SOURCE: AFI
In a covert and high-stakes move to challenge India’s growing air defence dominance, Pakistan reportedly attempted to use the CM-400AKG—also known as CKG-400—supersonic anti-ship missile against Indian strategic air defence assets, including the formidable S-400 Triumf system. Developed by China and marketed as a “carrier killer,” the CM-400AKG is known for its high speed and difficult-to-intercept flight profile. However, the Pakistani gambit ended in failure, highlighting both the limitations of Chinese missile technology and the robustness of India’s integrated air defence network.
The CM-400AKG, developed by China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC), was supplied to Pakistan as part of the broader China-Pakistan defence cooperation. Capable of reaching speeds up to Mach 5 and boasting a range of approximately 240–250 km, the missile is launched from platforms such as the JF-17 Thunder multirole fighter.
Marketed as an anti-ship missile with land-attack capability, the CM-400AKG was believed by some Pakistani defence circles to be a potential “game-changer” in neutralizing critical Indian air defence nodes—specifically the S-400 system deployed along India’s western and northern frontiers.
Pakistan’s primary motivation behind employing the CM-400AKG was to find a loophole in India’s layered air defence architecture, particularly the highly advanced Russian-origin S-400 system. The S-400, with its long-range radar and ability to simultaneously engage up to 80 targets at ranges of 400 km, is considered one of the most lethal air defence systems in the world.
The assumption in Rawalpindi was that the high speed and quasi-ballistic flight profile of the CM-400AKG would complicate detection and interception by the S-400’s radar and missile interceptors. In theory, it would approach its target rapidly and with enough kinetic energy to overwhelm static defences.
What Went Wrong?
Despite the theoretical capabilities, the real-world execution fell flat.
- Detection and Early Warning: Indian surveillance systems, including ground-based radars and airborne assets like the Netra AEW&C and Israeli Phalcon AWACS, detected the JF-17’s flight path well in advance. This early warning allowed Indian air defence operators to go on high alert and track the incoming threat.
- S-400’s Advanced Radar Suite: The CM-400AKG’s speed was no match for the S-400’s advanced 91N6E Big Bird acquisition radar and the 92N6E Grave Stone engagement radar, which are designed to track fast, low-RCS targets including ballistic and cruise missiles.
- Mid-Course Interception: When the missile was launched, the S-400’s command post swiftly computed its trajectory. An interceptor missile, likely the 48N6 or 40N6 variant, was launched and reportedly destroyed the CM-400AKG in mid-air before it could come within range of its target.
- Electronic Countermeasures: India’s Electronic Warfare (EW) units are believed to have played a role by jamming the missile’s datalink, rendering it blind during its terminal phase. This may have further contributed to its loss of guidance and eventual interception.
- Lack of Stealth and Precision: Despite its speed, the CM-400AKG lacks stealth features and has limited terminal maneuverability. Moreover, its reliance on an inertial guidance system with GPS/Beidou corrections makes it susceptible to spoofing and jamming.
Lessons Learned
Pakistan’s failed attempt has exposed several fault lines in its offensive missile strategy:
- Overreliance on Chinese Systems: The CM-400AKG’s underperformance under combat-like conditions has cast doubts over the efficacy of other Chinese-origin missile systems in Pakistan’s inventory.
- Underestimation of Indian Defences: The operation revealed a serious underestimation of India’s multi-layered air defence grid and rapid response capability.
- Ineffectiveness Against Strategic Assets: The idea that a tactical missile like the CM-400AKG could destroy strategic-level air defence systems like the S-400 reveals flawed threat assessments by Pakistani planners.
For India, this failed missile strike attempt validates its investment in the S-400 and integrated surveillance systems. It also offers a case study in countering high-speed, non-stealthy threats with layered defences.
NOTE: AFI is a proud outsourced content creator partner of IDRW.ORG. All content created by AFI is the sole property of AFI and is protected by copyright. AFI takes copyright infringement seriously and will pursue all legal options available to protect its content.