400

Well, the CM-400 attack profile is pretty conventional itself – it functions basically like a scaled down Kh-22, with accordingly less range.
For a missile of that size and range, I think sea skimming supersonic is a superior way to go, both for missile and airframe survivability.

The difficulty to achieve attacking a sea moving target as far as possible is not the missile’s range, but the attacker’s detection/tracking/ID assets that can work that far, in the regard, 200km+ range is quite a reasonable range for CM-400Akg. Let along the 600km range of Kh22, even Yanks have difficulty to track that far. It’s totally different concept. Furthermore, a 4 times heavier Kh22, which only can be carried by less survivable heavy bomber, only achieves less than 2 times more range then Cm400akg, I don’t know how the range is less ” accordingly”. While kh22 only features active radar seeker, the cm400akg can be in anti radiation version, a JH 7a launching a simultaneous pair attack of cm400akgs, one in active radar homing, the other as the anti- radar missile, can dramatically suppress any fleet defense.

Talking about survivability of cm400akg alone, how many assets can intercept a mach 4+ target?

Cm400akg’s lightweight actually let it be able to be carried by many platforms, even a Jf17 can do. And it’s pin pointed land attack ability via it imaging mode, really makes the missile very versatile in mission.

Considering there are plenty 4th gen fighters that can carry standoff missiles with 200km+ range i think its a tough situation for RAF considering they only have 2 airfields. 1 on the Falklands and one on a carrier.

All Argentina have to do is to bomb the living hell out of those two spots and the enemy (as in the UK) wont have any airplanes that are operational in the area.

The jets can fire at ships from a longer distance than the ships can respond. So with a fleet of Su34 in the attack role escorted by more capable jets that to higher alt CAP Argentina could be very succesful despite having less capable jets.

So basically UK has a huge tactical disadvantage if Argentina gets actual standoff weapons and a somewhat capable airforce. Then the ships will be sunk one by one. There isnt even necessarily a need to go to A2A combat.

Well, a mere JF-17 coped with CM-400AKG hype speed A2G missile seems fit the scenario nicely

Very interesting, thanks for sharing Flanker man. (quite sorry to see Minsk like that , they should take it away from there and transform it into a usable vessel – helicopter carrier, or some training ship – for PLAN! 🙂 )

At least is better than totally scrap her.

images tell more…

http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2012-11/25/c_123998037_6.htm

These are not ordinary MKIs, they will be hard-wired for nukes.. The price for a standard MKI is about $60-65mil today.

That’s a gd premium, not sure other fellow members going to agree this or not.
But so called standard MKIs are ordered 10 yeai ago?

J-10/10A do not have WS-10. There is one J-10B prototype (1035) with a WS-10B installed, but all other J-10B seem to have AL-31FN.

Regarding the reliability issues, they did not solve the problems fully. They managed to increase the the reliability. MTBO was increased from a horrible “less than 70” to a max of 500. J-10 is single engined unlike the J-11. So, PLAAF/CAC is going to be a lot more concerned when it comes to reliability.

Reliability no longer an issue or otherwise J16 prototype won’t fly firstly with WS10 engine.

What powerplant for J10b remains unclear. But various reasons attribute to that J10 still uses Al31fn

1. Good, long term relations between CAC n salut
2. Competition between CAC n SAC, where ws10 made.
3. Ws10 still undergo integration with J10 as seen in prototy 1035 of j10b
4. Least likely, the volume of ws10 production

India’s Su-30’s have more western kit in them than what the Chinese will get, so it is not really comparable.

Let’s put Plaaf vs raaf. Can 2 su35s eat 1 superbug or not if ur Western stuff so fancy

LOL, a J20 hotdog reborn?