.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Yes more successful in going offcourse and crashing.. while Babur CM is in service... while its naval version is under development with more range...



Im talking abt air launched version with shorter range etc..



Sir except yakhont or brahmos.. none other are in service and under development..



Brahmos itself has a range of 280-290 kms... whereas CM-400AKG has a range of 250km.



Here is what Air Commodore Mahmood Khalid, PAF JF-17 Deputy Project Director stated:

"The CM-400AKG is a very high-speed missile that is very tough to intercept. It hits the target at Mach 4 or above and its kinetic impact alone is enough to destroy any high-value target, like an aircraft carrier."

More info:

The CM-400AKG is a 400 kg solid-rocket-powered weapon that can be fitted with either a penetrator or blast/fragmentation warhead. It is a fire-and-forget precision-guided weapon that can be fitted with several seeker options, which are understood to include an active radar seeker and an imaging infrared seeker with target-recognition (TR) capabilities. PAF sources say the missile can be pre-programmed with digital imagery for highly precise attacks against fixed sites in TR mode, but it can also be retargeted in flight by using the radar seeker option.

Again .. im not much familar with the missile...also most of the specs of CM-400 are not known anyways...

Also this thread might interest you... as youve already post a few comments in it... :

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/256774-cm-400akg-tough-job-indian-navy-25.html



Sir it was supposed to be a 1000km LRCM... but now 700km is the range being worked upon...



Its not just S-300 or HQ-16 (improved n long ranged HQ variant) even barak-8 will have a hard time dealing with missiles like cm-400akg...as the thread i posted mentions the issues..

1.Nirbhay travelled at least 25% of its range before crashing.Babur just 17 km in first,22km second.None of them something to brag about i admit.
2.Ok.
3.True,but again pakistan air defence network too is not complete and modern.
4.CM-400 AKG has range of 180 km to max 240 km.Brahmos 280-290.
Here's the gig,cm-400AKG is launched by jf-17 whose radar can pick up naval sized targets at aroudn 130 km..negating most of the range.
5.I have no doubt its capable missile..and no officer will trounce the missile his force just bought.Still there are limitations to the 'carrier killer',its not manueverable,and can't hit fast targets,the jf-17s radar and that it will have to face mig-29ks,Shipborne phased array radars like ones on kolkata class can track jf-17 RCS targets at 300 km-400km.There will aslo be airborne early warning aircraft like helix or an AWACS from IAF around CBG.
6.Yes the verson to be tested is around 750 km.But operational requirement is 1000 km and when inducted it will be that range..though as u say will take time.Pakistan clearly has taken a lead in this area with babur.
7.There is one difference between klub/yakhont and cm-400akg..it ability to conduct rapid evasive manuevering .Even CIWS can potentially shoot down high mach targets that don't manuevre.But yes no system is foolproof and can't be said absolutelty certain.But we will use layered system of decoys,barak-8,shtil-1,barak-1 and CIWS.

 

[Skull and Bones]

A 250 Km range missile hitting with 5+ mac speed is lethal... dnt you agree?

In earlier discussions it was already established the warhead weight is too less to make a significant damage, unless it hits the weapons or fuel storage.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

but bro a aircraft carrier is surrounded and protected long range early warning system which is more than 250km. i am still not sure its effectiveness against aircraft carrier but it is certainly a lethal weapon against frigate type ships.

Its much less use against frigate type ships which move quickly as it can't hit fast moving targets.

In earlier discussions it was already established the warhead weight is too less to make a significant damage, unless it hits the weapons or fuel storage.

Now warhead weight is sufficient to make heavy damage due to speed,probably won't outright kill carrier unless hits a soft spot.But a 'mission kill' would produce same result.

 

[Gessler]

@DESERT FIGHTER

High-supersonic/hypersonic PGMs like these have existed since 1970s in the Soviet inventory. They are all
but redundant against an aircraft carrier battle group in the modern world.

Secondly, just 1 or 2 such missiles will do anything except hit the carrier successfully. That's why
the Soviet naval doctrine envisaged the use of high-speed anti-ship missiles against aircraft carriers
in a much bigger & elaborate way.

What is needed is swarm attacks - with atleast 24 such missiles launched from 12 x JF-17s,
supported by 1 x Saab-2000 AEW&C, if to overwhelm the air defences of the carrier, it's supporting
warships etc.

The Soviet plan of ambushing US CBGs was much bigger - swarms of high-speed missiles launched
off strike fighters or Tu-22s, submerged nuclear SSGNs & maybe even some warships - all at once to
overwhelm the defences and sink the carrier.

Either way, the element of surprise will be lost very early, greatly reducing the chances of success.

Is it any wonder that Russia, China no longer field such high-speed PGMs as a means to attack CBGs?

As someone once said, it's not like you just fire a missile and sink an aircraft carrier, there's much
more to it than what meets the eye.

The PAF officer either seems to be dodgy to explain the complexities involved in anti-carrier doctrines,
or as someone rightly pointed out, the principle use of CM-400AKG in PAF inventory is to be
a high-supersonic supplement to the subsonic Ra'ad in the A2G role, possibly given India's recent push
to acquire state-of-the-art CMDs like low-level radars, SPYDER etc.

I had explained the problems regarding anti-carrier doctrine with CM-400AKG in another forum.

Since I shouldn't provide the link to that forum here (or can I?), you should simply search for the
thread "CM-400AKG:Tough job for Indian Navy" in the counterpart of PDF from across the border,
if you know what I mean.

If not, I will explain the same points here tomorrow.

 

[BDforever]

Its much less use against frigate type ships which move quickly as it can't hit fast moving targets.



Now warhead weight is sufficient to make heavy damage due to speed,probably won't outright kill carrier unless hits a soft spot.But a 'mission kill' would produce same result.

yes and another disadvantage is that it is not sea skimming. I think C803 sea skimming with a range of 300km at mach 2 is good option, BD is going for it.

 

[Kloitra]

A 250km range missile cannot be a threat to an aircraft carrier by any stretch of imagination.

The media needs to tone down their voices.

Depends. If the missile can maintain supersonic speed for entire flight, than it would be difficult to intercept. But if it is subsonic for most of the flight path, than it increases chances of interception.

 

[Skull and Bones]

Now warhead weight is sufficient to make heavy damage due to speed,probably won't outright kill carrier unless hits a soft spot.But a 'mission kill' would produce same result.

It will just punch a hole through the hull, won't even drown it in most cases as the hull is segmented, hence the damaged part can be locked to keep it floating. But the hard thing will be to come at a range of 200 km from the carrier, as the naval radar can easily look at ranges exceeding 400km.

 

[Gessler]

Sir jee nirbhays range was decreased to 700kms..

There are 2 versions of Nirbhay - one 1,200km variant for ALCM role from Su-30MKI,
and one 750km variant for ALCM role from Jaguar DARIN-III & Rafale MMRCA.

The SLCM will end up with 1,200km range too.

Provide a source for your claim.

A 250 Km range missile hitting with 5+ mac speed is lethal... dnt you agree?

I'm sure you know about the SY-400 tactical missile, don't you?

The CM-400AKG airframe is derived from that missile.

Now tell me, what is SY-400's max velocity when diving at the target from a vertical envelop?

It's between Mach 4 and Mach 5 as per most sources I came across.

So how come CM-400AKG achieve Mach 5.5 in a horizontal flight profile? Does it have a SCRAMJET
engine?

It is simply against the laws of physics - the PAF officer is either confused or is trying to keep the
enemy guessing. The latter being the most likely aspect.

You must take such extravagant specs with a pinch of salt.

 

[Dillinger]

yes and another disadvantage is that it is not sea skimming. I think C803 sea skimming with a range of 300km at mach 2 is good option, BD is going for it.

The C803 is only supersonic during the initial target approach phase (30km out from the target) and attains the mach 2 velocity only in its terminal phase, whereas the Brahmos has a sustained mach 2 velocity throughout its cruise profile. Secondly the Brahmos is indeed sea-skimming ( 4 meters to 5 meters Ship-launched BRAHMOS can fly in sea-skimming mode, completely destroy target :: BrahMos.com - from the official source), the C803 has a flight altitude between 5 to 50 meters- smaller warhead, smaller punch due to lesser momentum.

 

[BDforever]

The C803 is only supersonic during the initial target approach phase (30km out from the target) and attains the mach 2 velocity only in its terminal phase, whereas the Brahmos has a sustained mach 2 velocity throughout its cruise profile. Secondly the Brahmos is indeed sea-skimming ( 4 meters to 5 meters Ship-launched BRAHMOS can fly in sea-skimming mode, completely destroy target :: BrahMos.com - from the official source), the C803 has a flight altitude between 5 to 50 meters- smaller warhead, smaller punch due to lesser momentum.

Why comparing with Brahmos LOL ? all know Brahmos is better than C803

 

[BATMAN]

Malaysia eyes Air Launched BrahMos?

what kind of English is this?

'Malaysia eyes', reminds me... your eyes .. my eyes...

 

[Dillinger]

@DESERT FIGHTER @BDforever The AKG is not a threat to a CBG simply because its range dictates that the attacking aircraft will have to bypass the BARCAP (180nm- 340km out from the CBG on the main threat axis of which there is only one as far as we are concerned (Outer air battle zone defense) and the AEW&C assets flying a race track loiter (100nm out)- there are other reasons why the AKG is not so effective. BUT it will certainly ensure a very tight operational window and force us to dedicate an AEW&C Platform for the navy's shore based support system.

Lastly, interception of said missile is not particularly difficult, the shorter response time that speed would provide is eaten up by the fact that it has a purely ballistic trajectory thus making it far easier to track whereas a slower weapon like the C803 is in fact harder to detect (cruise missile defense is conducted by tracking the CM with an AEW&C and using it to provide guidance through time share to the SAM). A high mach vehicle can and has been intercepted, hell we've intercepted re-entering SRBMs (which happen to be hypersonic as well) with a 4.5 mach interceptor which just has a lateral acceleration of 7g and a RF seeker- the said interceptions were made at an altitude of 15000 meters- http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/interceptor-missile-test-fired-successfully-89715 you can find the thermal imagery recorded video of said interception in the forum itself) the AD for the CBG has a far more capable interceptor, with a Active phased array seeker, 80g lateral acceleration and the same speed. So its not so easy. But the main glitch will always remain the BARCAP which will intercept any AC a good 300 km+ out from the CBG. But yes our CBG will not be able to sanitize a whole theater wide zone like the AEGIS nor will it be protected from proper BMs.

 

[Gessler]

Depends. If the missile can maintain supersonic speed for entire flight, than it would be difficult to intercept. But if it is subsonic for most of the flight path, than it increases chances of interception.

Interception depends on speed if the interceptor is in tail-chase mode. But most instances of
CM-400AKG popping up against IN CBGs will see the IN interceptors facing the missile - i.e. head-on
mode.

Speed is irrelevant because the radar calculates the incoming missile's trajectory and the interceptor
(say, a Barak-2) simply goes and stands in the way of AKG - hitting it and deflecting it/destroying it.

This is particularly true because there is no mention of evasive maneuvering capability on the AKG.

The advantage provided by the speed is impact velocity - an object coming at 500m/s does more
damage than one coming at 250m/s. And reaction time (but this is largely redundant
if the ship's radar's can see the planes coming from more than 400km away) The speed in itself does not help the missile dodge/escape
interceptors.

 

[Dillinger]

Why comparing with Brahmos LOL ? all know Brahmos is better than C803

Not comparing, you stated that it ( the "it" here being Brahmos and ergo my mentioning of Brahmos) was not sea skimming- corrected that. You stated that the C803 has a speed of Mach-2, not entirely correct, since it only achieves said velocity in the terminal phase. Just putting out the right info yaara.