Pakistan officially inducts HQ 9 Air Defence system

[JamD]

I don't know. If the Army is taking the long-range SAM requirement off the PAF's hands, then it would be the PAF's HiMADS mission from years ago. Otherwise, it's probably a redundant IADS set-up from VSHORAD all the way up to HiMADS.

Ideally, it'd be a complementary mission where the PA, PN and PAF mapped out their area of responsibilities, and the PAF is moving to the 300+ km range and BMD coverages.

We can expect HiMADS to be fairly static. What locations are we looking to enforce no fly zones over. Pakistan is a famously thin piece of land. Is it to deter a future Balakot type strike by reducing reaction times that are associated with fighter intercepts? Is it to protect strategic locations inside Pakistan (the way India will probably use their s400)? What strategic locations are deep enough that they require such long range stuff? These are the questions that I'm thinking about.

 

[serenity]

@serenity if China is using S-400 surely its not as good as some of the PDFers are claiming it to be?

HQ-9 and S-400 are different.

S-400 is a system of many missiles with different ranges and totally different radar and command units. The purchase decision was made a long time ago to see what Russia's best SAM technology is capable of and offer Chinese forces some look into this new system. It is very different to S-300 which HQ-9 originally was based from.

HQ-9 immediately then changed entire radar and command units to digital type but kept fast set up similar to S-300 using similar philosophy of how the various pieces are moved and set into a position.

S-400 has a 400km range 40N6 which only HQ-9B begin to get close to which should be above 300km range by similar measurement method.

If USA can buy S-400 they will as well. Does that mean USA's THAAD and GBI also their PAC-3 and Patriot are not as good as S-400?

Trust me if USA can buy Su-57 they also would. Doesn't mean it is better than F-22 or F-35.

US has stolen Pantsir missiles, bought Migs from blackmarket and Kh-31 at least. These are just the ones they admit to. I don't think trying acquire adversary technology for evaluation means domestic ones are worse.

S-400 if it is better and truly useful after evaluation against stealth target drones which China has many types of, then China would buy 100 battalions. I think S-400 is probably very useful still and advanced system but not to the point it is worth stopping HQ-9 and buying all S-400. Reverse engineering it is also unlikely since even 40N6 is similar to previous long range S-300.

Now China's got HQ-19, HQ-26 and HQ-29 along with SC-19 and many other types of long range missiles for either ballistic missiles or satellites. Nothing in 400km range for aircraft but 300km of HQ-9B is good enough. It is questionable just how useful against aircraft the 40N6 is at around 400km range.

 

[Aryeih Leib]

This complicates Indian planning greatly, even at a 250km range it means all stand off weapons bar Bhramos (of which they only have a few capable aircraft to fire it) will be out ranged. Even Brahmos will have to be fired at extreme ranges. Further it provides a 250km air defence umbrella around Karachi making life very tough for the Indian Navy.

Additionally US will now know that the air corridor it has over Pak can be shut done in an instant by a system they have very little knowldge of (HQ-9 not been exported to anyone else yet)

 

[SecularNationalist]

Is it comparable to Russian S-400 effectiveness wise?

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Is it comparable to Russian S-400 effectiveness wise?

These missiles don't give anyone time to drink tea

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

We can expect HiMADS to be fairly static. What locations are we looking to enforce no fly zones over. Pakistan is a famously thin piece of land. Is it to deter a future Balakot type strike by reducing reaction times that are associated with fighter intercepts? Is it to protect strategic locations inside Pakistan (the way India will probably use their s400)? What strategic locations are deep enough that they require such long range stuff? These are the questions that I'm thinking about.

The LR-SAM requirement predates Balakot, so I don't think deterring future Balakot-type episodes is the intent. I think it's closer to protecting 'strategic locations' or 'high-value targets' (HVT). I remember Haris Khan saying a big reason for the LY-80s was for protecting HVTs. It could also be a coverage-related requirement (cover more area with fewer SAM systems).

 

[SecularNationalist]

These missiles don't give anyone time to drink tea

Seriously like no time to eject? Complete blow up in the air?

 

[serenity]

Is it comparable to Russian S-400 effectiveness wise?

Yes in the way that both missile systems are designed to intercept, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles in range, fighters, drones, helicopters, and other aircraft.

However S-400 is many types of missiles not just 40N6. HQ-9 is just one type of long range missile. Depending which version Pakistan is buying of course the system has been upgraded over the decades.

S-400 is arguably better since it covers all types of targets and ranges. It has short range and medium range missiles from other platforms like S-350 and smaller ones that deal with different missiles but S-400 mainly is really 40N6 just integrated with other shorter rangers.

HQ-9 as a long range SAM is already one of the best in the world. Along with PAC-3 and latest Patriot. HQ-9 has more range but not as much as S-400 on paper. Its performance when measured against older Patriot and S-300 was superior. It's radar and command I consider to be superior to S-400 since HQ-9B is around a similar age as S-400 but S-400's only advantage is 40N6's superior range or superior energy for same range which is very useful.

S-400's radar systems make use of more platforms and they were not able to integrate it into a simple package of search and track and fire control. I guess also ECM and EW resistance. All of them are relatively weak since not as much power and requirement to be highly mobile.

HQ-9A and HQ-9B already made even more use of active phased array radars and simplifying with benefit of greater capability and greater electronic attack resistance and less chance of radar being intercepted due to AESA's low probability of intercept characters.

Russia did the best with what their electronic industry could offer and it is still fantastic since it achieves same purpose using different methods. They claim it can detect and attack stealth fighters but I doubt it. If it is able to China would buy 10000 missiles and 100 battalions.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Fantastic

• SPADA2000
• FM-90
• LY-80
• HQ-9

Excellent defensive weapon , the modernization will ensure , sufficient deterrent

 

[iLION12345_1]

Paa system the firing unit vehicle does not have firer cabin on the missile vehicle itself but looks like centralise firer cabin vehicle which could be away from firing vehicle and away from it ?? Different config
View attachment 785171View attachment 785172

More mobility and flexibility this way. Can keep the launchers and the command vehicles separate and control several launchers from a single Command vehicle.

 

[KaiserX]

HQ-9 is not a copy of the S300. The HQ9 takes many technologies from the patriot. It actually takes the best from both the S300/Patriot series.

HQ9s range back in 2015 was up to 200km. Somehow people here are assuming Pakistan received a downgraded version. In Pakistans press release it specifically states the introduction of the HQ-9. If it was the FD-2000 why would they not say that?

Somehow Pakistan gets the best tanks, best avionics, best missiles, of the latest version that China has available. Yet some member here think that the PA will spend the little funds it has on downgraded or used systems

In all likely hood its the HQ9BE, which itself was ONLY MADE PUBLIC RECENTLY. This does not mean it was not available for sale in 2018....

Whether the range is 200km or 250km, it makes very little difference in a real war scenario. Sensors/electronics/AI make a huge difference.

Fantastic

• FM-90
• LY-80
• HQ-9

Excellent defensive weapon , the modernization will ensure , sufficient deterrent

For short range you could add anzas and crotales. For medium range their are LY-80 and Spada 2000 both in decent numbers.

In a real war setting I would not be surprised if most IAF/IA air assets where still shot down by short range missiles. Kargil is a perfect example.

Our gap was only in long range air defence.

 

[iLION12345_1]

HQ-9 is not a copy of the S300. The HQ9 takes many technologies from the patriot. It actually takes the best from both the S300/Patriot series.

HQ9s range back in 2015 was up to 200km. Somehow people here are assuming Pakistan received a downgraded version. In Pakistans press release it specifically states the introduction of the HQ-9. If it was the FD-2000 why would they not say that?

Somehow Pakistan gets the best tanks, best avionics, best missiles, of the latest version that China has available. Yet some member here think that the PA will spend the little funds it has on downgraded or used systems

In all likely hood its the HQ9BE, which itself was ONLY MADE PUBLIC RECENTLY. This does not mean it was not available for sale in 2018....

PAF usually gets export variants of the technology it buys from China, they’re more rigid on that. Army generally gets its own upgraded variants (barring some stuff like SAMs; LY80E). Might also be a difference in the budget of the two. That being said, I do believe this is not FD-2000 at least, that is a very old system by now.

 

[KaiserX]

Yes in the way that both missile systems are designed to intercept, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles in range, fighters, drones, helicopters, and other aircraft.

However S-400 is many types of missiles not just 40N6. HQ-9 is just one type of long range missile. Depending which version Pakistan is buying of course the system has been upgraded over the decades.

S-400 is arguably better since it covers all types of targets and ranges. It has short range and medium range missiles from other platforms like S-350 and smaller ones that deal with different missiles but S-400 mainly is really 40N6 just integrated with other shorter rangers.

HQ-9 as a long range SAM is already one of the best in the world. Along with PAC-3 and latest Patriot. HQ-9 has more range but not as much as S-400 on paper. Its performance when measured against older Patriot and S-300 was superior. It's radar and command I consider to be superior to S-400 since HQ-9B is around a similar age as S-400 but S-400's only advantage is 40N6's superior range or superior energy for same range which is very useful.

S-400's radar systems make use of more platforms and they were not able to integrate it into a simple package of search and track and fire control. I guess also ECM and EW resistance. All of them are relatively weak since not as much power and requirement to be highly mobile.

HQ-9A and HQ-9B already made even more use of active phased array radars and simplifying with benefit of greater capability and greater electronic attack resistance and less chance of radar being intercepted due to AESA's low probability of intercept characters.

Russia did the best with what their electronic industry could offer and it is still fantastic since it achieves same purpose using different methods. They claim it can detect and attack stealth fighters but I doubt it. If it is able to China would buy 10000 missiles and 100 battalions.

I agree with your points but HQ-9s missiles are interchangeable depending on the requirements. Similar to both the Patriot/S400. Everything else sums it up.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

HQ-9 is not a copy of the S300. The HQ9 takes many technologies from the patriot. It actually takes the best from both the S300/Patriot series.

HQ9s range back in 2015 was up to 200km. Somehow people here are assuming Pakistan received a downgraded version. In Pakistans press release it specifically states the introduction of the HQ-9. If it was the FD-2000 why would they not say that?

Somehow Pakistan gets the best tanks, best avionics, best missiles, of the latest version that China has available. Yet some member here think that the PA will spend the little funds it has on downgraded or used systems

In all likely hood its the HQ9BE, which itself was ONLY MADE PUBLIC RECENTLY. This does not mean it was not available for sale in 2018....

Whether the range is 200km or 250km, it makes very little difference in a real war scenario. Sensors/electronics/AI make a huge difference.




For short range you could add anzas and crotales. For medium range their are LY-80 and Spada 2000 both in decent numbers.

In a real war setting I would not be surprised if most IAF/IA air assets where still shot down by short range missiles. Kargil is a perfect example.

Our gap was only in long range air defence.

Crotales have been a long lasting systems these have served well in past
But having the New generation SAMs is a great Assurance , Alhamdulillah

I would imagine the Crotales could still make impact against some particular air targets


However the items below are proper setup

• SPADA
• FM-90
• LY-80
• HQ-9

 

[KaiserX]

Crotales have been a long lasting systems these have served well in past
But having the New generation SAMs is a great Assurance , Alhamdulillah

I would imagine the Crotales could still make impact against some particular air targets

The Crotales and Anzas are still extremely capable systems. Last I heard the Crotales were upgraded to the 4000 standard and Pakistan is even producing its own domestic version in house. The Anza series has also been updated and has been placed on many different vehicles thoughout the PA.

In a realtime conflict I would bet you the Crotales/Anzas would still take out more IAF assets compared to other SAM systems.

There are just too many technologies around these days against SAMS. The induction of the HQ9Ps should be seen as an increase in strategic deterence. IAF Rafales/Mirages/ SU30s would think many times before coming anywhere near the border.

Furthermore people forget that inoperability between the PA/PLA will increase significantly with the introduction of joint systems such as the HQ9, J10C, VT4, etc...