PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles


tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Because the sources of the antiship missiles are not relevant to the antiship missiles?

Because this is a discussion. The author presented the argument in away like:

Based on his research -> his conclusion is so forth.

You can disagree with his conclusion if you want, but he is allowed to reach his own conclusions. And it's up to the website whether he has done enough research and they obviously believe he has. Our goal is to debate his conclusions and other conclusions. I can assure you that there are a lot of news services out there reporting on PLAN news who have done far less research than he has here. I know this because they either get very basic facts wrong (like Jane defense) or rely mostly on interviews.

Also, the other thing you might have noticed is that I'm making an effort to clamp down on debates involving two sides that are not willing to budge at all on their views. Let's try to have it as state your view a couple of times and let it go.
 

Miragedriver

Brigadier
It is a good article and written by one of our own SD members who is a serious Naval Weapons System analyst.

I could not find anything inaccurate in what was said, but did find a lot of explanation about how the PLAN designates its missiles which cleared up a lot of confusion about the YJ-8/83 missiles.

Jeff, in your professional opinion how would you rate the Yingji-83 or YJ-83 with the following missiles:

Exocet
Harpoon
Kh-35 aka Harpoonski
RBS-15
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Jeff, in your professional opinion how would you rate the Yingji-83 or YJ-83 with the following missiles:

Exocet
Harpoon
Kh-35 aka Harpoonski
RBS-15

I think a lot of this are comparable in performance. My guess is that kh-35 would be a little inferior just because Russia has been concentrating more on the supersonic stuff. Things like range, size and weight are all comparable and the terminal height is also comparable. But what we really can't measure is the seeker performance.
 

Jeff Head

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Jeff, in your professional opinion how would you rate the Yingji-83 or YJ-83 with the following missiles:

Exocet
Harpoon
Kh-35 aka Harpoonski
RBS-15
Well, lets look at the overall specs on each (all are subsonic and all are sea skimmers). I will include the max range for the most advanced (usually meaning the air launched variety):

Name - Diameter - Length - Wgt - Warhead Wgt - Range
Exocet - 34.8cm - 4.7m - 670kg - 165kg - 180+km
Harpoon - 34.0cm - 4.6m - 691kg - 221kg - 280km
Kh-35 - 42.0cm - 4.4m - 610kg - 145kg - 250km
RBS-15 - 50.0cm - 4.33m - 800kg - 200kg - 250km
YJ-83 - 36.0cm - 6.3m - 800kg - 190kg - 250km

These are all realtively close...although the fact that the Harpoon can pack a larger warhead into it's relatively smaller airframe and also have the greatest range speaks to it's probably more advanced electronics/micronization etc.

If I had to rate them by the danger they pose...well, all are dangerous and require sophisticated air defense systems for ships to deal with them, meaning not only the onboard sensors and launchers (and I'm talking about the sophisticated integrated defense systems with VLS, PARS, etc. liek AEGIS or SAMPSON or something like that), but also their ability to take and utilize input from other sensors and platforms to identify and target the threats further out (ie. AEW aircraft, patrol aircraft, other vessels, etc.).

Anyhow, as to which are the greatest threat, if I had to categorize them that way, I would say:

Most dangerous: The Excocet and Harpoiin are right at the top, perhaps with the Harpoon edging out the Excocet because of its greater range and bigger warhead. I believe the electronics on these two are the best.

Next most dangerpous: I would choose the RBS-15,

Next most dangerous: Right behind all of the above, and grouped right together, I would place the Kh35 and YJ-83. I consider both of those Harpoon clones, and very good ones, using their own technologies, airframe, electronics, engines, to basically come up with an anti-shipping, anti-surface missile that comes very close to the same envelope of the Harpoon's capabilities.

None of these missiles should be taken for granted or underestimated.

Anyhow, those are my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

pendragon

Junior Member
Does pla navy has any lighter, shorter range AShM at its disposal?
(800 kilo missile + container +ranging and guidance unit make up for considerable weight and space.)
just wondering, could be useful to upgrade simple older patrolcraft (like fitting manpads on pedestal to replace medium calibre manually aimed AA guns) or arm helo's.
AT10 might be used to this end but may on the other hand prove to be to light.
 

Jeff Head

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
All...here's a link where you can download a wonderful technical presentation regarding the PLAN's YJ-8 (Eagle Strike) family of anti-ship/surface missiles that was recenly made at the Admiralty Trilogy Seminar , and clears up a lot of confusion regarding YJ-8 designations:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(PDF File)

It is a presentation meant to go along with the article which Tphuang linked to at the start of this thread.

Also, for those who had been asking about it, a full Bibliography for that article has been posted and is available at the following link:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(MS Word, docx file)

(It is also available
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, having been added there)

All of this was creadted by our own SD poster, cirvine11, and thanks are due him for his research and willingness to have this infor posted on SD.

Thank you my friend!
 
Last edited:

duskylim

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Thanks, I read the article and it says that one of the major YJ-83 upgrades over the YJ-81 and YJ-82 is an INCREASE in the size of the warhead from 165 kg to 190 kg.
 

Lion

Senior Member
Thanks, I read the article and it says that one of the major YJ-83 upgrades over the YJ-81 and YJ-82 is an INCREASE in the size of the warhead from 165 kg to 190 kg.

YJ-83 speed also quote at 1.3 Mach compare to Harpoon 0.8 Mach speed. That also explain the bigger size, heavy weight of the YJ-83 compare to Harpoon. Probably due to a more powerful boaster.
 

Jeff Head

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
YJ-83 speed also quote at 1.3 Mach compare to Harpoon 0.8 Mach speed. That also explain the bigger size, heavy weight of the YJ-83 compare to Harpoon. Probably due to a more powerful boaster.
No, it the presentation and article indicates that there were rumors it was a faster than sound missile, but it has been clearly shown to be not so.

The final table in the presentation (next to last page), and in the article plainly states that the speed is .8-.9 mach, not mach 1.3 in the least.

duskylim said:
Thanks, I read the article and it says that one of the major YJ-83 upgrades over the YJ-81 and YJ-82 is an INCREASE in the size of the warhead from 165 kg to 190 kg.
Good catch, that is correct for the YJ-83K, the air launched version and I will fix my own table accordingly. Thanks.
 

Top