HJ-12 top-attack ATGM

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
I don't think you understand the practical difficulties associated with a wire tailing behind a missile whatever wire that may be.

Now that you have confirmed that the wire is "fiber optic" one I am sorry to say China may be a generation behind when most of world is ready with their 3rd gen ATGM which don't have to use wire for guidance.

About NLOS, the wire may simply break by hitting the obstacle or cover and missile will be without command. So the launcher has to be in clear sight of target while Namica can just shoot and run for cover, or just shoot from cover.
Umm, no. Again. Do a little reading before you post mate.

NLOS fiber optic guided ATGMs are active in the armed forces of several countries. Japan's type 96 uses FOG as well. Breakages happen, but they are not as prevalent as you assume, and when a break does happen within site of the target, the missiles thermal and optical sensors take over till engagement.

NAMICA would have to acquire its target before launching a NAG ATGM. Its a lock on before launch system. Much like man portable systems like Javelin and HJ12. Hence it's inferior survivability as a launch platform. It cannot acquire a target from cover.

HJ10s LOAL capability allows the launcher to fire from cover, acquire the target then engage. Hell, just the fact that the missile can engage at twice the range makes the HJ10s launcher more survivAble than NAMICA,.

It can also be launched in a fire and forget mode against targets within visual range acquired by the carrier's own sensors fr targets within 5km
 

Guest

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
924
Likes
2,951
Country flag
Umm, no. Again. Do a little reading before you post mate.

NLOS fiber optic guided ATGMs are active in the armed forces of several countries. Japan's type 96 uses FOG as well. Breakages happen, but they are not as prevalent as you assume, and when a break does happen within site of the target, the missiles thermal and optical sensors take over till engagement.

NAMICA would have to acquire its target before launching a NAG ATGM. Its a lock on before launch system. Much like man portable systems like Javelin and HJ12. Hence it's inferior survivability as a launch platform. It cannot acquire a target from cover.

HJ10s LOAL capability allows the launcher to fire from cover, acquire the target then engage. Hell, just the fact that the missile can engage at twice the range makes the HJ10s launcher more survivAble than NAMICA,.

It can also be launched in a fire and forget mode against targets within visual range acquired by the carrier's own sensors fr targets within 5km
Yes they are active since it is 2nd gen and lots of stock is left.

Namica has to take the Infra red image of the target, and then launch the missile. The launch itself can be done from cover and the launcher can run for another target or safety, since the missile is "Fire and Forget" main requirement of the 3rd gen ATGM.

While the Chinese missile vehicle has to stay put till missile hits the target else the wire will break, hence making it vulnerable to attack. The vehicle will be immobile till missile actually hits, which why It is 2nd gen "Fire and Guide" missile because the launcher had to do the guiding. Such missiles were rejected by even Pakistanis for use in Afghan war, I think It was called Red Arrow, However they did buy lots of TOW.

Twice the range is only in theory, the wire itself limits the range and possible engagement scenarios, and longer the range the longer the vehicle has to sit in one place and keep guiding the missile making it a sitting duck.

How can it be fire and forget with wire tailing behind It, apply some common sense.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Yes they are active since it is 2nd gen and lots of stock is left.

Namica has to take the Infra red image of the target, and then launch the missile. The launch itself can be done from cover and the launcher can run for another target or safety, since the missile is "Fire and Forget" main requirement of the 3rd gen ATGM.

While the Chinese missile vehicle has to stay put till missile hits the target else the wire will break, hence making it vulnerable to attack. The vehicle will be immobile till missile actually hits, which why It is 2nd gen "Fire and Guide" missile because the launcher had to do the guiding. Such missiles were rejected by even Pakistanis for use in Afghan war, I think It was called Red Arrow, However they did buy lots of TOW.

Twice the range is only in theory, the wire itself limits the range and possible engagement scenarios, and longer the range the longer the vehicle has to sit in one place and keep guiding the missile making it a sitting duck.


How can it be fire and forget with wire tailing behind It, apply some common sense.
Optical fiber guided surface-to-surface missiles like the Serbian ALAS and the proposed Polyphem missile have max ranges upwards of 50km. Your "theory" that the optical fiber guidance limits HJ12's 10km range is just that, a layman's theory. Something you would know if you just took the time to research before posting.

That two-way, high speed link allows for shots from behind cover, the operator can select a target, re-target or abort if necessary, with the missile capable of reaching altitudes of 300m. LOAL capability allows for that battlefield awareness at extended ranges.











NAMICA is restricted to targeting with its on board sensor turret. Unless its targeting a stationary target, how exactly does the firing platform launch from behind cover. At best you could say it has shoot and scoot capability, but it cannot fire from cover since its limited to line of sight targeting.

NORINCO's rival Poly Tech produces a larger ATGM the CM501GA surface to surface missile which has a 40km max range. Unlike the smaller AFT10/HJ10. this missile's mid-course guidance is INS and satellite data-link based.

http://www.janes.com/article/63786/precision-strike-aad16d2







Anyway, this is all of-topic. THe subject matter of the thread is NORINCO's HJ12 man-portable ATGM.
 

Guest

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
924
Likes
2,951
Country flag
Optical fiber guided surface-to-surface missiles like the Serbian ALAS and the proposed Polyphem missile have max ranges upwards of 50km. Your "theory" that the optical fiber guidance limits HJ12's 10km range is just that, a layman's theory. Something you would know if you just took the time to research before posting.

That two-way, high speed link allows for shots from behind cover, the operator can select a target, re-target or abort if necessary, with the missile capable of reaching altitudes of 300m. LOAL capability allows for that battlefield awareness at extended ranges.











NAMICA is restricted to targeting with its on board sensor turret. Unless its targeting a stationary target, how exactly does the firing platform launch from behind cover. At best you could say it has shoot and scoot capability, but it cannot fire from cover since its limited to line of sight targeting.

NORINCO's rival Poly Tech produces a larger ATGM the CM501GA surface to surface missile which has a 40km max range. Unlike the smaller AFT10/HJ10. this missile's mid-course guidance is INS and satellite data-link based.

http://www.janes.com/article/63786/precision-strike-aad16d2







Anyway, this is all of-topic. THe subject matter of the thread is NORINCO's HJ12 man-portable ATGM.
60km flight with wire attached shows the developer's inability to adopt modern guidance technique which is wireless, I doubt it can be successful. The wire adds additional weight and drag to the missile and limits maneuverability at high speeds. It also adds tactical operationalization limitations in practical battle filed scenario.

I am talking about practical limitations of a wire guided vehicle, in theory you can build a ladder to moon, but that's not possible is it ? The wire can get caught in a tree, or a rock or simply cannot go around an obstacle before the turning target. Such things would hardly happen with self guided weapon without any wire.

Namica's IIR camera has to take an image of the target vehicle, which is given to the Missile to match the image while in flight, The launch can be done from the cover, The missile itself is capable of acquiring its own target.

Lets end this debate, HJ12 is a "wire guided" missile which is at best 2nd generation while Nag is a "fire and forget" 3rd generation missile.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
60km flight with wire attached shows the developer's inability to adopt modern guidance technique which is wireless, I doubt it can be successful. The wire adds additional weight and drag to the missile and limits maneuverability at high speeds. It also adds tactical operationalization limitations in practical battle filed scenario.

I am talking about practical limitations of a wire guided vehicle, in theory you can build a ladder to moon, but that's not possible is it ? The wire can get caught in a tree, or a rock or simply cannot go around an obstacle before the turning target. Such things would hardly happen with self guided weapon without any wire.

Namica's IIR camera has to take an image of the target vehicle, which is given to the Missile to match the image while in flight, The launch can be done from the cover, The missile itself is capable of acquiring its own target.

Lets end this debate, HJ12 is a "wire guided" missile which is at best 2nd generation while Nag is a "fire and forget" 3rd generation missile.
I wouldn't even call this a debate mate.

It's not a "wire" genius. It's an optical fiber cable thinner than a fishing line. And how exactly is it going to get "caught in a tree, or a rock or an obstacle" 300m in the air?

In cases of wire breakage in site of a locked target, the missile completes engagement independent of the operator. Try reading up on a few NLOS FOG ATGMs.

Your arguments are based on layman's thinking and nationalistic bias. What you "doubt" is really not a point of reference. NLOS FOG ATGM operations are prevalent through out the world. Brazil has the FOG MPM, Japan the Type 96, Israel has FOG variants of SPIKE, Serbia has ATAS. All of these have ranges greater than 10km, some range up to 60km. And you want to claim a 4km range line of sight missile, that's not even operational is superior to a missile with double its range?

Again, try a little research before commenting mate. Unless you're making the unlikely claim that you have data to invalidate the developers and operators of these ATGMs?
 
Last edited:

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
In cases of wire breakage in site of a locked target, the missile completes engagement independent of the operator. Try reading up on a few NLOS FOG ATGMs.
Your missile claims to be NLOS (non-line of sight), if you don't have the target designated by the launcher it isn't going to be able to identify the target without seeing it on the way down. A wire breakage would obviously make it a dud.
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
I don't really understand why this "d*ck-measuring" mentality is necessary.
  • Its not a d**k measuring contest. All I am trying to ascertain is what the PLA has in terms of ATGM capability. I was not aware of HJ-10 before you mentioned it. And the reason why I am so damn interested in comparing it with Namica is not because Namica will be used against PLA. NAMICA is meant to butcher Porki tin cans. You could say NAMICA is an expensive oven that roasts pork.
  • The reason I asked about PLA ATGM capability similar to Nag is because any current Chinese system might end up in Porki hands sometime in the future. I wanted to gauge what the Porkis could equip themselves with in the future.
  • But this HJ-10 is a completely different kind of a system than NAMICA. NAMICA is meant to equip the Recce and Support Battalions of IA. They are meant to probe enemy frontlines.
  • HJ-10 looks like its meant to be used as a 10km range multiple missile launcher. The recce element that spots the target is going to be some other platform/infantry. But this is what confuses me. If there is going to be a separate recce element, why is PLA not trying to use Laser homing on this missile? Would be great if you could explain the rationale behind this.
  • Another thing to consider is the time it would take for HJ-10 to reach its target 10 km away. That is going to be the amount of time when you cannot move. Also, one vehicle can only fire two missiles at once. (Compare that to NAMCA, which can fire the entire 6 missile salvo and scoot before the enemy is able to spot it. So like I said, NAMICA is a different system for a different role)
  • Another question I have is, and I am not sure how this kind of guidance works so bear with me here, how will the HJ-10 missile operators target a visually camouflaged target like this:-


  • And last question: Does HJ-10 have top-attack mode?

Now coming back to the HJ-12: Indian ATGM that will face you guys will be:-
  • MPATGM (2.5 km range, 3rd gen, IIR seeker, LOBL fire and forget)
  • SAMHO (5 km, Laser guidance, LOAL)
^None are wire guided. SAMHO requires someone to "lase" the target. The missiles, however, are a little heavier than the current SALCOS ATGM that IA is using: Milan 2T and Konkurs.

OTOH, PLA troops will be equipped with HJ-12 I believe. Or are there other ATGM also that they might carry?
Interesting. We have advantage at night till you come up with a better seeker for HJ-12.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top