PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles

Thanks for Hongjian at the CDF for finding this.



It does appear the YJ-12 canisters can stack using these mounts, and the 167 Shenzhen can mount 16 of them. That is according to visitors who asked the sailors themselves, and the official model for the refit ship.





The four missile cluster mount would make sense if this was used to replace the Moskits on the Sovremmenny refits, as the Moskits are also clustered in four at each side.




I want to go back to an old picture of Test Ship 892 allegedly testing DH-10s or DF-10s according to the news articles talking about it. This was around 2013 or something. In hindsight I think this ship was testing YJ-12s instead. The canisters has the same number of clamping mounts as the 167's.

Tam said:

Thanks for Hongjian at the CDF for finding this.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It does appear the YJ-12 canisters can stack using these mounts, and the 167 Shenzhen can mount 16 of them. That is according to visitors who asked the sailors themselves, and the official model for the refit ship.

View attachment 49341

View attachment 49342

The four missile cluster mount would make sense if this was used to replace the Moskits on the Sovremmenny refits, as the Moskits are also clustered in four at each side.

View attachment 49345


I want to go back to an old picture of Test Ship 892 allegedly testing DH-10s or DF-10s according to the news articles talking about it. This was around 2013 or something. In hindsight I think this ship was testing YJ-12s instead. The canisters has the same number of clamping mounts as the 167's.


View attachment 49346

Click to expand...

Good catch; you can also make out similar canister door rivets on both launch boxes. There was no possibility for that test canister to be a DH-10 anyways, since there are no naval variants of the DH-10.

SinoSoldier said:

Good catch; you can also make out similar canister door rivets on both launch boxes. There was no possibility for that test canister to be a DH-10 anyways, since there are no naval variants of the DH-10.

Click to expand...

DH-10 or its ASM equivalent can still have four pin mounts, but this certainly throws doubt about the certainty of the missiles in Test Ship 892 being tested to be DH-10. In my opinion, its more likely YJ-12, which we have at least some picture of it being launched. It would conveniently match this picture.



I am starting to doubt the identification of this picture, supposedly a YJ-18 TEL. Misidentification happens in the press or in the rumor line. This might even be a YJ-12 TEL, I am thinking the odds of it being YJ-12 or YJ-18 are now 50/50 for each.




Another thing to think about is that the YJ-12 are being appropriated for "slant" use, along with aircraft use, while the YJ-18s are being appropriated for submarine and VLS use.

For DDG 167 to have 16 YJ-12s is very impressive, and it makes the ship more potent than a Sovremmenny, especially in the light the PLAN having issues upgrading the Sov. Makes me wonder if they plan on upgrading the 052Bs in the same manner, and eventually refitting the ASMs on the Type 051C and even the 052C.

With 756mm of diameter, I wonder if the YJ-12 can also be used in the universal VLS.

Insignius said:

With 756mm of diameter, I wonder if the YJ-12 can also be used in the universal VLS.

Click to expand...

I think it can, plus the length of the missile is said to be 6.3 meters, 7 meters with the booster. Meaning it may not even require the 9 meter version of the U-VLS to fit. Why we have not seen any pictures of this ever used in a VLS, that's another question.

So in the end, maybe the goal of both YJ-12 and YJ-18 is to replace the non VLS YJ-83 with yj-12, and leave the VLS for only YJ-18.

ILikeChina said:

So in the end, maybe the goal of both YJ-12 and YJ-18 is to replace the non VLS YJ-83 with yj-12, and leave the VLS for only YJ-18.

Click to expand...

not sure whether 054A and 056 could field YJ-18 (to replace YJ-83) ..... anybody?

ILikeChina said:

So in the end, maybe the goal of both YJ-12 and YJ-18 is to replace the non VLS YJ-83 with yj-12, and leave the VLS for only YJ-18.

Click to expand...

YJ-12 I am guessing, might replace all YJ-83 on older destroyers, and I mean destroyers. On smaller ships, I am not too sure. YJ-12 might be overkill against a small vessel. Besides the launcher for the YJ-83 might also used for the Yu-11 ASW missile, or flying torpedo.

The YJ-18 goes into the U-VLS of newer ships.

Talking about new ships, the Type 054B would be a big question mark on what ASM it will use.

antiterror13 said:

not sure whether 054A and 056 could field YJ-18 (to replace YJ-83) ..... anybody?

Click to expand...

The 054A and 056 will not be able to field the YJ-18 unless it has a slant-launched version, which I've never seen, though I think ILikeChina meant that these ships would take the YJ-12 as a replacement for the YJ-83, which we have seen being slant-launched. As for whether or not these ships have enough deck space to replace YJ-83 launchers with YJ-12 launchers on a one-for-one basis, that is hard to say. My guess is yes for both, though it would be a squeeze for the 056. OTOH I can't think of the 056 having a need to deploy with this missile except for possibly logistics reasons for the purpose of standardizing missiles across the PLAN surface fleet. OTOH I'm fairly certain that the 022 will not be able to carry this missile at all; there is just no further room for expansion in those closed-off spaces.

Tam said:

I think it can, plus the length of the missile is said to be 6.3 meters, 7 meters with the booster. Meaning it may not even require the 9 meter version of the U-VLS to fit. Why we have not seen any pictures of this ever used in a VLS, that's another question.

Click to expand...

In terms of size, it seems it can, but it involves a ramjet which needs to reach a critical velocity ASAP. I would think a slanted launcher can do this more efficiently, and perhaps a larger booster would be needed for a vertical launch version.