Another thing I was going to add is that stealth shaping does not work as well on longer wave lengths like what AEW uses so they can be spotted. However, such radars are low resolution and have a wide margin of error, and would need to queue shorter wavelength radars at the target so there you go again.
PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Another thing I was going to add is that stealth shaping does not work as well on longer wave lengths like what AEW uses so they can be spotted. However, such radars are low resolution and have a wide margin of error, and would need to queue shorter wavelength radars at the target so there you go again.
so you mean aew can spot a lrasm as far away as it would a tomahawk?
i always thought in that case aew will direct interceptor fighters to go after these missiles so all aew need to know is a rough direction and distance
and i think sub sonic ashm does not stand much chance against interceptor fighters, no matter those ashms are stealth or not
plawolf
Lieutenant General
With the PLA, just because you haven’t seen photos of something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Given Chinese stealth capabilities and the inherent advantages a stealthy AShM/LACM would bring, as well as the systematic way China has went about its AShM game, I would be amazed if the PLAN haven’t at a minimum commissioned for such a missile to be developed. The key question is just how far along its development path it is.
But something like this with significant tactical and strategic implications would be top of the list in terms of items to keep under wraps for opsec sake, so I don’t expect to find out an answer until years or decades later, or until a war breaks out involving the PLAN, when it will bring its latest toys out to play.
Yes. Both will appear like a blob. Note these are very low resolution radars so shaping doesn't work.
Long wavelengths also penetrate through surfaces easily and bounce off internal components. Radar absorbtion materials don't work as well as these materials have to be of sufficient thickness to resonate against the physical length of the wavelength, and you cannot get it thick enough against UHF or VHF wavelengths. Do you see the reason why the 052D sports a VHF array?
If you don't mind, I'll answer in a different topic: this is a pure ASCM discussion at this point, so it's only proper to continue it here.
First, before going to the necessity of LRASM-analogue for PLAN, let's make a short characteristic of the missile in question.
LRASM is:
---
1. Purely air-launched. As of now, all Lockheed attempts to sell it as a surface weapon have failed.
2. Actually quite heavy for its class - 1.1t - due to both range(500km) and heavy(454kg - 1000lb) warhead, both values were probably mandated by the customer. This has two implications - both on operations (platform has to be able to carry them - important for carrier aircraft!), and that it's a weapon intended to kill and maim ships, not to just disable.
3. Stealthy, subsonic, and passive(passive radar+IR imaging) - ensuring maximum survivability for the combination from (2). Quite likely - it isn't all that maneuverable for a subsonic weapon. Worth noting, that "fully passive" was quite probably not a design choice, but a necessity - it inherited JSM shape, and there is really no space for a proper radar seeker there.
4. Very expensive - this is not a weapon you launch on a whim, nor a weapon you install everywhere. Such weapon for Americans is either NSM(new ships) or old Harpoon stocks, which didn't go anywhere. Stupid, reasonably cheap, and proven.
---
Back to the PLAN.
1. LRASM concept appears to be of limited use to Chinese armed forces: PLANAF(coastal units) and PLAAF already have hi/lo mix of suitable weapons (IMHO - far more suitable for Chinese needs); LRASM doesn't fit there. The only exception where LRASM-like weapon checks all the boxes is carrier aviation, but more precisely - air groups of new 003-class carriers: here catapults are really paramount, LRASM configurations are heavy. Is it worth a new weapon? I personally don't know, there is unlikely to be enough 003-class carriers in the coming decade, and LRASM concept is inherently an intermediate one(2030s will probably need a new weapon).
For 001-type air groups, it's probably uncomfortably heavy.
2. As a ship-borne weapon it doesn't make almost any sense: there where it's suitable - it's too expensive and heavy (ship-launched version weighs 2 tons!). There where its weight and price aren't that much of a problem - egh, YJ-18 is already there, why bother?
Last edited:
Based on your analysis, LRASM does not work for US anymore. As you pointed out, the achieve stealth, LRASM can only work in passive RF mode, which means it needs some other plane working in active RF mode 200km to 300km away from the target to help guide it. Since the plane needs to be working at active RF mode, it would not be stealthy at all. And it would fly below the horizon because it needs to be able to "see" the target. If the target does not have aircraft carrier support or land based air fighter support, this LRASM concept can work because the supporting AWES plane outranges the defense missile. But now China has aircraft carriers, how can the AWES planes survives before sinking its target.
I agree with all this and it's really my opinion on LRASM equivalent for PLAN. I mentioned that stealthiness could be a feature PLAN looks at acquiring for in a YJ-18 replacement. However China values attrition capabilities quite a lot and we can be sure that they will continue to keep multiple anti ship missile types if a LRASM analogue is developed and put in service, it would be a rarer weapon.
For now, it appears China prefers the HGV and AShBM route for top tier anti shipping. These are far superior but I imagine also far more expensive and complex than a stealthy YJ-18 level missile. LRASM lacks YJ-12's speed. YJ-18 has similar if not superior ranges and much better terminal phase speed and maneuverability. These missiles have already been in Chinese service for half a decade. They're both capable of sea skimming so stealth is a given for everyone except USN and even then, possibly delayed detected anyway. A fully dedicated stealth sea skimmer (whatever launched) is probably of limited advantage once we consider costs and development time etc. Missiles already have relatively low RCS anyway. The rest is electronic and thermal signatures and at least the former is going to feature the best China has for the two YJs and any LRASM analogue.
LRASM passive mode or any passive mode for an antiship missile can only work in the mid phase. Terminal phase should be active mode only because passive mode is too inaccurate. Passive mode will only bring the missile to the general area where the target is, but to get that 1m to 3 meter accuracy of the target, you need to have an active. LRASM surely has an active mode. The passive mode I am in doubt and its probably using an external station (plane or ship). The problem of passive is that you have a signal rich environment, you are going to have to analyze each of them, that's like analyzing every hay in the haystack, to find the needle. When you find the needle, its better to have a person look at it to determine if that's really a needle and not another piece of hay.
Its possible for a ship or plane to work in passive mode (ESM).
When I grew up in 2000's , I always read of how the Moskit sunburn missile was the fastest anti-ship missile that is undefendable...
But how does Moskit sunburn compare now to YJ-12 or other Chinese anti-ship missiles? Is Moskit now obsolete tech and why?
But how does Moskit sunburn compare now to YJ-12 or other Chinese anti-ship missiles? Is Moskit now obsolete tech and why?