AGMs and Standoff Weapons

Ra'ad (Hatf VIII)

Type Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM)
Place of origin Pakistan
Operational range 350 km
Weight 1,100 kg


Babur (Urdu: باب&#1585 (named after the first Mughal Emperor Zahir ud-Din Babur), also designated Hatf VII, is the first land attack cruise missile to be developed by Pakistan
Weight <1500 kg (payload >300 kg)
Operationa range 750 km (466 mi)
Tomahawk (missile)
Type subsonic cruise missile
Place of origin United States
Weight 2,900 lb (1,300 kg)
Operational
range 1,350 nautical miles (2,500 km)


Storm Shadow

Type Long-range, air-to-surface missile
Place of origin France, Italy, United Kingdom
Weight 1,230 kilograms (2,711.7 lb)
Operational
range over 250 kilometres



AGM-158 JASSM

Type Air-to-surface cruise missile
Place of origin United States
Specifications
Weight 2250 lb (1021 kg)
Operational
range >230 mi (>370 km)



AGM-129 ACM

Type Cruise Missile
Weight 3,500 lb (1,334 kg)
Operational
range 2,000 nautical miles (3,704 km)


AGM-86 ALCM

Type Air-to-ground strategic cruise missile
Weight 3,200 lb (1,429 kg)
Operational
range AGM-86B: 1500+ miles (2,400+ km);
AGM-86C: classified (nominal 680 miles, 1,100 km)


AGM-154 

Type Air-to-surface missile
Weight 1,065 pounds (483 kg) to 1,095 pounds (497 kg)
Operational
range low altitude launch: 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi)
high altitude launch: 70 nautical miles (130 km; 81 mi)


AGM-142 

Type Air-to-surface missile
Place of origin Israel-United States
Weight 1,360 kg (3,000 lb)
Operational
range 78 km (48 miles)


Delilah
Type Cruise missile
Place of origin Israel
Weight 250 kilograms (550 lb)
Operational
range 250 kilometres (160 mi)


KEPD 350

Type Long-range air-to-surface missile
Weight 1400 kg
Operational
range over 500 km


HOPE/HOSBO
HOPE (HOchleistungs-PEnetrator = High Performance Penetrator) and HOSBO (HOchleistungs-Spreng-BOmbe = High Performance Explosive Bomb)

Range: 160 km
Weight: HOPE: 1,400 kg (3,086 lb); HOSBO: 907 kg (2,000 lb)



Standoff Land Attack Missile

The Standoff Land Attack Missile or SLAM is a subsonic[1], over-the-horizon, all-weather standoff cruise missile which grew out of the United States Navy's Harpoon anti-ship missile in the 1970s.
* AGM-84E &#8212; Basic SLAM
* AGM-84H &#8212; SLAM-ER
* AGM-84K &#8212; Internally improved AGM-84H
* SLAM-ER ATA &#8212; Version with autonomous target acquisition capability: operated by Republic of Korea Air Force & Turkish Air Force

DH 10

type: ALCM, LACM, 
Place of origin: Peoples Republic of China
Weight: 1800Kg
Operational range: >4000Km( > 2000Mi)
Warhead: Conventional or 20-90 Kt tactical nuclear device



Kh-55 (missile family)

Type Air-launched strategic cruise missile
Weight 1,650 kg (3,640 lb) (Kh-65SE)[1]
2,200&#8211;2,400 kg (4,900&#8211;5,300 lb) (Kh-101)
Place of origin Soviet Union
Operationalrange 
2,500 km (1,300 nmi) (Kh-55)
3,000 km (1,600 nmi) (Kh-55SM)
600 km (320 nmi)(Kh-65SE)[1]
300 km, later 600 km(Kh-SD


Kh-15 

Type air-to-surface missile
Place of origin Soviet Union
Weight 1,200 kg (2,650 lb)
Operational
range 300 km (160 nmi)


UUM-44 SUBROC

Type Standoff anti-submarine weapon
Place of origin United States
Weight 4,000 lb (1,814 kg)
Operational
range 55 km (30 miles)


Harpoon
Type Anti-ship missile
Place of origin United States
Weight 1,523 lb (691 kg)
Operational
range in excess of 67 nmi (124 km) 


RUR-5 ASROC

Type Standoff Anti-Submarine
Place of origin United States
Weight 1073 lb (488 kg)
Operational
range 12 nm (22 km)


RUM-139 VL-ASROC
Type Standoff Anti-Submarine Weapon
Place of origin United States
Operational
range 22 kilometers


Ikara 

Type Anti-submarine
Place of origin Australia
Weight 513 kilograms 
Operational
range Maximum range: 10 nautical miles (19 km)


3M-54 Klub

Type Anti-ship missile
Anti-submarine missile
Land attack cruise missile
Place of origin Russia
Weight Varies on variant, from 1,300 kg-1780 kg- 2300 kg
Operational
range Varies on variant, maximum range is 300 km




C-802
Type Anti-ship missile
Place of origin People's Republic of China
Weight 715 kg
Operational
range ~500 km (C-805); 350+ km (C-803); 180 km (C-802A); 120 km (C-802)


Exocet
Type Medium-range anti-ship missile
Place of origin France
Weight 670 kilograms (1,500 lb)
Operational
range 70&#8211;180 kilometres (43&#8211;110 mi; 38&#8211;97 nmi)

Kh-35
Type air-to-surface, surface-to-surface missile
Place of origin Soviet Union
Weight 520 kg (1,150 lb
Operational
range {130km)-(70nm)



Sea Eagle 
Type Anti-ship missile
Place of origin UK
Weight 580 kg
Operational
range 110 km

Naval Strike Missile
Type littoral/open sea anti-ship/land attack cruise missile
Place of origin Norway
Weight 410 kg
Operational
range 185 km +


RBS-15
Type Fire and forget
anti-ship and land attack
Place of origin Sweden
Weight 800 kg
Operational
range 250 km



CJ-10 
Type Land attack cruise missile
Place of origin People's Republic of China
Operational
range 2,200km

C-602
Type anti-ship / air-to-surface / land attack cruise missiles
Place of origin China
Weight 1.24 ton
Operational
range > 400+ km / 280+ km for export

P-800 Oniks
Type anti-ship missile cruise missile\
Weight 3,000 kg
Operational
range 120 to 300 km


Air-Sol Moyenne Portée
Type medium-range air to surface nuclear missile
Weight 860 kg
Operational
range between 80 km and 300 km

Kh-59 (AS-18 Kazoo)
Type air-to-surface missile
anti-shipping missile
Place of origin Soviet Union
Weight 930 kg 
Operational
range Kh-59ME(export) :115 km 

Kh-31 AS-17 Krypton
Type Medium-range air-to-surface missile
Place of origin Soviet Union
Weight Kh-31A :610 kg (1,340 lb)[1]
Kh-31P :600 kg (1,320 lb)
Operational
range Kh-31A: 25 km&#8211;50 km


YJ-91
Type anti-ship, anti-radar and air-to-surface missiles
Place of origin China
Weight 0.6 ton
Operational
range 5 to 120 km

The Taurus KEPD 350 



Low Cost Miniature Cruise Missile

The Low Cost Miniature Cruise Missile (LCMCM) is a Lockheed Martin program to develop a small, affordable cruise missile which will fit inside the internal weapons bay of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II.[1]
* Length: ~144 in.[2]
* Weight: ~1000 lbs
* Range: 750&#8211;1000 miles
AGM-65 Maverick
The AGM-65 Maverick is an air-to-ground tactical missile 
Operational
range 15 nmi (17 mi; 28 km)

AS-30L
Type laser guided short-to-medium range air-to-ground missile
Place of origin France
Weight 520 kg 
Operational
range Minimum range: 3-11 km


AGM-158 Joint Air-to-surface Stand-off Missile

AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon

AGM-130 Powered Standoff Missile





R]



Hadès (missile)

Type Short-range pre-strategic ballistic nuclear missile (SRBM)
Place of origin France
Weight 1,850 kg
Operational
range 480 km


Pluton (missile)

Type Short-range tactical ballistic nuclear missile (SRBM)
Place of origin France
Weight 2,423 kg
Operational
range 120 km

Ghaznavi Missile (Urdu: &#1594;&#1586;&#1606;&#1608;&#1740; &#1605;&#1740;&#1587;&#1575;&#1740;&#1604is a short range ballistic missile (SRBM) with an optimal range of 290 km,[1] produced by Pakistan 

Weight 5,256 kg
Operational
range 290 km


Abdali-I( named after the Afghan king Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founder of the Durrani Empire) is a short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) , developed by Pakistan 
Weight 1,750 kg
Operational
range 180 km

Hatf-I
Type Battle-field Range Ballistic Missile (BRBM)
Weight 1500 kg
Operational
range Hatf-I: 70 km, Hatf-IA/IB: 100 km

Shaheen-I
Type Short Range Ballistic Missile
Weight 9,500 kg
Operational
range 650 km

Dongfeng 11/M-11
An improved DF-11A version has increased range of >825 km


9K720 Iskander

Type Tactical ballistic missile
Place of origin Russia
Weight 3,800 kg
Operational
range 280-400 km



Scud


DF-15

The Dong-Feng 15 (a.k.a. M-9, CSS-6) is a short-range ballistic missile developed by the People's Republic of China.
Weight 6,200 kg
Operational
range 600 kilometres


Prithvi (missile)

Weight 4,400 kg 
Operational
range 150-350 km 

Fateh-110 / M600
iran
Weight 3,450 kg
Operational
range 250 km



Shahab-2

Weight 6,370-6,500 kg
Operational
range 750 km
The Soviet "Scud" missile family
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/Diverse/Scud/

J-600T missile
Project J is a Turkish Armed Forces program intended to develop a series of tactical and theatre ballistic missiles with a range of 150 to 300 km.

MGM-52 Lance
Weight 1,285-1,527 kg
Engine Liquid-propellant rocket
Operational
range 70 -125km

BGM



AGM-109


AGM-158 Joint air-to-surface standoff missile

KAB-GBU

MB-1 Ding-Dong, AIR-2) was an unguided air-to-air rocket with a 1.5kt W25 nuclear warhead. It was deployed by the United States Air Force (from the late 1950s) and the Canadian Forces Air Command (from 1 February 1968 to the 1980s) during the Cold War.
Powered by an unshielded nuclear ramjet engine at Mach 3! Carrying six H Bombs. Low level supersonic flight path.


Torgos Cruise Missile

Description:

Torgos is a long-range, precision-guided strike missile, designed to neutralise enemy targets such as hardened aircraft shelters, bunkers and command-and-control centres at extended stand-off ranges. Pinpoint accuracy is achieved by using advanced navigation and autonomous terminal-guidance technology. It will use GPS-INS midcourse guidance, but also has thermal imaging terminal seeker that can operate autonomously, or allow remote control over a data link.

The weapon was derived from the MUPSOW programme. It is not known if Mupsow has entered SAAF service.




The Ra'ad 
The Ra'ad (Arabic: &#1585;&#1593;&#1583;&#8206 (English: Thunder) is an air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) developed by Pakistan and operational with the Pakistan Air Force (PAF). Though initially launched from a PAF Dassault Mirage III ROSE combat aircraft during testing, the missile is planned to be integrated with and launched from other PAF platforms such as the JF-17 combat aircraft. The Ra'ad's current range is stated to be 350 km.[1]
The Ra'ad's airframe is designed with stealth capability,[4][5] provided by the shape of the airframe and the materials used in its construction, to give the missile a low detection probability and allow it to penetrate enemy air defence systems.[1] Designed to carry conventional or nuclear warheads, the missile would most likely be used for precision air strikes on enemy command centres, radars, surface to air missile launchers, ballistic missile launchers and stationary warships.[6]



discussed earlier--
AGM-158 JASSM


Storm Shadow


KEPD 350


The experience gained from The anti-radiation version of the YJ-91[120km] [ Chinese version of the Kh-31] also helped the engine development (basically copied the engine) of another supersonic missile indigenously developed in China, YJ-12 [400km]



MAR-1 is an anti-radiation missile (ARM) developed by Brazil's Mectron and the Aerospace Technical Center (Centro Técnico Aeroespacial, CTA) of the Brazilian Air Force (FAB).

The missile is guided by a Brazilian-developed passive anti-radiation seeker designed to target different types of land-based and sea-based radars with different modes, including high power surveillance radars, low power mobile radars and radars used by surface-to-air missile systems. Enemy radars can be targeted by the missile independently or with targeting data from the launch aircraft's electronic warfare systems, such as the radar warning receiver. The missile's airframe is constructed from composite materials to reduce its radar cross-section.[1] MAR-1 has been reported to have a range of 25 km when launched from an altitude of approximately 33,000 feet,[2] but according to a Brazilian engineer the actual range is far larger than this.




anti-ship missile Otomat

Otomat Mk 2 Block IV: latest version, also called Teseo Mk2/A (for the Marina Militare), with a new electronic set, partially derived from Marte Mk 2/S missile program. The TG-2 (data-link for helicopters) is abolished, because the ship is capable to guide the missile directly (as happened with ERATO) with information given by external platform with OTH engagements. The missile is capable of: re-attack, 3-D mission planning, coordinate attacks, capability to operate in littoral theaters, and attack with terminal evasive maneuvers. GPS is added and so the weapon can attack also land targets. In May 2006, Teseo MK2/A was successfully test fired for the first time. This variant will in due course be deployed on the Italian variant of the Franco-Italian FREMM frigate. Teseo MK2/A has entered service with the Italian Navy in 2007. Currently it is available on the export market and has been purchased by export customers in 2008.



Turkey’s air-launched cruise missile ‘almost ready’

It has been recently unveiled that SSM, Turkey’s Undersecretariat for Defence Industries, has awarded TUBITAK-SAGE a major contract for the development of Turkey’s first medium range high precision cruise missile program.

TUBITAK-SAGE has been working on the new-generation indigenous cruise missile since 2006, TRDEFENCE sources reported on Thursday. This new crusine missile, name still unknown, is now nearing the end of its development stage and is expected to make its initial debut in Turkey’s largest defence and aerospace fair IDEF 2011, taking place between May 10 and 13.
The cruise missile is designed for air-lunch from Turkey’s upgraded F-4 2020 Terminator aircraft and have a range of over 150 kilometers. Guidance will be provided by GPS and on-board INS, while terminal-stage homing will be accomplished with an advanced Aselsan-built infrared imaging kit for increased precision. 

Roketsan is known to be manufacturing the engine assembly in cooperation with TEI, a number of actuators, as well as the warhead of the missile.






some chinese missiles




















DF-11/CSS-7 (export edition: M-11) short-range tactical ballistic missile:
Propellant: Single-stage solid-fuel
Range: 300 km
Playing length: 9.75 m
Missile diameter: 0.8 m
Projectile Weight: 3.8 tons
Warhead: a 800 kg high-explosive warhead or 9-ton thermonuclear warhead equivalent
Guidance: Inertial gyro + onboard computer;
DF-15 modified with
Accuracy (CEP): 600 meters, 150 meters (modified)


Pacrim-ALCM-SLCM




The Raduga 3M-80, 3M-82 and Kh-41 Moskit (SS-N-22 Sunburn) are all variants of the same 4.5 tonne supersonic rocket-ramjet missile. This weapon is the primary armament of the PLA-N's new 956E Sovremennyy class destroyers and is credited with a range between 50 and 120 nautical miles. An air launch centreline tunnel adaptor enables Su-27/30 family strike fighters to carry a single round and this configuration has been displayed on the navalised Su-33. A coastal defence variant labelled the Moskit E is in development, with a two round TEL based on the MZKT-7930 chassis.

Inertial midcourse guidance is supplemented with an Altair active radar seeker - there are no reports to date of land attack derivatives.

Unlike subsonic Western anti-ship missiles such as the Harpoon and Exocet, the Moskit is a supersonic sea-skimmer. It can be programmed to fly a high altitude trajectory at Mach 3, or a sea-skimming trajectory at Mach 2.2. If the sea skimming mode is chosen, the missile will be first detected by a warship under attack when it emerges over the horizon at a distance of about 15 to 25 nautical miles. This provides the defences on the ship with about 25-60 seconds of warning time before impact. The raw speed of the Moskit makes it a challenging target for most shipboard defences.



3M80-Sunburn-Cruise-1S
The Novator 3M-54 Club (SS-N-27 Sizzler) comprises a complete family of ship (Club N), submarine (Club S) and air launched weapons. Unlike warship launched Moskit and Yakont variants, the Club is designed for launch from a 533 mm torpedo tube, or a vertical launch tube( Refer Military Parade, 2000-1 Exclusives Issue, Kamnev P., 'The Club Missile System').

Five distinct variants of this weapon exist. The basic 3M-54E1 and 3M-14E most closely resemble the US Navy's anti-ship and land attack Tomahawk missile. This weapon has a range of 160 nautical miles and is subsonic. The 3M-54E1 uses an ARGS-54 active radar seeker and Glonass satellite and inertial guidance, the 3M-14E Glonass satellite and inertial guidance alone. The more advanced 3M-54E combines the subsonic cruise airframe of the 3M-54E1/3M-14E with a Mach 2.9 rocket propelled guided payload.

Like its subsonic sibling, it approaches from under the radar horizon using the same radar seeker to detect its target. Once locked on, it discards the cruise airframe, fires its rocket motor, and accelerates to Mach 2.9 at a sea skimming altitude of 15 feet. Novator claim the missile follows a zig-zag flightpath to defeat defences. Both the 3M-54E1 and 3M-54E are small weapons which are difficult to detect on radar, especially should even basic radar signature reduction techniques be applied to them. The 91RE1 and 91RE2 are rocket boosted homing torpedoes, most closely resembling the US ASROC and Sea Lance weapons. All five weapons in this family share a common launch system and thus any ship, submarine or aircraft equipped for these weapons can carry an arbitrary mix.

Press reports indicate that India has fielded this weapon, and there are claims China also ordered in a 'tit-for-tat' deal for planned Kilo SSKs. The air launched variant has been marketed on the Su-32FN/34 but there are no reports as yet of hard sales.

3M54E1 Sizzler subsonic ASCM (Novator)



3M54E Sizzler supersonic ASCM. The supersonic kill stage is carried to the target area by a subsonic cruise airframe (Novator)

The mighty Kh-22 (AS-4 Kitchen) was the weapon which stimulated the development of the SPY-1 Aegis system. Designed during the 1960s for dual role use as a nuclear armed standoff weapon equivalent to the RAF's Blue Steel, and as an anti-shipping missile with either radar or anti-radiation seekers, the Kh-22 remains in service as the primary armament of the RuAF's residual fleet of Tu-22M3 Backfires. While the Tu-95K-22 Bear G was equipped to carry up to three Kh-22s, its progressive retirement has limited use to the Backfire.

The Kh-22 is a formidable weapon by any measure, powered by an Isayev R-201-300 (S5.33) liquid rocket delivering 83 kN full thrust and 5.9 kN cruise thrust, it is claimed to exceed 4.6 Mach in cruise at 80,000 ft AGL. Around 3 tonnes of propellant and oxidiser are carried - the highly toxic fuel presents serious handling problems in fuelling up the missile (these Isayev liquid fuel engines ran with AK-20K oxidiser - 80% nitric acid, 20% N2O4 with fluorine or iodine additives and TG02 fuel - 50% xylidine and 50% triethylamine). Cited range varies between 145 NMI (270 km) and 300 NMI (550 km), subject to variant and launch speed/altitude. Russian sources claim the 900 kg shaped charge warhead will blow a 5 metre diameter hole, penetrating 12 metres deep, when impacting a large warship.

Seven variants have been reported to date, and a mid life upgrade for the APK-22 guidance package has also been recently reported. Nuclear armed variants included a TERCOM system to supplement the inertial unit. If China proceeds with the much speculated upon Backfire purchase, the Kh-22 is likely to be supplied as the basic weapon for the aircraft. The Backfire carries up to three rounds, although typical payloads are one or two, on BD-45K/F adaptors.




When the Raduga bureau designed the P-15/4K-40 Termit (SS-N-2 Styx) anti-ship missile during the late 1950s, little could they have imagined that it would remain in production a half century later. The original Styx was powered by an Isayev P-15 liquid rocket rated at 1.213-0.554 tonnes thrust, using toxic AK-20K/TG-02 propellant, armed with an 1,100 lb (513 kg) shaped charge warhead and fitted with a con-scan active radar seeker. The weapon's first kill was the Israeli warship Eilat in 1967.

Cloned Chinese Styxes entered production in 1974 as the HY-1/SY-1 or CSS-N-1 Silkworm coastal defence and shipborne ASM. The Chinese soon improved the design, the stretched 6,600 lb (3,000 kg) HY-2 (C-201) or CSS-N-2 Seersucker carrying more propellant and achieving a range of up to 73 NMI (135 km). Many derivative followed, including models with infrared homing seekers, television seekers, monopulse radar seekers and the turbojet powered HY-4. The air launched YJ-6/C-601 or CAS-1 Kraken entered production during the mid 1980s, based on the HY-2 variant, and is carried by naval H-6D Badgers. It was superceded in production by the YJ-61/C-611 with improved 110 NMI (200 km) range via higher energy propellant. Iran acquired several hundred HY-2s and used the missile extensively during the 'tanker war'. It is now claimed that Iran is manufacturing its own clones of the HY-2 and HY-4.

While the Silkworm/Seersucker is a subsonic sea skimmer, it sheer size adds significant lethality. While it is often not regarded to be a serious threat to surface warships, it has the killing power to be a very effective blockade weapon against civilian shipping and naval transports, or amphibious vessels. Iraq used the HY-2 as a land attack cruise missile prior to the fall of Saddam, five were launched and most were neither detected nor engaged by Patriot batteries due to their low level cruise profile over flat terrain. Papers by US analyst Dennis Gormley repeatedly note the ease with which the land mobile turbojet powered HY-4 could be stretched to provide a 380 NMI (700 km) class cruise missile, equipped with GPS/IMU accurate enough to present a genuine risk to coalition ground forces. With thousands of cloned Styx derivatives worldwide, this early Cold War relic may remain a viable weapon in coming decades.




The recently revealed KD-63 is a derivative of the air-breathing HY-4 Sadsack. While it retains the delta wing and fuselage shape of the HY-4, it uses a new cruciform tail design, and includes a television / datalink terminal guidance package. It is thus a dual role weapon, capable of precision strikes against land and maritime targets. It is carried by the newly designed H-6H Badger variant, replacing the pair of Krakens carried by earlier variants. Range is cited at around 100 nautical miles.



China is known to have illegally acquired, in a joint operation with Iran, several examples of the Kh-55SM Kent cruise missile from storage in the Ukraine, including some ground equipment. The cost of the investment suggests an interest in partial or complete reverse engineering of this missile.

The Kh-55 family of cruise missiles owes its origins to a series of internal studies at the Raduga OKB during the early 1970s. Raduga were unsuccessful initially in convincing the Soviet leadership of the value of their concept, but this changed as public knowledge of the US AGM-86 Air Launched Cruise Missile program became better known in the Soviet Union.

Russian sources claim that Raduga's early work on these weapons was opposed by many Russian experts who were deeply sceptical of the viability of such a complex new weapon.

The Kh-55 family of weapons most closely resemble the early US BGM-109 Tomahawk in concept, using a cylindrical fuselage with pop out planar wings, unfolding tail control surfaces, and a ventral turbofan engine, with guidance provided by a TERrain COntour Matching (TERCOM) aided inertial navigation system.

The most visible difference between the Tomahawk and Kh-55 families of missiles is the engine installation. The Tomahawk's Williams F107-WR100 engine is embedded in the tail and uses a ventral inlet duct and tailcone exhaust. The Kh-55's Omsk AMKB TVD-50 two spool turbofan is mounted in a nacelle which is stowed in the aft fuselage and deploys via a ventral door on a pylon after launch.

The TVD-50 is a critical piece of technology in the Kh-55 as it is a compact and fuel efficient turbofan in the thrust and size class required to power cruise missiles, standoff missiles and UAVs. The cited thrust rating is 400 to 500 kp (880 to 1,000 lbf), with a dry mass of 95 kg (210 lb), a Specific Fuel Consumption of 0.65, a length of 0.85 m (33.5 in) and diameter of 0.33 m (13 in).

The Tomahawk uses a four surface tail control assembly with anhedral on the stabilators, whereas the Kh-55 uses only three larger surfaces, with more pronounced anhedral, a configuration since adopted in the new Block IV RGM/UGM-109E Tomahawk Land Attack Missile. The largely symmetrical aft fuselage of the Tomahawk differs from the more pronounced sculpting of the Kh-55 aft fuselage.

The cylindrical fuselage configuration is essentially the same for both designs. The Tomahawk has a 21 in diameter, the Kh-55 a 20.5 in diameter, the Tomahawk weighed 2,700 lb at launch, the Kh-55 2,870 lb. The later blocks of the Tomahawk have a chinned 'Beluga' nose to reduce radar signature, the Kh-55 retains an ogival/spherical nose.

The baseline guidance package on both missiles is designed around a digital computer running Kalman filter and TERCOM software, with an onboard memory storing a digital map, coupled to a radar altimeter for terrain profiling and a low drift inertial unit. Tomahawks later acquired an optical Digital Scene Matching Area Correlator and GPS - the Soviet had DSMAC technology but it has never been disclosed whether this was added to the Kh-55 series. The cited designation for the Kh-55 guidance package is the Sprut and BSU-55.

Like the Tomahawk, the Kh-55 spawned a range of derivatives, unlike the Tomahawk the Kh-55 became the dominant air launched weapon. The first generation of Kh-55s appeared in three configurations, entering service in 1984. The 'Izdeliye 120' Kh-55 / AS-15A was air launched from the Tu-95MS using a MKU-6-5 rotary launcher and external pylons, the RKV-500A / SS-N-21 Sampson was tube launched from the Type 671 Victor, Type 945 Sierra and Type 971 Akula submarines, and the RK-55 / SSC-X-4 Slingshot tube launched from a MAZ-543M (MAZ-7910) 8x8 TEL, carrying six rounds.

The air launched Kh-55 was followed by the improved 'Izdeliye 124' Kh-55OK, which was supplanted in production by the most capable 'Izdeliye 125' Kh-55SM / AS-15B subtype in 1987.

The aim of the Kh-55SM design was to further extend the striking range of the basic missile, cited at 1,350 NMI (2,500 km). This was achieved by adding a pair of conformal fuselage fuel tanks, which increased launch weight to 3,750 lb (1,700 kg), but increased cruise range to 1,620 NMI (3,000 km) with a 200 kT warhead fitted. The naval variant of the Kh-55SM was designated the RKV-500B.

A conventional derivative of the Kh-55, designated the Kh-555, was recently announced. A lightweight shorter ranging derivative weapon, the Kh-65, has been actively marketed since the 1990s.

For all intents and purposes, the late model Kh-55SM is a heavier and longer ranging equivalent to the BGM-109B Tomahawk, with performance closest to the AGM-86B ALCM.


YJ-82/C-802A cruise missile at Zhuhai 2008 (image © 2009, Zhenguan Studio).

China's indigenous response to the Exocet and Harpoon lies in the YJ-8 (CSS-N-4 Sardine) family of missiles, available in ship, sub, land and air launch variants. The basic air launch rocket powered YJ-8K achieves 27 NMI (50 km) range, the improved YJ-81 cca 43 NMI (80 km), the turbojet YJ-82 (CSS-N-8 Saccade) cca 65 NMI (120 km), and the recently trialed YJ-83 variant around 135 NMI (250 km). These are the primary weapon of many PLA-N warships, and the FH-7 maritime fighter carrying four rounds. 
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-Cruise-Missiles.html

The Molniya Kh-29 / AS-14 Kedge is a Russian supersonic equivalent to the French AS.30 and US AGM-65 Maverick, and is primarily intended for interdiction and close air support, and maritime strike roles. An APU-58 or AKU-58 launcher is used, on the Su-27/30 Flanker (up to 6 rounds), the MiG-27 Flogger (2 rounds), Su-17/22 Fitter (2 rounds) and Su-24M Fencer (3 round). Multiple variants exist.

The Kh-28L (Izdeliye 63 or AS-14A) is a semi-active laser homing variant used in the manner of the AS.30L, with a 24N1 seeker. The Kh-29T (Izdeliye 64 or AS-14B) is an electro-optical variant with a TV datalink and command uplink, using the APK-9 Tekon pod. The Kh-29TE is an enhanced variant. The Kh-29D is another EO variant, equipped with a thermal imaging seeker.

Launch weight for most variants is around 1,500 lb, with a 700 lb warhead being used most often. Range is usually cited at 16 nautical miles for a high altitude launch.
Kh-29TE (left) and APK-9E datalink pod (centre).

Kh-29L (foreground) and Kh-29TE (background).

The Mach 4.5 ramjet Kh-31P/MP/A/MA Krypton family of missiles includes anti-radiation, anti-shipping and anti-AWACS variants. Reports claim the PRC intends to licence build this weapon, depicted an Su-30KN prototype (KNAAPO).

Dubbed the 'Mini-Moskit', the supersonic Turayev ramjet powered Kh-31P (AS-17 Krypton) was originally designed as an anti-radiation missile to suppress NATO Patriot and IHawk batteries, entering use in 1988, with an L-111E family interferometric seeker. Since the end of the Cold War it has evolved an extended range airframe (Kh-31MP / Type 2 - 100+ NMI range). An anti-ship variant equipped with an active radar seeker, the Kh-31A/MA, was recently introduced, adaptation of this seeker permitting counter-ISR roles as an AWACS-Killer. At altitude the Kh-31 achieves Mach 4.5, as sea level Mach 2.7. Su-30MK fitted for the Kh-31 series carry up to six rounds on wing stations 3, 4, 11, 12 and inlet stations 9 and 10, using AKU-58 adaptors, the Su-27SKU four rounds on 3, 4, 9 and 10.

It has no equivalent in the Western inventory, the US Navy using it as the MA-31 target drone. The PLA is reported to use this weapon with recent claims of plans for licence production.



The 2,000 lb (920 kg) 62 NMI (115 km) range Kh-59M/D (AS-18 Kazoo) series stand-off weapon is a direct equivalent to the AGM-142 missile now being integrated on the RAAF's F-111C. Evolved from an anti-radiation missile, it shares the common Granit 7TM1 optical seeker and Raduga APK-9 Tekon DL pod with the KAB series, the D-model fitted with a thermal imager, and uses an RDK-300 jet sustainer. The PLA-N is reported to have ordered an anti-ship variant equipped with a radar seeker, designated the Kh-59MK2, for the Su-30MK2.

Su-27SK/30MK fitted for the Kh-59M/MK2 carry two rounds on wing stations 3 and 4, using AKU-58 adaptors, the pod carried on inlet station 9.



Dubbed the Kharpunski the Kh-35U Uran (AS-20 Kayak/SS-N-25 Switchblade) is the Russian equivalent to the US RGM-84/AGM-84 Harpoon. The missile is available in surface launched and air launched versions (AKU-58 adaptor) and was publicly canvassed as an option for India's Tu-142 Bear upgrade - it is already deployed on the New Delhi class DDG, reports indicate China ordered in 2001. An ARGS-35 active radar seeker is used, and there are claims of a 'SLAM-like' land attack variant although no images are as yet available.

H-4 in Pakistan Standoff Attack System


OTR-21 Tochka
Operational
range 
70 km (43 mi) Scarab A
120 km (75 mi) Scarab B





some jf-17 integrations
CM-802, MAR-1, CM-400 AKG, SD-10 Ra'ad , ls6











There are three significant recognition features that need to be highlighted. First, the C802 has a longer fuselage section aft of the wings, a necessary modification to accommodate the TRI 60 series turbojet. A second related identifier is the pronounced inlet scoop on the C802 for said turbojet. An inlet scoop is unnecessary on the shorter C801 as it is fitted with a solid rocket motor for propulsion. And finally, there are two external cable runs on the C802, located on both sides of the missile, while the C801 has a single cable run on the missile&#8217;s underside. Of note, some photos of the air-launched version of the YJ-83 lack cable runs. These photos are of dummy training missiles that do not require an electrical connection between the missile&#8217;s flight control computer and rudders


YJ-8

The YJ-8 was a radical departure from the Soviet P-15 (SS-N-2) Styx-based missiles that were the mainstay of the PLAN&#8217;s arsenal throughout the mid-1990s. Considerably smaller and lighter than the Styx, the YJ-8 had essentially the same range and speed, but with a much smaller warhead. The key technological leap forward was the transition from a liquid-fueled rocket engine to a solid rocket motor.

The approval to begin developing a small rocket-powered ASCM was granted by the Central Military Commission in September 1976. The decision to use a solid rocket motor was based on encouraging results from laboratory tests since 1973 and the preliminary work done on the SY-2 (Upstream-2) ASCM. According to a 1991 Aerospace China article, the development of the actual YJ-8 propulsion system began in 1978, with flight-testing completed by 1985. The YJ-8 reached initial operational capability (IOC) with the PLAN in 1987. Although first announced in 1984, the export version of the YJ-8, the C801, wasn&#8217;t formally introduced to the international arms market until three years later. This initial version had fixed wings and was stored in small externally ribbed box launchers on surface ships, or in external tubes on a single modified Type 033G Romeo class submarine. Figure 2 shows a YJ-8 missile being loaded into one of the tubes on the modified Romeo

The origins of the YJ-8 are somewhat shrouded in mystery. Several defense analysts have suggested the YJ-8 is a reverse engineered copy of the French MM38 Exocet. The general appearance of the missile, and the externally ribbed launcher, was cited in support of this theory. Other analysts and commentators disagree and argue the Chinese missile was a logical result of the development of a weapon system with similar requirements. The analysts that hold this view point to the differences in the size of the two missiles, and the significant disparity in rocket motor designs. The MM38 uses a sustainer and booster that are housed within the missile&#8217;s body, while the YJ-8 uses an internal sustainer motor with a separate, jettisonable booster.

The independent development hypothesis is difficult to support today given our knowledge of the PRC&#8217;s weapon acquisition and development strategy. China has perfected the practice of acquiring weapon systems, openly or covertly, analyzing them, and then developing indigenous versions. This is a necessary evil when a country has to close a significant gap in military capabilities within a short amount of time, and with limited resources.

A better argument to support the theory that the YJ-8 design was at least heavily influenced by the MM38, if not a highly modified copy, is to look at the two missiles&#8217; operational characteristics; the YJ-8&#8217;s are almost identical to the MM38. Range, speed, and warhead size for both missiles are virtually the same, but the most significant aspect is the flight profile. The French MM38 was the first sea-skimming ASCM, with a highly advanced (for the day) radar altimeter and flight computer. For China&#8217;s immature industrial base to successfully replicate the Exocet&#8217;s revolutionary flight profile in less than ten years (1976-1985) strongly implies they had access to proven technology



An article in the Shipborne Weapons journal (Volume 5, 2008) suggests this was the case, as the author states that the Chinese were quite interested in purchasing Exocet missiles from France. Unfortunately, the price the French wanted was too high and the deal was shelved, at least temporarily. The author doesn&#8217;t explicitly say whether or not a Chinese purchase of the MM38 eventually occurred. He does say that the flight control system gave Chinese experts &#8220;great inspiration.&#8221; Therefore, it is probable that the Chinese had either somehow acquired an Exocet missile, obtained individual flight control components, or at least had access to highly detailed production schematics early in the YJ-8&#8217;s development.

Beginning in the early 1990s, numerous publications referred to the YJ-8 as the YJ-1, claiming that this was related to the C801 export designation. This is an incorrect assertion, as photographic evidence shows the YJ-1 is the PLAN designation for the unsuccessful C101 supersonic ASCM.
YJ-8A

The YJ-8A appeared very quickly after the YJ-8 entered service, reaching IOC in 1992 or 1993. In fact, the YJ-8 was only deployed by the PLAN on the Jianghu III (Type 053HT) frigates Huangshi (Hull 535) and Wuhu (Hull 536), as well as the single Type 033G modified Romeo class submarine. The only known recipients of the export version of the fixed-wing C801, with the externally ribbed box launchers, were Thailand&#8217;s four Jianghu III frigates and Yemen&#8217;s three Hounan (Project 021) missile boats. The rationale for the limited fielding of this brand new weapon has not been made public, nor have there been any reports of technical problems or dissatisfaction with the YJ-8&#8217;s performance by the PLAN. Indeed, historical accounts of the YJ-8&#8217;s development published in the early to mid-1990s indicate the flight tests were quite successful.



The only physical difference that is readily visible is that the YJ-8A had wings and booster fins that folded (see Figure 3), permitting the missile to be stored in an even smaller, non-ribbed launch container. Of note, both the C802 and YJ-83 would also use the same container, as it was specifically designed to hold folding wing missiles. The change in launch canisters went largely unnoticed by Western defense publications, and subsequently so too did the deployment of the YJ-8A. Some ten years later, articles started popping up on an extended range version of the C801 using the designations YJ-12, YJ-81, and C801A to describe this missile. Both the extended range assessment and the majority of the designations are inaccurate.



The YJ-12 designation basically means YJ-1 Mod 2 in Western nomenclature. As has already been discussed, the YJ-1 is a very different missile from the YJ-8 family, and the repeated references to the YJ-12 being supersonic harken back to its true origins. The YJ-81 designation, on the other hand, is a valid one. However, it is the designation for the rocket-propelled, air-launched member of the YJ-8 family, as we will see in the next section. The C801A designation has been used repeatedly to describe the export version of this new longer-range missile. This makes some degree of sense; if the YJ-8 is the C801, then the YJ-8A must be the C801A. The problem with this assumption is the C801A designation has never been seen at arms shows. CPMIEC mockup displays, placards, and brochures seen throughout the 1990s and into the early 2000s (the C801 disappeared from the major shows after 2003) never used this designation. In every circumstance, the designation displayed was C801. Figure 4 shows a mockup of a C801 missile on display at the CPMIEC booth during an arms show in 1998, the C801 designation is clearly visible.

The argument that the YJ-8A has a longer range is also not supported by CPMIEC placard and brochure data. In all characteristics and performance aspects, including maximum range, both the fixed wing and folding wing versions of the C801 (aka YJ-8 and YJ-8A) are identical. In addition, if the YJ-8A truly had a greater range, one has to ask the question why wasn&#8217;t the extended range capability also integrated into the YJ-81 and YJ-82 missiles? An extra 28 to 48 km of range would be tactically significant, particularly for an aircraft attempting to penetrate the outer air defenses of a ship or formation. Furthermore, an aircraft with even a moderately capable surface search radar could actually employ the weapon out to near its maximum range. Up until about 2002 or so, the PLAN did not have an indigenous shipboard sensor system that could support over the horizon targeting. Such a targeting system would be necessary for the YJ-8A to be employed against targets at a range of 50 km or more. Still, the vast majority of the standard references, articles, and blog postings consistently hold the C801A as having a maximum range of 70 to 90 km.

This claim appears to stem from an unspoken assumption in Western journals that since the C801 was considered a reverse engineered MM38 Exocet, then the C801A with folding wings was a copy of the MM40, which has a range of 70 km. The French, by the way, had to add 0.6 meters to the MM40&#8217;s length to accommodate the necessary additional fuel. Given the YJ-8 and YJ-8A have the exact same length, the proponents of this argument assert the Chinese came up with a new high-energy density solid rocket fuel. This assertion is weak from a both a technological and programmatic perspective.

The Chinese aerospace industrial base was still in its infancy in the late 1980s, and relied heavily on technological assistance from other nations. Propulsion systems in particular were a significant weakness, one that China has struggled with for decades. Research into solid rocket propellants had started in the mid-1960s, and by 1977 the Chinese had developed a fuel that worked reliably, but represented only the state-of-practice from a technology perspective. It would take another eight years to complete the design and testing of the original YJ-8 rocket motor. To suggest the Chinese had developed a new higher performance solid rocket fuel, tested and deployed it in a modified YJ-8 missile in less than seven years strains credibility to the breaking point. And while translated historical accounts of Chinese weapon systems developments are by no means complete, there is no mention of a new propellant for the YJ-8A in what is available.

Even if the technological leap wasn&#8217;t an issue, programmatically the Chinese had already decided on a non-rocket solution for extending their anti-ship cruise missile&#8217;s maximum range. By the time the YJ-8 had reached IOC in 1987, the Chinese were already committed toward developing an air-breathing engine for the follow-on missile design that would eventually become the C802 and YJ-83.

China&#8217;s Eagle Strike-Eight Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles: Designation Confusion and the Family Members from YJ-8 to YJ-8A | Defense Media Network

YJ-81

The PLAN&#8217;s keen desire for an air-launched version of the YJ-8 drove a near simultaneous development and test program alongside the ship-launched missile. The YJ-81 is very similar to the YJ-8, but without the booster (see Figure 5). The shorter section aft of the wings, lack of a scoop, and an underbelly cable run, identify this as a rocket-propelled missile. Like the YJ-8 it has fixed wings, but there is a faired boattail cap over the rocket exhaust to help reduce the missile&#8217;s drag when carried on an aircraft&#8217;s pylon. The small size and low weight of the YJ-81 provided smaller tactical aircraft in the PLAN inventory with a standoff anti-ship strike capability for the first time.

The YJ-81 is reported to have begun flight-testing in the mid-1980s, and reached IOC in 1989. The missile was marketed as the C801K. The &#8220;K&#8221; reportedly means &#8220;Kongjun&#8221; or air force, indicating an aircraft launched missile. Iran purchased the C801K and began receiving shipments in the mid-1990s. The YJ-8K designator that has often been used is incorrect, but it is an understandable mistake. A knowledgeable outside source, which knew the proper designator for the ship version, merely added the &#8220;K&#8221; to distinguish the missile as an aircraft weapon. And while this is consistent with current PLAN practice (see the YJ-83 discussion) it either wasn&#8217;t accepted practice early on, or the policy wasn&#8217;t followed for this particular missile as the pictures in Figure 5 clearly illustrate.



YJ-82

Since the late 1970s, the PLAN had eagerly sought to develop a submarine-launched ASCM. But it wasn&#8217;t until the YJ-8 program got started that they finally had a weapon they could work with. The Styx-based missiles were far too big, and there were significant safety concerns with putting volatile liquid-fueled missiles on submarines. The small, solid rocket-fueled YJ-8 was exactly what the PLAN was looking for. Their first effort, however, was somewhat half-hearted.

In the fall of 1983, the PLAN accepted delivery of a modified Type 033 Romeo class submarine with six external missile tubes for launching the YJ-8. The new Type 033G submarine began test-firing trials in 1985, and while the launch system appears to have functioned adequately, there was one fatal flaw that effectively ended further development &#8211; the submarine had to surface to fire. With a range of only 42 km (22.7 nm), the submarine would be highly susceptible to detection by radar and engaged before it could get all its missiles off. According to one Chinese article, the six missiles could be launched in six to seven minutes after the submarine had surfaced. That&#8217;s an uncomfortably long time for a submarine to be on the surface, exposed, that close to a hostile surface ship. A submerged launch option had to be developed to enable the submarine to remain stealthy until it was time to fire, as well as giving it a chance of escape after launching its attack.

For reasons that haven&#8217;t been revealed, the Chinese chose a torpedo tube launched approach rather than the external tubes popular with Soviet submarines. This certainly alleviated many complicated submarine design issues, but this choice had problems of its own. In the late 1980s, there were only two ASCMs capable of being launched from a submarine torpedo tube, the French SM39 Exocet and the U.S. UGM-84 Harpoon. Both missiles were encapsulated in a sealed canister to protect the missile from the seawater, but they had very different ways of getting the missile out of the water and into the air.

The French SM39 capsule had a small rocket motor that propelled it out of the water, and once airborne, launched the missile. The U.S. Harpoon employed an unpowered buoyant capsule that used stabilizing fins to guide the capsule upward after being ejected from the tube. As soon as the missile broached the surface, a pressure sensor in the capsule&#8217;s nose would detect atmospheric pressure and initiated a small charge that would blow the nose cap off. A split-second later, the booster was ignited and the missile would rise skyward.

Obtaining either missile would have been difficult. France and the U.S. had been slowly warming to China, but it was problematic whether either country would be willing to sell the PRC advanced anti-ship missiles &#8211; at least at a price the Chinese were willing to pay. And after the Tiananmen Square incident in June 1989, it became even harder as an arms embargo was soon put in place. But China did have a growing relationship with a country that had access to the U.S. missile.




Pakistan is the most likely source of submarine-launched Harpoon technology that was transferred to China. The two nations were drawing closer to each other diplomatically and militarily due to their mutual concern over India, and the Pakistani Navy&#8217;s Agosta and Daphne class submarines had been modified to launch Sub-Harpoon missiles between 1984 and 1986. An additional motivating factor was China&#8217;s considerable technical assistance to Pakistan&#8217;s nuclear and ballistic missile programs. A quid pro quo arrangement for Chinese engineers to exam and/or dissect a Sub-Harpoon missile would not have been an outrageous request.

Western reporting put the first test firing of a YJ-82 in 1997 from the lead Song (Type 039) class submarine. Limited information suggests the initial flight tests didn&#8217;t go well. It wasn&#8217;t until 2004, at the Zhuhai Airshow China exposition, that the first photo of a model YJ-82 was seen in a CPMIEC brochure. The photo showed a YJ-8 type missile, without a booster, in an unpowered capsule that is an almost exact duplicate of the U.S. Sub-Harpoon system (see Figure 6). Subsequent Internet photos of encapsulated YJ-82 missiles are consistent with the brochure model, and the length of these capsules is virtually the same as the 6.1-meter submarine-launched encapsulated Harpoon missile. Photos of actual launches show a YJ-8 type missile, sans booster, rising from the ocean surface, very similar to submarine-launched Harpoon firings.




Figure 7 is a photo of an actual YJ-82 missile, and it has all the features of a rocket-propelled missile. The section aft of the wings is short, there isn&#8217;t a turbojet scoop, and while the underbelly cable run can&#8217;t be seen from this angle, the missile model in Figure 6 does show it. This finding conclusively counters one of the most popular myths propagated in the Western press and on many Internet sites; the YJ-82 cannot be the indigenous version of the export C802 &#8211; the two missiles are launched from very different platforms and have radically different propulsion plants. Furthermore, the designation C801Q starting showing up in Western articles and Internet blog sites around the same time and was described as a submarine-launched missile. Reportedly the &#8220;Q&#8221; means Qian, or submarine. The YJ-82 is most definitely a C801 type missile that is submarine launched, hence the C801Q designation undoubtedly represents the export version.


Figure 7: The YJ-82 is a rocket-propelled missile, and therefore, cannot be the indigenous version of the turbojet-propelled C802. Chinese internet courtesy of Christopher P. Carlson


As for the other related designator, YJ-8Q, this falls into the same category as the YJ-8K. A knowledgeable outside source added the &#8220;Q&#8221; behind the YJ-8 designation to distinguish it as a submarine-launched weapon. This was probably a well-intentioned attempt to help reduce the confusion, but nonetheless, it is still inaccurate.

C802

Even as the YJ-8 was undergoing flight tests, the Chinese knew they had to find a way to extend the missile&#8217;s range. While it is unknown as to when their deliberations actually began, the Chinese eventually decided on an air breathing solution and reached out to Microturbo SA in France sometime during the mid-1980s. Microturbo SA&#8217;s TRI 60 series small turbojets had been widely used in drones and missiles, to include the British Sea Eagle and the Swedish RBS-15 ASCMs. With a diameter of 0.33 meters, the small turbojet was just the right size for a YJ-8 type missile. By 1987, the year the YJ-8 reached IOC, Microturbo SA had delivered the first shipment of TRI 60-2 turbojets. According to a U.S. Congressional Research Service report, up to 150 TRI 60-2 turbojet engines would eventually be purchased through the mid-1990s. Shortly after this first shipment was received, the Chinese began a crash program to reverse engineer the turbojet engine and produce it themselves. But in the meantime, they could still offer an extended range missile on the arms market using the French supplied turbojets.

Like the C801, the C802 was advertised years before it was ready. It was first presented at ASIANDEX 1988, with a follow-on showing at the Paris Air Show in 1989. The C802 missile was 0.58 meters longer than the C801. The extra length was added aft of the wings, to accommodate the turbojet and it&#8217;s inlet duct, along with a short, flat-faced inlet scoop nestled between the lower wings. Figure 8 shows a mockup of a C802 missile with the longer aft section, scoop inlet, and flank-mounted cable runs.

The C802&#8217;s speed remained in the high-subsonic range, as the TRI 60-2 turbojet has a maximum rated speed between Mach 0.7 and 0.9. The warhead, navigation, and radar homing seeker subsystems remained essentially unchanged from the C801. CPMIEC brochure data, however, suggests that additional electronic counter-countermeasure features were added to the C802 seeker, but this would have had limited impact on the missile&#8217;s design. But by far and away the biggest selling point of the new C802 was the 120 km range &#8211; nearly three times that of the C801 &#8211; a characteristic that caught Iran&#8217;s attention. By 1990, Iran was in serious negotiations with China to purchase approximately 200 missiles, 100 or so each of the C801 and C802. These negotiations appear to have been successfully concluded in 1992, however, there would be additional discussions to hammer out disagreements up through the fall of 1994.

There are no known reports in the open press as to when the C802 began flight-testing. A review of news articles indicates the Iranians began receiving C801 missiles in 1993, and C802 missiles in late 1994 or early 1995, suggesting flight tests had to have been completed by 1993 or 1994. The first solid piece of evidence indicating the C802 had reached IOC was in late November 1995, when a C802 missile was launched during the Iranian Saeqa-4 (Thunderbolt-4) exercise.

In examining the designators for the C802, there is a unique aspect to this missile; it can&#8217;t be directly linked back to one used by the PLAN. The YJ-82 designator was discussed in the previous section, but the YJ-82K designator, signifying the air-launched variant, has also been used to refer to the export C802K. This designator is incorrect as well, as it presumes the YJ-82 and C802 are directly related, which they are not.

Many Western sources have also used the YJ-2 designation for the domestic version of this missile. Like the YJ-1 designation, this is an early-1990s creation that has its basis in speculation. However, unlike the YJ-1, there isn&#8217;t a missile in the PLAN inventory with the YJ-2 designator stenciled on its side to concretely disprove the claim. On the flip side, the lack of any evidence of a missile with the YJ-2 designator doesn&#8217;t bolster the other argument either. According to recent technical journal articles, the YJ-8A was the primary PLAN ASCM during most of the 1990s and into the early 2000s. Indeed, there are numerous Internet photos of PLAN ships with double, triple, and even quadruple launchers, which first appeared in 1997-98 on the Luhai (Type 051B) class destroyer, launching YJ-8A rocket-propelled missiles. Just as compelling is the complete lack of photos of a C802 being handled by PLAN sailors or launched from PLAN surface combatants during the 1990s. The lack of any kind of evidence whatsoever makes it very difficult to conclude the C802 was ever adopted by the PLAN.



Furthermore, all the C802 missiles that were delivered in the mid-1990s were manufactured with Microturbo SA supplied turbojets. The Chinese military rarely accepts a weapon into wide scale use unless its industrial base can produce it. The arms embargo after the Tiananmen Square incident drove that lesson home. And it wasn&#8217;t until late 1995, or early 1996, that Chinese engineers mastered the production of an indigenous version of the TRI 60-2 engine. Western news articles only started reporting on China&#8217;s negotiations with the Iranians to produce the turbojet in Iran during the 1996-97 timeframe. All this supports the conclusion the C802 missile was an export weapon only, a means to provide funds to pay for the development of the ASCM the PLAN really wanted, the YJ-83.
YJ8


YJ-83

The YJ-83 showed up on the scene without any advance warning, but even during its so-called début at the National Day Military Parade in Beijing in October 1999, no actual missiles were shown. The trucks that rolled by only sported two of the launch containers on their flatbeds &#8211; containers that were also used by YJ-8A missiles. Almost immediately, wild claims as to the YJ-83&#8217;s performance began showing up on Internet blog sites. Published largely by enthusiastic Chinese nationals, the claims of supersonic speeds, GPS guidance, and a ship-to-missile data link were made repeatedly.

As photos of missiles with the YJ-83 designation stenciled on them started showing up on Internet sites, questions were raised about the performance claims. The visible configuration of the missile just didn&#8217;t support what was being said online. And yet, despite the lack of any solid evidence to support the speculative claims, many Western defense journalists accepted them as gospel, and articles proclaiming China&#8217;s unexpected rapid advancement became the norm. Even after some Chinese blog site moderators began raising flags that much of the hype concerning the YJ-83 was unfounded, the content of Western books and articles remained largely unchanged.


The development of the YJ-83 is somewhat blurred as it is closely linked with the C802. A rough estimate is that the technical design was probably locked down as soon as the Chinese were confident the C802 would fly. This lone criterion suggests the design for the YJ-83 was frozen sometime between 1993 and 1994. Several Western sources reported that the new missile entered service in 1994, but hindsight now indicates that this was when the final design was likely approved.

The choice of the TRI 60-2 turbojet essentially defined the YJ-83&#8217;s size and aerodynamic form. Measurements of broad aspect photos of missiles with the YJ-83, C802A, and C802 designations all show them to be essentially the same. According to CPMIEC brochure data, the C802A is actually nine millimeters shorter than the original C802, a trivial difference. All other dimensions are the same. With the propulsion plant fixed, and the warhead design largely the same, only about 25% of the YJ-83 missile&#8217;s subcomponents were open for significant improvement. Fortunately, those subcomponents were predominantly electronic in nature.

The early YJ-8/8A missiles used hybrid computers for the navigation, autopilot, and radar seeker. A hybrid computer uses a mixture of digital and analog components &#8211; that is solid-state elements along with servos, relays, and vacuum tubes. It is interesting to note that only the radio altimeter was fully digital, comprised of solid-state components only, which reflects the likely direct influence from the revolutionary French MM38 Exocet missile.



The inertial reference unit used small mechanical gyros and accelerometers that feed their input to the autopilot computer. Servomechanisms transmitted the steering commands to the four independent rudders. While the Chinese were satisfied with the YJ-8/8A&#8217;s overall performance, the electronic and navigation components were very bulky and took up a considerable amount of space inside the missile&#8217;s fuselage. By transitioning to all digital, microprocessor based computers, and a more compact strap-down mechanical inertial reference unit; the YJ-83 had more internal volume available for fuel and a slightly larger semi-armor piercing warhead (190 kg vice 165 kg). These changes increased the maximum range of the YJ-83 and its export variant, the C802A, from 120 km to 180 km.

With a well-established airframe and mature propulsion plant already in place, the YJ-83 benefitted from an exceptionally short development timeline and began flight-testing in 1997. Apparently the missile passed through its trials quickly, as it was reported to have reached IOC in 1998. It was formally announced in October 1999 at the National Day Military Parade, and it has slowly worked up to become the dominant ASCM in the PLAN inventory (see Figure 9). The C802A export variant, shown in Figure 10, wasn&#8217;t displayed until the DSEi 2005 arms show in London, England. The seven-year delay was likely due to production limitations, and the more urgent need to replace YJ-8A missiles on the PLAN&#8217;s warships. The information presented by CPMIEC C802A brochures since 2005 go a long way toward defining the capabilities of the YJ-83 more accurately.

In regard to maximum speed, the YJ-83 is most definitely a subsonic missile. The TRI 60-2 turbojet is unaugmented, i.e. no afterburner, and is only capable of speeds up to Mach 0.9. In fact, in the 1990s there weren&#8217;t any small turbojets with the ability to support supersonic speeds. The first time an engine with this capability is mentioned is in a 2008 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics conference paper, a historical overview of Mircoturbo SA&#8217;s engines, which stated the TRI 60-5+ turbojet first demonstrated supersonic flight capability in 2007.



From a drag perspective, the rounded blunt nose of the YJ-83 is highly inefficient for supersonic flight. Since the effects of the shock wave on the nose dominate supersonic drag, the missile&#8217;s overall drag coefficient is heavily influenced by the nose cap&#8217;s fineness ratio (length of the nose cap divided by its diameter). The YJ-83 nose has a rather low fineness ratio, thus its drag coefficient would be approximately twice that of a missile with a sharper, more pointed nose such as the one on the 3M-80 Moskit (SS-N-22) family at speeds between Mach 1.5 and 2.0. Higher drag requires more thrust to maintain speed and would dramatically increase fuel consumption, thereby greatly reducing the missile&#8217;s range.

Another related problem is the turbojet&#8217;s scoop inlet. It is a fixed geometry inlet that is by design optimized for a very narrow speed range. Operating away from that design point incurs a non-trivial loss in engine performance. Furthermore, the inlet face is completely flat, which would make it even less efficient at supersonic speeds as it lacks an upper diverter to isolate the inlet from shockwave interactions with the boundary layer near the missile&#8217;s body. Finally, the scoop inlet of the YJ-83/C802A is identical to that on the C802, and similar in design to the scoop inlet on the C602 and C705, all known to be subsonic missiles. All of these observable features strongly point to the inlet design being optimized for subsonic airflow.

Combining the technical limitations of the turbojet, nose cap, and scoop inlet makes it all but impossible for the YJ-83/C802A to be supersonic. And it should be no surprise at all that the CPMIEC brochure lists the C802A&#8217;s maximum speed as Mach 0.8 to 0.9 &#8211; identical to the earlier C802.

The YJ-83 has often been described as having the ability to use the Global Positioning System (GPS) with its inertial navigation system to improve its accuracy. This claim is also unsupportable.

The first GPS-directed ordnance was the U.S. Joint Direct Attack Munition, or JDAM, a free falling bomb with an integrated inertial navigation system (INS) and GPS receiver. JDAM began flight-testing in 1996 and reached IOC in 1998. A B-2A stealth bomber first used the JDAM operationally during Operation ALLIED FORCE in the spring of 1999. An in depth Chinese technical paper, published in 1995, stated that Chinese scientists and engineers were well aware of the benefits that GPS could provide to both manned aircraft, as well as weaponry. But there were technical limitations that had to be overcome before they could be implemented in Chinese systems.

By the time the JDAM reached IOC, the YJ-83 was at the end of its flight-testing phase and was about to enter IOC itself. To even consider replacing the mechanical strap-down INS with one using ring laser gyroscopes, an integrated GPS receiver, and a dedicated computer would have delayed the introduction of this missile for at least five years, as China was still in the research and development stage of an indigenous ring laser gyro and GPS receivers had to be obtained from outside the country. And of course, since the GPS was an American system, there would always be concerns about the accuracy of the satellites&#8217; signals. Programmatically, a decision during the 1994 &#8211; 97 timeframe to include a GPS feature in the YJ-83 would make little sense.

Indeed, senior Chinese military leaders seem to show more discipline then their Western counterparts in regard to requirements creep with defense acquisition programs, and in this case they would move any satellite navigation requirement on to the next missile in an earlier stage of development. This requirement would also be tied to the development of the indigenous Beidou system that first went operational, with a limited regional capability, in 2000. In looking at the CPMIEC brochures for the C802A, there is no reference to GPS as part of the navigation system. It is, however, explicitly stated as a feature in the C602 brochures (the PLAN version is the YJ-62) that reached IOC in 2005.

A similar argument can also be made against the data link claim. Prior to the late 1990s, only the very large Soviet ASCMs of the SS-N-3 and SS-N-12 families, and the Franco-Italian Otomat had a limited ship-to-missile data link capability. In 1997, both Israel and the U.S. were well along with their respective Harpoon improvement programs. The U.S. Harpoon II under went its first test flight in 2001, while the Israeli Harpoon Extended Performance (HAP) program was completed around the same time. Both missiles included a full two-way data link and an integrated INS/GPS to improve targeting in littoral environments cluttered with civilian shipping. Again, incorporating a command data link this late in the YJ-83&#8217;s development would have incurred significant delays. In addition, articles discussing such an advanced data link assume highly accurate navigation information; implicitly suggesting an integrated INS/GPS navigation capability is required.

The CPMIEC brochure on the C802A doesn&#8217;t mention a data link as one of the missile&#8217;s features. In fact, it is quite the opposite as the brochure explicitly states the C802A is a &#8220;fire and forget&#8221; weapon. There are three YJ-83K-based land attack missiles with a command data link, two versions of the KD-88 (one electro optic and the other probably IR-guided) and the electro optical homing CM802AKG. These missiles all showed up much later than the YJ-83. The first Internet photos of the electro optical version of the KD-88 were posted in 2006, while the CM802AKG made its initial appearance at the Zhuhai Airshow China 2010 exposition. For the earlier KD-88 missiles, the data link antennas are clearly visible on the missile&#8217;s wings. In the case of the CM802AKG, the display mock-up lacked the wing-mounted data link antennas, however, a Chinese news article covering the 2010 Zhuhai show contained a summarized interview with an unidentified CM802AKG designer who explicitly stated that a data link had to be added to the missile. When combined, all these points rule out the possibility of a data link in the YJ-83. But if this is true, how does one explain the reported attributes of adaptive mission planning and post-launch maneuvers? Again brochure data helps close this loop.

In the CPMIEC 2010 C802A brochure, route planning using waypoints is described for the first time. The missile system is capable of storing four different attacking paths with a maximum of three waypoints each. This enables a single ship to launch a multi-axis attack, a significant improvement over the limited range of launch bearings of the earlier YJ-8 and C802 missiles.

For years, the YJ-83 has been tied to the C803 designation. This linkage is based on a flawed assumption that the YJ-81 is the C801, the YJ-82 is the C802, and therefore, the YJ-83 must be the C803. As has been shown throughout this article, this naming convention is incorrect. The export version of the YJ-83 is the C802A, but there is so much reporting on the C803 that it must be dealt with separately. The air-launched version is the YJ-83K and, as one would expect, the export variant is the C802AK (see Figure 11). As for the submarine-launched version, a missile with the YJ-83Q designation hasn&#8217;t been seen; nor is it likely it ever will be.

Indigenously designed and built Chinese submarines have torpedo tubes that are about the same length as Western submarines. A review of Chinese torpedoes shows that they are less than seven meters in length, over a meter shorter than Russian weapons. This puts the torpedo tubes on the Song (Type 039), Yuan (Type 041), Shang (Type 093) and others at about 7.1 meters in length. This assumes an additional 0.25 meters clearance on top of the 6.8 meters of the Yu-4 torpedo with a wire dispenser. The Yu-6 looks to be a little shorter, about 6.5 meters long with the torpedo mount dispenser for the wire.

Going back to the earlier discussion, recall that the YJ-82 capsule is about 6.1 meters long, and this is for a YJ-8-size missile without the booster. If the booster were added, the capsule would be at a minimum 7.3 meters long, probably closer to 7.5 meters as the heavier missile would likely require some additional buoyancy to ensure it reached the surface. Both the C802 and YJ-83 start out at almost 6.4 meters in length, and both missiles must have the booster to operate properly &#8211; there is no option with this, as the turbojet can only start when the missile is under powered flight. Using simple ratios, this makes the capsule length of a C802 or YJ-83 missile on the order of eight meters, far too large for the probable torpedo tube length of approximately 7.1 meters. Rumors of a YJ-83 submarine-launched variant being developed are based on speculation that doesn&#8217;t take into account the limitations of the potential launching platforms.


Figure 11: The YJ-83K is the air launched version of the YJ-83, as denoted by the &#8220;K&#8221; at the end of the designator. The missile in the photo is a training version without the side cable runs. The export variant is the C802AK as shown next to a Pakistani JF-17 fighter-bomber at the Dubai Air Show in 2011.
Chinese internet photos courtesy of Christopher P. Carlson



In addition, the 2011 U.S. Department of Defense&#8217;s annual report to Congress on China&#8217;s military developments stated that a new long-range submarine-launched ASCM, with the NATO designation CH-SS-NX-13, was under development for the Song (Type 039), Yuan (Type 041), Shang (Type 093), and the future Type 095 SSN. If this ASCM were a variant of the YJ-83, it would not have an entirely new NATO designation. The YJ-83, being a variant of the C802, would share a similar NATO designation and nickname. Since the C802 is the CSS-N-8 Saccade, the CH-SS-NX-13 designation (note the change in designator format) explicitly shows the U.S. government believes it is a new weapon.

C803

Since about 2002, the &#8220;C803&#8221; designation has worked its way into just about every Western naval systems book and article. And yet, in over ten years of reporting there has been no formal evidence to support its existence. If one examines the brochures, placards, and mockup displays that CPMIEC has put up at the various arm shows throughout the years, nowhere will the designation &#8220;C803&#8221; be found. Never. For example, Figure 12 shows a flat screen display at the CPMIEC booth at the Airshow China 2010 expo. The display lists, by range, all the ASCMs that China had on the market &#8211; the C701, C704, C802, C705, C802A, and the C602. Furthermore, there was a full mockup display of each of the above missiles on the exhibition hall floor, as well as a smaller scale model. A missile with the &#8220;C803&#8221; designation was conspicuous by its absence. The recent Zhuhai Airshow China 2012 also lacked any mention of the C803, even though numerous new missile variants were presented to the public for the first time. That is because the &#8220;C803,&#8221; if it exists at all, is likely still in the developmental stage, probably in early flight testing, and isn&#8217;t ready to be marketed.

If the high performance attributes that have long been ascribed to the YJ-83 are actually for an entirely new advanced missile, a program start date can be roughly estimated by looking at when Western and Chinese-based media sources first started reporting on these capabilities. A quick review of the primary Western references indicates these attributes were first described around 2001-2002. Chinese blog sites, as well as the Kanwa Defense Review, started to mention these capabilities in late 1999. If this new missile began development between 1999 and 2002, then the integrated INS and satellite navigation system (GPS and Beidou) and the command data link would now be within China&#8217;s technical capabilities. However, a small supersonic capable propulsion system would undoubtedly still be the most challenging aspect.

Early on, the &#8220;C803&#8221; was initially described as a supersonic missile throughout its entire flight. The problem with this is that the new missile couldn&#8217;t possibly go 200+ km at supersonic speeds and still fit in a torpedo tube; all existing missiles with these speed and range characteristics are much larger than any torpedo tube ever built. The &#8220;smallest&#8221; missile is the Russian 3M-55 (SS-N-26) Onyx/Yakhont at 0.67 meters in diameter and 8.9 meters long, not including the launch canister. Given that the U.S. Department of Defense&#8217;s report explicitly stated the CH-SS-NX-13 is to go on all classes of modern Chinese attack submarines, it is either a torpedo tube-launched weapon, or every PLAN submarine in the Song, Yuan, Shang, and Type 095 classes would have to be fitted with external launch tubes &#8211; a significant modification for the vast majority of these submarines.

This would be tremendously expensive, not to mention occupying most of the available submarine construction way space for years. In short, fitting existing submarines with external tubes for a large supersonic missile seems totally unreasonable from a programmatic perspective. It also completely skips the PLAN&#8217;s proven acquisition concept of buy some, study thoroughly, then build our own, and is fraught with technological risk. With the recent memory of the unsuccessful YJ-1/C101 and HY-3/C301 large supersonic ASCM programs still fresh in the PLAN leaderships minds&#8217;, neither missile was formally accepted into service, it is highly unlikely they would try to go down this path again.

By the mid-2000s, there was a noticeable change in regard to the &#8220;C803&#8217;s&#8221; speed. Chinese blog sites, and some Western sources started questioning the all-supersonic flight profile, and shifted to a subsonic cruise mode followed by a supersonic terminal attack. This change eliminates the problem of requiring a large missile to meet the 250 km range figure that most of the blog sites coalesced about. If one accepts the premise that the missile had a subsonic cruise mode, with a supersonic terminal attack, then this narrows down the possible propulsion system options considerably, as there is only one ASCM in the world that can do this &#8211; Russia&#8217;s 3M54 Novator Alpha (SS-N-27).

Recall that Mircoturbo only demonstrated a supersonic flight capable small-scale turbojet in 2007; this would be rather late in the design stage for this missile and there is no reason to believe China could count on such a development six or so years earlier. However, China had signed a contract with Russia for eight Project 636M Kilo class submarines with the ability to fire the export Novator Alpha (3M54E/SS-N-27B) in May 2002, with the first submarines and SS-N-27B missiles being delivered in 2005.



It is likely Chinese engineer&#8217;s had access to detailed design documentation for both the submarine and the missile after signing the contract, and this timing corresponds roughly with the first rumors of China developing a new advanced ASCM &#8211; one that the U.S. Department of Defense&#8217;s 2010 and 2011 annual reports stated was in &#8220;development and testing.&#8221; While admittedly speculative, and based largely on coincidental inference, there is at least some basis to suggest that the new CH-SS-NX-13 ASCM may be a modified Chinese copy of the Russian Novator Alpha, a very different missile from the YJ-83.

P-1000 Vulcan antiship missle



Length: 11.7 m
Height: 0.88 m
Wingspan: 2.6 m
Launch mass: 5070 (without boosters)
speed M(km / h)
on high: 2.5 (3077)
at the surface: 2 (2460)
Maximum range: 600-700 km
Control system: Inertial + radar
Warhead:
blast and cumulative: 500 kg (weight of explosives)
Nuclear 350 kt
French Cruise Missile Successful in First Firing Test

The new cruise missile built for the French Navy has completed the first qualification test firing last week. The naval cruise missile (MdCN or Missile de Croisière Naval) is under development by MBDA under contract from the defense armament directorate DGA (Direction Générale de l&#8217;Armement) awarded 2006.

It successfully carried out the firing test on July 1st, 2013. The test, representing a vertical launch from a frigate, took place at the DGA&#8217;s Biscarrosse missile test centre. MdCN will eventually equip the French Navy&#8217;s multi-mission frigates (FREMM) and its Barracuda submarines.

Featuring a range of several hundred kilometers, MdCN is intended for strikes against targets deep within enemy territory. It complements the SCALP air-launched cruise missile from which it is derived. MdCN will comprise one of the strategic weapons carried by surface vessels and submarines.

According to the announcement, the firing scenario was especially demanding as, in addition to meeting range objectives, it also served to validate the missile&#8217;s performance with regard to its autonomous terminal navigation using infrared target recognition.



3M25 missile Meteorite P-750


Maximum range - 5500 km
Maximum speed - 3 M
Length: 12.8 m
Diameter: 0.9 m
Weight: 6380 kg
Warhead weight: 1000 kg (nuclear warhead possible)
carriers = Aircraft carrier, ships, submarines, land-based launchers
was not put into service because of the collapse of the USSR

YJ-12 AShM


CM502KG AGM


C-705 AGM


LD10 ARM


AR1 AGM
Mizrak U Anti Tank Missile (old name was Umtas)




CM-506KG PGB


CS/BBC-5 PGB


TG-100 PGB


FT1 PGM


FT6A PGM


LS-6 SDB PGB


TD500ER PGB
From Pakistan.


JSOW:

490 kg, 22-130 km range, 227 kg warhead:







RAFAEL Spice guidance bomb kit family:

Spice-250 (113 kg, 100 km range)


Spice-1000 (60+ km range, 460 kg warhead)




Spice-2000 (60+ km range, 925 kg warhead)


J-600T Yıldırım - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yıldırım I: 150 km 
Yıldırım II: 300 km
Yıldırım III: 900 km



From top to bottom: Taurus KEPD 350; APACHE/Storm Shadow/Black Shaheen/SCALP-EG; and the Haft 8



BAE contracted to study Brimstone 2 for Typhoon
By: Beth Stevenson
19 Jun 2014

Following doubts over the timeline for the integration of MBDA-developed Brimstone 2 missiles on the Royal Air Force’sEurofighter Typhoons, the UK Ministry of Defence has contracted BAE Systems to study the possibility of accelerating the process.

In February the National Audit Office released its Major Projects Report 2013, which claimed the integration of the air-to-surface Brimstone 2 on the Typhoon would not come to pass until 2021. This would result in a two year capability gap, following the retirement of the Panavia Tornado GR4 in 2019.

The £5 million ($8.5 million) contract for an initial study will facilitate an "effective route" to Brimstone 2 integration for theRAF by 2018, according to BAE and MBDA. The study will also explore the possibility of a common launcher that could be used with other RAF weapon systems, such as the latter's future Spear 3.

BAE is currently carrying out windtunnel tests at its facility in Warton, Lancashire, which will assess the aerodynamic effects of carrying the precision-guided weapon on the aircraft.

Brimstone 2 was originally due to enter service in October 2012 with the Tornado, although integration is now slated for completion in November 2015.

The delay in the introduction of Brimstone 2 has been attributed to a reliability problem with the Roxel rocket motor, which came to light during the latter stages of an environmental stress testing campaign in January 2012. Issues with the weapon’s new warhead also contributed to the slip.

"The Brimstone 2 will add to the swing-role capability of the Typhoon," BAE says in a statement released on 19 June. “Brimstone 2 is effective against the most challenging, high speed and manoeuvring targets over land and sea."

BAE adds: “The study contract will transition the dual-mode Brimstone capability that is combat-proven on Tornado GR4 to [the] Typhoon.”

One way to mitigate a capability gap between the retirement of the RAF's remaining Tornados and the introduction of Brimstone 2 on the Typhoon would be to integrate the dual-mode variant of Brimstone with the service's General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Reaper unmanned air vehicles.

In March, MBDA announced a series of tests into the integration of the weapon with the Reaper had concluded in January 2014, at the US Navy’s China Lake weapons range in California.

The campaign involved nine live firings against moving ground vehicles, all of which resulted in “direct hits”, according to MBDA.
 

BAE contracted to study Brimstone 2 for Typhoon - 6/19/2014 - Flight Global






Specifications
Weight: 110lb

Length: 71in

Diameter: 7in

Guidance: Millimeter Wave Radar and Semi-Active Laser

Warhead: Tandem Shaped Charge