Pakistan navy deploys Chinese C-602 cruise missile

[Bilal.]

But Brahmos can follow many flight profiles which Yakhont cant..and Since missile is now made in India,range can also be increased..

How so?? Air laauched version will be launced from a height as it will be mounted on an aircraft.Also it would have an initial velocity becasue fo fighter plane so its path will be less parabolic.
Ship launched version will be launched from ship and will have 0 initial velocity so tell me how they will have same flight path??

Yes it can go lo-lo profile but in that case the range is reduced to 120km. Correction, Yakhont can follow these different flight profiles. The balancing act is between range and cruise altitude(hence detection time).

BRAHMOS Supersonic Cruise Missile - BrahMos.com

"Its cruising alttitude could be up to 15 km and terminal altitude is as low as 10 meters"

 

[MilSpec]

Do you understand the difference between a LAND ATTACK cruise (Babur) and ANTI SHIP cruise (C602) missiles?

I actually do, Anti Ship missile navigation system and seeker combination usually has inertial navigational system, Tercom, GPS, Radio linked Active or passive radar seeker, Dsmac,and ATRS depending on range, attack modes and end application (Pure anti ship - Sea to Land).
Babur missile by it's specifications with INS, TERCOM/DSMAC, GPS, GLONASS navigational modes can used to target dynamic/static targets in the sea (ships/refineries) and thus in theory can be absolutely used to engage in anti-ship role, and thus the premise of my query.

I hope that explains my post, if not then please do educate me on challenges of adapting a "LAND ATTACK" cm to a Anti-Ship CM role....I would highly appreciate it.

 

[Bilal.]

Babur missile by it's specifications with INS, TERCOM/DSMAC, GPS, GLONASS navigational modes can used to target dynamic/static targets in the sea (ships/refineries) and thus in theory can be absolutely used to engage in anti-ship role, and thus the premise of my query.

Name one ASCM using TERCOM/DSMAC guidance. Infact, TERCOM is pretty much useless over sea and against a moving target.

In theory an INS guided ballistic missile can be used against ships, just shoot it in the general direction and hope it hits. But that would be absurd.

 

[MilSpec]

Did you read em? do tell us what they say?

Absolutely:
In the first link you posted from UPI : The article discusses India seeking russia to deploy brahmos... I suspect your calling card is the paragraph which suggest that russia experts holding the view that Brahmos is a downgraded Yakhont. Caveat being it doesn't mention the experts or gives any explanations of how a missile with better deployment platforms, same speed, same range, additional flight path and attack modes be a down graded system Essentially the rhetoric being masked behind unnamed experts...In the excitement of insulting Indian contributions you might have posted a self defeating source as YOUR SOURCE itself states the following "The missile's target acquisition software, guidance, navigation and fire control systems are all Indian contributions to the JV, along with the firing mechanisms." thus repudiating you silly claims of "software change"

In the second link you have posted from russia&India report, if you would have cared to read, is the exact same content as the first one, but then again your keywords in google might explain that...

The third link that you posted from aus power, was indeed a good read not just about yakhont and other rusian munition and I would thank you for that. In the Yakhont section due to vintage of the article strongly supports my view of the Indian contribution in the system (which on the first link inadvertently was corroborated by you) as the article claims the following:
"Indian promotional materials indicate guidance improvements to the Brahmos over the original design, and the intent to deploy shipboard, mobile coastal defence and air delivered variants. There has also been speculation about a land attack or dual role variant, requiring a more accurate midcourse navigation system"
As land attack, Submarine launched versions were launched, it absolutely confirms Karlo Kopps rhetoric that Brahmos today has better and more accurate navigation system than the Yakhont or the Bastion P.

Your fourth link is to specs of Yakhont which has not been contested, refuted or claimed otherwise by anyone on the forum till date.

Your Fifth link provide splended information on chinese munition which again has not been refuted or contested, and was a treat to read.


As i said before my stance remains same, but none of your ill researched links provide any confirmation of your suspicions of upgrades.

On the other hand I would have hoped you were right that, P800 oniks was such an advanced system which by just a software upgrade could achieve "SLCM and Land Attack modes" that would have been indeed revolutionary....

Feel free to correct me if I have missed any of the facts or content in your presented argument.

thanks!

 

[MilSpec]

Name one ASCM using TERCOM/DSMAC guidance. Infact, TERCOM is pretty much useless over sea and against a moving target.

In theory an INS guided ballistic missile can be used against ships, just shoot it in the general direction and hope it hits. But that would be absurd.

ASCM:

TERCOM- KH55 (russia), Naval Strike Missile (Norway), BGM-109B Tomahawk (USA), SOM (Turkey) note these system employ active/passive seeking, GPS along with Tercom

understand that tercom or terrain reference systems are for ensuring stealth of flight path, which over the water can be achieved by systems as simple an ultrasonic transducer mated to the digital gyroscope or to the actuated aerodynamic surface. But the targeting in these missiles for dynamic targets are carried out by Active/passive radar seekers, ATRS, IR Seekers etc.

Now on the babur, the along with tercom, you have redundant navigation using GPS and Glonass, the only system which it would need would be an active/passive/ir seeker. thus the development part of it....

 

[Bilal.]

ASCM:

TERCOM- KH55 (russia),

Dont know if an operatinal ASCM version exists for it.

Naval Strike Missile (Norway)

Uses IIR for terminal phase, tercom for land attack only.

BGM-109B Tomahawk (USA),

Uses active radar guidance

SOM (Turkey) note these system employ active/passive seeking, GPS along with Tercom

Not an ASCM

understand that tercom or terrain reference systems are for ensuring stealth of flight path,

True but its useless over sea, since, its featureless.

which over the water can be achieved by systems as simple an ultrasonic transducer mated to the digital gyroscope or to the actuated aerodynamic surface. But the targeting in these missiles for dynamic targets are carried out by Active/passive radar seekers, ATRS, IR Seekers etc.

Exactly, it needs a specially developed terminal guidance system, which, Babur does not have.

Now on the babur, the along with tercom, you have redundant navigation using GPS and Glonass, the only system which it would need would be an active/passive/ir seeker. thus the development part of it....

and what about Search/Target/ Firecontrol/command vehicle? An ASCM is not a standalone piece of equipment, its part of a system. So not only a terminal guidance would need to be developed and software reprogrammed and tested but also all these other pieces of a complete ASCM system would need to be developed. And when you plan to induct just a couple of hundred, it doesn't make sense to invest so much. You just wont achieve economy of scale.

 

[sniper.fighter]

Well you do not produce exocet ot Harpoons, both are imports, whereas Babur is claimed to be made in pakistan. So it is intriguing that you would import a system marred by MCTR but not use your own system which is supposed to have better potency

dear indians,
frst you cover your sub-marines,,,which is base for your WORLD'S BEST missiles. one of them in each year is going to be destroyed.

 

[gslv mk3]

dear indians,
frst you cover your sub-marines,,,which is base for your WORLD'S BEST missiles. one of them in each year is going to be destroyed.

Starts pdf career with a troll post.... anyway..

 

[Drebin]

Hi,

This is off topic and I'm too lazy to google it (SORRY). So I'll ask if any Indian or Pak friend could ans whether Brahmos is Nuclear tipped cruise missile or, is it conventional? Also, what's its payload?

Thanks.

 

[Bilal.]

Hi,

This is off topic and I'm too lazy to google it (SORRY). So I'll ask if any Indian or Pak friend could ans whether Brahmos is Nuclear tipped cruise missile or, is it conventional? Also, what's its payload?

Thanks.

No, its not nuclear tipped, it carries a conventional warhead of 200 kg.

 

[Drebin]

No, its not nuclear tipped, it carries a conventional warhead of 200 kg.

Thanks @Bilal. for prompt reply. And so in this regard, may I ask about the complexity involved in development of Nuclear tipped Ship/Submarine launched cruise missile vs conventional cruise missile. I'm curious because as per our Armed Forces revised doctrine, we are aiming for second strike capability to complete our Nuclear triad. And also due to India's greater economic muscle, the asymmetry in our conventional forces is ever increasing for which, we've moved towards "dis-appropriate response" and deployment of BRBMs.

Thus, my point is whether C-602 is actually a stop-gap measure as we quietly move towards the the naval variant of Nuclear tipped Babur along with new AIP subs while keeping everything hush hush so as not make too many ripples internationally to jeopardize our economy further? Or even sanctions courtesy of uncle Sam?

 

[Bilal.]

Thanks @Bilal. for prompt reply. And so in this regard, may I ask about the complexity involved in development of Nuclear tipped Ship/Submarine launched cruise missile vs conventional cruise missile. I'm curious because as per our Armed Forces revised doctrine, we are aiming for second strike capability to complete our Nuclear triad. And also due to India's greater economic muscle, the asymmetry in our conventional forces is ever increasing for which, we've moved towards "dis-appropriate response" and deployment of BRBMs.

The answer in technical terms would be that it depends if one has achieved a degree of warhead miniaturization to fit into a cruise missles limited space/payload. With our move towards plutonium based warheads that seems to have been achieved. The more important question is that while we are moving towards a possible nuclear tipped LACM launched from sea based platform, does our doctrine call for an antiship nuclear missile? Probably not yet.

Thus, my point is whether C-602 is actually a stop-gap measure as we quietly move towards the the naval variant of Nuclear tipped Babur along with new AIP subs while keeping everything hush hush so as not make too many ripples internationally to jeopardize our economy further? Or even sanctions courtesy of uncle Sam?

Different roles, C-602 of PN are coastal defence ASCM while nuclear tipped Babur will be a LACM launched from sea based platform.

 

[Drebin]

@Bilal.

Thanks mate. The last part as per role of each missile puts things into perspective

 

[IND151]

Lmao.. yes we copied tomahawk missiles... and even have the naval version under development...


View attachment 24213


With increased range and other advance/upgrades....Source DESTO .




Yup google the average IQ level wrt countries...

Kindly provide link for claim.

yup, what i said was correct, we can never beat India in anything because they are born to be superior

Brahmos is flasher while missiles like C-602 are dancers.

 

[Secur]

May be , Maybe Not ....... You can source the turbofan from outside also , right .

Source the turbofan - a critical component of the missile from a foreign country and that too without inviting a huge outcry from the West ? Not possible . It ai'nt the 90's anymore and there's not an iota of evidence that it's happening . Just the same old wild conjectures to explain/rationalize the facts .