Well crobato, that is what Janes had always believe. (they could be wrong).

I posted Janes Strategic Weapons in CDF on the Hong Niao series and they had believe then that the DH-10 designation was used for the HN-1 series. Come to think of it, i believe they could be wrong. LACM developments are considered highly classified in China and I wouldnt be surprise if there was a mistake or deliberate misinformation.

“The first test flight of X-600 was made in 1985, using a small turbojet engine especially developed for the project. This missile is believed to have had terrain-following radar and an optical correlation terminal seeker. It is reported that development testing began in 1988 of an improved design, which was given the Chinese designator Hong-Niao-1 (Red Bird-1). An alternative designator, DH-10, has been reported, but has not been confirmed. This missile has a range of 600 km and is believed to use an airframe similar in shape and size to the Russian AS-15A ‘Kent’ (Kh-55) and SS-N-21 ‘Sampson’ (3M10) and to the American RGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles. There are two versions of the HN-1 missile; the HN-1A, which is ground-launched, and the HN-1B, which is air-launched. The HN-1 missiles began operational evaluation in 1992, and it is believed that they entered service around 1996.”

Interesting thread. Many of these ‘navies’ operates monitors, which is a distinct class of ship meant for inshore and riverine patrols.

The truth lies somewhere in between.

When i wrote my paper for CDF, i had cross referenced Janes Fighting Ship (multiple revisions), Janes Radar and Electronic Warfare, Friedman’s World Naval Weapon Systems Guide as well as Conway’s Combat Fleet.

Some are in agreement, some are not and some had things i did not have. If i had credible sources that disagreed with anyone of the above, i would use them. Other are plain common sense and in some cases, it is just because the data is outdated.

😮

Therefore, “Jane’s Fighting Ships”??? I’d say
the name “Speculation’s Galores” sounds more fitting 😀 !!! Nice contents, Yes!
But informative and accurate? Not in my book!!!

😮

That is a very very stiff opinon. You are basically saying that Janes is less accurate than top81 or CMF.

I have been around Chinese forums for the past 5-6 years. If Janes is 50/50 on Chinese matters, so is someplace like CMF You should know very well that there are good stuff and plain PS crap we got to sift through. The same happens with the editorial staff down at Janes Information Group and that is therefore a unfair comment.

Having said that, there are errors in JFS that i don’t agree with. You could always drop a mail to David Shipton to request him to check with Mr Saunders. I have done it before on afew occasions.

Oh the IRONY!!!! I concede my mistake.

Whoever posted this on the Chinese forums had a wicked sense of humour to pass it off as PLA-N subs. I salute you!

the problem and why i said it is a ming is because i recall having seen this photo before… years ago. The old CDF thread might have cleared this up but unfortunately the photos from afew years back was lost during the server crash.

Payne Harrison’s novel, Thunder of Erebus describes a hypothical land grab between US and Soviets of Antartica due to some exotic minerals being found there.

The Soviets deployed a secret anti carrier weapon for the express purpose of killing carriers much like what phrozenflame described.

The weapon (Zimordork or something) has three stages. The first stage is ballistic launch from a refitted Delta SSBN. Initial target acquistion from ROSATs. I supposed it could be used because the carriers was anticipated to be around a certain area at McMurdo Sound. The missile will transition to cruise missile phase on its way to the carrier and dive down into the sea as a torpedo on the final terminal phase to avoid CIWs. (Torpedo is vertical rising with tandem warheads)

So phrozenflame, is this the inspiration of your idea?