Chinese Cruise Missles

[walter]

from Aviation Week & Space Technology:

Chinese cruise missile portfolio expands


Douglas Barrie and Robert Wall
London

Beijing unveils more missiles for export, shedding light on its internal programs

Printed headline: Cruise Offer

Further evidence of China's progress in cruise missiles is emerging, with detail coming to light on research and development and upgrade programs.

Beijing is touting improved anti-ship missiles for export, featuring seeker technology with greater resistance to countermeasures. The Chinese are also revealing more about their air force's first-generation land-attack cruise missile, the YJ-63.

China is beginning to provide data on one of its latest anti-ship cruise missile programs, the YJ-62, which it is giving the export designation the C602. The YJ-62 appears to be in the final stages of development for the Chinese navy, but is also already being proposed for overseas sale by the China National Precision Machinery Import and Export Corp (CPMIEC). Also detailed for the first time is the C802A, an improved version of the YJ-8 anti-ship missile.

CHINA'S SUCCESS in nurturing its indigenous missile capability will almost certainly mean it will play a larger role in the export sector. Its products could prove attractive to nations that would otherwise be unable to purchase such classes of missiles.

Data on both systems was released last week by CPMIEC during the Defense Systems & Equipment International (DSEI) land and naval systems exhibition here Sept. 13-16. CPMIEC claims both missiles are fitted with frequency agile radar seekers, giving the systems much greater resistance to jamming. Chinese anti-ship missiles used single-frequency seeker technology previously.

The C602/YJ-62 has a stated range of 280 km. (174 mi.), with the missile flying at an altitude of 30 meters (98 ft.) during the cruise phase of an engagement. In the terminal phase, the missile descends 7-10 meters. The active radar seeker has an acquisition range of up to 40 km. The system is a conventional cruise missile design, with mid-body wings which deploy following launch. The engine inlet is mounted slightly forward of the cruciform tail fins.

The C802A is an extended-range version of the YJ-8 family of missiles, with an engagement envelope of up to 180 km. This program may be associated with the YJ-85 designation. Turbojet propulsion is used on two missiles.

Both systems are initially intended for ship or coastal defense, though they could also be adapted for air-launched applications. Previous versions of the C802/YJ-8 family have been modified for such applications. Iran is an export customer for versions of this missile.

http://www.aviationnow.com/media/images/awst_images/large/AW_09_19_2005_1151_L.jpg
China's YJ-63 land-attack cruise missile is carried by the H-6 bomber aircraft. China is pursuing a number of cruise missile programs for both air and ship launch.Credit: CHINESE MILITARY AVIATION

The YJ-62 will equip Chinese navy guided-missile destroyers. At least two of a new class, the 052C, are being built; the first was launched in 2003. The ship is fitted with two sets of four-canister launchers amidships.

Range for the C602 export version is given as 280 km., which falls within the 300-km. threshold of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Warhead size is given as 300 kg., again below the 500-kg. limit of the MTCR accord.

It is claimed that the C602 uses strap-down inertial guidance coupled with GPS, and active radar for the terminal phase. The missile is 6.1 meters long, without the 0.9-meter launch booster, and 1,140 kg. The solid propellant booster weighs an additional 210 kg.

High-quality imagery of the Chinese air force's first in-service land-attack cruise missile, the YJ-63, has also become available. Readily apparent is the missile's airframe design heritage from the Russian Styx class of anti-ship missiles, the basis of Chinese missile families. The YJ-63 is believed to use an electro-optical seeker for terminal guidance, and man-in-the-loop guidance with target imagery from the TV-seeker being fed back to the H-6 launch aircraft. What could be a datalink antenna is visible toward the missile's front. The missile shown may be a practice round--the nose cover appears too small for a TV seeker.

[MIGleader]

finally some info on the 52'cs weaponry. 280 km is very impessive. the progress the lacm is getting is also very good. the missle may be finished development by 2007 and will enter srvice when gallileo come online in 2008.

is their info on the speed of the yj-62?

[tphuang]

nice, that's 280 KM lo-lo range for YJ-62 and probably more for domestic versions. And also 210KM+ lo-lo range for YJ-83.

[tphuang]

from Aviation Week & Space Technology:
by the way, can you give the source for this article?

[Chairman Hu]

Can it only be carried by the H-6?

The H-6 isnt very reliable these days...

Wow Iran wants it too

[walter]

by the way, can you give the source for this article?

Aviation Week & Space Technology
09/19/2005, page 43

Most of their articles are only available to subscribers. :(
AW&ST is an unbiased source and is read by nearly all involved in the aerospace industry.

[swimmerXC]

Can it only be carried by the H-6?

The H-6 isnt very reliable these days...

Wow Iran wants it too


H-6 not reliable...? have you considered the new versions? the B-52 is jsut as old!

well... the only reason i see Iran wanting it is to handle CBG....

[Chairman Hu]

No dude, the H-6 really isnt that great

1. B-52 > H-6 w/ upgrades

2. B-52 is from mid-50s, but still can get more job done than the H-6

3. B-52 payload is 70k lb, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE H-6 CAN CARRY THAT MUCH! I can understand if the H-6 is equal to the B-52 in many things from... H-6 is too FARRRR away from the B-52

Summing up: B-52 MAY from the 50s, but truely revolutionary

[MIGleader]

the b-52 is a great aircraft, and is set to retire after over 100 years of service. the h-6 was comparable to early versions of the b-52, but quikly lost its lead. but im sure the chinese will find more ways to upgrade it. but the best way is replace it with a backfire.

[Chairman Hu]

China is wasting time upgrading the H-6, it cant carry 70k worth of weapons... low payload... i agree, backfire is out solution for the time being

[SABRE]

according to www.defencetalk.com news Ukrain had sold 12 Kh-55 long range Cruise Missiles. 6 to Iran & 6 to China. They are both nuclear & conventional weapon capable. Chinese new Cruise Missiles based on Kh-55 might coming soon.

[IDonT]

the b-52 is a great aircraft, and is set to retire after over 100 years of service. the h-6 was comparable to early versions of the b-52, but quikly lost its lead. but im sure the chinese will find more ways to upgrade it. but the best way is replace it with a backfire.

The Russian equivalent to the B-52 is the Tu 95 Bear.

H-6 should be replaced with the BEar.

[adeptitus]

I'm not sure how closely the H-6 specs resembles the Tu-16 today, but going by Tu-16's specs, that aircraft can haul a 9,000 kg bomb to a range of 4,800 km:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-16

The PLAAF does not have any other bomber or fighter-bomber with that kind of range on internal fuel. I doubt the Russias would be willing to sell long-range bombers like the Tu-95 or Tu-160 to PRC.

[swimmerXC]

No dude, the H-6 really isnt that great

1. B-52 > H-6 w/ upgrades

2. B-52 is from mid-50s, but still can get more job done than the H-6

3. B-52 payload is 70k lb, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE H-6 CAN CARRY THAT MUCH! I can understand if the H-6 is equal to the B-52 in many things from... H-6 is too FARRRR away from the B-52

Summing up: B-52 MAY from the 50s, but truely revolutionary

RCS????
H-6>B-52

[IDonT]

I'm not sure how closely the H-6 specs resembles the Tu-16 today, but going by Tu-16's specs, that aircraft can haul a 9,000 kg bomb to a range of 4,800 km:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-16

The PLAAF does not have any other bomber or fighter-bomber with that kind of range on internal fuel. I doubt the Russias would be willing to sell long-range bombers like the Tu-95 or Tu-160 to PRC.


Actually they are. The Indian navy has about 8 of them for maritime reconaissance.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Images/Tu-142a.jpg

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Images/Tu-142f.jpg

[MIGleader]

russia has loaned india some blackjacks aswell. why the indians get the cool equipment and the chinese basic equip ment is strange. one reason may be that china can make its own cool equipment.

russian sources have stated that they are willing to sell the bear and tu-22.
but the chinese af needs to wait, it just spend over a billion $ on transports.

[Chairman Hu]

China spends 67 billion last year in military spending, China needs to spend more, maybe 100 billion at least

1 more thing, CRUISE MISSILES!!! how is China doing in GPS guided missiles?

[tphuang]

russia has loaned india some blackjacks aswell. why the indians get the cool equipment and the chinese basic equip ment is strange. one reason may be that china can make its own cool equipment.

russian sources have stated that they are willing to sell the bear and tu-22.
but the chinese af needs to wait, it just spend over a billion $ on transports.
yeah, if we can get like a production line for the bear and backfire, it'd be pretty awesome. I think China should demand to be treated at least equal to India by the Russians.

[IDonT]

yeah, if we can get like a production line for the bear and backfire, it'd be pretty awesome. I think China should demand to be treated at least equal to India by the Russians.


Indian and Russian relationship goes far deeper than Chinese Russian relationship. That is why Russia will sell India "better" equipment.

[Gollevainen]

russia has loaned india some blackjacks aswell.

??? don't post bullshit...

And what does indian martime patrolaircrafts to do whit chinese cruise missiles? stay on the topic!

[adeptitus]

China spends 67 billion last year in military spending, China needs to spend more, maybe 100 billion at least
1 more thing, CRUISE MISSILES!!! how is China doing in GPS guided missiles?

IMO it's not the amount being spent, but rather where it's being spent that matters. The PRC today is wealthy enough to afford $60 billion or $100 billion military budget, but the political-security situation has changed.

Today the PRC is in a very good security situation. It faces no wars other than those of its own making. Most of the land border disputes have been resolved, and the Nansha island situation is pretty calm after the ASEAN agreement. The Taiwan dispute does not require a war to resolve, economic integration and demographics trend will take care of that over time.

The PLA today does not need a huge infantry force backed by thousands of old tanks. Recent reforms have put it on the right track - reduction in numbers and shifting the emphasis to rapid deployement capability. IMO one of the most important moves, often over-looked, is the PAP.

By shifting demobolized PLA to PAP and making PAP responsible for internal/border security, it frees the PLA for its intended purpose - training for war. Also, since the PAP is technically "armed police", there's less opposition in sending them to oversea "peace keeping" operations.

The PLA has not had any real combat experience since the Vietnam war. And due to the events of 6/89 I think it may be politically unvaiable to sending the PLA overseas with tanks. But the PAP with armored vehicles painted white with the big "UN" letters on the side is another story.

I think the PRC should allocate more $ to the PAP and have them paticipate in more "peace keeping" operations around the globe. This will enable the PAP to gain valuable experience in being deployed to potentially hostile areas and learn/pratice urban combat patrol techniques.

=======================

As for the GPS-Cruise Missiles question, China has its own GPS satellites and is joining the European Galileo project. This would disrupt the US dominance on GPS technology, which the US finds unacceptable and some media has suggested that if the European GPS satellites are used by China in war agains the US, the US would attack the European satellite system:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milspace-04zc.html

Although the Europeans have said that they wouldn't turn off or jam Galileo GPs system if used against the US in war, you cannot trust them to this. If the PRC does get into a shooting war agains the US in 10 years and the US threatened destruction of the satellites unless if EU turn them off so China cannot use them to guide cruise missiles, I think the EU will bend to US demands.

Ultimately China will still need its own GPS technology to protect its own interest.

[MIGleader]

??? don't post bullshit...

And what does indian martime patrolaircrafts to do whit chinese cruise missiles? stay on the topic!

its not bull shit, but the indians have the backfire, not blackjack.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/tu-22m.htm

the pla spending nearly 70 billion is good enough. the military is already rising fast.

as for gps, gallileo is very advanced and the best solution. the u.s may not like it, but china is taking part in funding and reaserch of gallileo, so they will own part of the system. the U.s cannot just shoot down a sattelite very easily. plus it would make europeans outraged that the U.s would do such a thing for its own interests. as a back up to gallileo, china can use the russian glonass or its indegedous beidoui, which is coming along nicely, and will be better in the future. remeber, in ten years, china may have a considerable amount of lleverag on the E.u to make tham think twice about who to help

[k1975]

Every importantly, the PLA army command structure is still not slim and transparent enough. Thus, there would be alot of reduncy in staff power and inefficency in manpower development and deployment. On the whole, the PLA top commanders are still "old fashion" compare to their other counterparts in States or UK.

When the structure is big, a lot of precious dollars had to spend on the salaries of high ranking staffs. In addition, the PLA chain of command is too long. Hence, the decision making process is often too slow to respond to the battlefield development and technology development.

[TJJH]

Incorrect, the top commanders are given full control of the PLA. By this I mean little to no bureaucracy. If anything unexpected happens the high command can just seize power and order the troops directly.

[MIGleader]

the pla works much like the government. fast, central, no beaurovracy. if the u.s takes a week to respond to katrina, how long will it take to respond to the pla?

[Chairman Hu]

Thats not fair... that we compare it like that...

No beaurcracy... yea right... every country has them...

but anyways...

HOW IS CHINA COMING ALONG WITH GPS GUIDED MISSILES!??!!?

[MIGleader]

gallieo will allw chinese missles to hit targets within a meter. the signal is cinstant, and will not be jammed by u.s. its comes onlne in 08, so now, we can use beidou, accurate to 12m, glonass, accurate to less than 20m, or a civil gps(never in war), accurate to about 10m.

[Chairman Hu]

how well is China doing in the GPS area period?

[BrotherofSnake]

Has China even launched any global positioning satellites?

[tphuang]

http://www.sinodefence.com/space/spacecraft/bd1.asp

I guess chinese planes have to use gps for now, but galileo is definitely a more advanced technology than gps. This is according to my friend who is doing his PHD in EE.

[IDonT]

http://www.sinodefence.com/space/spacecraft/bd1.asp

I guess chinese planes have to use gps for now, but galileo is definitely a more advanced technology than gps. This is according to my friend who is doing his PHD in EE.

Galileo is not even up yet and its more of a European venture. China will just be a customer.

http://www.esa.int/esaNA/GGGMX650NDC_galileo_0.html

What is Galileo?


Galileo will be Europe’s own global navigation satellite system, providing a highly accurate, guaranteed global positioning service under civilian control. It will be inter-operable with GPS and GLONASS, the two other global satellite navigation systems.


The US told Europe that it reserves the right to shoot those satellites down if it were ever use against it.

[Totoro]

I don't believe galileo sats would ever be shot down by US. Rather, the whole network would be temporarily shut down on US's request, of course with US paying EU for the financial losses brought by that shut down. Anything else would just put huge strain on US-EU relationship, which is not wanted on any side of the atlantic.

If you ask me, the whole deal on relying solely on GPS of any kind, be that for US military, chinese or any other, is just a bit too risky in a true global war scenario. Sure, against iraq or the like it's possible, but against a country with real asat capability (im talking near future here) i'd suggest having a secondary guidance system. Not that US or china are relying solely on gps, of course.

[Chairman Hu]

Does China have anything in the range of the Tomahawk?

[Totoro]

Does China have anything in the range of the Tomahawk?
Cruise missile? Nope, not to my knowledge. Not even close. I guess that tiny turbofan engine is the main problem for chinese.

[MIGleader]

gallieo is not just a european venture. chinha partakes in some of its reaserch, and has been generous to foot a fifth of the production cost.

now, lets not forget, in the years 08 or 2010, the u.s's position to make the the e.u shut down gallileo might not be enough to make the e.u turn on china.
the u.s cant just say they can shoot down anyones sattelites. the eu should tall that to the u.s's face. let the u.s shoot them down, then china can use glonass or beidou to win the war, and china and the e.u will be pissed at the u.s afterwards.

[MIGleader]

Does China have anything in the range of the Tomahawk?

well, they have the new cruise missle, but its actuall stats are unclear.

[Chairman Hu]

Great... a great big d@mn mystery...

Btw, how much of "it" does China have, and what can they be wield with?

or w/e or h/e you say it

[swimmerXC]

BEIDU?!?!
that thing is a complete failure, it can't provide gobal 24/7 coverage like the GPS...

[MIGleader]

beidou is not a failure. it can provide regional coverage for the east asia area, will suffice for now. now if the chinese can make it operable with glonass, it will a good positioning system. remeber, its just a backup to gallileo

[swimmerXC]

Beidou, can only provide coverage on one fixed position due to its geostationary orbit; if they wanted to change the coverage, they can, but the thruster fuel will be used out more quickly; the only reason why i see Beidou as an advantage to the others (GPS, GLONASS, and Galileo) is that you don't need as many satellites, nevertheless the coverage will still not be gobal compared tot he the others

http://beidou-navigation-system.area51.ipupdater.com/ (http://)

China already has three BeiDou satellites in orbit, but they cannot provide the three-dimensional (3-D) precision location inherent in GPS and GLONASS. More satellites are planned for the constellation, which will add this and other capabilities.

Source (http://www.afcea.org/signal/articles/anmviewer.asp?a=973&z=38)

[Chairman Hu]

I see the point is that BeiDou can be as effective as GLONASS and GPS for military attack and I am fine with that

I don't demand much...!

[sumdud]

Wow Iran wants it too The YJ-8, which they have already........
They have their own versions of the Styx, I don't know the role, but they aren't compatable with Chinese Styx/Silkworms. They are longer, fatter, 3.5 tonnes.

russia has loaned india some blackjacks aswell. why the indians get the cool equipment and the chinese basic equip ment is strange. one reason may be that china can make its own cool equipment. No they were Blinders......or Backfires........

Cruise missile? Nope, not to my knowledge. Not even close. I guess that tiny turbofan engine is the main problem for chinese.The engine is not the problem. The Chinese have engines on both the C-802/3 series and on the C-401. I don't think it has the range.(401 is said to have 135 km range I think)
http://sinodefence.com/missile/antiship/c201.asp
But nothing is really out yet.

How can you locate something w/ only 2 satellites?

[BrotherofSnake]

I've heard that Israel sold China some Harpy attack drones. Can anyone confirm if this is true?

[AssassinsMace]

I've heard that Israel sold China some Harpy attack drones. Can anyone confirm if this is true?


Hmmm.... Old news that's been known for a while. Where have you been?

[MIGleader]

I've heard that Israel sold China some Harpy attack drones. Can anyone confirm if this is true?

hmmm...there a news thing on it in sinodefence, and a whole page on the harpy too