Chinese ATGM discussion


AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Was any info released on the cost? Look at the ease of HJ-8s in the hands of groups China did not intend to have and this could be game changer if this is cheap to make.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Going by the cost of javelin, I suspect HJ-12 will be relatively expensive compared to previous types of PLA ATGMs. But I also think it is likely HJ12 will be cheaper than foreign competitors.
 

Insignius

Junior Member
Yeah, due to the uncooled seeker, I guess the HJ-12 will be not only cheaper, but also more rugged. I can believe the slightly inferior range compared to the Javelin comes from that.

On the other hand, I can believe that the HJ-12's excellent 1100mm RHA penetration also comes from that. A simplified seeker without the need for a coolant system frees up more space for a bigger warhead. The Javelin, on the other hand, is rated for 600mm RHA.

But not that it makes any difference when it would fly the top-attack profile anyway when employed against heavily armored modern western tanks, though...
 

Skywatcher

Captain
Yeah, due to the uncooled seeker, I guess the HJ-12 will be not only cheaper, but also more rugged. I can believe the slightly inferior range compared to the Javelin comes from that.

On the other hand, I can believe that the HJ-12's excellent 1100mm RHA penetration also comes from that. A simplified seeker without the need for a coolant system frees up more space for a bigger warhead. The Javelin, on the other hand, is rated for 600mm RHA.

But not that it makes any difference when it would fly the top-attack profile anyway when employed against heavily armored modern western tanks, though...

Actually, you can't attack over 2,500m a lot of times with the Javelin (issues with the IIR device on the Block I CLU).

In theory, and in theory mind you, if the IIR seeker was expanded to cover the near IR bands, cooling might not be such an issue (but then you open up other cans of worms).
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Actually, you can't attack over 2,500m a lot of times with the Javelin (issues with the IIR device on the Block I CLU).

In theory, and in theory mind you, if the IIR seeker was expanded to cover the near IR bands, cooling might not be such an issue (but then you open up other cans of worms).

I think HJ-12 is deserving of an eastern arsenal post :)

Certainly, if this weapon is equipped in meaningful numbers by the PLA, this will be a very serious threat to US and US allied armour. I think HJ-12 would be the first potentially large scale, hard counter to US armour ever deployed by a US adversary (helicopter ATGMs don't really count, given they are dependent on air superiority, and non fire and forget+non top attack missiles I do not consider reliable counters to ATGMs).
 

plawolf

Brigadier
I think HJ-12 is deserving of an eastern arsenal post :)

Certainly, if this weapon is equipped in meaningful numbers by the PLA, this will be a very serious threat to US and US allied armour. I think HJ-12 would be the first potentially large scale, hard counter to US armour ever deployed by a US adversary (helicopter ATGMs don't really count, given they are dependent on air superiority, and non fire and forget+non top attack missiles I do not consider reliable counters to ATGMs).

No, I think the first and real hard counter against western modern armour are the CBU97 equivalent sensor fused weapons developed by the Russians and Chinese.

I'm unsure about the others, but the Chinese version could also be deployed using MLRS, meaning you do not need air superiority to employ it.

Infantry ATGMs are useful and have their place, but when faced with a large scale enemy tank offensive, a barrage of sensor fused weapons will decimate the attackers and stop the advance in its tracks far before they get within ATGM range of your infantry.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
No, I think the first and real hard counter against western modern armour are the CBU97 equivalent sensor fused weapons developed by the Russians and Chinese.

I'm unsure about the others, but the Chinese version could also be deployed using MLRS, meaning you do not need air superiority to employ it.

Infantry ATGMs are useful and have their place, but when faced with a large scale enemy tank offensive, a barrage of sensor fused weapons will decimate the attackers and stop the advance in its tracks far before they get within ATGM range of your infantry.

True, although I wonder if they are widely available enough, and survivable enough against enemy air strikes to prove a serious deterrent to enemy armour against more unorthodox battle environments like urban areas or where artillery may be unavailable or destroyed.

I'd argue that an infantry portable anti tank capability is the more suited to different environments and more reliable for modern fast paced combat, where artillery may be more difficult to keep up, or may be threatened by air power.

edit: although you are of course right that Chinese and Russian SADARM style weapons are earlier hard counters, I just think infantry portable ATGMs are a more survivable, multirole hard counter. HJ-12 finally gives China an ability to one shot enemy MBTs the same way the enemy can China's Type 99s
 
Last edited:

Broccoli

Senior Member
Going by the cost of javelin, I suspect HJ-12 will be relatively expensive compared to previous types of PLA ATGMs. But I also think it is likely HJ12 will be cheaper than foreign competitors.

I guess that means only best units will ever see it and others will have to survive with PF-98, HJ-8, and perhaps even with the old HJ-73C.

Where did that Russian blog owner get those pictures from?
 

Top