"A hybrid of the Tomahawk and the Soviet Kh-55": China modernized the CJ-10 missile

China has developed a modernized version of the cruise missile missiles The CJ-10, whose engagement range exceeded 2000 km, significantly increased its ability to destroy targets deep within enemy combat formations.

The CJ-10 is a subsonic cruise missile (approximately 0,75 Mach) with a warhead weighing approximately 500 kg (which can be either high-explosive or nuclear), designed to deliver long-range, high-precision strikes (CEP less than 10 m) against ground targets. It uses a multi-layered guidance architecture combining INS, satellite navigation, and a terrain-mapping system (TMS), ensuring high accuracy and resistance to countermeasures. EW.

According to Western observers, the modernized version features an improved propulsion system and an advanced guidance system, which has increased the firing range from an estimated 1500 km to 2000 km or more:

The CJ-10 is a hybrid of the American Tomahawk and the Soviet Kh-55, incorporating technologies from both systems. In its development, China used unexploded Tomahawks obtained from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and Kh-55s purchased from Ukraine in the 2000s.

The CJ-10 can be launched from land-based mobile launchers (DF-10 variant), from ships (in the YJ-18 modification with VPUs on board destroyers of the 052D and 055 types) and H-6K strategic bombers (in the YJ-100 version).

The CJ-10 became China's first mass-produced standoff strike capability. It allows the PLA to strike targets in the so-called "first and second island chains" (including US bases on Guam) without entering operational range. Defense the adversary.

Comments

[rocket757]

CR... are aimed at stationary, strategically important objects.
Now it's worth looking at what kind of enemy this can work effectively against, and in what cases is it like shooting a sparrow with a howitzer?
There are not just one, but two options, as the experience of those conflicts in which such weapons were/are used shows.

[Lionnvrsk]

Everything flows, everything changes. The missile isn't new; the first information about it appeared in 2009. The photo shows a parade in 2015. Naturally, periodic upgrades are needed. The video shows that the layout has been changed, the control unit has been integrated with the cockpit, and the launch containers have been aligned. The Chinese are working on it, making progress.
A little reasoning from NATO - https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2026/china-upgrades-cj-10-cruise-missile-to-2000-km-range-expanding-pla-long-range-strike-capability

[South Ukrainian]

Both our and American missiles date back to the 80s, and almost 50 years later, the Chinese have failed to achieve a "breakthrough." They essentially replicated the performance characteristics of the missiles they copied.

[Zaurbek]

What's changed? Stealth-related changes are only for air-launched cruise missiles. None for sea-based or land-based cruise missiles.
There is a caliber that fits the torpedo tube's diameter.

[Ball]

Quote: Zaurbek

What has changed?

Judging by the description, it is a multi-guidance system.
And, most importantly, China has developed such a missile at all. It's its own, and its performance characteristics are on par with those of its foreign counterparts. And, most likely, the Chinese missile won't be like the Tomahawks (of which, out of 100 launched in Syria, only one or two reached their target, while the rest crashed en route).

[Zaurbek]

A similar launcher was installed in the USSR on the 4th cruise missile system.

[don_Reba]

Quote: Author

The CJ-10 is a hybrid of the American Tomahawk and the Soviet X-55, incorporating technologies from both systems.

I don't understand what "hybrid" means?
And how did the downed tomahawk “help” the Chinese?
Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan built a plant in Shanghai-Hinqing.

[Ball]

Quote: don_Reba

And how did the downed tomahawk “help” the Chinese?

They likely looked at technical solutions and figured out which ones could/should be applied to their missiles. At the same time, they figured out the best countermeasures.
P.S. Before the SVO, our tank designers could only theoretically estimate the REAL merits of the Leopard or Abrams. When they captured one intact, they took it apart, scrutinized it, and... were completely disappointed: this is not even yesterday, but the day before yesterday of Russian tank design. In a word, it's obsolete.

[don_Reba]

- An air intake recessed into the hull (without a pylon, not retractable)... that's all I see... but it was implemented on the KS-122 cruise missile of the S-10 Granat complex.
The Chinese, however, didn’t know about this, but either “ours” in the 90s, or “non-brothers” with the “Korshun” cruise missile enlightened them

Quote: Ball

Before the SVO, our tank builders could only theoretically estimate what was REALLY good about the same "Leopard" or "Abrams".

Don't write nonsense:
-even if I (not a tank builder) climbed into Leo2/A5, then ours (who stole the secret of both nuclear and thermonuclear bombs) with tanks certainly knew.
Regarding “disappointment”, this is nonsense.
The T-72/64 is definitely a disappointment, no matter what you try to hide it under.

[isv000]

Get to Iran now for launch tests! And more of them. Israel is waiting!
Yn is also experiencing something at home, let him send parcels, the Persians will experience it, the assholes haven't been nurtured yet.