JF-17 Thunder / FC-1 Xiaolong

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,537
Likes
2,416
Country flag
I didnt design the radar neither i claim to be an expert unlike your radar engineers. I shared the news though ;)
As expected, none of the Pakistanis really visit school, but take mandarin classes for the job of Chinese Mouthpiece. Go and read physics for the properties of Semi conductors and their usage.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Dazzler

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
1,160
Likes
317
As expected, none of the Pakistanis really visit school, but take mandarin classes for the job of Chinese Mouthpiece. Go and read physics for the properties of Semi conductors and their usage.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
Do enlighten the world with your knowledge on AESA radars. I am waiting.

Note: avoid using made in China phone buddy, it can harm your intellect. ;)
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,537
Likes
2,416
Country flag
Do enlighten the world with your knowledge on AESA radars. I am waiting.

Note: avoid using made in China phone buddy, it can harm your intellect. ;)
Nah not to waste my intelligence on a Mouthpiece who is comparing commercial grade technology with military grade. Meanwhile Aqua Ace II is a flagship of Intex(Indian brand) and atleast on the box, it is made in India.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
CM-400AKG being test fired from Thunder..

View attachment 23324





View attachment 23325
Is this that "Mach 5+ super duper ultra uber carrier killer" missile?
Lol. :rotfl:
  • Can't hit a moving target
  • Subsonic throughout the flight path
  • Terminal supersonic (Mach 3)
  • Range of ~240 km
  • No capability to maneuver before engagement.
  • To top it all of, the Jf-17 "Dunder" will have to climb high to launch these missiles. => Asking for trouble (Detection)
And this is sold to you as a carrier killer by the Chinese? :bplease:

Good for the PAF though. Something is better than nothing.
 
Last edited:

nongaddarliberal

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
3,999
Likes
22,767
Country flag
Is this that "Mach 5+ super duper ultra uber carrier killer" missile?
Lol. :rotfl:
  • Can't hit a moving target
  • Subsonic throughout the flight path
  • Terminal supersonic (Mach 3)
  • Range of ~240 km
  • No capability to maneuver before engagement.
  • To top it all of, the Jf-17 "Dunder" will have to climb high to launch these missiles.
And this is sold to you as a carrier killer by the Chinese? :bplease:

Good for the PAF though. Something is better than nothing.
JF 17 is a 3rd gen aircraft masquerading as 4th gen. I think paf is the first airforce in the world to go back a generation in fighter purchases. And they're delusional enough to think its better than the F 16. The fanboys that is, not the poor pilots who will have to fly the thing in combat.
 

Dazzler

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
1,160
Likes
317
JF 17 is a 3rd gen aircraft masquerading as 4th gen. I think paf is the first airforce in the world to go back a generation in fighter purchases. And they're delusional enough to think its better than the F 16. The fanboys that is, not the poor pilots who will have to fly the thing in combat.
Keep repeating it a hundred times a day to satisfy your ego.
 

Dazzler

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
1,160
Likes
317
Is this that "Mach 5+ super duper ultra uber carrier killer" missile?
Lol. :rotfl:
  • Can't hit a moving target
  • Subsonic throughout the flight path
  • Terminal supersonic (Mach 3)
  • Range of ~240 km
  • No capability to maneuver before engagement.
  • To top it all of, the Jf-17 "Dunder" will have to climb high to launch these missiles. => Asking for trouble (Detection)
And this is sold to you as a carrier killer by the Chinese? :bplease:

Good for the PAF though. Something is better than nothing.
Show the evidence of the claims you made above. Tall claims are not going to save your ACs, better look for some countermeasures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neo

Dazzler

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
1,160
Likes
317
Barak 8, and s400. Good luck keeping your fighters in the air long enough. They wont get too far from the runway.
S400 is not coming, keep dreaming for it. Barak 8 is no big deal. All the best to you to intercept a hypersonic target.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Barak 8, and s400. Good luck keeping your fighters in the air long enough. They wont get too far from the runway.
How exactly is a 70km missile going to intercept an aerial platform launching from 200+ km away? The best such a medium range SAM could do is try intercept the CM-400AKG no?

Or does the IN have plans to integrate S400 onto its Air Defense ships?
 

Adioz

शक्तिः दुर्दम्येच्छाशक्त्याः आगच्छति
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,419
Likes
2,819
Show the evidence of the claims you made above. Tall claims are not going to save your ACs, better look for some countermeasures.
You beg to differ? OK, forget all else and focus on this:-
DUBAI: China details performance of 'carrier killer' missile for JF-17
A list of system features appears to confirm an unusual characteristic associated with the CM-400. Unlike most high-speed cruise missiles, which fly at low altitude to avoid detection, the CM-400 uses “high [altitude] launching” to achieve “higher aircraft survivability”, according to the video.
A fighter such as the Chengdu/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex JF-17 would launch the missile at speeds between Mach 0.7 and M0.9 at an elevation between 26,200ft and 39,400ft, according to the AVIC specifications.
You think your junk fighter is going to be able to get into the the air space around an Indian CBG and get anywhere within the 240 km range while flying at high altitude of 26000 feet?
Your aircraft will be tracked, before it reaches its target, by the MF-STAR radar of the Kolkata class destroyers. It becomes so easy with you flying at high altitude. I am not sure how you are going to get past the Combat Air Patrol of the Carrier's fighters. Even if one Jf-17 manages to get past, it will be shot down by a frigate long before it gets near the 240 km mark that it requires to launch the missile. For your missile to be a carrier killer, it needs to have a much longer range (like the Brahmos-A with range of 400 km).

^And this was the scenario when your own claims about this missile are considered true. While the truth, as I stated in my previous post is far from you tall claims. Here:-
Resolving The CM-400AKG Supersonic ASM Conundrum
Let us begin with what is available to the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and Pakistan Navy (PN) in terms of maritime strike capabilities. The PAF’s No8 ‘Haiders’ Squadron operating out of Karachi’s Masroor Air Base presently operates only two Dassault Aviation-built Mirage-VPA3s, each of which can be armed with two MBDA-built 55km-range subsonic AM-39 Exocet ASCMs. They will be replaced in the near future by six JF-17 Thunder MRCAs, each of which will be able to carry two IIR-guided CM-802AKG subsonic anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM) plus one data-link pod for man-in-the-loop guidance (a configuration identical to what the PLA Navy has adopted for its JH-7A maritime strike aircraft and which is similar to the RAFAEL-built Popeye PGM/Pegasus data-link pod combination).

The CM-802AKG, 40 of which have been ordered by the PAF, has a range of 230km, weighs 670kg, and comes with a blast-penetration warhead weighing 285kg.

The PN, on the other hand, has at its disposal 120 C-602 ASCMs of which along with 40 8 x 8 transporter-erector-launcher vehicles, three Agosta 90B and two Agosta 70B SSKs that can be armed with subsonic Boeing UGM-84A Harpoon ASCMs, plus six Lockheed Martin P-3C Orion LRMR/ASW aircraft armed with subsonic AGM-84A Harpoon ASCMs, along with several ship-launched subsonic AGM-84A Harpoons and 180km-range subsonic C-802A ASCMs.

The C-602 is a conventional cruise missile design, with mid-body wings that deploy following launch. The fixed ventral air inlet is mounted slightly forward of the cruciform tail fins. The missile is 6.1 metres long (without the 0.9 metre-long launch booster), and weighs 1,140kg. The solid propellant booster weighs an additional 210kg.

The C-602 has a cruise speed of Mach 0.6, carries a 300kg HE blast-fragmentation warhead, is powered by a small turbojet, and has a stated range of 280km, with the missile flying at an altitude of 30 metres during the cruise phase of an engagement. In the terminal phase, the missile descends to a height of seven metres, and it can be launched from truck-mounted launchers, from warships as well as from medium multi-role combat aircraft.

It is evident that when both the PAF and PN are already in possession of formidable sea denial capabilities, it makes little sense to go for a supersonic ASM that is claimed by its Chinese OEM to have an IIR terminal seeker. Incidentally, all existing operational supersonic ASCMs to date, like the 130km-range, Mach 2.3, 1.5-tonne, 225kg self-forging fragment warhead-armed Hsiung Feng-3/Brave Wind-3 of Taiwan; Russia’s 4.15-tonne, Mach 3, 120km-range Raduga Kh-41 Zubr armed with 320kg HE warhead; Russia’s Novator 3M54E Klub-S/N, India’s BrahMos-1; and Japan’s 200km-range, Mach 2+ Mitsubishi ASM-3, all make use of on-board active radar seekers for terminal guidance, simply because no supersonic ASCM-based IIR sensor has the kind of target detection/lock-on range of up to 26km.

The 910kg/2,000lb CM-400AKG, possessing a claimed engagement envelope of 240km (130nm) a maximum cruise speed of Mach 4, airframe diameter of 0.4 metres, and 200kg blast-penetration warhead, has apparently been designed to be launched when the JF-17 reaches cruise speeds of between 750kph and 800kph at altitudes of between 26,200 feet and 39,400 feet. While its on-board RLG-INS offers a CEP of 50 metres (164 feet) during the mid-course navigation phase, the CEP reportedly gets reduced to 5 metres when the IIR seeker is activated during the terminal guidance phase.

If it is imperative that the JF-17 attain an altitude of either 26,200 feet or 39,400 feet in order to launch its two CM-400AKGs in ripple-fire mode, the element of surprise will be lost very early since the missile is not sea-skimming and will be detected by warship-mounted active phased-array volume search radars like the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR, while the airborne JF-17 will be easily located and tracked by AEW platforms like the Ka-31 AEW helicopters while the JF-17s are still 250km away from the IN’s targetted carrier battle group. And lastly, the JF-17 will have to continue cruising at medium altitudes so that the underbelly data-link pod can continue to maintain line-of-sight contact with the CM-400AKG’s (and even that of the CM-802AKG) on-board IIR imagery transmitter. Incidentally, neither during the Airshow China 2012 in Zhuhai last November nor during the recently concluded Dubai 2013 Airshow was any data-link pod displayed by Chinese OEMs like CETC International.

Countering The ASCM Threats
The IN today is sufficiently well-protected against subsonic ASCMs, thanks to the combination of indigenously developed shipborne jammers and RAFAEL-built Barak-1 CIWS, which will in future be supplemented by the EL/M-2248 MF-STAR/Barak-2 LR-SAM combination, along with IAI/ELTA Systems-supplied EL/M-2222S NAVGUARD, which is an active phased-array radar-based missile approach warning system (MAWS) that automatically detects, classifies and verifies incoming threats, and consequently triggers the targetted warship’s hard-kill/soft-kill self-defence systems.
S400 is not coming, keep dreaming for it. Barak 8 is no big deal. All the best to you to intercept a hypersonic target.
Miyan pehle launch to karo apna "hypersonic missile".

How exactly is a 70km missile going to intercept an aerial platform launching from 200+ km away? The best such a medium range SAM could do is try intercept the CM-400AKG no?

Or does the IN have plans to integrate S400 onto its Air Defense ships?
Lol, @J20! is here to provide after sales services to the Porkies. This includes CPP feature (CPP: Continuous Propaganda Propagation)
 

Guest

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
924
Likes
2,951
Country flag
How exactly is a 70km missile going to intercept an aerial platform launching from 200+ km away? The best such a medium range SAM could do is try intercept the CM-400AKG no?

Or does the IN have plans to integrate S400 onto its Air Defense ships?
How does Chinese Ships defend against a 290km Brahmos, or 450km one ? And what is behind this dumb logic that the interceptor has to be always present near the target. The whole reason behind area defense is neutrality of huge areas in air, a 90km range Barak 8 means, 90 km radius circles covered, add two ships two circles cover a length of total 360 km.

And this length is enough to cover all approach of Pakistan towards Indian coasts.

Then comes COAP of Mig 29Ks which can cover 1000km or keep in a radius of ~600km to prevent any Pakistani activity in the sea, and here I am not even talking about Su30MKI.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top