The C-602 subsonic multi-role cruise missile, which was unveiled by China National Precision Machinery Import-Export Corp (CPMIEC) during the DSA 2006 exhibition, is ideally suited for installation on board guided-missile frigates and corvettes. Each such vessel will be able to carry eight such missiles in twin quad launchers mounted amidships and inclined at 20 degrees. The C-602 can also be air-launched by twin-turboprop MPA/ASW aircraft. The C-602’s ship-launched anti-ship strike and land-attack variants are presently operational with China's PLA Navy. Both variants have a cruise speed of Mach 0.6, maximum range of 290km, launch weight of 1,350kg, incorporate a 300kg blast warhead, and have one solid rocket booster and a turbojet for cruise flight. For long-range navigation use is made of a strapdown inertial navigation suite combined with GPS receiver, and a monopulse X-band active radar with 40km range for terminal homing. The radar bears an uncanny resemblance to the Grifo-7 X-band monopulse radar which Italy's Galileo Avionica supplied for the Pakistan Air Force's upgraded F-7PG light multi-role combat aircraft--Prasun K. Sengupta
11 comments:
to sengupta
can our akash missile engage these missiles
Akash can defintely engage these subsonic missiles. Its Rajendra radar is designed to handle low RCS targets and the Akash tests take place against Lakhsya drone which even equipped with RCS increase, are still low RCS targets.
The issue is not whether the Akash missile can engage such targets. If you want to engage such anti-ship cruise missile with the Akash it will be an overkill. Secondly, the Akash and its ground-based fire-control systems were developed to shoot down airborne targets, not sea-skimming ones. Therefore, the Akash uses proportional navigation to engage its targets out to a slant distance of 25km. To shoot down such anti-ship cruise missiles what is required is a much more lightweight missile that should be highly manoeuvrable (capable of sustaining a combined g-force of a high order but not like close-range air combat missiles that have to sustain 76Gs at times), should incorporate proportional navigation features as well, but most importantly should be compact enough to fit into the vertical launch cells which themselves must be sited within the the narrow confines of a warship. In other words, the Barak-1 and Kashtan-M in a sense are the optimum choices for engaging a C-602.
prasun, what i was saying was that if need be the Akash can engage skimming targets. that is clearly shown in tests at chandipur on sea.
also barak-1 and kashtan are ciws, and not ideal for engaging this missile. first it will be shtil and then only if it misses then barak-1. in future 1st layer will be barak-2.
To Anon@3:14PM: The Akash firing trials at ITR Chandipur-at-sea involved interception of low-flying and not so high-speed targets, not sea-skimming targets. The Shtil-1 so far cannot intercept sea-skimming targets. But it is capable of intercepting the previous-generation anti-ship missiles like the P-18/P-20/P-22 Termit of the type on board the Project 16 Godavari-class FFGs and Kashin II-class DDGs. The Barak-1 & Kashtan can take on even high subsonic targets (like the C-602, Harpoon, Exocet and C-802A), but the Barak-2 will be optimised and used for intercepting heavier inbound supersonic cruise missiles like the Kh-41 Zubr and BrahMos/Yakhont.
to segupta
The Shtil-1 so far cannot intercept sea-skimming targets. But it is capable of intercepting the previous-generation anti-ship missiles like the P-18/P-20/P-22
----------------------------------------------
i thik shtil 1 quite capable missile otherwise navy will not induct it
It indeed is a very capable missile, but against airborne targets cruising at medium- and high-altitudes. It was not developed as an anti-missile air defence system. For that the Kashtan-M was developed in Russia.
kashtan m is much better than phalnx CIWS
prasun, anon@14:00pm is correct,
at ITR the rajendra locked onto v low flying targets repeatedly showing that the missile/radar combo can manage.
in fact, iaf asked for the ability to engage very low flying targets from akash team, and it was a challenging task to solve the multipath reflection problem which was done.
the problem is not of missile/radar combo but of placement. the radar will have to be suitably sited to provide clear field of view downwards (ie at elevation) for reasonable range, which of course impacts somewhat on mobility of system
that is why other sam system nowadays use mast mounted 3d surveillance radar instead of expensive fire control radar and move task to missiles with seekers which have task of acquiring and engaging target.
but akash follows approach specified by iaf where cost/round is low. if user asks for it, a new missile can be developed as well for akash system. the raj/rohini combination is very potent.
You're absolutely right. It is purely an issue of the engagement radar's placement, preferably in a clutter-free and physical obstacle-free environment. But the IAF's operational GSQRs call for the Akash to intercept, as you've rightly said, very low-flying targets, i.e. up to 50 metres ASL. An anti-ship cruise missile, on the other hand, flies much lower, i.e. 5 metres ASL in the sea-skimming mode. This flightpath can be accurately tracked only if the multi-beam/multi-mode Rajendra APAR's naval variant is located high on a warship's mast, just as the EL/M-2248 MF/STAR will be sited on the Project 15A DDG. While the naval Revathi 3-D system will be an excellent long-range air/surface search radar, I'm still at a loss to understand why did the DRDO since the early 1990s not think about developing a naval variant of the Rajendra APAR (with four separate antenna arrays.
prasun it was thought of, but choice was made to go for aesa instead with tightly coupled missile system, ie lrsam. there are more devpt underway, which will be v positive for local radar devpt.
Post a Comment