Containerized missile systems of Chinese development

22 679 20
Containerized missile systems of Chinese development
Containerized MLRS, presented in 2016. Photo ALIT


Several years ago it became known that the Chinese defense industry was developing missile container-type complexes. Launchers and other devices were proposed to be placed in standard cargo containers. This architecture provides a number of important advantages related to transportation, deployment and use. Complexes of this kind have been repeatedly shown at exhibitions, but they have not yet entered service.



Multiple Launch Rocket Container


China began working on container missile systems no later than the middle of the last decade. It was reported that the “source of inspiration” for such projects was the Russian Club-K concept, presented several years earlier. Chinese specialists were interested in the special capabilities that could be obtained by mounting weapons in a container.

The first project of this kind was presented in the summer of 2016. It was developed by Aerospace Long-March International (ALIT), a company that is part of the state corporation China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC). It was reported that the container-type complex could be adopted by the PLA and exported.

The complex was made on the basis of a 40-foot container. An operator's cabin was placed at one of the ends, and the remaining volumes were given over to the launcher. In addition, hydraulic jacks were placed on the sides, under the lifting covers, for positioning and leveling.

The launcher of the complex was made in the form of a swinging frame with fastenings for transport and launch containers with missiles. It was placed near one of the ends of the container and carried a roof section. A hinged door was provided nearby for the release of reactive gases.


CSDCS missile system. Photo by Vermilionchina.com

The new system could use four types of ammunition from the Weishi family and perform various combat missions. The universal installation was proposed to be equipped with a TPK for a 122-mm unguided rocket from the WS-15 MLRS with a range of 40 km or for its corrected modification WS-22. It was also possible to use a 200-mm WS-33 rocket with a range of 70 km. An interesting innovation was the WS-43 loitering munition, capable of flying 60 km.

It was proposed to transport the containerized complex on suitable multi-axle vehicles with a manipulator for unloading at the position. It was also possible to place it on other platforms, including above-water ones.

Coastal defense


At the end of 2021, information appeared in foreign media about the development of a new container missile system in China. It was claimed that this product would be armed with anti-ship missiles of one type or another. Concerns were also expressed about the possibility of deploying such systems on merchant ships to carry out covert attacks.

This information was confirmed in the fall of 2022. At that time, a new container complex developed by China Aerospace Science and Industrial Corporation (CASIC) was presented at the Airshow China exhibition. At that time, the product was called the Containerized Sea Defense Combat System (CSDCS). A full-size model of the complex or its prototype was shown in the exhibition pavilion.


Basic information about the CSDCS project. Photo by Vermilionchina.com

The launcher was made in the dimensions of a standard 40-foot container. At the same time, the container itself was significantly reworked: part of its body was separated from the rest of the elements and turned into a movable cover for the launcher.

As in the previous project, part of the former container was occupied by the crew cabin and instrument compartment. Access to them was provided by side doors, while the standard end door became decorative. The remaining volume of the container was given over to the lifting launcher. A version with four large-sized TPKs was demonstrated. The launcher was protected from external influences by a U-shaped casing made of container elements.

The CSDCS complex was designed to use several types of anti-ship missiles. The Yingji family of products was offered in various modifications in versions for the Chinese armed forces and for export.

Subsonic anti-ship missiles of the JY-180 type (C-83 for export) were proposed to destroy surface targets at ranges of no more than 802 km. The supersonic CM-300 should be used at ranges of up to 103 km. The YJ-62 (CM-602) products allow attacking targets from a distance of up to 400 km. The supersonic YJ-12 would allow the system to destroy ships from 450-500 km. At the same time, the range of export weapons was limited to 280-300 km.

In addition to the container launcher, a set of other means of the complex was developed. A radar, a battery control point, various auxiliary means, etc. were proposed to solve various tasks during combat operations. Some of the components of the complex were also made in the form of containers.


Subsonic anti-ship missiles compatible with the CSDCS complex. Photo by Vermilionchina.com

It was reported that the CSDCS complex could be used with various vehicles and platforms. Its dimensions and weight allowed it to be transported on suitable vehicles and transferred between positions. The possibility of deployment on various types of ships was also mentioned. At the same time, the developers emphasized the versatility of the complex, rather than issues of camouflage.

Interest without prospects


In 2016, ALIT and CASC presented their containerized MLRS at one of the Chinese exhibitions. In 2022, the CSDCS project was presented by CASIC. Both developments of the Chinese industry predictably attracted the attention of specialists and the interested public.

The potential and prospects of such systems were actively discussed in specialized publications. In addition, in this context, they recalled the Russian project "Club-K", which was presented earlier and probably influenced Chinese developments. Specialists noted the characteristic advantages of the new systems and expressed understandable concerns.

However, the forecasts did not come true. Apparently, both unusual systems did not go beyond the stage of demonstration at exhibitions and the search for potential customers. The PLA or foreign armies did not want to purchase such equipment. At the same time, since 2016, the Chinese industry has repeatedly received orders for missile systems of a traditional appearance.


A YJ-62/CM-602 missile with a self-propelled launcher in the background. Photo Wikimedia Commons

In general, it is not difficult to understand what advantages and disadvantages the two Chinese developments had, and why they were not successful in the market. The strength of these systems can be considered the relative ease of transportation, due to the standard-sized body. The product can be transported by road, rail or water. At the same time, it can be transferred to a combat position and launched at almost any time.

In this context, camouflage is of great importance. A container with a launcher is difficult to distinguish from a similar product with a different load. In theory, this allows for covert delivery of the complexes to the desired area and for unexpected attacks.

The two projects show that the container launcher can carry a wide variety of missile types. CASC and CASIC have created systems for both unguided rockets and supersonic anti-ship missiles. Without significant reworking, the proposed launchers could be adapted for other types of ammunition.

With all this, there were also disadvantages. The main one is the lack of fundamental advantages over launchers of traditional appearance. The container with missiles in its functions and tasks duplicates self-propelled combat vehicles or is an analogue of the complexes on ships.


Launch of a YJ-62 missile from a production launcher. Photo Wikimedia Commons

The ability to transport the container by any means of transport simplifies the transfer over long distances, but limits tactical mobility. Deployment to and from a position involves lengthy loading operations. Unlike other MLRS or BRK, the container system will not be able to quickly leave the position.

Even during the premiere of the Club-K project, attention was drawn to the idea of ​​placing a container with missiles on board a transport vessel. Thanks to this, any container ship could become a "missile cruiser". However, this deployment option can be difficult in terms of organization and implementation. At the same time, a missile dry cargo ship has only one advantage over a combat ship - the ability to covertly deliver missiles to the launch line.

Developments for the exhibition


Over the course of several years, Chinese industry developed and presented two missile systems of different classes, made in the form factor of a standard container. They could carry and use missiles of different classes, from unguided projectiles to full-fledged anti-ship missiles. Such systems attracted attention, but did not become the subject of orders.

As it turned out, an interesting concept with unusual capabilities and advantages does not guarantee commercial success. New solutions can impose various restrictions that will scare off a potential customer. Now we can assume that after two unsuccessful projects, China will abandon further development of unusual ideas.
20 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    20 June 2025 04: 28
    It can now be assumed that after two unsuccessful projects, China will abandon further development of unusual ideas.
    That's all about the article...
    1. +5
      20 June 2025 05: 47
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      That's all about the article...

      The author apparently thinks that they did it in vain. For example, I agree with him because container placement reduces operating costs.
      1. The container is easier to store and keep records of because there is a marking and accounting system.
      2. The container is transported by a regular civilian semi-trailer, which are already produced in large quantities and can be mobilized from the civilian sector.
      3. A container on a semi-trailer can be transported by any civilian tractor unit, i.e. there is no need to order R&D for its development and, again, it can be mobilized from the civilian sector.
      4. To work with the container, there is no need to create special lifts; a regular reach stacker can easily handle this.
      Well, regarding this thesis:
      Deployment to and from a position involves lengthy loading operations.

      Why remove the container from the cart? If you need better stability, you can put it on outriggers. Why remove the container?
      1. +2
        20 June 2025 13: 11
        The most important thing, in the context of a possible war in Iran, is that it can be quietly brought to the coastline, disguised as a civilian truck. Or installed on any dry cargo ship. And I suspect that it was created precisely for such purposes. In such a concept, it is a necessary and important development.
        1. 0
          20 June 2025 21: 55
          But, as I understand, the container does not fit ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel. This is the problem. Cruise missiles have a reduced ability to reach their target due to air defense countermeasures.
          1. 0
            20 June 2025 22: 10
            So the task is to drive the American fleet away from the shores of the Persian Gulf.
      2. 0
        20 June 2025 21: 02
        Quote: Puncher

        The author apparently thinks that they did it in vain. For example, I agree with him because container placement reduces operating costs.

        Did it seem to me or did you miss the particle "NOT" in your phrase? wink
  2. +3
    20 June 2025 05: 55
    In Russia, the container complex was invented more than 10 years ago. So China once again "copied" a ready-made idea.
    1. +2
      20 June 2025 09: 23
      The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

      Quote: Good
      In Russia, the container complex was invented more than 10 years ago. So China once again "copied" a ready-made idea.

      Club-K missile system:
      https://topwar.ru/18852-raketnyy-kompleks-club-k-kritika-i-perspektivy.html
  3. +4
    20 June 2025 06: 18
    The PLA doesn't need them, but Iran could use them now. It's quite possible that the Iranians bought the Chinese ones as a sample and developed their own with their own anti-ship missiles of the same range as the originals, not the export versions of the anti-ship missiles. How will the Americans identify containers with anti-ship missiles? The only option here is not to enter the Persian Gulf, otherwise you might not get out or get out but not all of them.
  4. +3
    20 June 2025 08: 29
    The PLA has plenty of working systems, but Iran and the Houthis could really use them.
  5. +3
    20 June 2025 08: 55
    In general, anyone who has production of KR (this is easier) and BR (this is difficult) can make a container version.
    The main thing that is not visible (openly) is the Intelligence and Control system of such systems that the USA and NATO showed us.
    They showed that it is possible to install a Himars-type missile launcher in the 404 and vary the calibers and range. And to fly themselves, using RC and AWACS aircraft, over neutral territory and issue targeting instructions. In real time.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. +1
    20 June 2025 10: 14
    Not everyone understands that a weapon is built for a CARTRIDGE and a missile system for a missile/product... the rest is the entourage of placement options and delivery vehicles of varying degrees of advancement plus control modules... but everything is built for the parameters of the missile and its potential for use
    1. 0
      20 June 2025 21: 06
      Quote: silberwolf88
      Not everyone understands that a weapon is built for a CARTRIDGE and a missile system for a missile/product...

      You can argue, and how. Today, universal launchers capable of launching missiles of different types and sizes are in trend. The Americans have this implemented everywhere, from Hymers to Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, universal launchers are everywhere.
  9. 0
    20 June 2025 16: 53
    Thirteen years ago there was an interesting article about container installations Club-K (export designation)/Kalibr-K. They started developing in 2009. They used regular transport ISO containers. Tests were conducted in 2012.
  10. +1
    20 June 2025 21: 14
    The topic is very interesting, it is a pity that many do not see the main advantages of such a weapons placement scheme. And this is the standardization of logistics! A container today is just a standard package. Almost everywhere you will find vehicles capable of transporting or handling containers. Our military-industrial complex strives to offer a separate, special armored vehicle weighing 82 tons even for an 20 mm mortar (there was such an article on VO). In fact, in weapons it does not matter what and how to transport, the main thing is that it is fast and simple. If we had those same Club-K, there would be no rushing around with strategists who, as I understand, will be raised all the way from Chukotka for launches on Kyiv. But a couple of KamAZ trucks would simply arrive, launch what is needed and leave without noise and dust. But apparently this is not kosher. There must be at least 20 wheels and such installations must be visible even from the Moon with the naked eye. negative
    1. +2
      20 June 2025 22: 01
      It is written correctly about a 20-ton armored car with an 82-mm mortar. They expected a wheeled tank, but got a self-propelled artillery unit without the ability to fire direct fire and without any clear prospects.
  11. 0
    21 June 2025 00: 29
    A distant predecessor (and widely copied...): 1982, Falkland Islands, "Operation UKA UKA". On June 12, 1982, thanks to the ingenuity of naval officers and the Argentine army, a naval missile battery became a land-based weapon that struck the British destroyer "HMS Glamorgan". Big hug from Argentina!!! https://www.facebook.com/malvinasune/posts/operaci%C3%B3n-uka-uka-itb-el-12-de-junio-de-1982-integrantes-de-la-armada-argentina-/1253532602802322/
  12. -1
    21 June 2025 02: 39
    Attempts to squeeze in the unsqueezable lead to expensive and ineffective options. Yes, there are cranes for 40-foot containers, but they are located mainly in large ports and hubs. Yes, there are trailers for 40-footers, but they will not pass on all roads. In our region, when transporting such a monster, the road is closed in sections, otherwise it simply cannot fit into the turn without driving into oncoming traffic. And so for several days at the speed of a pregnant grandmother. Plus limited ammunition, and now this is very important. A complex based on 20-foot containers is more profitable. The control container is placed separately from the others and does not need to be removed from the conveyor. The radar container, if necessary - also separately and also without loading / unloading - on outriggers. And 2-5 containers with launchers. And make them as simple as possible, because they are consumables. Because after a salvo there is always a return fire and risking lives and valuable equipment to save an empty box is not reasonable. But switching to another launch container, standing somewhere a kilometer away, is a sweet deal. And longer missiles can be loaded into a container without a control complex. There are much more possibilities for transporting and reloading 20-footers. And no one forbids making a launcher in a 40-foot container. If this is necessary, of course.
  13. 0
    24 September 2025 11: 33
    The ability to transport the container by any means of transport simplifies long-distance deployment, but limits tactical mobility. Deployment and departure from a position require lengthy loading operations. Unlike other MLRS or BRK systems, the container system cannot quickly leave its position.

    What's the problem with a container truck quickly leaving the area after hitting its target? It would be easier for it to blend in among the civilians.
  14. 0
    24 September 2025 11: 41
    Even during the premiere of the Club-K project, attention was drawn to the idea of ​​placing a container with missiles on board a transport vessel. Thanks to this, any container ship could become a "missile cruiser". However, this deployment option can be difficult in terms of organization and implementation. At the same time, a missile dry cargo ship has only one advantage over a combat ship - the ability to covertly deliver missiles to the launch line.

    A civilian container ship has a number of advantages over a warship:
    1. The secrecy indicated by the author.
    2. Higher cargo capacity.
    3. Low price and fuel efficiency.
    4. Unlimited replenishment resource - a huge number of civilian container ships on the market, they do not necessarily need to be built, they can be purchased used.
    Cons:
    1. Legal conflict. How legal is it to use civilian vessels for an attack?
    2. All civilian vessels are equipped with AIS and are easily tracked, even over public internet channels. If the AIS is turned off, the vessel will immediately attract attention.
    3. With a large stockpile of missiles on board, it is necessary to receive external target designation. This could be a warship, aircraft, helicopter, drone, submarine, satellite, human intelligence, etc.