‘Pakistan Navy fully capable of defending country’s long coast’

[ghauri05]

The missile doesn't maneuver and its speed is not so much a factor because - 1.You will detect it a 100 miles out due to high trajectory like a plane 2.interceptor is head on ..not in tail chase making speed not a factor as such once recation time is not considered due to early detection.

Then why do indians jump in the name of brahmos...all those things are exactly same in case of brahmos

 

[Big Tank]

Could not go through all the posts but I do not doubt the credibility of @Oscar regarding his opinion about the current state of PN which is incredibly worst!

There is no harm to acknowledge the flaws within an organization but unfortunately 17yo kids at PDF cannot even go through basic strategic chain. They should ready how Indian Navy grilled PN in 1971.

 

[SQ8]

Show me which records mentioned that Pakistan inducted the J-10s. Sales fall apart all the time just like your logic.

I think that one flew over your head.. at Brahmos type speeds.

Then why do indians jump in the name of brahmos...all those things are exactly same in case of brahmos

The P-800(essentially what Brahmos is based on) is a sea skimming weapon while the CM-400akg is a high altitude terminal dive weapon.

One tries to fly a few feet above the waterline while the other flies way high and dives down.
One is detected much earlier and the other a little late.

The missile doesn't maneuver and its speed is not so much a factor because - 1.You will detect it a 100 miles out due to high trajectory like a plane 2.interceptor is head on ..not in tail chase making speed not a factor as such once recation time is not considered due to early detection.



Basically stating its fast and accurate.But stating none of the vital flaws - no maneuver,high lo profile only with no sea skimming.They are again advertising something they themselves won't use.PLAN itself uses supersonic sea skimmers ,and older subsonics for cheap support.

Even the subsonic sea skimmers are fairly deadly, simply because they have better last minute evasive maneuvering compared to the faster supersonic so they can make life difficult for any CIWS to pinpoint them.

 

[MiG-35-BD]

.....

Dear @Oscar thank you for these excellent posts that discuss the white elephant in the room. I would love to hear what solutions you have for the limited budget PN has. Here are some of my thoughts:

1. Mini submarines with detaching UUVs
2. An enlarged and locally produced Azmat class (around 800 tons) with medium range SAM capabilities
3. Small quantities of the 054A
4. USVs or manned small boats as AShM decoys

The key fact is that SAMs are expensive. You can try to avoid the problem by going underwater (submarines) or using better air defence (fighters like the Su-35) or spending a good amount of money on air defense frigates whose utility is unknown as the technologies are not tested in battle.

I would love to know what choices you would make if you were the head of PN...

 

[SQ8]

Dear @Oscar thank you for these excellent posts that discuss the white elephant in the room. I would love to hear what solutions you have for the limited budget PN has. Here are some of my thoughts:

1. Mini submarines with detaching UUVs
2. An enlarged and locally produced Azmat class (around 800 tons) with medium range SAM capabilities
3. Small quantities of the 054A
4. USVs or manned small boats as AShM decoys

The key fact is that SAMs are expensive. You can try to avoid the problem by going underwater (submarines) or using better air defence (fighters like the Su-35) or spending a good amount of money on air defense frigates whose utility is unknown as the technologies are not tested in battle.

I would love to know what choices you would make if you were the head of PN...

1. Submarines are being developed in sufficient numbers. Underwater UUVs were tested as well.. but as such mini subs can help in sabotage operations but not against a deployed at sea fleet or aerial attack.

2. The cost and complexity of the design makes it not feasible.

3. Maybe more might be useful.

4. That would be a good start.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

CM-400AKG is an air launched quasi ballistic missile with a solid fuel rocket which can stop start.
The engine gives about three sustained bursts of thrust. First just after launch at 25000+ feet, where the rocket heads upwards and levels out at about 50,000 feet and glides un-powered. Then second Burst mid flight to maintain glide speed of Mach 2-3. Last burst of thrust comes at terminal phase when the missile has pointed downwards an heads towards the target. Seeker acquired the target and rear small wings provide maneuverability. Last thrust and gravity together give the impact velocity of about Mach 5 .
The speed alone causes damage of a shaped charge hitting the ship with 200Kg explosives.
Since there is Maneuverability but very limited capability to do so, the Missile is advertised for "Large Slow moving targets" i.e. Air craft carriers and large ship,not small destroyers and missile boats.

None of that changes the fact that 1.Early detection due to high lo profile.
2.Reaction time problem due to high speed negated by early detection.
3.No maneuverability makes it easy for interceptors,here speed is a non issue except in reaction timeas its head on impact not tail chase.

Then why do indians jump in the name of brahmos...all those things are exactly same in case of brahmos

No.
Brahmos has both hi-lo for weakly defended targets and lo-lo flight profile for well protected ones.
Its a sea skimmer and difficult to pick up on radar until close by,here speed is valuable to cut down reaction time after late detection.
It can perform maneuvres such as s-maneuver when close to ship to evade defences.
Thats why if you see PLAN latest missile its supersonic sea skimmer.

 

[Safriz]

None of that changes the fact that 1.Early detection due to high lo profile.
2.Reaction time problem due to high speed negated by early detection.
3.No maneuverability makes it easy for interceptors,here speed is a non issue except in reaction timeas its head on impact not tail chase.



No.
Brahmos has both hi-lo for weakly defended targets and lo-lo flight profile for well protected ones.
Its a sea skimmer and difficult to pick up on radar until close by,here speed is valuable to cut down reaction time after late detection.
It can perform maneuvres such as s-maneuver when close to ship to evade defences.
Thats why if you see PLAN latest missile its supersonic sea skimmer.

There are two sets of wings on the missile. The rear ones are movable,and front set is fixed. The rear set is for maneuvering and front set for lift.
The nose cone has IR seeker or some other seeker can also be fitted. So yes there is maneuverability.
It will be detected soon after launch . But flies out of reach of any SAm or AAM at 50 Km altitude. Then the dive is too fast for interception.
However being just 400Kg in weight,the JF-17 an carry two and fire two on the same target. So one will hit even if one gets intercepted..theoretically

 

[MastanKhan]

There are two sets of wings on the missile. The rear ones are movable,and front set is fixed. The rear set is for maneuvering and front set for lift.
The nose cone has IR seeker or some other seeker can also be fitted. So yes there is maneuverability.
It will be detected soon after launch . But flies out of reach of any SAm or AAM at 50 Km altitude. Then the dive is too fast for interception.
However being just 400Kg in weight,the JF-17 an carry two and fire two on the same target. So one will hit even if one gets intercepted..theoretically

Hi,

The CM400AKG is close to a 1000Kg---only one can be mounted on the belly of the aircraft---.

"
Export variants[edit]
CM-400AKG[edit]
The CM-400AKG is an air-launched supersonic surface attack cruise missile, believed to be the export version of the YJ-12.[15] The 910 kg (2,000 lb) missile is 0.4 m (1.3 ft) in diameter and has a range of between 54–130 nmi (62–150 mi; 100–241 km) while carrying either a 150 kg (330 lb) blast or 200 kg (440 lb) penetration warhead. It has three guidance options, including inertial navigation system (INS) coupled with satellite positioning to get within 50 m, an onboard IR/TV seeker for terminal guidance and 5 m accuracy, and passive radar to supplement the seeker, which delivers (strangely worse) 5–10 m accuracy. One unusual characteristic is that it does not fly at low altitude to avoid detection, but rather uses “high altitude launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability.”[16] It may have a top speed of Mach 5".

 

[MiG-35-BD]

1. Submarines are being developed in sufficient numbers. Underwater UUVs were tested as well.. but as such mini subs can help in sabotage operations but not against a deployed at sea fleet or aerial attack.

2. The cost and complexity of the design makes it not feasible.

3. Maybe more might be useful.

4. That would be a good start.

The idea I have (and i am just a lay person not an engineer or a professional in the defense field) is that a small say 500 ton submarine, with a simple litium electric propulsion, with a small UUV piggybacking it. The submarine would have enough range to target major ports on the Western side of India. Armed with 4 torpedoes (simple, non-reloadable except at port), and a few mines, it would be able to stalk the ports.

The UUV would detach and be vectored towards the port. It would be armed with two torpedoes and target anything in the harbour that moves, or simply wait just outside the port for a ship to enter or leave.

The mini submarine, while not ideal for what you pointed out - striking at an indian fleet (we can leave that to the big subs), would be a step up from A2/AD just like the latest Azmat class boats.

Both these could be locally built. Instead of having complex and full performance systems, one could build this mini submarine locally. Sonar, torpedoes and propulsion from abroad, but the intellectual property would belong to PN, and there would be possibilities for sale. I think it could be a hit product as a decent coastal mini submarine is overpriced and overengineered right now.

Most navies don't need a full sized submarine which cost billions to acquire and operate.

A small boat, an enlarged Azmat class would not only be a lot harder to hit with a supersonic cruise missile (estimates I saw say that there is only a 50% chance of a hit, even without any defences, just because of size, speed and maneuvering), but also the loss of a capital ship would be catastrophic compared to the loss of a large FAC.

Advances in electronics mean a small boat today can basically have similar capabilities to a frigate 30 years ago. The main problem is over the horizon radar. That is something you can't put on a small boat and doesn't make financial sense. Sonars have become incredibly small and compact. So have missiles and even radars.

Now, there may be a work around for the over the horizon radar problem. To have reasonable air defense, you should have a medium range SAM, which means targeting at 20km away, which would need detection at 50-70 km range. A radar on a small boat would barely be able to to 30-40 km in real world conditions due to curvature of the earth. This has been a perennial problem of small boats.

Now that an AESA radar (say C or L band) has allowed us to make such a radar light and small, all one needs is to think out of the box. One such solution is to integrate a small airship - rigid aerostat that is a hybrid of an aeroplane, an aerostat and a kite. Shaped like an aeroplane so has lifting surfaces, powered by an electric engine, and tethered to a Azmat MKII. AESA and propulsion runs on power from the ship (tethered means connected with a cable). As it is a heavier than air platform, it will be relatively stable. When not in use, the "Aero-ship-kite" would be winded down and tucked into a rear platform of the ship. This rear platform does not need to take up a lot of the precious deck space. One could extend the rear deck with a steel extension, and use a telescope hangar. Being an airship like device, it can be deflated to make it smaller. since it has little weight, an extended platform in the rear would not be challenged.

The ship would be able to deploy such a flying contraption and perhaps a UAV (perhaps the whole concept of a combat ship can be rethought, perhaps in the A position, a main gun does not need to lie, instead one could have a rail launching system for a UAV). Mid ship you would have an 16x medium SAM, and in the rear 4x2 Anti-ship Harba (I think this is an extended range C-602). 2x CIWS/RAM hybrid (I've seen a CIWS with a few Chinese RAM integrated as a single unit).

And viola, you have an 800 ton vessel that has meaningful air defense and an offensive punch unlike anything in the planet. The main cost would be the SAM. If this can be made locally (what happened to the Italian sams bought by the PAF with "TOT"?)

 

[Gryphon]

A small boat, an enlarged Azmat class would not only be a lot harder to hit with a supersonic cruise missile (estimates I saw say that there is only a 50% chance of a hit, even without any defences, just because of size, speed and maneuvering), but also the loss of a capital ship would be catastrophic compared to the loss of a large FAC.

Advances in electronics mean a small boat today can basically have similar capabilities to a frigate 30 years ago. The main problem is over the horizon radar. That is something you can't put on a small boat and doesn't make financial sense. Sonars have become incredibly small and compact. So have missiles and even radars.

Now, there may be a work around for the over the horizon radar problem. To have reasonable air defense, you should have a medium range SAM, which means targeting at 20km away, which would need detection at 50-70 km range. A radar on a small boat would barely be able to to 30-40 km in real world conditions due to curvature of the earth. This has been a perennial problem of small boats.

From Naval Technology,

vessel incorporates a steel hull, and a super structure made of aluminium.

The fast attack craft measures 63m-long and 8.8m-wide, and has a design draught of 2.46m and displacement of 560t.

The ship has a maximum speed of 30kt and can attain a range of 1,000nmi.



Azmat is a FAC only in name. The superstructure is not made of composites but aluminium and addition of 2x3 Harba missiles has increased the RCS further. The ship is underpowered which limits speed and maneuverability.
A single AK-630 CIWS provides some sort of air defence.

A surface search radar is not installed, which means it cannot be detected by the enemy's passive sensors at longer ranges. Why do you believe a supersonic anti-ship missile will have low probability of taking it out?

 

[MiG-35-BD]

Why do you believe a supersonic anti-ship missile will have low probability of taking it out?

Hi there Gryphon,

the probability or so I read once by a naval personnel here or in pakdef, of hitting such a small craft is approximately 50%. I will try to dig up where I read it. I am not sure if that is small or big (depends on perspective and relativity).

For instance, if we assume the probability of hitting a small vessel like the Azmat is 50 percent, then two missile strikes would (according to decision mathematics) have the probability of 75%. While 3 missiles would have a near 90% probability of hit (87.5%).

 

[Gryphon]

the probability or so I read once by a naval personnel here or in pakdef, of hitting such a small craft is approximately 50%. I will try to dig up where I read it. I am not sure if that is small or big (depends on perspective and relativity).

Azmat is not a small craft, it is more like a corvette minus the helicopter deck. Supersonic anti-ship missiles have high hit probability, particularly when the target has a large RCS and is not very fast.

See here, CM-302 is claimed to have a ‘high hit probability of 0.9’.

Even if the AK-630 manages to intercept one incoming missile, the flying debris will damage / put the aluminium superstructure on fire.
Cheers!

 

[MiG-35-BD]

....

You are entitled to your opinion but cruise missiles / supersonsic cruise missiles don't work in the real world like a video game. I would rather take the opinion of a senior poster in Pakdef than your opinion on the matter, who I recall (from memory) stated that about the Azmat class. I personally am not involved in the defense industry so I do not know first hand.

Perhaps you are, and are an expert in this field, but I have no way of knowing that. Most of us here are armchair generals, I definitely am one. Perhaps the senior posters here who are involved in the cruise missile development like @Oscar or others can have a more enlightened discussion about it.

 

[SQ8]

You are entitled to your opinion but cruise missiles / supersonsic cruise missiles don't work in the real world like a video game. I would rather take the opinion of a senior poster in Pakdef than your opinion on the matter, who I recall (from memory) stated that about the Azmat class. I personally am not involved in the defense industry so I do not know first hand.

Perhaps you are, and are an expert in this field, but I have no way of knowing that. Most of us here are armchair generals, I definitely am one. Perhaps the senior posters here who are involved in the cruise missile development like @Oscar or others can have a more enlightened discussion about it.

I was in encrypted radios and c4I.
But knew some of the pioneers so have an idea what goes in what.

Its not about small or big ships but rather the Radar signature of these ships.
The Azmat shows small from the side for a ship of its size but it isn’t invisible and modern missiles are pretty accurate.

 

[CHI RULES]

The Azmat class only deficiency is it's lack of SAM, may be FM90s from F22Ps should be transferred on Azmat Class FACS if possible, meanwhile the F22Ps should be armed with a decent medium range SAM/Radar.
However so far no PN ship rather FAC or frigate has any capable SAM, in case of LY 60 one may clearly assume that is now incapable to tackle new challenges, meanwhile FM90 is short range and insufficient to protect F22Ps.
The position shall be better after 5-6 Years when we may start to induct Type 54A frigates with capable PESA radar and LY80 variant along with possible induction of Turkish corvettes may have medium range SAMs.

Then we may use our different ships in groups armed with different range SAMs.

The urgent step should be to arm our F22Ps with at least medium range SAM and if possible to further upgrade our sole OHP with VLS and major overhaul to increase it;s useful life and effectiveness.