What's new

Zhuhai Air Show 2014 - Updates & Discussions

FN-16 MANPADS display on 2014 ZhuHai Air Show

在航天科工集团的展区,一款名为FN-16的便携式防空导弹引起了记者的关注,之前外媒曾报道,中国生产的FN-6便携式防空导弹曾现身国外热点冲突地区,引起了国内外关注。
 据介绍,FN-16便携式防空导弹是FN-6导弹的升级版本,各项技术均有较大提高。具体来说,有三方面的提高:一是采用了红外紫光玫瑰双色扫描技术,将探测距离提高到了9公里,射程达到6公里,并且有较强的抗干扰能力;二是采用了侧向力技术,不需要计算提前量、直接采用直瞄射击;三是采用了激光近战引信碰撞技术,大幅提高了杀伤能力。

FN16_01.jpg
FN16_02.jpg
FN16_03.jpg
FN16_04.jpg
FN16_05.jpg
FN16_06.jpg
FN16_07.jpg
 
.
China CM-102 ARM on 2014 ZhuHai Air Show, range 100km/ warhead 80kg / accuracy <7m

第十届中国航展在珠海开幕,由中国航天科工集团研制的CM-102型反辐射导弹亮相航展现场。CM-102型反辐射导弹为超声速导弹,可挂载到歼击机、强击机等各类固定翼飞机及无人机上,用于攻击敌各类防空导弹武器系统制导雷达和警戒、引导雷达,实施空中压制,为空中进攻作战提供保障。该型导弹最大射程100公里,战斗部重80公斤,对典型雷达命中精度CEP不大于7米。该型导弹具有作战使用灵活、发射包络宽、命中精度高、战斗部威力大等特点。

CM102_01.jpg
CM102_02.jpg
CM102_03.jpg
CM102_04.jpg
 
.
I am not talking about a Nimitz stand alone. We are talking about a Nimitz escorted by a range of vessels, and itself carrying F22/F35 which have an operational range of 180-200 km.

Americans were talking about the threat posed by this system the CX 1. They were talking in the context of Iran using these weapons. Here is the quote from the forum that I posted the link back.
"To begin with, you have to realize that it is almost impossible to directly threaten a US carrier at sea.

To start, they have a pretty impressive array of defensive ships surrounding it. Typically 4-5 Arleigh Burke class destroyers, and a Ticonderoga class cruiser. All by themselves, each of these ships has a pretty powerful anti-missile system. Working in combination, I doubt any missiles would get through.

And even if they do, the carrier then has a lot of defensive firepower of it's own.

Depending upon the ship, from 2-3 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launchers, 2-3 Sea Sparrow missile launchers, and 2-3 PHALANX CIWS systems. In addition, you have E-2 Hawkeye AEW aircraft. If the carrier is operating in "hostile territory", expect one of these in the air at all times.

So now you not only have the powerful and sophisticated AEGIS RADAR systems looking for missiles from the ground, you have the E-2C/D series aircraft looking for them from the air in a look-down capability. So it's ability to "sea skim" to avoid detection is greatly reduced. This may keep them out of sight of the Tico's and Burke's, but not the Hawkeye.

And the newest series, the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye has some pretty impressive capabilities. It's RADAR capabilities are tied into the AEGIS system, and can actually target and guide an SM-6 ship based missile. So the destroyers and cruisers are no longer limited to what their RADAR can see, the AEW aircraft can actually target inbound threats while they are still over the horizon from the ship, up to the 240 km range of the missile itself.

So before it can even hit the carrier, it has to get through a "crapstorm" of defensive weapons systems, each of which is designed to destroy such inbound missiles. Then it has to actually find the carrier. Not exactly an easy task in and of itself. These weapons target by RADAR, so they will target any large vessel they find (or even a rock formation that comes close to what it is looking for).

These missiles are fast (MACH 1.5+), have a decent range (around 400 miles), and pack a decent punch (750kg of HE). But they are also large, so easier to target by defensive systems then say the smaller EXOCET or SILKWORM missiles.

So to try to fully answer, is this missile a threat to US ships? Yes, unquestionably - depending on how many can be volley fired at a time. Soviet-Russian tactics dictate launching 2-3 groups of 6-7 missiles ideally (one missile of each group operating as a "controller", popping up from time to time to get RADAR fixes and navigation corrections, then relaying those to the rest of the swarm). That means anywhere from 12-21 missiles being aimed at the carrier group. Now that many missiles at a time you will have one or two get through the defensive systems. But will they actually target the carrier? Likely not, they would want to target the defensive vessels, making future waves more likely to penetrate and making the group retire from the area for fear of future strikes actually getting through.

Now is say Iran capable of launching such massive swarms? Not likely, their surface ships are all armed with missiles that are domestic or Chinese copies of the EXOCET, a missile that is much less capable. None of them can be converted to fire a missile of this size, which would mean they would need to build much larger ships before they could use them at sea. This means they are limited to ground launching.

And now you are talking about roughly 2-3 batteries of such launchers. They might be lucky enough to get 1 volley off, possibly 2 before they are then hunted down and destroyed by the aircraft on the carrier. Before the missiles are even intercepted, the CAP is going to be screaming towards theselaunchers, trying to take them out before they can fire another volley. So the best way for Iran to use them would be to fire, then immediately try to hide in pre-prepared bunkers. And hope they are not discovered.

Threat to the carrier, insignificant. Threat to the carrier group, low to moderate. But once again, depending upon the number of missiles that can be fired in a volley. 1-2 missiles at a time, almost laughably small risk. A Soviet planned volley of 20+ missiles, now you are talking a significant risk to the carrier group, a moderate risk to the carrier itself (not in being sunk, but in being damaged - US carriers are massive and remarkably tough vessels)."​

Then someone asked what will happen in a coordinated strike, that is if China tries to attack using bombers, submarines and missiles together against the carriers. The guy has this to say about that.
A well written quote. I would guess you would be pretty accurate in that one dimensional scenario. My question is when the Chinese or whomever decide to leverage their missiles in a multidimensional attack strategy. We cant say our enemies are dumb. Using a time on target multi axis attack vector from different platforms and weapons types. Say a combination attack of missiles, bombers, and submarines utilizing the strengths of each while trying to cover for their for their weakness. Using the missiles and bombers to soak up cap fighters and ADA missiles and making the Task force go into high speed mode wear they lose their ears, leaving them open to ambush by a cruse missile equipped submarine stalking at distance and a diesel attack boat stalking close in that can use their fish the moment the Task Force goes into ADA evasion mode. The Chinese do have some capability to pull off a coordinated attack like that. How would a task force fair against a combination threat like that? Me I would never do a one dimensional attack against any force if I could help it. Its too easy to defend against.​

To which the other guy replies this:

Interesting concept. However, it is a well known military axiom that the more complex a plan is, the more likely it is that something will go wrong.

Part of the very idea of a "surprise attack" is that it is sudden without warning. A launch of say a dozen of these missiles could be done with almost no warning.

A plan like you are talking about however, is not stealthy at all. The preparation for the attack would be seen days in advance, preparations of this nature simply can't be hidden like they were in WWII. We keep a close track on where all of their subs are at all times. And if we see them putting out to sea (they are almost constantly tied up to the dock), that would be noticed immediately. And the same with their bombers and fighters taking to the air.

Over The Horizon RADAR is pretty piss-poor for targeting, but it is effective in early warning. As is the E-2 AEW bird, with a RADAR range of over 400 miles. You would have to have a very staggered deployment if these are all going to be striking the fleet at the same time.

First, the subs would have to put out to sea. And Chinese subs are notorious for being among the noisiest subs among major nations.

Then the bombers have to take to the skies. Their only bomber is the Xian H-6, a domestic copy of the Tu-16 (and dating to 1959). These subsonic bombers (MACH .75) only carry 6 Saccade/Silkworm missiles. And trust me, the moment that the bombers start to take to the skies, the fleet is going to be moving full speed ahead to safer waters. And all available fighters will be screaming off of the carrier towards the bombers, knowing that they have to be less then 110 miles from the target before they can launch their missiles.

Oh, and BTW, the range for the SM-2 is 115 miles. So just before the bombers get in range, they will be met by the first of the inbound missiles trying to take them out. The F/A-18E/F fighters will also be streaking towards them at MACH 1.8.

And their submarine attack capabilities even if they are within range are not all that impressive. If outfitted all-out for anti-ship attack, that only gives each one 12-24 submarine launched Silkworm missiles, that are of questionable functionality (China is known to have problems with these submarine launched missiles - doctrine says for the ship to surface before launching).

The problems here is that China is known to not trust their submarines, and almost never deploy more then 1 or 2 at a time. The moment more started to take to sea, defensive postures will change dramatically. The moment bombers started to take to the skies, CAP will be increased and fighters will go out so they can meet them before they arrive.

ADA is irrelevant, since we would not be talking about a land battle. This would be an Air-Naval battle, ADA would not be within hundreds of miles of this conflict with only one exception. That would be if raising tensions had caused one concept for keeping China off of Taiwan. The US places it's CTF to the East of Taiwan, and placed PATRIOT-THAAD on Taiwan. Then I would expect almost no risk to the carrier, China would not have the range or ability to punch through the missile defenses of Taiwan.

Trust me, I do very much think of these in "multi-dimensional" ways. And with the alleged speed of this missile being over twice that of the bombers, the bombers would likely already be fighting it out with the fighters before the missiles were ever launched. And knowing the ranges, I could not understand any reason why the carrier would be operating in their range in the first place. It is a carrier with aircraft, it has no need to be operating less then 250 miles from shore during a time of heightened tensions.​


I am interested here in general theatre of war where China will maybe need to push out US till the second island chain. Remember, US has substantial ground bases in the region, with the one in okinawa single handedly able to operate till chinese shores. So even ignoring that for a while. How can China take out a carrier group placed around 400 km from its shores?
How are you going to break thorugh the multiple defences of ships, counter-attack vessels, missile defence systems, and then 5th gen top notch aircraft zipping through?

Also, can you tell me more about the BW-II system?

I understand that China has much more than CX1 in its arsenal, and that is what I want to know. Your strategy.

@SvenSvensonov
@mike2000 Your comments will be highly valued and appreciated.
The operation range of F35C is over 800KM.
180-200 km is WW2 level. Of course you can use Brahmos to easily sink a fleet of WW2 level.
 
.
I am not here to spoon feed u.Go search yourself from open sources,,it cleared trials on il-76 but its heavy and lacks optimum wet thrust.
Plus we cannot mass produce the single crystal blades yet,,,u think we won't do it in next 10 years??
It will be done,don't worry
It depends on the development of your industry.
Increase funding is not enough. Too much variables.
LCA is a vivid example.
 
Last edited:
. .
LOL funny ... Lockheed Martin "spy" FC-31 v2.0 mockup on ZhuHai Air Show :partay:

The guy from Lockheed Martin's intellectual property agency ... lol. :enjoy: Good employee !

第10届珠海航展期间,一名老外在中航工业最新推出的FC-31/新版歼-31战机模型前,用手机类装置拍了整整一个上午,尤其重点拍摄了尾部和弹舱。
据现场群众猜测,此人是美国洛克希德·马丁公司的知识产权代表。美方这种行为,一方面或许有搜集所谓的中国“窃密”的证据。
可是从另一面讲,在大家心目中早已默认,歼-31将是美方F-35的竞争对手!作为几乎注定要在未来国际市场上激烈碰撞的先进隐身战机,美方的准备早已经开始!


FC31_01.jpg

FC31_02.jpg

FC31_03.jpg

FC31_04.jpg

FC31_05.jpg

FC31_06.jpg
 
Last edited:
. . . .
China two styles of Top Attack ATM on 2014 ZhuHai Air Show: HJ-12 & TS-01 :china:

HJ-12 Top Attack ATM detail pics :enjoy:
hj12_00.jpg

hj12_01.jpg

hj12_02.jpg

hj12_03.jpg


HJ-12 CDD TV guided warhead

hj12_04.jpg


HJ-12 IR guided warhead

hj12_05.jpg


hj12_06.jpg

hj12_07.jpg


 
Last edited:
.
China two styles of Top Attack ATM on 2014 ZhuHai Air Show: HJ-12 & TS-01 :china:

Poly's TS-01 Top Attack ATM pics, China version light Javelin :enjoy:
TS01_01.jpg

TS01_02.jpg

TS01_03.jpg

TS01_04.jpg




Compared with U.S Javelin ATM
132233wjz5xxrgrzur7pns.jpg

124718zowxroozzo06x0xm.jpg



What's this ???
124721fct5rtggzf55htig.jpg

 
Last edited:
. .
More China next-gen fighter cockpit v2.0 pics, everything looks very fine. :coffee:

@SvenSvensonov What u think ? Official news said that China HMD helmet is ready for produce. :D

鹘鹰的照片,无论是1.0版的实机还是2.0版的模型,已经看得有些腻了。这次珠海航展上展出的所谓先进战斗机座舱其实还是有些看点的。这款座舱模型,采用了宽屏主显,一个较大的下显,另外配备了三个较小的备用显示器,除了仍旧配备有平视显示器(HUD)外,这些配置和美帝的F35有些类似。从主显上那个小小的飞机图像可以基本判断出这个座舱模型应该是鹘鹰2.0版的配置,相信歼20原型机2011的座舱也会和这个类似。

这个座舱模型的另一个亮点就是模特头上戴的这款头盔了,从外形上看和F35用的头显有些类似,但是由于此款座舱配备了HUD,这款头盔可能仅仅是个改进型的头瞄。但是按环球军事记者采访,该概念座舱内飞行员人体模型头上所戴的是一款具备头盔显示系统的新型作战头盔。据研制该座舱的负责人介绍,该新型概念座舱具备综合控制、综合处理、综合显示的能力,采用高度集成化设计。其所使用的头盔显示系统能够从机体外侧的摄像头获取图像,并能根据飞行员头部转动进行计算,实现精准跟踪飞行员可以从头盔显示器上获取战机各个角度的图像,对于瞬息万变的战场态势的感知能力将大幅度提高。同时,飞行员还可以通过头盔显示器对目标进行跟踪、锁定,然后向目标发射导弹进行攻击据悉,该型头盔显示系统已经定型

nextgencockpit_01.jpg
nextgencockpit_02.jpg
nextgencockpit_03.jpg
nextgencockpit_04.jpg
nextgencockpit_05.jpg
nextgencockpit_06.jpg
nextgencockpit_07.jpg




Compared with F-35 HMD :partay:
nextgencockpit_05.jpg

nextgencockpit_08.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
NO, you are wrong, the material is not question, China has been long exporting turbo engine blades for years to western countries, like US,UK, there are other reasons that China did not show its air engine productive abilities.
欢迎莅临无锡透平叶片有限公司—电站汽轮机|燃汽轮机|工业用汽轮机|鼓风机|轴流压缩机|叶片

I would disagree, There are different levels of performance for Engines and their Blades. What China is able to develop and export is different from what it needs. the Rolls Royce Trent Blades are for performance on airliners.. not combat fighters. Moreover, if just making jet fighter engines would have solved China's Jet engine woes then the earlier Wopen series of engines should have led to a reliable fighter turbofan engine out to power its J-10 and today the J-31.
 
.
There is little reason to buy Su-35 which is why we are lukewarm to the idea unless it's cheap and offer some technology transfer, otherwise, it is just a waste of money when money can be spend on buying more J-31 and J-20.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom