Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 108

PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

This is a discussion on PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles within the Navy forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; Hey, guys, i know that the PLAN's Moskits on their Sovremenny Destroyers are supersonic, as well as the Klub missiles ...

  1. #1
    Su-34 is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    72

    PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Hey, guys, i know that the PLAN's Moskits on their Sovremenny Destroyers are supersonic, as well as the Klub missiles on the Kilos. But does China's indigenous anti-ship missiles have supersonic flight too? Because from what heard, China's best anti-ship missile, the YJ-62 has a range of 300 km but just a speed of MACH 0.9???

    Taiwan claims that the HF-3 is a supersonic missile, does this mean the HF-3 is better than YJ-62 and C-802?

  2. #2
    Totoro is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,367

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Go to sinodefence.com and look it up, the missile section. You will find that there are indigenous chinese supersonic missiles.

    And no, speed doesn't necesarrily mean a missile is better than a slow one. But if same guidance, tracking and targeting tech is used, then yeah, the faster one would probably be better. Disadvantages would be bigger heat signature and somewhat smaller potential manouverability. Real edge of speed becomes obvious when a salvo is fired, and ship defences just dont have time to coordinate their their attacks on every missile coming towards them.

  3. #3
    KlubMarcus's Avatar
    KlubMarcus is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    33

    Question Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    How much more expensive is a supersonic cruise missile versus a subsonic one? Is it 2x more or 4x more? Defense systems are so good nowadays that the only way to hit a ship may be in shooting a full load and pray that one gets through. So the pocketbook will affect how many you can take with you.

  4. #4
    MIGleader's Avatar
    MIGleader is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Da Eastside
    Posts
    3,564

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    the yj-83 is supersonic, going arounf mach 1.5 in the terminal stage of flight.
    the hai ying 3 is also a supersonic ramjet missle, going mach 2. but it inly has a range of 45 km, so it never entered service.

  5. #5
    utelore's Avatar
    utelore is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    491

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    CARRIER KILLER

    I think the Moskit is a absolutly terrorfying weapons . not only do you need to look at the 600lbs of HE it carries but the kenitic force of a missile hitting a carrier at Mach 2.5 with the leftover rocketfuel would be no less than hell. I believe the SPEED of the missile is a HUGE factor. I Think if you were to develop a top attack system that went strait down through the ship to then exploded about at the bottom deck would be one hell of a system.

  6. #6
    IDonT is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,091

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    When in comes to anti-ship missile, speed and range are not everything. Guidance system and targetting are much more effective factors to develop.

    How good is a 500km range missile if you can't "see" over the horizon. It is equivalent to having a long range sniper without a scope. You can still use it but not at the range you want to. Targetting issue is very important because range is a factor of accuracy. The further your target, the less likely you are to hit it or hit something else like a neutral merchantship.

    Guidance is by far the most important. What good is your missile if it can't hit anything? The harpoon missile, for example, is not that 'glamorous' from a distance. It is not the fastest or the longest range anti-ship missile. On closer inspection, it is very sophisticated. Its guidance system allows the ship commander to fly the missile around islands, vector it around a target ship and approach it from an unexpected direction. Imagine if you will if you are a PLAN captain and you know that the USN is to your east. Then all of a sudden you get a "vampire" call from a harpoon coming at you from the west. You might conclude that it came from a sub or that the USN has outflanked you. Furthermore, several harpoons can be fired in such a way as for it to arrive at the same time from different directions.

  7. #7
    Totoro is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,367

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Don't certain variants of the Klub missile family feature dive down attacks? Also, i'm positive some of them feature a torpedo, which is a nice idea, avoiding the RAM and phalanx defences. Anyway, if it's not the club missile which does the vertical dive towards the target then it's some ither- but i'm positive i saw some russian missiles featuring such ability. It is, however, questionable if that's such a good thing since a ballistic trajectory is easier to detect/track and intercept. And if it does the high altitude pop up only in the last 30 or so km that it's gonna get detected anyway, by doing that pop up it's sure to prolongue its exposure to the US defences, giving them more time to react.

    A question: Does US count on its E2s on detecting and tracking the missiles below them, while they're still hundered or more km away from the ship they're attacking? Or is the wide spread confidence that the fleet can deal with any kind of antiship missile attack based purely on the capabilities of ship based radars? at mach 3, a missile needs only half a minute to hit the ship from the point where it pops up from the horizon. What is the time needed for the first standard to be launched, upon detection of the incoming missile? How many standards can be fired within 30 seconds from one ship? How many ESSMs? how many RAMs can be launched within 10 seconds?

  8. #8
    KlubMarcus's Avatar
    KlubMarcus is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    33

    Lightbulb Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by IDonT
    How good is a 500km range missile if you can't "see" over the horizon. It is equivalent to having a long range sniper without a scope. You can still use it but not at the range you want to. Targetting issue is very important because range is a factor of accuracy. The further your target, the less likely you are to hit it or hit something else like a neutral merchantship.
    The "Sunburn" missile is listed at 60-80% hit probability. So I figure in wartime it will be lower. The only thing that worries me is cost. If it's relatively "cheap", then it will be a problem.

  9. #9
    IDonT is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,091

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by KlubMarcus
    The "Sunburn" missile is listed at 60-80% hit probability. So I figure in wartime it will be lower. The only thing that worries me is cost. If it's relatively "cheap", then it will be a problem.
    In what context was this probability listed? Was the target manuevering, decoying, and shooting it down?

    Besides, how are you going to shoot the sunburn if you don't know where the target is. Say you send in your Helo for a recon mission about 90 miles from where you are. The helo needs to fly high in order for its surface search radar to "see a bigger area". It gets shot down by a standard missile before it can verify its target. You are a captain of a Sovremenny destroyer and you just lost 50% of your helicopter fleet, but however you have a "probable" enemy surface contact about 90 miles in the direction of your helo. Lets say you have pinpoint from the helo data that the enemy ship is in a 10x10 square mile of ocean. That's 100 square mile of open ocean that the enemy ship can occupy. The question is, will you fire your sunburns? If so, how many? Can your sunburn able to search that particular swath of ocean of enemy ships on its own, acquire the target, descriminate from neutral shipping, and have the manueverability to head for it...the Harpoon missile can.

    What I'm trying to say is that speed and range are not the end all aspect of an anti-ship missile. If you have a good clear picture of your target and can effectively give your missile mid-course guidance, then speed and range can have a noticible impact. The problem is acquiring and tracking your target at such ranges. This problem is compounded by the low survivability of heliborne recon craft, which needs to fly high in order to see more area.

    Totoro: I think Sea Dog can answer your question better than I can. But the rate of fire and the number of missiles the AEGIS can guide is more than 50.
    Last edited by IDonT; 12-28-2005 at 02:46 PM.

  10. #10
    Falstaff is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    in most western city of germany
    Posts
    9

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    I agree with you guys that speed isn't everything for AShMs. In a real combat situation the party with the ability to launch a multi-angle saturation attack accompanied by intensive jamming will win, not the one with the fastest missiles .

    In addition to all the disadvatages you mentioned, only subsonic missiles are maneuverable enough to perform complex evasive maneuvers during their terminal approach in order to avoid CIWS-fire.

    I think the reason that all western navies are equipped with and still develop sub- or transsonic AShMs (e.g. Harpoon, Exocet, RBS-15, Otomat, Penguin, Kormoran, Gabriel) is not that they aren't able to build supersonic ones.

    However, I think we will never see top-attack-AShMs. You simply give the target ship too much time to react. It would be an invitation for any CIWS. Sea-skimmers will remain the most effective missiles.

  11. #11
    KlubMarcus's Avatar
    KlubMarcus is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    33

    Cool Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by IDonT
    In what context was this probability listed? Was the target manuevering, decoying, and shooting it down?

    Besides, how are you going to shoot the sunburn if you don't know where the target is.
    I just took the probability numbers listed off this website so they are probably no good in the real world so I figure it has to be a lower figure once the shooting starts.

    The PLAN commander might just blind-launch his missiles in a wide pattern at the suspected target area and hope for the best. The key is cost of replacement missiles. If the PLAN can afford the time, effort, and money, they'll launch blind.

  12. #12
    AssassinsMace's Avatar
    AssassinsMace is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    5,012

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    When a obsolete Seersucker can hit Kuwait City without being seen by Patriot, AWACS, and Aegis sensors nets, one doesn't need only high tech to do the job. So speed maybe a plus but not paramount in importance.

  13. #13
    IDonT is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,091

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by AssassinsMace
    When a obsolete Seersucker can hit Kuwait City without being seen by Patriot, AWACS, and Aegis sensors nets, one doesn't need only high tech to do the job. So speed maybe a plus but not paramount in importance.

    Hitting Kuwait City, any part of a city, is totatly different than hitting a warship. I'll tell you why
    1.) Kuwait city is way bigger
    2.) It's location is known
    3.) It doesn't move.
    4.) It is sorrounded by ground clutter that can block surface based radar sensors.

    A ship manuevering at sea is totally different.
    1.) It is smaller
    2.) It's location is not known
    3.) It can move about 500 miles a day
    4.) Any missile that approaches it cannot hide because it has no ground clutter.

    See the difference?

  14. #14
    KlubMarcus's Avatar
    KlubMarcus is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    33

    Lightbulb Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by AssassinsMace
    When a obsolete Seersucker can hit Kuwait City without being seen by Patriot, AWACS, and Aegis sensors nets, one doesn't need only high tech to do the job. So speed maybe a plus but not paramount in importance.
    Kuwait City isn't floating in the sea in sections and moving hundreds of miles a day.

    Does China have enough missiles to cover a million square kilometers of sea by firing at coordinates? Of course not, they're going to have to send planes and ships out hundreds of kilometers away from base to spot the fleet. Those planes and ships will be destroyed. Eventually the PLAN will stick close to port to "save face" or launch suicide missions at unknown forces over water. It's going to be a turkey shoot! Can you imagine the psy ops guys talking trash at the commie Chinese? They know we can hit them, but they have trouble hitting us beyond their horizon.

  15. #15
    Roger604's Avatar
    Roger604 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,152

    Re: PLAN Supersonic Anti-Ship Missiles

    Quote Originally Posted by IDonT
    Totoro: I think Sea Dog can answer your question better than I can. But the rate of fire and the number of missiles the AEGIS can guide is more than 50.
    Does this mean that if more than 50 ASM are launched, they will surely defeat the system? If the PLAN can get into position to launch that many (of course this would be the hard part), then some will definitely break through -- even assuming a 100% kill rate for each AEGIS guided missile. Or am I misunderstanding something here?

Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •