# China to get S-400 from russia in 2017



## DrSomnath999

China wants to buy S-400 anti-aircraft missile launchers from Russia, Vasily Kashin from the Center for Strategy and Technology Analysis told Interfax-AVN on Monday, January 16, 2012. "China has expressed its interest in buying S-400 systems. As far as I understand, Russia is reserved about this
deal," he said.





Russian officials said many times that the deliveries of the new system, S-400 'Triumf', to foreign partners, among them China, would begun after the demand from the national armed forces was met in full. "Not only China but also some other countries are interested in this weapon. Yet our priority is domestic defense orders and the state armament program," the expert said.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said in its annual report last year that Russia wished to supply S-400 launchers, Ilyushin Il-476 transport jets and Sukhoi Su-33 ship-based jets to China at fair prices despite its concerns about the Chinese possible copying of defense technologies and prospective rivalry on the global market.

The S-400 'Triumf' of the Almaz-Antei Concern is built for highly efficient protection of key political, administrative, economic and military sites from air strikes, strategic, cruise, tactical and operative tactical ballistic missiles and medium-range ballistic missiles.

It can destroy air targets on the range of up to 250 kilometers and hits non-strategic ballistic missiles on the range of up to 60 kilometers.

The aerodynamic target destruction altitude varies from 0.01 to 27 kilometers, and the indicator is 2/7 for ballistic targets. The maximum speed of the destroyed target is 4,800 meters per second. The system simultaneously locks on 6 targets with 72 missiles. It takes five minutes to deploy the system.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janu...efence_missile_system_from_russia_1901121.htm

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Imran Khan

now russia will never agree i think because of copy issue ?.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## DrSomnath999

Imran Khan said:


> now russia will never agree i think because of copy issue ?.


yes u goTTTTA point


----------



## Zabaniyah

I thought Russia wasn't willing to export the S-400 to anyone?


----------



## Imran Khan

then what was it by jenes defence?


*First Photos of S-400 in China.*
Here is a background information for a public released Jane's entry.


Looking at joint projects such as the S-300/400 family of SAM, it has became apparent that days of hardware fire-sell to the PLA had been long gone; increasingly, as demonstrated by the many joint defense projects that China is a partner with financial and technology contributions.
















http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jsws/jsws9067.html


HQ-19 (S-400) (China)

Section
Defensive weapons

Appearing in
Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems

Publication date
Dec 23, 2008

Description
It is now believed that the Russian S-400 Triumf (Chinese designator HQ-19) surface-to-air missile system was a joint development programme with China. The system uses the same sensors, battle management and launch vehicles as the Russian S-300 (SA-10/-20 'Grumble') and Chinese HQ-9/-15. The S-400 introduces three new missiles, the 9M96, 9M96/2 and the 40N6, which can be fitted in new canisters replacing all or some of the S-300 missile canisters on the TEL. It is believed that a new TEL vehicle has been developed specifically to carry the S-400 missiles, and that this is a wheeled vehicle carrying six to eight missiles. The 9M96 missile has a length of 4.75 m, a body diameter of 0.24 m, a launch weight of 333 kg, and a 24 kg HE warhead. Guidance is inertial with command updates and an active radar terminal seeker. The missile has a two-stage solid propellant motor system, with a maximum range of 40 km. The second stage has lateral thrust motors to improve manoeuvrability in the terminal phase, similar to the US PAC-3 design. It can intercept targets from 5 m up to 20 km altitude. The 9M96/2 missile has a length of 5.65 m, a body diameter of 0.24 m, and a launch weight of 420 kg. The two missiles share the same separating second stage, but have different boost motors. The 9M96/2 missile has a maximum range of 120 km, and can intercept targets from 5 m up to 30 km altitude. The 40N6 version

---------- Post added at 09:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 PM ----------

S-400 Triumf (SA-21 'Growler') (Russian Federation), Defensive weapons

Type
Short- and medium-range, ground-based, solid-propellant, theatre defence missile system.

Development
Development is believed to have started in 1990 on a family of missiles to make up a new surface-to-air missile system, called S-400 Triumf. The NATO designator is SA-21 'Growler'. Three missiles have been developed, the 9M96 with a range of 40 km, the 9M96/2 with a range of 120 km, and the 40N6 with a range of 400 km. A fourth missile was reported in 2002, for an upgraded S-400B system, as a proposal for an anti-ballistic missile system. It is also possible that a small number of the 40N6 missiles may be modified for use as ASATs in the future. All the components of the S-400 system are believed to be made in Russia. There have been unconfirmed reports that the complete S-400 family has been developed jointly between Russia and China, with China providing the majority of the funding. It is also reported that the Chinese-built versions will have the designator HQ-19. The missiles are to defend against aircraft, cruise missiles, UAVs, and short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. At some stage in the development programme, it was decided to reduce development costs and to use the S-300 (SA-10 'Grumble') system as a building block, as an alternative to the Triumf stand-alone system. The 9M96 and 9M96/2 missiles, in their respective canisters can be fitted to the S-300 (SA-10D/SA-20) TEL vehicles, with four 9M96 or 9M96/2 missile canisters replacing one S-300 missile canister. This is similar to the US MIM-104 Patriot TEL being fitted with four PAC-3 missiles

S-400 Triumf (SA-21 'Growler') (Russian Federation) - Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xataxsata

Why china is importing from Russia despite of all made in china claims??????? 

few days back there was news that china is importing second hand planes from Russia.  

china spends about 4 times more on defense then India still so much of imports.


----------



## IFB

self delete


----------



## canadian icehole

If Russia is so concerned about China copying it's tech then why ask China for funding. Strictly from a business perspective, I won't go into a joint venture unless I'm going to get something back. There's something missing from these reports. Wouldn't it be better for Russia to license the product to China?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Cheetah786

xataxsata said:


> Why china is importing from Russia despite of all made in china claims???????
> 
> few days back there was news that china is importing second hand planes from Russia.
> 
> china spends about 4 times more on defense then India still so much of imports.



Isn't India doing the same

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## below_freezing

They say we want to buy alot of things.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

I say sell it to the Chinese. This would increase better relationship between Russia and China.


----------



## Birbal

Leaving the discussion of wether it's morally justified or not, China will copy the S-400 if Russia sells it to them. If Russia cares about revenues, it is not in its interest to sell the S-400 to China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kaniska

Pax Sinica said:


> even a bullet is a copy of another bullet, but it will still kill you. lucky for you, indian, you don't have to worry about bullets, you need to worry about your mass starvation, which is a self inflicted massacre in itself.



Do you think that India is the only one poor country who has mass starvation....? Oh s**t...I forgot China is the super duper power of the world..they do not have any poor mass starvation people in their country..Then why do your country is so fearful to allow freedom of speech and freedom of press to the outside world?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

These Russians are annoying, always saying we want to buy this and that, but it always turns out to get faceslapped.

Just few months ago, they also said that we can't produce the arrester cable, now this S-400 crap again.


----------



## Martian2

"The HQ-9 (Chinese: &#32418;&#26071;; pinyin: hóng qí, "red flag" or "red banner") is China&#8217;s new generation medium- to long-range, active radar homing air defence missile.[4][5] There are unconfirmed rumors that the HQ-9 uses guidance systems that are similar to those developed in U.S. Patriot missile technology.[3]" (Source: Wikipedia with footnotes to primary sources)





Left: HQ-12/KS-1A TELs and H-200 engagement radar; right: HQ-9 TEL and HT-233 engagement radar. (Source: Australia Air Power)





Deployed HQ-9 battery. Above, self-propelled YLC-2V to the left with its three support vehicles, in the background a HT-233 battery engagement radar. All vehicles employ the &#8220;classic&#8221; rather than more recent &#8220;pixelated&#8221; camouflage patterns. (Source: Australia Air Power)

If China is interested in the S-400, it makes perfect sense. Chinese engineers want to see the features that the Russians have incorporated into their system.

China can compare their own innovations for the indigenous HQ-9C "active radar homing air defence missile" with the Russian improvements in the S-400.

----------

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9#Variants

"Variants

&#8226; FT-2000 - Anti radiation version that was the first model of HQ-9 family being completed.
&#8226; *HQ-9* - TVM version SAM.
&#8226; HHQ-9 &#8212; Naval version.[13]
&#8226; *HQ-9A* &#8212; Upgraded version, first tested in 1999 and service entry in 2001.[13] Chinese sources claim that the HQ-9 family of systems employ much newer computing technology than imported Russian S-300PMU/PMU1/PMU2 systems, because HQ-9 is developed more than a decade later, thus allowing it to incorporate advancement in microelectronics. Due to the superior computing capability for signal processing, data processing and guidance support, this missile can have an optional semi-active radar homing (SARH) mode, because more info can be processed on board the missile itself.
&#8226; HHQ-9A &#8212; Ship-borne naval version of HQ-9A. Eight 6-cell vertical launch silos, of cylindrical shape and using "cold launch" method, mounted on the Type 052C destroyer (48 missiles in total).[14]
&#8226; FD-2000 - First revealed in the 8th Zhuhai Airshow, the export version of HQ-9, providing extra anti-stealth capability by incorporating YLC-20 passive sensor as an option.
&#8226; *HQ-9B* &#8212; reportedly tested in February 2006.[13] According to Jane's Information Group, this missile has a dual seeker that incorporates both SARH & imaging IR mode [15]
&#8226; *HQ-9C* - Currently under development, incorporating active radar homing mode."

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Desert Fox

Didn't China co-produce the S-400 in a joint venture with the Russians?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IndianTiger

Kaniska said:


> Do you think that India is the only one poor country who has mass starvation....? Oh s**t...I forgot China is the super duper power of the world..they do not have any poor mass starvation people in their country..Then why do your country is so fearful to allow freedom of speech and freedom of press to the outside world?


 
Simple chinese goverment don't want to disclose the truth that how people are committing Suicide plus goverment sponsored human right violation plus mass killing without legal proceeding. And most importantly fear that people will demand democracy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Secur

Believe it or not ... Russia will sell it to China  Didn't they do it for Su 30 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ao333

xataxsata said:


> Why china is importing from Russia despite of all made in china claims???????
> 
> few days back there was news that china is importing second hand planes from Russia.
> 
> china spends about 4 times more on defense then India still so much of imports.



That's because the Chinese economy is over 4 times larger than India.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

xataxsata said:


> Why china is importing from Russia despite of all made in china claims???????
> 
> few days back there was news that china is importing second hand planes from Russia.
> 
> china spends about 4 times more on defense then India still so much of imports.



China import things we needs that are not available yet in our manufacturing plan to complement our defense...even the second hand transport planes...until our Y-20 ready.

For me it's not suprise that China still want to buy new weapons available on the market either Russian or else...as long as it can provide some meanfull utility to our defense...say no to new toys is condam ourself...and if Russia is afraid of China's copy then they better not do the same mistake as mig-19, mig-21,su-27, Kilo, missiles, destroyer...wow the list of mistakes is very long...it seems to me that Russia has old habit to make sames mistake with China

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## marshall

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> For me it's not suprise that China still want to buy new weapons available on the market either Russian or else...as long as it can provide some meanfull utility to our defense...say no to new toys is condam ourself...and if Russia is afraid of China's copy then they better not do the same mistake as mig-19, mig-21,su-27, Kilo, missiles, destroyer...wow the list of mistakes is very long...it seems to me that Russia has old habit to make sames mistake with China


The Mig-19, Mig-21 and SU-27 were copied. Today, the SU-27...aka J-11 has changed so much that it is basically an indigenous fighter except for the external appearance. The Kilo, destroyers and most missiles are indigenous. Anybody can argue that so and so component is derived from a foreign design. The reality is, every development is based on something before it and doesn't make them copies. The only things that can realistically be described as copies are licensed copies or stolen blueprints. I still find the claims of the J-10 being a copy of the Lavi ridiculous, especially given that China was already developing the J-9, a delta canard design, for over 10 years prior and that the Lavi is significantly smaller, was never completed, and whose direct involvement with the J-10 was never definitively proven unless you consider a bunch of unsubstantiated claims from unofficial accounts as proof.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Sadhu

One thing i must say china does colour their military hardware nice to make an visual impact  even wheels are given white ring i wish they were come with those shinny chrome ring 

Compare the two picture from above russian hardware and chinese one...... Masters of art and deception


----------



## Chinese Century

IndianTiger said:


> Simple chinese goverment don't want to disclose the truth that how people are committing Suicide plus goverment sponsored human right violation plus mass killing without legal proceeding. And most importantly fear that people will demand democracy.



Lol Indians have one of the worst human rights records, the Hindu radicals murdered millions of sikhs demanding their freedom from Hindu oppression.

Democracy is the way western regimes control weak powder puff countries like India. IndiA has no democracy, it's run by the white man for the white man. India is a western colony. Washington and London run India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rocky25

IndianTiger said:


> Simple chinese goverment don't want to disclose the truth that how people are committing Suicide plus goverment sponsored human right violation plus mass killing without legal proceeding. And most importantly fear that people will demand democracy.



If some one is going out of the way and debate about Indian Poverty and starvation, It is not needed to go again to attack troller and feed them. Report the post and debate on topic.

On Topic: Any news on the budget China is willing to pay?


----------



## sweetgrape

no doubt, S-400 is a very sophisticated weapon, and S-500 is better, I don't think in here, no one will doubt the Russian capability in anti-aircraft missile system. Of course, I think, If we can, and Russian accept the request, We will glad to buy the S 400, and we will try to learn something from them. If they don't sell them to us, We have no choice, Just do it by ourself to improve our system.
And here, Indian are so happy, If them can "copy" as good as S 300 weapon, I will so surprised, It will be a miracle. They buy too much weapon, But can make a decent weapon, I don't know how thick are their face skin. Copy, So what, the important is that it works, But your "creativeness" can't be seen by the world. Keep mocking china, You just can get the happiness from here, in the real life, I know your hurt, Oh, poor people!!
If doing these can relieve your pain, Please work harder, It is momentum to us, change ourself, do better next time. No like some country, even know the root, but can't do anything, what a pity!


----------



## Project 627

Anybody who wants to buy the S-400 will have to wait until 2017 at the very least, because all current S-400 production is for the Russian Military, and the export version will no doubt be a downgraded. 

Anyway by 2017, S-500 will be ready so who cares

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SinoChallenger

Desert Fox said:


> Didn't China co-produce the S-400 in a joint venture with the Russians?


It's probably more like giving Russia money to make S-400 in exchange for S-300 PMU-2 technology.




below_freezing said:


> They say we want to buy alot of things.


It never hurts to ask for a sample. Even if you can make your own competitive world-class product. If we want have a healthy relationship with certain Russian companies it benefits us to buy some of our needs from them.


----------



## oct605032048

Ogannisyan said:


> Anybody who wants to buy the S-400 will have to wait until 2017 at the very least, because all current S-400 production is for the Russian Military, and the export version will no doubt be a downgraded.
> 
> Anyway by 2017, S-500 will be ready so who cares



According to your logic, by 2017 people will go after S-500 instead of S-400. But the Russo factory will have to meet the needs of domestic market first, so exporting S-500 will have to wait to ... er... to 2022. By then there will be S-600 and no one cares about S-500.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PERSIAN GOD KING

Can I say how do people even know the s-400 is any good? is it war tested?


----------



## oct605032048

PERSIAN GOD KING said:


> Can I say how do people even know the s-400 is any good? is it war tested?



I think S-300 have been accepted as sound. But S-400 is more or less an upgrade version of S-300 with a new name. Kinda like Winxp and Winxp sp2.


----------



## PERSIAN GOD KING

^^
good point, but what to say russia will sell you the "accepted as sound" version? they will give you an extremelly downgraded version. dont trust them. china is capable of making its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## oct605032048

This thread began with an Indian posted Russo self-talking article. The Russians like to talk about how popular their toys are and how other people are interested to buy them.

We all know that China won't buying any IL-476 for sure. As for S-400, if the price is ok it's no harm buying one or two for study or research.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Seriously, we have started to master the much more advanced MKV technology, and S-400 is nothing, but a primitive toy compared to this.

Buying a sample of S-400 for the studying purpose is not a bad idea either, just like how US has bought few Su-27 from Ukraine also for studying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Ogannisyan said:


> Anybody who wants to buy the S-400 will have to wait until 2017 at the very least, because all current S-400 production is for the Russian Military, and the export version will no doubt be a downgraded.
> 
> Anyway by 2017, S-500 will be ready so who cares



No problem..but just don't miss the window of opportunity..we can wait but ask yourself if S-400 will still be relevant defense system for 2017...which 5 years aways..and with you drown grade version, China will probably improve and enhance the S-300 version...


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> No problem..but just don't miss the window of opportunity..we can wait but ask yourself if S-400 will still be relevant defense system for 2017...which 5 years aways..and with you drown grade version, China will probably improve and enhance the S-300 version...



We don't need to improve the S-300, since we already have the HQ-9.

Don't get me wrong, HQ-15 is an exact copy of S-300, but HQ-9 is a new SAM incorporating with some S-300 features.

And they still mention the S-400, eh? China already rejected this offer since 2007.

Remember the Russian media also claimed that China wants to buy the monkey version of Su-35, so has this turned out to be true or not?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Seriously, we have started to master the much more advanced MKV technology, and *S-400 is nothing, but a primitive toy compared to this.*
> Buying a sample of S-400 for the studying purpose is not a bad idea either, just like how US has bought few Su-27 from Ukraine also for studying.


 

Do you ever contribute anything meaningful or technical? What is the hit probability of the MKV? Can it engage low flying targets? (likely not). Can it be quickly deployed? Can it engage multiple targets? Is it maneuverable? Does it have ECM?

The MKV is built to knock out satellites and this is it. The S-300/400 is built to shoot down aircraft/cruise missiles. The MKV would be worthless at shooting down aircraft and the S-400 would be worthless at shooting down satellites. 

The S-300/400 systems can engage highly maneuverable, highly fast and very small targets at any altitude. Both systems can be quickly deployed within minutes (crucial). Both systems can manage a battlefield by tracking anywhere from 100-300 targets, both systems have a data-link network which makes it very difficult to kill or jam.

In any the anti satellite weapons take meticulous planning which could last days, weeks or even months before the right window of opportunity is there which includes whether and vector timing--not to mention orbital launches are often delayed for a number of technical reasons.

The MKV is a highly specialized weapond, it would not be able to engage, for instance, low level targets.











ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Remember the Russian media also claimed that China wants to buy the monkey version of Su-35, so has this turned out to be true or not?




How is that when even the Russian Air Force is still testing them. Moreover, from what I have read China was interested in engines and avionics and not purchasing

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> Do you ever contribute anything meaningful or technical? What is the hit probability of the MKV? Can it engage low flying targets? (likely not). Can it be quickly deployed? Can it engage multiple targets? Is it maneuverable? Does it have ECM?
> 
> The MKV is built to knock out satellites and this is it. The S-300/400 is built to shoot down aircraft/cruise missiles. The MKV would be worthless at shooting down aircraft and the S-400 would be worthless at shooting down satellites.
> 
> The S-300/400 systems can engage highly maneuverable, highly fast and very small targets at any altitude. Both systems can be quickly deployed within minutes (crucial). Both systems can manage a battlefield by tracking anywhere from 100-300 targets, both systems have a data-link network which makes it very difficult to kill or jam.
> 
> In any the anti satellite weapons take meticulous planning which could last days, weeks or even months before the right window of opportunity is there which includes whether and vector timing--not to mention orbital launches are often delayed for a number of technical reasons.
> 
> The MKV is a highly specialized weapond, it would not be able to engage, for instance, low level targets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is that when even the Russian Air Force is still testing them. Moreover, from what I have read China was interested in engines and avionics and not purchasing



Of course, they have different specialization. However, knocking down a satellite or an ICBM at the exoatmosphere level is a much more impressive feat than shooting down an aicraft or intercepting a subsonic cruise missile.

Do we really need the S-400?

Heck, this is like saying we can build the nuclear supercarrier, while we can't build a tiny frigate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## marshall

oct605032048 said:


> As for S-400, if the price is ok it's no harm buying one or two for study or research.


China has now reached a level of technological proficiency where they only need to improve individual components rather than entire systems. It's doubtful Russia will ever sell 2 of anything to China anymore because unlike 20 years ago where the entire world was certain China couldn't figure out the advanced technologies being sold to them...today, China can basically figure out anything in record time and release an improved version of it to boot. If the S-400 is sold to China, it will be a more downgraded version than Russia would sell to India or any other country while requiring hundreds to be ordered because if they don't do this, China would come out with a more advanced version and become Russia's market competitor and Russia will not have made that much money anyways since China only needs a handful of samples to learn everything they need to learn.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Of course, they have different specialization. However, knocking down a satellite or an ICBM at the exoatmosphere level is a much more impressive feat than shooting down an aicraft or intercepting a subsonic cruise missile.
> 
> Do we really need the S-400?
> 
> Heck, this is like saying we can build the nuclear supercarrier, while we can't build a tiny frigate.




You have to know of and locate a satellite in order to destroy it and that is a tall order. Furthermore, knocking out something like a GPS satellite would be foolish beyond words considering China also depends on GPS. As do many other nations and for military purposes.

And China has nothing *operational* that can destroy ICBM&#8217;s at the &#8220;exoatmosphere level&#8221;. 

But you are welcome to believe that the S-400 is outdated crap--comments like that are expected from you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bratva

ptldM3 said:


> You have to know of and locate a satellite in order to destroy it and that is a tall order. Furthermore, knocking out something like a GPS satellite would be foolish beyond words considering China also depends on GPS. As do many other nations and for military purposes.
> 
> And China has nothing *operational* that can destroy ICBM&#8217;s at the &#8220;exoatmosphere level&#8221;.
> 
> But you are welcome to believe that the S-400 is outdated crap--comments like that are expected from you.



What's the defense of S-300/400 against High speed anti radiation missiles? Do S-300/400 deploy Chaff and other counter measures?


----------



## Kompromat

HQ-19 = S-400 Joint R&D. Program is already active.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nomi007

china also attempt to stolen the western missiles
The Mystery Missiles In Finland


----------



## SinoChallenger

ptldM3 said:


> You have to know of and locate a satellite in order to destroy it and that is a tall order. Furthermore, knocking out something like a GPS satellite would be foolish beyond words considering China also depends on GPS. As do many other nations and for military purposes.
> 
> And China has nothing *operational* that can destroy ICBM&#8217;s at the &#8220;exoatmosphere level&#8221;.
> 
> But you are welcome to believe that the S-400 is outdated crap--comments like that are expected from you.


Satellites follow fixed orbits and are easily tracked via ground stations. You can actually find the precise location of all satellites in real time from public sources.

China has Beidou GPS system, we don't use the US one, because our is more advanced by one generation. We already have Asian covered under Beidou, and within a few years the rest of the world. It's already being made commercial available to Chinese private sector.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xizhimen

the trend is that future Russian weapon building industry will be in Chinese hands.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> You have to know of and locate a satellite in order to destroy it and that is a tall order. Furthermore, knocking out something like a GPS satellite would be foolish beyond words considering China also depends on GPS. As do many other nations and for military purposes.
> 
> And China has nothing *operational* that can destroy ICBM&#8217;s at the &#8220;exoatmosphere level&#8221;.
> 
> But you are welcome to believe that the S-400 is outdated crap--comments like that are expected from you.



Still, we have performed the ICBM interception just 2 years ago, while Russia hasn't done anything comparable to this feat.

It would be foolish to believe that we need to copy the S-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gambit

SinoChallenger said:


> Satellites follow fixed orbits and are easily tracked via ground stations. You can actually find the precise location of all satellites in real time from public sources.
> 
> China has Beidou GPS system, we don't use the US one, *because our is more advanced by one generation.* We already have Asian covered under Beidou, and within a few years the rest of the world. It's already being made commercial available to Chinese private sector.


How?

If you -- the public -- value your privacy, do not use Beidou.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

nomi007 said:


> china also attempt to stolen the western missiles
> The Mystery Missiles In Finland



Just few corrupt US officers have smuggled the SAM missiles to South Korea for some extra bucks, and it has nothing to do with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SinoChallenger

gambit said:


> How?
> 
> If you -- the public -- value your privacy, do not use Beidou.


Beidou civilian signal is accurate within 10 meters. Chinas Beidou Global Navigation System

GPS civilian signal is only accurate within 20 meters. Global Positioning System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

SinoChallenger said:


> Satellites follow fixed orbits and are easily tracked via ground stations. You can actually find the precise location of all satellites in real time from public sources.
> 
> China has Beidou GPS system, we don't use the US one, because our is more advanced by one generation. We already have Asian covered under Beidou, and within a few years the rest of the world. It's already being made commercial available to Chinese private sector.




So does China also plan on tracking the thousands of pieces of space debris that orbit the earth and than shooting that down? And if China does succeed in shooting down a few satellites what do you think will happen to its launch sites?





ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Still, we have performed the ICBM interception just 2 years ago, while Russia hasn't done anything comparable to this feat.
> 
> It would be foolish to believe that we need to copy the S-400.




Russia is working on an MIRV that can engage 10 targets simultaneously .


----------



## oct605032048

It's all about money. I think for China and Russia, it is a better way to spend the budget on warheads instead of MIRVs. 
Let the otherside worried about how to intercept them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

oct605032048 said:


> It's all about money. I think for China and Russia, it is a better way to spend the budget on warheads instead of MIRVs.
> Let the otherside worried about how to intercept them.



Our EKV/MKV is designed to shoot down the ICBM during the first half of the midcourse phase, when its MIRVs and decoys haven't been splitted off.

So all the radioactive nuclear debris will fall back on the enemy's soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

SinoChallenger said:


> Beidou civilian signal is accurate within 10 meters. China&#8217;s Beidou Global Navigation System
> 
> GPS civilian signal is only accurate within 20 meters. Global Positioning System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The American GPS signal's higher *IN*accuracy for civilian is by design. The reality is that while the Beidou system has some advantages, those advantages belongs in the logistical, not the technical, realm, and even if the Beidou system is superior by 10 meters, in practical applications by civilians, if you cannot find your target within that 10 meters difference, may be you have no business using satellite assisted navigation. Where the Beidou has disadvantages, those are truly technically inferior to the American GPS.

To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use Beidou.


----------



## below_freezing

gambit said:


> The American GPS signal's higher *IN*accuracy for civilian is by design. The reality is that while the Beidou system has some advantages, those advantages belongs in the logistical, not the technical, realm, and even if the Beidou system is superior by 10 meters, in practical applications by civilians, if you cannot find your target within that 10 meters difference, may be you have no business using satellite assisted navigation. Where the Beidou has disadvantages, those are truly technically inferior to the American GPS.
> 
> To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use Beidou.



that's fine. i'm sure GLONASS is also not as good as GPS, because of US's 20 year head start on this, but only 3 countries in the world have an independent global positioning system right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SinoChallenger

ptldM3 said:


> So does China also plan on tracking the thousands of pieces of space debris that orbit the earth and than shooting that down? And if China does succeed in shooting down a few satellites what do you think will happen to its launch sites?


Launch sites? ASAT is DF-21 based and road mobile. Of course, if we shoot any satellites, they would belong to our adversary USA, not our friend Russia, so chill.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The enlightened

SinoChallenger said:


> Launch sites? ASAT is DF-21 based and road mobile. Of course, if we shoot any satellites, they would belong to our adversary USA, not our friend Russia, so chill.


What do you think will happen if you start shooting at American sattelites, did you even think about the implication of such actions.


----------



## Alfa-Fighter

below_freezing said:


> that's fine. i'm sure GLONASS is also not as good as GPS, because of US's 20 year head start on this, but only 3 countries in the world have an independent global positioning system right now.



I think either you are getting very less information about the world or your govt. telling you less about real things.

1) Two Global GPS system 
A) USA(GPS) 
B) Russia (GLONASS) (Joined by India for military grade)

2) Regional GPS
A) China - Beidou 1
B) France- DORIS
C) India - IRNSS- to be completed by 2013-2014
D) Japan- Quasi-Zenith Satellite System

3) Global GPS undress Progress:
A) China - COMPASS (to be completed by 2020)
B) Europe - Galileo


A) Glonass : Originally, GLONASS was designed to have an accuracy of 65 m, but in reality it had an accuracy of 20 m in the civilian signal and 10 m in the military signal.

As of 29 December 2011, the GLONASS constellation status is
Total Satellites in Constellation	31 SC
Operational 24 SC (Glonass-M)
In Commissioning 1 SC (Glonass-M)
In Flight-test 1 SC (Glonass-K)
In Maintenance 2 SC (Glonass-M)
Spare 3 SC (Glonass-M)

According to Russian System of Differentional Correction and Monitoring's data, as of 2010, precisions of GLONASS navigation definitions (for p=0.95) for latitude and longitude were 4.46&#8212;7.38 m with mean number of NSV equals 7&#8212;8 (depending on station). In comparison, the same time precisions of GPS navigation definitions were 2.00&#8212;8.76 m with mean number of NSV equals 6&#8212;11 (depending on station). C*ivilian GLONASS used alone is therefore very slightly less accurate than GPS. On high latitudes (north or south), GLONASS' accuracy is better than that of GPS due to the orbital position of the satellites.*

In order to increase the navigation definition of GLONASS to an a*ccuracy of 2.8 m by 2011*. I*n particular, the latest satellite design, GLONASS-K has the ability to double the system's accuracy once introduced.*

Glonass K is 3rd gen Sat ,In which India also is share holder by launching and providing money.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> The American GPS signal's higher *IN*accuracy for civilian is by design. The reality is that while the Beidou system has some advantages, those advantages belongs in the logistical, not the technical, realm, and even if the Beidou system is superior by 10 meters, in practical applications by civilians, if you cannot find your target within that 10 meters difference, may be you have no business using satellite assisted navigation. Where the Beidou has disadvantages, those are truly technically inferior to the American GPS.
> 
> To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use Beidou.



ALL GPS(current or planned) have a degraded civilian signal (except i think, the European one). however in practical application 10 meters difference can mean a lot, if you drive on a road that has other roads next to it(ie: when getting out of NYC), a inaccuracy of 20 meters means your position can jump to the road next to you leading to a "recalculation" by the gps system and possibly missing your exit in the mean time. its all about convenience. 

now explain those disadvantages that are "truly technically inferior to the American GPS"

also care to explain to me what about my daily movements in my car that the chinese government would find so interesting

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> ALL GPS(current or planned) have a degraded civilian signal (except i think, the European one). however in practical application 10 meters difference can mean a lot, if you drive on a road that has other roads next to it(ie: when getting out of NYC), a inaccuracy of 20 meters means your position can jump to the road next to you leading to a "recalculation" by the gps system and possibly missing your exit in the mean time. its all about convenience.


The car is not driving, *YOU* are. You are talking as if no one else here uses satellite assisted location/driving except for you. What a feeble attempt at defending the Beidou system.



applesauce said:


> now explain those disadvantages that are "truly technically inferior to the American GPS"
> 
> also care to explain to me what about my daily movements in my car that the chinese government would find so interesting


Easy...

The Beidou system is only 1/2 as satellite assisted navigation as the American GPS. See if you can figure out what that mean...


----------



## EndoClock

gambit said:


> How?
> 
> If you -- the public -- value your privacy, do not use Beidou.



Since GPS receivers are strictly signal receiver, how would using them reveal your privacy?


----------



## gambit

EndoClock said:


> Since GPS receivers are strictly signal receiver, how would using them reveal your privacy?


The American GPS receivers are indeed only receivers. But the flaw in your thinking here is that the American way is the *ONLY* way. We never said it is.


----------



## SQ8

gambit said:


> The American GPS receivers are indeed only receivers. But the flaw in your thinking here is that the American way is the *ONLY* way. We never said it is.



You are telling me there is a handshake for GPS?
The transmitter knows there is a receiver??


----------



## gambit

Santro said:


> You are telling me there is a handshake for GPS?
> The transmitter knows there is a receiver??


Not for the American GPS. But apparently not too many people, including the Chinese, know the truth about the Beidou system, so here goes...

The Beidou as a satellite assisted navigation system with its 'Big Brother' aspect have been known for a long time but the Chinese government tries very hard to suppress that fact.

For the Beidou system, each satellite is only a relay of queries and responses...

http://events.eoportal.org/presentations/10001572/10001573.html


> *BeiDou-1 requires two-way transmissions between the user and the central control station via the satellite.* Firstly, the central control station sends inquiry signals to the users via two satellites. When the user terminal received the signal from one satellite, it sends responding signal back to both satellites. The central station receives the responding signals sent by the user from two satellites, and calculates the users 2D position based on the time difference between the two signals. This position is then compared with the digital territorial map stored in the database to get the 3D position data, which is then sent back to the user via satellites using encrypted communications


For Beidou 1, it is the ground controller that tells the receiver/requester its location. Not that the receiver calculates its own positions from triangulation of detected satellites.



> The new system under development will be a constellation of 35 satellites, which include 5 geostationary orbit (GEO) satellites, 3 IGSO (Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit), and 27 MEO (Medium Earth Orbit) satellites, that will offer complete coverage of the globe. *The BeiDou-2 system will allow a ground receiver to calculate its position by measuring the distance between itself and three or more satellites in view*, in analogy to the method of signal reception practised by the GPS and GLONASS constellations.



CAPS


> 3. Because the satellite is only a transponder, *the navigation signal relies on the ground station.* If anything happens to the ground station or the uplink, the satellite loses its navigation function. Compared with the other navigation satellite systems, therefore, CAPS is more vulnerable.


Beidou 2 will supposedly allow receivers to be receivers instead of requesters but by now, privacy activists already have plenty of doubts on the honesty of the Chinese government.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Capt.Popeye

> The reality is that while the Beidou system has some advantages, those advantages belongs in the logistical, not the technical, realm,


originally posted by gambit 

Now your post in #62 figures. If the tech that you outlined is being used, then the satellites will be much smaller, lighter, cheaper and easier to maintain. All on a substantially lower budget and not so challenging technologically.


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> The car is not driving, *YOU* are. You are talking as if no one else here uses satellite assisted location/driving except for you. What a feeble attempt at defending the Beidou system.



no sh1t Sherlock, i am the driver, how does that change anything? if i dont know the neighborhood/route how would i know which exit/turn to take if the GPS don't tell me. you like looking at the map thats your fetish not mine.



gambit said:


> Easy...
> 
> The Beidou system is only 1/2 as satellite assisted navigation as the American GPS. See if you can figure out what that mean...



okay so the chinese system requires the gps receiver to transmit as well, thats a disadvantage yes(battery comsumption and such). 

you have yet to tell me what about my daily movements in my car that the chinese government would find so interesting not to mention there is no name/ID attached to such a GPS device, it could be anyone using the device

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## below_freezing

gambit said:


> Not for the American GPS. But apparently not too many people, including the Chinese, know the truth about the Beidou system, so here goes...
> 
> The Beidou as a satellite assisted navigation system with its 'Big Brother' aspect have been known for a long time but the Chinese government tries very hard to suppress that fact.
> 
> For the Beidou system, each satellite is only a relay of queries and responses...
> 
> http://events.eoportal.org/presentations/10001572/10001573.html
> 
> For Beidou 1, it is the ground controller that tells the receiver/requester its location. Not that the receiver calculates its own positions from triangulation of detected satellites.
> 
> 
> 
> CAPS
> 
> Beidou 2 will supposedly allow receivers to be receivers instead of requesters but by now, privacy activists already have plenty of doubts on the honesty of the Chinese government.



How will the very feeble signal from a Beidou device transmit back to the satellite without very strong degradation? A receiver only mode is much easier to build.


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> no sh1t Sherlock, i am the driver, how does that change anything? if i dont know the neighborhood/route how would i know which exit/turn to take if the GPS don't tell me. you like looking at the map thats your fetish not mine.


Sure as the sky is blue Sherlock you ain't. You talk as if *YOU* are the only one who know how to use the GPS. In Vegas, there are plenty of roads close enough to each other that will throw any civilian GPS off that will require the driver to pay attention to his driving regardless of what his GPS device indicate, whether it be 20 meters or 10 meters accurate.



applesauce said:


> okay so the chinese system requires the gps receiver to transmit as well, thats a disadvantage yes(battery comsumption and such).


Dang...Schooled by an American and from an 'inferior' Asian at that. 



applesauce said:


> you have yet to tell me what about my daily movements in my car that the chinese government would find so interesting not to mention *there is no name/ID attached to such a GPS device*, it could be anyone using the device


You gotta be freaking kidding me, jack...!!!

*WHEN YOU HAVE A TRANSPONDER AND/OR RELAY DEVICE THAT MUST MANAGE MULTIPLE CLIENTS IN A TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL, YOU MUST HAVE A WAY OF DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN CLIENTS, AND WHAT ELSE BUT CLIENTS HAVE THEIR OWN UNIQUE IDS?*

Yup...Sure as the sky is blue Sherlock you ain't. It does not matter if it is the political dissent who drives his car or loaned it to the his neighbor. What matter is that the Chinese government is able to keep track of *A CAR*. Sooner or later the political dissent will drive it and government agents will be able to track his movements to other political dissidents. Get it now ?

---------- Post added at 10:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 PM ----------




below_freezing said:


> How will the very feeble signal from a Beidou device transmit back to the satellite without very strong degradation? A receiver only mode is much easier to build.


Feeble? Is the satellite phone feeble?


----------



## HavocHeaven

gambit said:


> Beidou 2 will supposedly allow receivers to be receivers instead of requesters but by now, *privacy activists already have plenty of doubts on the honesty of the Chinese government.*



So you do know the difference between Beidou-1 and Beidou-2, right? You just keep skeptical that Beidou-2 terminal &#65288;without Beidou-1 back compatibility&#65289;may not be a truly passive client as the China government claim. Well, you can build your own Beidou-2 navigator from scratches (IC, PCB, antenna etc.), using interface control files released by China government. You can make sure nothing will be transmitted.

Actually Beidou will not sell anything but IC design license. Everything commercially available to you is manufactured by 3rd party companies. Conspiracy theory sucks.


----------



## gambit

HavocHeaven said:


> So you do know the difference between Beidou-1 and Beidou-2, right? You just keep skeptical that Beidou-2 terminal &#65288;without Beidou-1 back compatibility&#65289;may not be a truly passive client as the China government claim. Well, you can build your own Beidou-2 navigator from scratches (IC, PCB, antenna etc.), using interface control files released by China government. You can make sure nothing will be transmitted.
> 
> Actually Beidou will not sell anything but IC design license. Everything commercially available to you is manufactured by 3rd party companies. Conspiracy theory sucks.


The only way Beidou 2 will be completely trusted is when the system is reviewed and proven to be 100% passive by credible third party and you can bet your life that IEEE or EDN or the likes will be all over the system. I trust them more than I trust the Chinese government. I have no problems using Beidou at that time. Bi-directional governmental dependency satellite navigation system sucks.


----------



## Guest

gambit said:


> To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use Beidou.


 
To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use mobile phones. turn them off (and remember to *REMOVE* their batteries) now!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HavocHeaven

gambit said:


> The only way Beidou 2 will be completely trusted is when the system is reviewed and proven to be 100% passive by credible third party and you can bet your life that IEEE or EDN or the likes will be all over the system. I trust them more than I trust the Chinese government. I have no problems using Beidou at that time. Bi-directional governmental dependency satellite navigation system sucks.



FFS stop being willfully ignorant. It's crystal clear that a US GPS-like navigation system is technically a subset of Beidou-2. Beidou-2 is NOT "Bi-directional governmental dependency" which means you don't have to send anything to satellites to locate yourself. Plain and Simple. Only when you need the message feature, realized by Beidou-1 payload attached to Beidou-2 GEO satellites, you implement TX antenna on your Beidou-2 terminal.

Tell me how the hell can you doubt anything if China never touches a single molecule of you Beidou-2 navigator? How? Paranoid sucks!

Regarding Beidou-2 terminals with messenger, it's perfectly reasonable if people don't trust Beidou until they know for sure there is no backdoor or whatever malicious stuff. But again, nobody points a gun on your head to force you. If you don't trust Beidou, use passive navigation only. If you don't trust Google, don't use Gmail, use search engine only. Not a big deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## canadian icehole

Guest said:


> To the public, if you value your privacy, *DO NOT* use mobile phones. turn them off (and remember to *REMOVE* their batteries) now!


 
LOL gambit might as well live off the "grid" (i.e. pay cash only, no credit cards, no utility bills, etc...). Unfortunately for him, posting online doesn't help with the "living off the grid".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> Sure as the sky is blue Sherlock you ain't. You talk as if *YOU* are the only one who know how to use the GPS. In Vegas, there are plenty of roads close enough to each other that will throw any civilian GPS off that will require the driver to pay attention to his driving regardless of what his GPS device indicate, whether it be 20 meters or 10 meters accurate.
> 
> 
> Dang...Schooled by an American and from an 'inferior' Asian at that.



i dont think you understand what "schooled" means

of course we pay attention to the road but LIKE i alrady said, if you dont know the area and the GPS thinks your on a different road its not gonna give you the correct instructions hence you may take a wroing turn until the GPS corrects itself, do you understand?






gambit said:


> You gotta be freaking kidding me, jack...!!!
> 
> *WHEN YOU HAVE A TRANSPONDER AND/OR RELAY DEVICE THAT MUST MANAGE MULTIPLE CLIENTS IN A TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL, YOU MUST HAVE A WAY OF DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN CLIENTS, AND WHAT ELSE BUT CLIENTS HAVE THEIR OWN UNIQUE IDS?*



AND what? when i bought the GPS i dont need an ID to buy it, i didnt need to register the chip client ID to my name.

i sold my GPS on ebay, hey look, no way of knowing if its still me using it. 




gambit said:


> Yup...Sure as the sky is blue Sherlock you ain't. It does not matter if it is the political dissent who drives his car or loaned it to the his neighbor. What matter is that the Chinese government is able to keep track of *A CAR*. Sooner or later the political dissent will drive it and government agents will be able to track his movements to other political dissidents. Get it now ?
> 
> Feeble? Is the satellite phone feeble?





oh noes!!! like others have already said YOU are so concerned about this? better stop using the internet, better stop using your cell phone(and regular phone), hell please go dig a hole in the woods , apperently thats the only way you wanna live.


----------



## gambit

applesauce said:


> i dont think you understand what "schooled" means
> 
> of course we pay attention to the road but LIKE i alrady said, if you dont know the area and the GPS thinks your on a different road its not gonna give you the correct instructions hence you may take a wroing turn until the GPS corrects itself, do you understand?


 This tell me right of the bat, right from the git-go, that you have never used a GPS device in an *OFF-ROAD* environment, that you have never used it when snow covered the terrain for as far as the eyes can see for kilometers, and that you have never used it off shore when land is out of sight. 

Clue for you, conscript reject, the satellite assisted navigation method is supposed to be *SUPPLEMENTARY* to the human brain, eyes, and ears. Never a replacement. Map overlays and integration are the responsibility of the user, meaning the consumer and the device manufacturer, not the satellite assist machines themselves. In other words, map overlays and integration that determine GPS accuracy for city usage rests upon the maker of the device and it is their differences in competency that distinguishes themselves from each other.

But if you had ever used GPS in an off-road or at sea environment you would know that when the user has weather permitted visibility he is supposed to use his senses and his brain to get to his final destination and people have used theirs at far greater distance than 20 meters. If you cannot see *AND* comprehend where you are going at 20 meters accuracy, in the desert or in the ocean, then 10 meters or even 5 meters accuracy is not going to help you. If you cannot set aside the machine and use your own brain and senses at 20 meters accuracy, then you deserve to get lost and eaten by wild animals. The GPS method was *NEVER* intended to replace the human brain and the map.

Here is another clue for you: The reason why we want satellite assisted bombings is because we want to carry less bombs per mission. We want to put the bomb's maximum potential as close to the target as possible. Some targets are hardened so that 20 or 10 meters miss they will survive, so we want to use GPS to deliver everything the bomb has right on the target itself.







That is with GPS assisted weapons delivery. Would an increase in 10 meters accuracy matters in this situation? No. In other situations? May be. But if the US with the current system can render a runway system useless for hours if not days, then a 10 meters accuracy improvement will not matter.

But if we are talking about city drivers, backwoods hikers or even open water sailors, if you need an increase in 10 meters accuracy -- from 20 to 10 -- then it is best if you remain home. Poor baby that he cannot use his senses and his brain when he is within 20 meters of his destination when guided by the American GPS and must have the Chinese Beidou with its 10 meters improvement while trying to find a hotel in a strange city. 

Yeah...I schooled you...Again.



applesauce said:


> AND what? when i bought the GPS i dont need an ID to buy it, i didnt need to register the chip client ID to my name.
> 
> i sold my GPS on ebay, hey look, no way of knowing if its still me using it.


It is not *YOU* but the device. A satellite assisted navigation device is not something you buy and discard the next day, next week, or even within the next 5 yrs. You buy it and as long as it serves you with reasonable reliability, you will keep it for as long as its features continues to serve your needs. How long you have the watch on your left wrist?



applesauce said:


> oh noes!!! like others have already said YOU are so concerned about this? better stop using the internet, better stop using your cell phone(and regular phone), hell please go dig a hole in the woods , apperently thats the only way you wanna live.


The issue is about governmental knowledge and tracking of your activities and satellite assisted navigation is the method in discussion. In the US, we already have issues with 'Big Brother'. But here is where your hypocrisy shines: You are trying to defend the Chinese government's ways of keeping tabs on the people but if the US government does the same things, you would be crying bloody murder.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DrSomnath999

Martian2 said:


>


HQ 9 has limited anti ballistic missile capability unlike S 400 so what's the point of buying S400 for just comparing what HQ9 is not 
having


----------



## bdslph

S400 simply the best no other country i think was able to make like the S400 SAM 
China needs the S400 not only them even Pakistan 
Imagine the S300 was block by the USA to be sold to Iran 
so think what the S400 can do


----------



## IronsightSniper

Russia needs the S-400 SAM. Everyone else just wants it for their own selfish needs.


----------



## Hafizzz

xataxsata said:


> Why china is importing from Russia despite of all made in china claims???????
> 
> few days back there was news that china is importing second hand planes from Russia.
> 
> china spends about 4 times more on defense then India still so much of imports.


 



Cheetah786 said:


> Isn't India doing the same



Exactly. But India list all the imports as "indigenous" whereas China is accused of copying !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

marshall said:


> The Mig-19, Mig-21 and SU-27 were copied. Today, the SU-27...aka J-11 has changed so much that it is basically an indigenous fighter except for the external appearance. The Kilo, destroyers and most missiles are indigenous. Anybody can argue that so and so component is derived from a foreign design. The reality is, every development is based on something before it and doesn't make them copies. The only things that can realistically be described as copies are licensed copies or stolen blueprints. I still find the claims of the J-10 being a copy of the Lavi ridiculous, especially given that China was already developing the J-9, a delta canard design, for over 10 years prior and that the Lavi is significantly smaller, was never completed, and whose direct involvement with the J-10 was never definitively proven unless you consider a bunch of unsubstantiated claims from unofficial accounts as proof.


 
You've finally said what I've been trying to tell others for the past 10000 posts



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Seriously, we have started to master the much more advanced MKV technology, and S-400 is nothing, but a primitive toy compared to this.
> 
> Buying a sample of S-400 for the studying purpose is not a bad idea either, just like how US has bought few Su-27 from Ukraine also for studying.



was there a rumor that a HQ-26 was being built?



DrSomnath999 said:


> HQ 9 has limited anti ballistic missile capability unlike S 400 so what's the point of buying S400 for just comparing what HQ9 is not
> having



both are missiles designed to engage planes and relatively medium altitude missiles, so no, the s-400 will not be a wondrously better abm

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistanisage

Russia should sell S-400 to china and let them produce S-400 under license.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Pakistanisage said:


> Russia should sell S-400 to china and let them produce S-400 under license.



China already has something comparable.

HQ-19 (S-400) (China) - Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems

Now China is working on the next-gen SAM, and S400 is simply not our cup of tea. 



SinoSoldier said:


> was there a rumor that a HQ-26 was being built?



Not sure, but it is confirmed that the next-gen SAM gonna be revealed soon.

BTW, i just wonder when those rumors of China gonna buy this and that is going to die out.

The Russians have overestimated their 1980s technology too much.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> China already has something comparable.
> 
> HQ-19 (S-400) (China) - Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems
> 
> Now China is working on the next-gen SAM, and S400 is simply not our cup of tea.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure, but it is confirmed that the next-gen SAM gonna be revealed soon.
> 
> BTW, i just wonder when those rumors of China gonna buy this and that is going to die out.
> 
> The Russians have overestimated their 1980s technology too much.



hopefully the next generation missile will be like the standard missile 3

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Battle of Bach Dang River

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Seriously, we have started to master the much more advanced MKV technology, and S-400 is nothing, but a primitive toy compared to this.
> 
> Buying a sample of S-400 for the studying purpose is not a bad idea either, just like how US has bought few Su-27 from Ukraine also for studying.


 


ChineseTiger1986 said:


> We don't need to improve the S-300, since we already have the HQ-9.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, HQ-15 is an exact copy of S-300, but HQ-9 is a new SAM incorporating with some S-300 features.
> 
> And they still mention the S-400, eh? China already rejected this offer since 2007.
> 
> Remember the Russian media also claimed that China wants to buy the monkey version of Su-35, so has this turned out to be true or not?



This is what the Chinese said, after they have finished copying the weapons, fighters from Russia.
Imagine, What did China make if without the help of former Soviet and if China does not copy from Russia today?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Battle of Bach Dang River said:


> This is what the Chinese said, after they have finished copying the weapons, fighters from Russia.
> Imagine, What did China make if without the help of former Soviet and if China does not copy from Russia today?



Well, our top tier technology has nothing to do with Russia.

For example, J-20 and midcourse interception.


----------



## Battle of Bach Dang River

In my opinion, just as Su-35 contract, Russians will require China to accept a clause "committed not to copy in any way". And it is too difficult to terms with Chinese, because their purpose is to buy some, then removable, copy, produce many copy, and then sell....



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Well, our top tier technology has nothing to do with Russia.
> 
> For example, J-20 and midcourse interception.


At least you should not deny they have laid the foundation for you


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Battle of Bach Dang River said:


> In my opinion, just as Su-35 contract, Russians will require China to accept a clause "committed not to copy in any way". And it is too difficult to terms with Chinese, because their purpose is to buy some, then removable, copy, produce many copy, and then sell....
> 
> 
> At least you should not deny they have laid the foundation for you



USSR was no doubt our former mentor, they have laid a good foundation for our military complex industry.

But does this mean the student cannot challenge the teacher? Russians were once the student of the Western Europeans as well.

Also Russia sold us the weapons during the 1990s, and it indeed helped us to speed up our military modernization, but the price of their weapons wasn't cheap either, and we did pay a higher to acquire their weapons compared to India.

PS, China never intended to buy any unit of SU-35, Russia always uses us an excuse to promote their weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

That's right, all Chinese who know a lot about Chinese military stuffs know exactly that we got help from SU. So yes we never denied that. China invented gunpowder and we laid the foundation for the Western countries.


----------



## senheiser

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Seriously, we have started to master the much more advanced MKV technology, and S-400 is nothing, but a primitive toy compared to this.
> 
> Buying a sample of S-400 for the studying purpose is not a bad idea either, just like how US has bought few Su-27 from Ukraine also for studying.



what does your china have?? Some copied inferior s300s, chinese army is very weak uk is even stronger than china.



oct605032048 said:


> This thread began with an Indian posted Russo self-talking article. The Russians like to talk about how popular their toys are and how other people are interested to buy them.
> 
> We all know that China won't buying any IL-476 for sure. As for S-400, if the price is ok it's no harm buying one or two for study or research.



china already operates 17 IL-476so they bought, russia wont sell s400 to china just as they didnt sell su35 to china



below_freezing said:


> that's fine. i'm sure GLONASS is also not as good as GPS, because of US's 20 year head start on this, but only 3 countries in the world have an independent global positioning system right now.


not its only two glonass and gps

china hasnt its system ready



xizhimen said:


> the trend is that future Russian weapon building industry will be in Chinese hands.


the trend is that future European weapon building industry will be in Russian hands.

mistral cough cough


----------



## Beast

senheiser said:


> what does your china have?? Some copied inferior s300s, chinese army is very weak uk is even stronger than china.



2010 Chinese anti-ballistic missile test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> *The People's Republic of China carried out a land-based high-altitude anti-ballistic missile test on 11 January 2010.This reportedly made China the second country in the world after the United States of America to successfully destroy an incoming missile beyond the Earth's atmosphere*



An ABM mid course interception missile can never be a copy of S-300. Becos, S-300 is never intended to fly few hundred kilometre up the sky and not to mention pass atmosphere into space to intercept the BM. 

Not to mention , the killing method is kinetic impact which is the most advance unlike proximity fuse. US ABM too deploy the kinetic kill for their ABM as oppose to proximity fuse.

China air defence can be claimed to be more superior than the Russian.


----------



## senheiser

Beast said:


> 2010 Chinese anti-ballistic missile test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> An ABM mid course interception missile can never be a copy of S-300. Becos, S-300 is never intended to fly few hundred kilometre up the sky and not to mention pass atmosphere into space to intercept the BM.
> 
> Not to mention , the killing method is kinetic impact which is the most advance unlike proximity fuse. US ABM too deploy the kinetic kill for their ABM as oppose to proximity fuse.
> 
> China air defence can be claimed to be more superior than the Russian.



Russia can this too


----------



## Beast

senheiser said:


> Russia can this too



Hahaha.. Talk is cheap! Shoot one down before you say 'CAN'

Russia is declining. That is a true fact. Good thing is Putin know who is the rising star and who to cling to , to stay in touch wit reality..


----------



## senheiser

Beast said:


> Hahaha.. Talk is cheap! Shoot one down before you say 'CAN'
> 
> Russia is declining. That is a true fact. Good thing is Putin know who is the rising star and who to cling to , to stay in touch wit reality..



am not going to argue about a wiki article linked by some chinese sites where chinese officials saying they can this and that, i am pretty sure there is something related for russia as well then.

Russia is declining since how many times people say it and keep saying it?? And yet russia disproves people every time in global affairs. Syria is just an example. When lybia civil war brought out china didnt veto despite losing much more bussnes than they do in syria now. China is too afraid of america they cant handle alone like russia.


----------



## Beast

senheiser said:


> am not going to argue about a wiki article linked by some chinese sites where chinese officials saying they can this and that, i am pretty sure there is something related for russia as well then.
> 
> Russia is declining since how many times people say it and keep saying it?? And yet russia disproves people every time in global affairs. Syria is just an example. When lybia civil war brought out china didnt veto despite losing much more bussnes than they do in syria now. China is too afraid of america they cant handle alone like russia.



The test was tracked and confirmed by US defence. It's by no mean a fantasy. Same as the ASAT test in 2007.

China defense spokesman too confirmed the ABM test been conducted. 

If you want to continue be in denial, so be it. I am not trying to change yr view. I am telling you the test is real and the capability of Chinese air defense is there.


----------



## tvsram1992

Imran Khan said:


> now russia will never agree i think because of copy issue ?.


After they acquire few , you could see a new system in HQ series .


----------



## regular

I thought that China has already developed their own S-400 eqvivalent to Russians version......


----------



## kawaraj

looks like "senheiser" this Russian is doing cheap ads here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

senheiser said:


> China is too afraid of america they cant handle alone like russia.



Well, USSR wasn't afraid of USA either, yet it got dismembered into 15 pieces.

You should thank to China in fact, if it wasn't us, they would have already crushed your tiny fragile economy depending on oil and maybe further dismember your country into dozen pieces.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arzamas 16

> Hahaha.. Talk is cheap! Shoot one down before you say 'CAN'



When S-500 comes out it will put all your ABM tech to SHAME. MARK MY WORDS.



> *Russia is declining.* That is a true fact. Good thing is Putin know who is the rising star and who to cling to , to stay in touch wit reality..


 
You are welcome to keep on thinking that, despite the fact that everything else that happened in 10 years says other wise, its always best for Russia's enemy's and competitors to underestimate her, *so keep on doing it. * 



> crushed your tiny fragile



Russian GDP Grew 4.9% in First Quarter, Beating Estimates - Bloomberg

If this trend continues we have the biggest economy in Europe 5-10 years easy, going by PPP figures we are already second largest behind Germany. 




> economy depending on oil



Myth







Look at Russia growth compared to other oil producing powers.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zzzz

Beast said:


> An ABM mid course interception missile can never be a copy of S-300. Becos, S-300 is never intended to fly few hundred kilometre up the sky and not to mention pass atmosphere into space to intercept the BM.
> 
> Not to mention , the killing method is kinetic impact which is the most advance unlike proximity fuse. US ABM too deploy the kinetic kill for their ABM as oppose to proximity fuse.
> 
> China air defence can be claimed to be more superior than the Russian.



Russian *air* defence systems are about engaging high-speed high-maneuvering targets hundreds of km away, track them hundreds of km away, surpassing enemy's EW capabilities, stealth operation and mobility. Its not about sending into space on predetermined trajectory some crappy missile with 1960s technology that is not even powerful enough to carry payload.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

zzzz said:


> Russian *air* defence systems are about engaging high-speed high-maneuvering targets hundreds of km away, track them hundreds of km away, surpassing enemy's EW capabilities, stealth operation and mobility. Its not about sending into space on predetermined trajectory some crappy missile with 1960s technology that is not even powerful enough to carry payload.



 somebody are having sour grape. 60s technology? I know jealousy blind people judgement. Then 5th gen fighter can also be called obsolete or 50's tech, right?


----------



## lordwedggie

Beast said:


> If you want to continue be in denial, so be it. I am not trying to change yr view. I am telling you the test is real and the capability of Chinese air defense is there.



No, it's BETTER when your enemies are in denial. Sadly, he was only a russian civilian, we would have a much easier ride if the RU and US government felt the same way he and gambit do.


----------



## MilSpec

Imran Khan said:


> now russia will never agree i think because of copy issue ?.



WHAT, are you implying chinese copy stuff


----------



## Pakistanisage

It is merely a matter of time before china has its own version of highly efffective Air Defence System.


----------



## lordwedggie

Arzamas 16 said:


> If this trend continues we have the biggest economy in Europe 5-10 years easy, going by PPP figures we are already second largest behind Germany.



This I agree. Given your industrial strength and resolve of your people, Russia is destined to rise again, it's just a matter of time. 

Europe will be ruined if countries like UK, Spain, France, Italy don't do something dramatically different and do it soon. I think Germany alone has a healthy economy in the EU.


----------



## cirr

So the Russians are still dreaming about selling their S-400s to the Chinese&#65311;

These guys don't give up easily&#65292; do they&#65311;


----------



## Paan Singh

Russia will start exports of the S-400 Triumph air defense missile systems to China no earlier than 2017, a source in the defense industry told RIA Novosti on the condition of anonymity.

An export version of the S-400 Triumph air defense missile will have been developed by 2017 with the Chinese to be the first clients, the source said.

Russia currently has four S-400 regiments - two in the Moscow region, one in the Baltic Fleet and one in the Eastern Military District.

By 2020, Russia is to have 28 S-400 regiments, each comprised of two battalions, mainly in maritime and border areas.

In early June, Russian Defense Ministry said there were no plans to export the S-400, which will be produced only for the Russian Armed Forces.

The S-400 Triumph, which succeeds the Soviet-era S-300, is a medium- to long-range surface-to-air missile system that can effectively engage any aerial target, including aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and cruise and ballistic missiles at up to 400 kilometers and an altitude of up to 30 kilometers.

Russia Looking at China S-400 Deliveries in 2017 | World | RIA Novosti

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UKBengali

I seriously cannot see China being interested in the S-400 in 2017 as China is busily engaged in developing systems now that would be at least as effective as the S-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## skyknight

Another Russian ad like su35&#65292;Tu22&#65292;T-50, without paying China appearance fee

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SinoChallenger

UKBengali said:


> I seriously cannot see China being interested in the S-400 in 2017 as China is busily engaged in developing systems now that would be at least as effective as the S-400.


Yawn....... this means Russia is panicking that China has not requested any serious numbers of S-400 (maybe just 1 or 2 to study) so they are doing a sales campaign.


----------



## qwerrty

nothing wrong with this. SAM is of the area where russia is still leading the world. this good news if true..


----------



## Raphael

ITAR-TASS: Russia - China may become first foreign country to buy S-400 anti-aircraft systems

GUIYANG (China), July 10. /ITAR-TASS/. Chief of Russian presidential staff Sergei Ivanov said it was possible that China would become the first foreign country to buy long- and medium-range anti-aircraft defense missile systems S-400 Triumf, but this may take several years. “Chances that China will be the first foreign purchaser are big,” Ivanov told reporters, recalling that Russian army had already received first air defense missile systems S-400.
As for military-technical co-operation between the two countries, Ivanov recalled effective and promising agreements that were concluded. “Promising contracts exist, for instance, for supplies of S-400 air defense missile systems. But their fulfillment will take several years to say the least, it is just impossible to produce this type of military hardware in six months,” the presidential staff chief added.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## mujhaidind

China buys foreign technology. Then with help of reverse engineering they create their own.

Smart people.


----------



## Genesis

mujhaidind said:


> China buys foreign technology. Then with help of reverse engineering they create their own.
> 
> Smart people.



let me ask you something, in 20 years when we achieved parity with US in Asia, who would talk about what we did today?

And if we don't what good is ethics going to do us?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## janon

If true, this is very good news fo China. The S-300 is a formidable air defence system, and China was able to make succesful domestic copies of the same. They can pose a threat to any aircraft even today, even low observable ones.

Given their track record, I would expect the S-400 also to deliver on their promises, and defend against stealth aircrafts and cruise missiles.



Genesis said:


> let me ask you something, in 20 years when we achieved parity with US in Asia, who would talk about what we did today?
> 
> And if we don't what good is ethics going to do us?


I don't think you will achieve parity with the US in every sphere in 20 years. But regardless of that, the poster you quoted was complimenting you.


----------



## mujhaidind

Genesis said:


> let me ask you something, in 20 years when we achieved parity with US in Asia, who would talk about what we did today?
> And if we don't what good is ethics going to do us?


 I wasn't mocking you. I like China's policy. Even Westerners took so many things from China and re-introduced as them their own. I like that China doesn't care about what western countries think. And do things as they wish.

Same can't be said for India which despite claims of having best brains wants to rely on Western technology forever.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## GeHAC

S400 is not bad，we have too many HQ-2s in storage（7000+）.Purchase few battalions of S400s is a good choice

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jlaw

mujhaidind said:


> China buys foreign technology. Then with help of reverse engineering they create their own.
> 
> Smart people.


Reverse engineering is not copy and paste. Every country will be a power house if it were that easy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Counter-Errorist

Jlaw said:


> Reverse engineering is not copy and paste. Every country will be a power house if it were that easy.



Reverse engineering is good for progress. Why reinvent the wheel?!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jlaw

Counter-Errorist said:


> Reverse engineering is good for progress. Why reinvent the wheel?!



Reverse engineering helps to save $ and time if you know what you're doing. Once China fully modernize the military you will see more innovation. Right now we are just trying to catch up to the world. We were asleep for 100 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HonestyIntegrity

Good on china. Thanks Russia.


----------



## Indus Falcon

*China may become first buyer of S-400s - Russian official*_10 July, 2014_

*




*

*China may become the first buyer of Russia's S-400 anti-aircraft missile system, the Kremlin's chief of staff Sergei Ivanov said on Thursday. *

"Chances that China may be the first foreign buyer [of S-400s] are high," he told reporters.

S-400, a new-generation long and medium-range anti-aircraft missile system, is capable of destroying all the existing air attack weapons, including tactical and strategic aircraft, ballistic missiles and hypersonic targets.

China may become first buyer of S-400s - Russian official - News - Politics - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert opinion, podcasts, Video


----------



## Indus Falcon

*Slightly old, but an interesting article. *

*Putin Approves Sale of S-400 to China*
By Zachary Keck
April 11, 2014

_The advanced air and missile defense system will strengthen China vis-à-vis Taiwan, Japan and India._






Vladimir Putin has approved in principle the sale of Russia’s most advanced air and missile defense system to China, Russian media outlets have reported.

According to a report on the Russian business channel_RBK TV_, which was reproduced by_BBC Monitoring_, Russian President Putin has approved the sale of between two and four S-400 air and missile defense systems to China.Such a deal has long been under negotiation, and if approved would make China the first foreign customer of the advanced defense system. Already, China deploys a number of the Soviet-era S-300 defense system.

Despite the ongoing talks, some had felt that Russia would ultimately refuse to sell China the S-400 surface-to-air missile system for a number of reasons. First, there were reports that Russia planned to withhold all foreign sales of the S-400 until Moscow’s own military needs had been satisfied, sometime later this decade. More importantly, there were widespread concerns in Russian military circles that China would purchase a few of the systems with the intent of stealing the technology and reverse engineering a domestic version.This has been a common problem with military systems Russia has sold to China in the past.

Russia and China have sought to overcome this problem by signing stronger intellectual property protection (IPP) agreements. One IPP agreement was signed in 2008, but Russian officials later dismissed it as being insufficient. Russia and China also reportedly signed a stronger IPP agreement in 2012, although few details about this deal have been released.

With regards to the S-400, _Jane’s_ reports that Russia and China hope to overcome the issue of reverse-engineering using a combination of stronger IPP agreements as well as larger volumes of sales. If China purchases a larger quantity of S-400 missile systems up front, Russia’s arms industry will suffer less if Beijing turns around and reverse-engineers the system.

The S-400 itself is likely to significantly enhance Chinese military power in a number of different contingencies. No country will be more affected by China’s S-400 missile systems, which—with a range of 400 kilometers—experts suggest will allow Beijing to achieve air dominance over the Taiwanese strait. York Chen, a former member of Taiwan’s National Security Council, told _Defense News_ last year: “When S-400s work together with Chinese land- and sea-based fighters, the Chinese will have more confidence in sustaining airspace dominance over the Taiwan theater, thus depriving any organized resistance by the Taiwan Air Force and deterring the American intervention.”

While Taiwan is likely to be the most affected by China’s deployment of S-400s, it will not be alone in having to deal with this new capability. Japan also will have to contend with China’s S-400, which are expected to cover the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. The impact the S-400 system will have on Japan’s ability to project power against China will be mitigated somewhat by Tokyo’s procurement of F-35 fighter jet. The joint strike fighters are built with enough stealth to operate in environments with advanced air defense systems.

India will also be impacted by the S-400. Because the system can defend against ballistic missiles, China’s deployment of the S-400 could jeopardize India’s strategic deterrent, which currently relies heavily on land-based missiles. This is likely one of the reasons that India next government is expected to reassess India’s no-first use nuclear doctrine. Should China launch a first strike on India’s nuclear arsenal that was able to wipe out most of its strategic forces, it could use missile defense systems like the S-400 to potentially defend against the remaining missiles.

Putin Approves Sale of S-400 to China | The Diplomat


----------



## idune

What does Chinese S-400 mean for indian capability? Does indian forward movement of air and missile asset in Tibet region mean worthless?


----------



## slapshot

GeHAC said:


> S400 is not bad，we have too many HQ-2s in storage（7000+）.Purchase few battalions of S400s is a good choice


Maybe spare some HQ-2s for Pakistan


----------



## UKBengali

China is unlikely to buy S-400 as it has equivalent systems very close to deployment.

Russia is known for lying about "impending" Chinese weapons purchases.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## tahir195

Russia and China have signed a contract for the supply of Beijing six battalions of antiaircraft missile systems S-400. Under the agreement, China will pay for each division of about $ 500 million.
The contract provides training services for combat vehicles crews, supply of spare parts and additional missiles. Note that there is no official confirmation of the signing of the contract.
According to the US site, a part of each division consists of eight launchers with two missiles each, command car, radar and per charging installation 16 missiles each. According to the Chinese portal , several battalions of S-400 will be posted on the coast from Taiwan, and the rest – from Japan, Vietnam and South Korea.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## A2Z

Can't reach the specifications.


----------



## AgentOrange

tahir195 said:


> Note that there is *no official confirmation* of the signing of the contract.



All you need to know right there. Anyways, there's already a thread on this. Russia selling S-400s is most likely untrue and the rest is just fluff and speculation. Like the "Su-35 sales to China" rumors that have been floating around for 6 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## j20blackdragon

The Chinese defense industry is fully capable of making world class SAMs nowadays. Don't forget that China won the T-LORAMIDS competition in 2013. I'm also willing to bet that modern-day Russia is incapable of building anything comparable to the 052C and 052D, both with 360 degree AESA coverage.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## surya kiran

j20blackdragon said:


> The Chinese defense industry is fully capable of making world class SAMs nowadays. Don't forget that China won the T-LORAMIDS competition in 2013. I'm also willing to bet that modern-day Russia is incapable of building anything comparable to the 052C and 052D, both with 360 degree AESA coverage.



This is an interesting read

China Debuts Aegis Destroyers | SIGNAL Magazine


----------



## rockstar08

Congratulations to China if its True ... S-400 is a Good SAM system


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

rockstar08 said:


> Congratulations to China if its True ... S-400 is a Good SAM system



I must say congratulation to India, since Russia always uses China as a promotional advertisement to convince India and Vietnam to purchase their newest SAM that is available for export.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## rockstar08

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I must say congratulation to India, since Russia always uses China as a promotional advertisement to convince India and Vietnam to purchase their newest SAM that is available for export.



well i wish Pakistan will have some deal with Russians for S-400  
its good for both Russians and Pakistan ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgentOrange

surya kiran said:


> This is an interesting read
> 
> China Debuts Aegis Destroyers | SIGNAL Magazine



That article is almost 10 years old, replete with factually incorrect or out of date information.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## surya kiran

AgentOrange said:


> That article is almost 10 years old, replete with factually incorrect or out of date information.



Possible. Which parts were incorrect, though?


----------



## ayesha.a

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I must say congratulation to India, since Russia always uses China as a promotional advertisement to convince India and Vietnam to purchase their newest SAM that is available for export.


Care to look up which is the newest SAM that India purchased from Russia?

On topic, I find this dubious. China has already been manufacturing S-300 equivalent SAMs, and my guess is that they should be able to make an S-400 class system on their own.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## anilindia

rockstar08 said:


> well i wish Pakistan will have some deal with Russians for S-400
> its good for both Russians and Pakistan ...


Where is money. ???


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ayesha.a said:


> Care to look up which is the newest SAM that India purchased from Russia?
> 
> On topic, I find this dubious. China has already been manufacturing S-300 equivalent SAMs, and my guess is that they should be able to make an S-400 class system on their own.



The S-400 for China is definitely another cooked up rumor.

But not sure if India is interested for this SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rockstar08

anilindia said:


> Where is money. ???



not your Problem ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## A2Z

vsdave2302 said:


> This has busted the bubble of that chinese hype that thier HQ series is more capable than S 300 and S400. Had they been even half capable, CHina would not have gone for S 400. Same is the case of Su 35 which china intends to buy. Chinese goods is not capable enough to be used in war against any potent adversary. Except chinese S to S missile, nothing is good enough. No Submarine, NO BMD, No Plane, No ship nor tank.


May be they want it for reverse engineering they did it with Su-27 and Mig 21 so now they want to reverse engineer S-400 as well.


----------



## j20blackdragon

Why would anyone be interested in the S-400 when the 052D is already commissioned?







Why would anyone be interested in the Su-35 when the J-10B is already in mass production?






And the pre-production J-20 is already in the air?






Use your brains people.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

It's indeed funny how much noise a faked report can always make in a forum, where some try to keep their opinion regardless the facts ...

This deal was never a done deal, it is even denied by the Kremlin:



> The Kremlin denied on June 2 that the sale of Su-35 fighters and S-400 missiles to China was near completion, reversing an earlier statement by the chief of Sukhoi aircraft maker Mikhail Pogosyan. Maxim Syssoev, the chief of Russia’s state-run United Aircraft Corp [UAC], refuted Pogosyan’s claim that he had discussed with the Chinese the Su-35 and S-400 sales.



Russia denies closing the sale of Su-35s, SAM missiles to China | East-Asia-Intel

or ...

Russian Fighters for China Still On Hold | Defense News | defensenews.com

and finally ....



> Numerous reports have appeared in the media of late regarding a deal whereby Russia would export 24 Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker fighters and four Ladas-class submarines to China. The Russian government has officially denied these reports. Numerous unofficial sources, however, indicate that S-400 antiaircraft missiles and IL-476 transport planes could be included as part of a large deal. That would be the largest China-Russia sale package since 2002.



Making Sense of Massive China-Russia Arms Deal - USNI News

So as long as no Russian site officially announces this deal - and we can be sure they will tell it everyone - there is *NO* deal.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## rcrmj

vsdave2302 said:


> They already have reverse engineered in HQ series which is a failure so now they are purchasing from Russia once again. Their J series is a big failure. They are negotiating with russia for SU 35 and some subs to counter India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am impressed with your answer. When I shall have no logical answer to any post in discussion, i shall use your blah, blah formulae to counter the arguement and hide my ignorance.


HQ won the Turkey deal, only got stalled due to Western pressure, it scored the 100% accuracy (with 9 random targetts) and second longest range```and yet its downgraded export version of HO-9 ```

so your delusion and ignorance is the only thing that put you indian on world map to be honest

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## war is peace

VW Dave another idiot with no purpose on life just talking rubbish I hope no body takes you seriously so that you can aswell go hug a transformer sleep on the express or jump of the mountain idiot.


----------



## Infra_Man99

Another news article claiming China bought Russia's S-400 S2A system:

-------------------------------------------------------------
*China becomes first foreign buyer of Russian S-400 air defense system, according media*
China becomes first foreign buyer of Russian S-400 air defense system, according media | April 2015 Global Defense Security news UK | Defense Security global news industry army 2015

Monday, 13 April 2015 06:58

China has purchased *S-400* missile defense systems from Russia, director general of Russia's major arms exporting company Rosoborobexport Anatoly Isaykin has told the Kommersant daily in an interview, according Tass Russian news agency.

. . . . 

China plans to deploy its first S-400 battalion opposite Taiwan. That one battalion can cover all Taiwanese air space. The next battalions will be deployed to deal with Japan, South Korea and Vietnam.
-------------------------------------------------------------

I could see China wanting a few components of the S-400, but not the entire thing.

I'll believe it when I see pictures of it being used in China. Until then, this news story goes in the bigfoot sighting category.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

The S-400 deal is better than the rumour Lada submarine and obselete Su-35.


----------



## cnleio

What about last Su-35 news ... now S-400 news incoming ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

cnleio said:


> What about last Su-35 news ... now S-400 news incoming ?


Su-35 will never come. Same as Lada sub. I heard China provide Russia half the development fee of S-400 and thats why China is first customers for S-400.


----------



## desimorty

S-300 is already under license production in China. Perhaps they will just be interested on an upgrade via the original vendor


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

Not again.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

That's very good new for Sino-Russia deal: we got new toys while Russia get $$$, indirectly both can boost the military relation to higher level without saying any words about alliance. In the future, don't be suprise if there is other high tech military cooperation to come. As I said before only Sino-Russia military cooperation will speed up the catch up to US military technology, we can complement each other with our resources technologies & finance.

Some of our neighbors are not happy with this new such India and Vietnam, but they can't blame Russia if they like to cozy with Russia's enemy, don't be surprise to get some payback , with 400km interception range, we can virtually shot down airplane take off from New Delhi.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Umair Nawaz

i will be interested in S-500.


----------



## terranMarine

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> That's very good new for Sino-Russia deal: we got new toys while Russia get $$$, indirectly both can boost the military relation to higher level without saying any words about alliance. In the future, don't be suprise if there is other high tech military cooperation to come. As I said before only Sino-Russia military cooperation will speed up the catch up to US military technology, we can complement each other with our resources technologies & finance.
> 
> Some of our neighbors are not happy with this new such India and Vietnam, but they can't blame Russia if they like to cozy with Russia's enemy, don't be surprise to get some payback , with 400km interception range, we can virtually shot down airplane take off from New Delhi.



No mentioning of this deal on Rosoborobexport site, still waiting for confirmation.


----------



## mike2000 is back

Beast said:


> Su-35 will never come. Same as Lada sub. I heard China provide Russia half the development fee of S-400 and thats why China is first customers for S-400.



huh......so China is playing the same role as India financing Russian weapons they cant produce themselves?? Hope this will make Chinese Tiger to tone down his rhetoric of China not needing any weapon from Russia anymore, since China is already 'self sufficient' in this regard.



Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> That's very good new for Sino-Russia deal: we got new toys while Russia get $$$, indirectly both can boost the military relation to higher level without saying any words about alliance. In the future, don't be suprise if there is other high tech military cooperation to come. As I said before only Sino-Russia military cooperation will speed up the catch up to US military technology, *we can complement each other with our resources technologies & finance*.
> .


Yes only if you provide the Finance and moscow the tech obviously.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

mike2000 is back said:


> Yes only if you provide the Finance and moscow the tech obviously.


 
There is two ways of possible cooperations: buy tech and share the production to reduce the military cost of both nation. If Russia is willing to sell some key tech that China need, why not? we got the tech , they get the money to even improve further their defense industries, it come to be a win-win. But there is other way of cooperation too, we can share the production to amortize the cost of military procurement such as build 75% of commun parts and the other 25% shall be specific and secrecy to the nation. As an example if China and Russia to build 4 aircraft carriers each by havee 75% of commun parts then we can greately reduce the military cost for both nations...that is another win-win solution too.

There is alot of fomula of military cooperation between China and Russia, we can complemented each other's need.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mike2000 is back

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> There is two ways of possible cooperations: buy tech and share the production to reduce the military cost of both nation. If Russia is willing to sell some key tech that China need, why not? we got the tech , they get the money to even improve further their defense industries, it come to be a win-win. But there is other way of cooperation too, we can share the production to amortize the cost of military procurement such as build 75% of commun parts and the other 25% shall be specific and secrecy to the nation. As an example if China and Russia to build 4 aircraft carriers each by havee 75% of commun parts then we can greately reduce the military cost for both nations...that is another win-win solution too.
> 
> There is alot of fomula of military cooperation between China and Russia, we can complemented each other's need.



Good/fair points. I never said otherwise. I just wanted ultra nationalistic members like Chinese tiger to tone down their rhetoric, since he use to think China doesn't need to import any arms/weapons whatsoever from Russia, since China is 'self sufficient' in such a field while India is the only one dependent on Russia for weapons/tech . Always good to be pragmatic and less boastful.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Keel

It is always good to have a competent foreign system to be used for checking the functions of the one built on our own
This will happen in S-400 if the deal comes through and also it will apply to any other weapons from Russia against ours. Russia is a respected weapon supplier 

The same checking and self-examiniation exercises cannot be carried out in other countries which are unable to produce any decent advanced weapons on their own






Jingdezhen handcrafted and painted porcelain vase

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Luca1

Keel said:


> It is always good to have a competent foreign system to be used for checking the functions of the one built on our own
> This will happen in S-400 if the deal comes through and also it will apply to any other weapons from Russia against ours. Russia is a respected weapon supplier
> 
> The same checking and self-examiniation exercises cannot be carried out in other countries which are unable to produce any decent advanced weapons on their own
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jingdezhen handcrafted and painted porcelain vase



Are you trying to hint that India is one of those countries?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

mike2000 is back said:


> Good/fair points. I never said otherwise. I just wanted ultra nationalistic members like Chinese tiger to tone down their rhetoric, since he use to think China doesn't need to import any arms/weapons whatsoever from Russia, since China is 'self sufficient' in such a field while India is the only one dependent on Russia for weapons/tech . Always good to be pragmatic and less boastful.


 
Personally, I believe China can still learn alot from Russia, China once defeated because of our arrogance from blindly close our eyes to this dynamic world. Regardless of what Russia or others can offer to us, we Chinese should alway open our mind to even a mediocrity that people are willing to share with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beidou2020

Luca1 said:


> Are you trying to hint that India is one of those countries?



I think we all know what country he was talking about. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Personally, I believe China can still learn alot from Russia, China once defeated because of our arrogance from blindly close our eyes to this dynamic world. Regardless of what Russia or others can offer to us, we Chinese should alway open our mind to even a mediocrity that people are willing to share with us.



Same as Russian has a long to learn from China. Its no more one way traffic. Russian shipbuilding and drone technology are poor. Even in terms of aviation, they are slowly losing the edge.
We have implement 3D printing for aviation and even leaders in this area where the Russia is still infant stage.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## F-22Raptor

China’s plan to purchase Russia’s new S-400 anti-aircraft missile defense system is expected to put Taiwan in greater jeopardy in the case of a Chinese invasion, as the system would likely increase Beijing’s ability to control the skies over the nation and over the Taiwan Strait.

However, Russia’s S-400 system is not enough to stop the US from coming to Taiwan’s aid — if Washington makes that decision — and the US already has classified countermeasures for dealing with it, Global Security think tank director John Pike said.

Russian state weapons export agency Rosoboronexport announced the US$3 billion sale last week.

Defense News reports that the system, with an estimated range of 400km, would allow China to strike any aerial target over Taiwan.

“The S-400 will challenge Taiwan’s ability to conduct air defense operations within its own air defense identification zone, which covers the Taiwan Strait,” Defense News said.

“There’s no doubt that Russia and China would like Taiwan to think this is very bad news,” Pike said.

However, he said that while the S-400 sale should be of “great concern” to Taiwan, it would not be decisive in an actual invasion.

Pike said that if the US decides to defend Taiwan, the S-400 system would not impact that decision and that he was confident the Pentagon could deal with the Russian-made system.

According to Defense News, China’s aging inventory of S-300s — with an estimated range of about 300km — allows it to strike targets only along Taiwan’s northwest coast.

Earlier this year, the Project 2049 Institute said the potential of an S-400 sale to China had “understandably caused something of a panic in Taiwan security circles.”

Research fellow Ian Easton wrote on the Project 2049 Web site that the S-400 threat “may not be as dire as forecast.”

Easton said: “Chinese air defenses are not invulnerable today, not will they be in the future.”

He said that in peacetime, if an S-400 air surveillance radar unit were switched on, it would be subject to immediate interception by Taiwanese signals intelligence units on Dongyin Island (東引), Matsu Island and the Penghu Islands.

It would also be detectable by US and Japanese signals intelligence units on Okinawa, submarines off the Chinese coast and crewed and automated aircraft patrolling in the East China Sea.

Once radar emissions are captured, countermeasures can be developed, Easton added.

China still would not have missile coverage over Taiwan’s air bases at most operational altitudes, and Taiwanese pilots could fly under the S-400’s radar sweep, Easton said.

Also, in case of a full-scale conflict, Chinese S-400 missiles would be susceptible to Taiwanese electronic jamming and cyberwarfare units, anti-radiation drones and cruise missiles.

China’s Russian missiles will not deter US: analyst - Taipei Times

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AMDR

F-22Raptor said:


> China’s plan to purchase Russia’s new S-400 anti-aircraft missile defense system is expected to put Taiwan in greater jeopardy in the case of a Chinese invasion, as the system would likely increase Beijing’s ability to control the skies over the nation and over the Taiwan Strait.
> 
> However, Russia’s S-400 system is not enough to stop the US from coming to Taiwan’s aid — if Washington makes that decision — and the US already has classified countermeasures for dealing with it, Global Security think tank director John Pike said.
> 
> Russian state weapons export agency Rosoboronexport announced the US$3 billion sale last week.
> 
> Defense News reports that the system, with an estimated range of 400km, would allow China to strike any aerial target over Taiwan.
> 
> “The S-400 will challenge Taiwan’s ability to conduct air defense operations within its own air defense identification zone, which covers the Taiwan Strait,” Defense News said.
> 
> “There’s no doubt that Russia and China would like Taiwan to think this is very bad news,” Pike said.
> 
> However, he said that while the S-400 sale should be of “great concern” to Taiwan, it would not be decisive in an actual invasion.
> 
> Pike said that if the US decides to defend Taiwan, the S-400 system would not impact that decision and that he was confident the Pentagon could deal with the Russian-made system.
> 
> According to Defense News, China’s aging inventory of S-300s — with an estimated range of about 300km — allows it to strike targets only along Taiwan’s northwest coast.
> 
> Earlier this year, the Project 2049 Institute said the potential of an S-400 sale to China had “understandably caused something of a panic in Taiwan security circles.”
> 
> Research fellow Ian Easton wrote on the Project 2049 Web site that the S-400 threat “may not be as dire as forecast.”
> 
> Easton said: “Chinese air defenses are not invulnerable today, not will they be in the future.”
> 
> He said that in peacetime, if an S-400 air surveillance radar unit were switched on, it would be subject to immediate interception by Taiwanese signals intelligence units on Dongyin Island (東引), Matsu Island and the Penghu Islands.
> 
> It would also be detectable by US and Japanese signals intelligence units on Okinawa, submarines off the Chinese coast and crewed and automated aircraft patrolling in the East China Sea.
> 
> Once radar emissions are captured, countermeasures can be developed, Easton added.
> 
> China still would not have missile coverage over Taiwan’s air bases at most operational altitudes, and Taiwanese pilots could fly under the S-400’s radar sweep, Easton said.
> 
> Also, in case of a full-scale conflict, Chinese S-400 missiles would be susceptible to Taiwanese electronic jamming and cyberwarfare units, anti-radiation drones and cruise missiles.
> 
> China’s Russian missiles will not deter US: analyst - Taipei Times



"but the news told me that the F-35 is a piece of trash that can't fly"




Navy League 2015: F-35 studies next-generation EW capability - IHS Jane's 360

Next.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## munchkin

AMDR said:


> "but the news told me that the F-35 is a piece of trash that can't fly"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Navy League 2015: F-35 studies next-generation EW capability - IHS Jane's 360
> 
> Next.




F-35 sucks


----------



## AMDR

munchkin said:


> F-35 sucks


I actually encourage you to keep believing that

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

F-22Raptor said:


> China’s plan to purchase Russia’s new S-400 anti-aircraft missile defense system is expected to put Taiwan in greater jeopardy in the case of a Chinese invasion, as the system would likely increase Beijing’s ability to control the skies over the nation and over the Taiwan Strait.
> 
> However, Russia’s S-400 system is not enough to stop the US from coming to Taiwan’s aid — if Washington makes that decision — and the US already has classified countermeasures for dealing with it, Global Security think tank director John Pike said.
> 
> Russian state weapons export agency Rosoboronexport announced the US$3 billion sale last week.
> 
> Defense News reports that the system, with an estimated range of 400km, would allow China to strike any aerial target over Taiwan.
> 
> “The S-400 will challenge Taiwan’s ability to conduct air defense operations within its own air defense identification zone, which covers the Taiwan Strait,” Defense News said.
> 
> “There’s no doubt that Russia and China would like Taiwan to think this is very bad news,” Pike said.
> 
> However, he said that while the S-400 sale should be of “great concern” to Taiwan, it would not be decisive in an actual invasion.
> 
> Pike said that if the US decides to defend Taiwan, the S-400 system would not impact that decision and that he was confident the Pentagon could deal with the Russian-made system.
> 
> According to Defense News, China’s aging inventory of S-300s — with an estimated range of about 300km — allows it to strike targets only along Taiwan’s northwest coast.
> 
> Earlier this year, the Project 2049 Institute said the potential of an S-400 sale to China had “understandably caused something of a panic in Taiwan security circles.”
> 
> Research fellow Ian Easton wrote on the Project 2049 Web site that the S-400 threat “may not be as dire as forecast.”
> 
> Easton said: “Chinese air defenses are not invulnerable today, not will they be in the future.”
> 
> He said that in peacetime, if an S-400 air surveillance radar unit were switched on, it would be subject to immediate interception by Taiwanese signals intelligence units on Dongyin Island (東引), Matsu Island and the Penghu Islands.
> 
> It would also be detectable by US and Japanese signals intelligence units on Okinawa, submarines off the Chinese coast and crewed and automated aircraft patrolling in the East China Sea.
> 
> Once radar emissions are captured, countermeasures can be developed, Easton added.
> 
> China still would not have missile coverage over Taiwan’s air bases at most operational altitudes, and Taiwanese pilots could fly under the S-400’s radar sweep, Easton said.
> 
> Also, in case of a full-scale conflict, Chinese S-400 missiles would be susceptible to Taiwanese electronic jamming and cyberwarfare units, anti-radiation drones and cruise missiles.
> 
> China’s Russian missiles will not deter US: analyst - Taipei Times


First of S 400 is a Defensive weapon secondly if China decides to take Taiwan USA will just watch and do nothing

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

The S-400 SAM was never meant to deter anything. One can't deter an enemy with defensive weaponry. However, if things do go south, then what matters will be the ability of these systems to eliminate threats with efficacy and reliability, and it is due to this criteria that the S-400 is such a significant addition to their arsenal.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Viper0011.

munchkin said:


> F-35 sucks



I am sure you think so. Just don't come within 120 miles of it acting hostile, you may not be able to tell us again how bad it sucks


----------



## munchkin

Viper0011. said:


> I am sure you think so. Just don't come within 120 miles of it acting hostile, you may not be able to tell us again how bad it sucks




My advice would be, stay 1,200 miles away from J-20 or you might not be able to tell us how J-20 sucks


----------



## Oldman1

munchkin said:


> My advice would be, stay 1,200 miles away from J-20 or you might not be able to tell us how J-20 sucks



Actually the J-20 should stay away about 1,200 miles from the F-35.


----------



## munchkin

Oldman1 said:


> Actually the J-20 should stay away about 1,200 miles from the F-35.




Both stay 12,000 miles away from each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beidou2020

China took back control of the Scarborough Shoal in 2012 from the Philippines and the U.S. military coins by do a damn thing to stop China 

U.S. is a military ally of the Philippines and yet China did what it wanted, when it wanted. U.S. military was left helpless giving hot air warnings.

China has a military that will ensure the U.S. will NEVER be able to use its military against China as the cost of war is too high for the U.S.

Chinese conventional and asymmetric weapons have already achieved China's deterrence against the U.S. Now China can continue to develop economically and accelerate the demise of the U.S. in Asia and the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## english_man

I think this article about the 'US' would not be deterred by the Chinese deploying S-400 missile batteries is absurd.

One thing the Russians are expert at..........and that is in the area of air-defense.

Of course the deployment of S-400 batteries would have quite an impact on the planning by an adversary for a military campaign.............even if you knew where the missiles were.


----------



## 420canada

AMDR said:


> "but the news told me that the F-35 is a piece of trash that can't fly"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Navy League 2015: F-35 studies next-generation EW capability - IHS Jane's 360
> 
> Next.



CIWS take care of the rest of the decoys. now it just seems stupid.


----------



## Keel

Are THAADs going to be deployed in the Korean Peninsula?
S-400s are the answers from China!






"The barber and his client"
The sculptor working at Clay Figurine Zhang - Tianjin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Keel

The purchase is confirmed!

*PLA to buy advanced missiles from Russia*
By Zhao Lei (China Daily) Updated: 2015-04-16 07:48
Comments Print Mail Large Medium Small


The S-400 missile system is one of the most advanced missile technologies in Russia, and media reported China has bought the cutting-edge weapon. Kirill Kallinikov / Ria Novosti


The deployment of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system will substantially improve China's air defense capability, military experts said as Russian media reported that China has bought the cutting-edge weapon.

"The S-400 is definitely one of the top anti-aircraft weapons in the world. It will greatly supplement the People's Liberation Army's air defense system, which now has some loopholes in long-range, high-altitude defense of airplanes or ballistic missiles," said Wang Ya'nan, deputy editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge magazine.

"The system has multiple types of missiles with various ranges, enabling it to safeguard a very large area of airspace. Some of its missiles are even specifically designed to intercept ballistic missiles," Wang said. "Moreover, some of its launch tubes can store and launch several different missiles, which makes it very convenient and fast to use."

Russia has a long history of developing anti-aircraft and missile defense weapons, so the S-400 is a concentration of some of the most advanced missile technologies Russia has, such as an active electronically scanned array radar, according to Wang.

"China still lacks experience in the development of long-range air defense systems, especially those that can intercept ballistic missiles. There is no shortcut because the development of such sophisticated weapons requires a great number of experiments and tests. It is a matter of time and resource input," he added.

According to Russian media reports, the S-400 is a new-generation, anti-aircraft weapon system capable of engaging any aerial target, including airplanes, helicopters and drones, as well as cruise and tactical ballistic missiles, with a maximum speed of 4.8 km per second. The system's 40N6 missile can destroy airborne targets at ranges up to 400 km.

Anatoly Isaikin, chief executive of the Russian state-run arms trader Rosoboronexport, confirmed on Monday that China has a contract with his company for the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems.

"I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system. It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations," Isaikin told the Russian newspaper Kommersant.

China clinched the deal in September at a cost of more than $3 billion for the delivery of at least six S-400 battalions, Moscow Times reported.

Currently, China relies on its domestically developed HQ-9 and the Russian-made S-300 missile system, according to Western military observers.

Du Wenlong, a senior researcher at the PLA Academy of Military Science, said the operational ranges of modern military aircraft and missiles are much longer than their predecessors, so an effective defense system must have long-range missiles that can hit aircraft as well as cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles.

"Our air force has deployed the Russian S-300 systems, which are good at dealing with aircraft, but their performance in intercepting cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles is not very satisfactory," he said. "After we commission the S-400, it can work with the HQ-9 and S-300 to form a fully covered air defense network."

Zhao Zhihua, a senior missile researcher at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, a major developer of China's missiles, said that through the introduction of the S-400, China can gain a lot of experience and expertise on how to operate a missile defense system.

"Operating such a complex system will go beyond our current knowledge and experience, which in turn will teach us things that we don't know, so it is worthy spending big money buying it," he previously told the Ordnance Industry Science and Technology magazine.

_zhaolei@chinadaily.com.cn




_
China Art Print Painting


----------



## Wolfhound

Keel said:


> The purchase is confirmed!
> 
> *PLA to buy advanced missiles from Russia*
> By Zhao Lei (China Daily) Updated: 2015-04-16 07:48
> Comments Print Mail Large Medium Small
> 
> 
> The S-400 missile system is one of the most advanced missile technologies in Russia, and media reported China has bought the cutting-edge weapon. Kirill Kallinikov / Ria Novosti
> 
> 
> The deployment of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system will substantially improve China's air defense capability, military experts said as Russian media reported that China has bought the cutting-edge weapon.
> 
> "The S-400 is definitely one of the top anti-aircraft weapons in the world. It will greatly supplement the People's Liberation Army's air defense system, which now has some loopholes in long-range, high-altitude defense of airplanes or ballistic missiles," said Wang Ya'nan, deputy editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge magazine.
> 
> "The system has multiple types of missiles with various ranges, enabling it to safeguard a very large area of airspace. Some of its missiles are even specifically designed to intercept ballistic missiles," Wang said. "Moreover, some of its launch tubes can store and launch several different missiles, which makes it very convenient and fast to use."
> 
> Russia has a long history of developing anti-aircraft and missile defense weapons, so the S-400 is a concentration of some of the most advanced missile technologies Russia has, such as an active electronically scanned array radar, according to Wang.
> 
> "China still lacks experience in the development of long-range air defense systems, especially those that can intercept ballistic missiles. There is no shortcut because the development of such sophisticated weapons requires a great number of experiments and tests. It is a matter of time and resource input," he added.
> 
> According to Russian media reports, the S-400 is a new-generation, anti-aircraft weapon system capable of engaging any aerial target, including airplanes, helicopters and drones, as well as cruise and tactical ballistic missiles, with a maximum speed of 4.8 km per second. The system's 40N6 missile can destroy airborne targets at ranges up to 400 km.
> 
> Anatoly Isaikin, chief executive of the Russian state-run arms trader Rosoboronexport, confirmed on Monday that China has a contract with his company for the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems.
> 
> "I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system. It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations," Isaikin told the Russian newspaper Kommersant.
> 
> China clinched the deal in September at a cost of more than $3 billion for the delivery of at least six S-400 battalions, Moscow Times reported.
> 
> Currently, China relies on its domestically developed HQ-9 and the Russian-made S-300 missile system, according to Western military observers.
> 
> Du Wenlong, a senior researcher at the PLA Academy of Military Science, said the operational ranges of modern military aircraft and missiles are much longer than their predecessors, so an effective defense system must have long-range missiles that can hit aircraft as well as cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles.
> 
> "Our air force has deployed the Russian S-300 systems, which are good at dealing with aircraft, but their performance in intercepting cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles is not very satisfactory," he said. "After we commission the S-400, it can work with the HQ-9 and S-300 to form a fully covered air defense network."
> 
> Zhao Zhihua, a senior missile researcher at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, a major developer of China's missiles, said that through the introduction of the S-400, China can gain a lot of experience and expertise on how to operate a missile defense system.
> 
> "Operating such a complex system will go beyond our current knowledge and experience, which in turn will teach us things that we don't know, so it is worthy spending big money buying it," he previously told the Ordnance Industry Science and Technology magazine.
> 
> _zhaolei@chinadaily.com.cn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> China Art Print Painting


I cant wait to see what the locally bulit Chinese versions will be like. Good news for china and even better for us

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Once again. China is the first customers of Russia advance system.


----------



## mike2000 is back

Wolfhound said:


> I cant wait to see wNo the locally bulit Chinese versions will be like. Good news for china and even better for us



So you mean China will again copy Russian designed missiles/weapons? 
Not that I'm complaining though since I know its through learning from those ahead of you and copying that you can catch up and MAYBE one day surpass them.



Beast said:


> Same as Russian has a long to learn from China. Its no more one way traffic. Russian shipbuilding and drone technology are poor. Even in terms of aviation, they are slowly losing the edge.
> We have implement 3D printing for aviation and even leaders in this area where the Russia is still infant stage.



Militarily China is still no match for Russia to be honest
China needs at least 15 to 20years to match Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

mike2000 is back said:


> So you mean China will again copy Russian designed missiles/weapons?
> Not that I'm complaining though since I know its through learning from those ahead of you and copying that you can catch up and MAYBE one day surpass them.
> 
> 
> 
> Militarily China is still no match for Russia to be honest
> China needs at least 15 to 20years to match Russia.


Just becos of a missile deal and there goes ur theory again? Then Russia is a step below France with Mistral LHD deal!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

mike2000 is back said:


> Militarily China is still no match for Russia to be honest
> China needs at least 15 to 20years to match Russia.



Isn't it odd that an individual on an internet forum can "know" the answer to a question that even the world's most established think tanks cannot dissect?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ashok mourya

Luca1 said:


> Are yweaponsng to hint that India is one of those countries?


The super power self reliant military power still buying weapons.?


----------



## Beast

ashok mourya said:


> The super power self reliant military power still buying weapons.?


May I know which superpower do not buy weapon from others? Even Uncle Sam buys foreign weapon like advance trainer aircraft and Russia buys mistral LHD. Don't forget to look into mirror and see your dear India doing that too

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## mike2000 is back

vostok said:


> View attachment 217221
> View attachment 217222
> View attachment 217223
> View attachment 217224
> View attachment 217225
> View attachment 217226
> View attachment 217227
> View attachment 217228



The deadly armata?


----------



## vostok

mike2000 is back said:


> The deadly armata?


Sorry, wrong thread.


----------



## mike2000 is back

Beast said:


> May I know which superpower do Ct buy weapon from others? Even Uncle Sam buys foreign weapon like advance trainer aircraft and Russia buys mistral LHD. Don't forget to look into mirror and see your dear India doing that too


True talk. But I think he was just trying to tone down the rhetoric of some Chinese members here who made it sound like China produces all its weapons indigenously while India and even Japan rely on foreign countries for their weapons. Every country buys weapons from others, no nation is totally self sufficient not even the mighty U.S . the only difference is just how much a country imports relative to others.


----------



## Luca1

Beast said:


> May I know which superpower do not buy weapon from others? Even Uncle Sam buys foreign weapon like advance trainer aircraft and Russia buys mistral LHD. Don't forget to look into mirror and see your dear India doing that too



The difference is that India cannot produce anything on its own. If it does, it's obsolete on arrival that their own arm forces won't induct in large numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Beidou2020

Luca1 said:


> The difference is that India cannot produce anything on its own. If it does, it's obsolete on arrival that their own arm forces won't induct in large numbers.



Exactly.



Keel said:


> The purchase is confirmed!
> 
> *PLA to buy advanced missiles from Russia*
> By Zhao Lei (China Daily) Updated: 2015-04-16 07:48
> Comments Print Mail Large Medium Small
> 
> 
> 
> The S-400 missile system is one of the most advanced missile technologies in Russia, and media reported China has bought the cutting-edge weapon. Kirill Kallinikov / Ria Novosti
> 
> 
> The deployment of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system will substantially improve China's air defense capability, military experts said as Russian media reported that China has bought the cutting-edge weapon.
> 
> "The S-400 is definitely one of the top anti-aircraft weapons in the world. It will greatly supplement the People's Liberation Army's air defense system, which now has some loopholes in long-range, high-altitude defense of airplanes or ballistic missiles," said Wang Ya'nan, deputy editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge magazine.
> 
> "The system has multiple types of missiles with various ranges, enabling it to safeguard a very large area of airspace. Some of its missiles are even specifically designed to intercept ballistic missiles," Wang said. "Moreover, some of its launch tubes can store and launch several different missiles, which makes it very convenient and fast to use."
> 
> Russia has a long history of developing anti-aircraft and missile defense weapons, so the S-400 is a concentration of some of the most advanced missile technologies Russia has, such as an active electronically scanned array radar, according to Wang.
> 
> "China still lacks experience in the development of long-range air defense systems, especially those that can intercept ballistic missiles. There is no shortcut because the development of such sophisticated weapons requires a great number of experiments and tests. It is a matter of time and resource input," he added.
> 
> According to Russian media reports, the S-400 is a new-generation, anti-aircraft weapon system capable of engaging any aerial target, including airplanes, helicopters and drones, as well as cruise and tactical ballistic missiles, with a maximum speed of 4.8 km per second. The system's 40N6 missile can destroy airborne targets at ranges up to 400 km.
> 
> Anatoly Isaikin, chief executive of the Russian state-run arms trader Rosoboronexport, confirmed on Monday that China has a contract with his company for the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems.
> 
> "I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system. It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations," Isaikin told the Russian newspaper Kommersant.
> 
> China clinched the deal in September at a cost of more than $3 billion for the delivery of at least six S-400 battalions, Moscow Times reported.
> 
> Currently, China relies on its domestically developed HQ-9 and the Russian-made S-300 missile system, according to Western military observers.
> 
> Du Wenlong, a senior researcher at the PLA Academy of Military Science, said the operational ranges of modern military aircraft and missiles are much longer than their predecessors, so an effective defense system must have long-range missiles that can hit aircraft as well as cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles.
> 
> "Our air force has deployed the Russian S-300 systems, which are good at dealing with aircraft, but their performance in intercepting cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles is not very satisfactory," he said. "After we commission the S-400, it can work with the HQ-9 and S-300 to form a fully covered air defense network."
> 
> Zhao Zhihua, a senior missile researcher at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, a major developer of China's missiles, said that through the introduction of the S-400, China can gain a lot of experience and expertise on how to operate a missile defense system.
> 
> "Operating such a complex system will go beyond our current knowledge and experience, which in turn will teach us things that we don't know, so it is worthy spending big money buying it," he previously told the Ordnance Industry Science and Technology magazine.
> 
> _zhaolei@chinadaily.com.cn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> China Art Print Painting



Confirmed by who? 

China Daily is just reporting that Russian media is saying China bought it.

Russian media have been saying China will buy this and that for over a decade but no deal officially announced.

Until the PLA confirms it, nothing is official. 

PLA word is final.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## HariPrasad

Oh no!!!!!!!

Cause of concern for India. S 400 is an A** kicking Weapon. Ofcourse India has it.


----------



## Beidou2020

Mr Zhou is back!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HariPrasad

Beidou2020 said:


> Mr Zhou is back!



Hi Super Zhou!!!!!!

How are you? 

I really missed your innocent childish comedy. Well come Now entartain the forum!!!!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UKBengali

China will not buy S-400 in numbers as it has equivalent SAM's.


----------



## Viper0011.

Luca1 said:


> The difference is that India cannot produce anything on its own. If it does, it's obsolete on arrival that their own arm forces won't induct in large numbers.



Boy, you are brutally honest. You are about to get swamped with our emotional Indian members on here. They don't like the reality said. They like the reality to look like the way it exists in their heads about India!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## mike2000 is back

vostok said:


> Sorry, wrong thread.


No worries bro. But still relevant. One thing I can deny is that Moscow still has some badass weapon system.
@Ceonwulf you said recently that Russia will soon be China's poodle/junior partner/puppet remember? Gues you have to first surpass the before you start claiming you re their big brother. Of anything it's still the opposite for now (especially militarily and space industry). so advice you to tone down your boasting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashok mourya

Beast said:


> May I know which superpower do not buy weapon from others? Even Uncle Sam buys foreign weapon like advance trainer aircraft and Russia buys mistral LHD. Don't forget to look into mirror and see your dear India doing that too


But most of your countrymen defame India citing it purchases weapons from other nations.I just shown the mirror to them.


----------



## Keel

Beidou2020 said:


> Exactly.
> Confirmed by who?
> 
> China Daily is just reporting that Russian media is saying China bought it.
> 
> Russian media have been saying China will buy this and that for over a decade but no deal officially announced.
> 
> Until the PLA confirms it, nothing is official.
> 
> PLA word is final.



From #37 China Daily's report:

"*Anatoly Isaikin*, chief executive of the Russian state-run arms trader *Rosoboronexport*, confirmed on Monday that China has a *contract* with his company for the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems.

"I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system. It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations," Isaikin told the Russian newspaper Kommersant." *PLUS*

*Du Wenlong, *a senior researcher at the PLA Academy of Military Science
*Zhao Zhihua,* a senior missile researcher at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp
*Wang Ya'nan*, deputy editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge magazine

All the above* people* said directly or implied that selling of S400 from Russia to China is a done deal which means a "contractually" binding deal unless you have a different interpretation of what "contract" means or there is a serious mis-statement in translation.

You can wait for the confirmation by PLA buddy but for me, the deal is solid





Shanghai Dance Theatre and Oriental Youth Dance Troupe

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## milvipes

Same Russian media that's been saying that Su-35 entered service with VVS in 1996.
Rosboronexport is so desperate that it's cooking up fake news.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Keel

Beast said:


> May I know which superpower do not buy weapon from others? Even Uncle Sam buys foreign weapon like advance trainer aircraft and Russia buys mistral LHD. Don't forget to look into mirror and see your dear India doing that too



Absolutely
Russia also buys Mistral from France



ashok mourya said:


> The super power self reliant military power still buying weapons.?





ashok mourya said:


> But most of your countrymen defame India citing it purchases weapons from other nations.I just shown the mirror to them.



Check out post #32 for my comment



milvipes said:


> Same Russian media that's been saying that Su-35 entered service with VVS in 1996.
> Rosboronexport is so desperate that it's cooking up fake news.



Did any other guys say the same like the people quoted @# 57?






Ink and fine brush painting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Keel

Wolfhound said:


> I cant wait to see what the locally bulit Chinese versions will be like. Good news for *C*hina and even better for us



We have to work within the terms dictated in the contract between China and Russia until we improvish for a system that is substantially different but that takes a longer time

Apart from this I believe there are many other items in the arsenal in which Pakistani bros can discuss with PLA for outright purchases /cooperation in production.





China ink and fine brush painting

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Terra Cotta Warriors

Beidou2020 said:


> China took back control of the Scarborough Shoal in 2012 from the Philippines and the U.S. military coins by do a damn thing to stop China
> 
> U.S. is a military ally of the Philippines and yet China did what it wanted, when it wanted. U.S. military was left helpless giving hot air warnings.
> 
> China has a military that will ensure the U.S. will NEVER be able to use its military against China as the cost of war is too high for the U.S.
> 
> Chinese conventional and asymmetric weapons have already achieved China's deterrence against the U.S. Now China can continue to develop economically and accelerate the demise of the U.S. in Asia and the world.



I think you should use "HuangYan Island".


----------



## Basel

F-22Raptor said:


> China’s plan to purchase Russia’s new S-400 anti-aircraft missile defense system is expected to put Taiwan in greater jeopardy in the case of a Chinese invasion, as the system would likely increase Beijing’s ability to control the skies over the nation and over the Taiwan Strait.
> 
> However, Russia’s S-400 system is not enough to stop the US from coming to Taiwan’s aid — if Washington makes that decision — and the US already has classified countermeasures for dealing with it, Global Security think tank director John Pike said.
> 
> Russian state weapons export agency Rosoboronexport announced the US$3 billion sale last week.
> 
> Defense News reports that the system, with an estimated range of 400km, would allow China to strike any aerial target over Taiwan.
> 
> “The S-400 will challenge Taiwan’s ability to conduct air defense operations within its own air defense identification zone, which covers the Taiwan Strait,” Defense News said.
> 
> “There’s no doubt that Russia and China would like Taiwan to think this is very bad news,” Pike said.
> 
> However, he said that while the S-400 sale should be of “great concern” to Taiwan, it would not be decisive in an actual invasion.
> 
> Pike said that if the US decides to defend Taiwan, the S-400 system would not impact that decision and that he was confident the Pentagon could deal with the Russian-made system.
> 
> According to Defense News, China’s aging inventory of S-300s — with an estimated range of about 300km — allows it to strike targets only along Taiwan’s northwest coast.
> 
> Earlier this year, the Project 2049 Institute said the potential of an S-400 sale to China had “understandably caused something of a panic in Taiwan security circles.”
> 
> Research fellow Ian Easton wrote on the Project 2049 Web site that the S-400 threat “may not be as dire as forecast.”
> 
> Easton said: “Chinese air defenses are not invulnerable today, not will they be in the future.”
> 
> He said that in peacetime, if an S-400 air surveillance radar unit were switched on, it would be subject to immediate interception by Taiwanese signals intelligence units on Dongyin Island (東引), Matsu Island and the Penghu Islands.
> 
> It would also be detectable by US and Japanese signals intelligence units on Okinawa, submarines off the Chinese coast and crewed and automated aircraft patrolling in the East China Sea.
> 
> Once radar emissions are captured, countermeasures can be developed, Easton added.
> 
> China still would not have missile coverage over Taiwan’s air bases at most operational altitudes, and Taiwanese pilots could fly under the S-400’s radar sweep, Easton said.
> 
> Also, in case of a full-scale conflict, Chinese S-400 missiles would be susceptible to Taiwanese electronic jamming and cyberwarfare units, anti-radiation drones and cruise missiles.
> 
> China’s Russian missiles will not deter US: analyst - Taipei Times



21st century wars are not fought one system v one system it a network of systems v network of systems and here S-400 will be part of a network which will have HEL and other advance weapons for air defense so US will be able to penetrate China's air defense but what China is doing is making the cost too high for them, so they don't take that route against China.


----------



## Zarvan

Russia will deliver S-400 Triumf Mobile Multiple Anti-Aircraft Missile systems to China on time.

Rosoboronexport General Director Anatoly Isaikin Tuesday said that the company will honor its contract with China to deliver S-400 missile defense systems on time.

“China was the first country that we signed a contract with on the delivery of the S-400 and this contract will undoubtedly be fulfilled on time,” Isaikin told journalists without specifying the delivery dates or any other details of the contract.

Russia signed a contract to sell upgraded version of S-300 missile defense system to China in April this year. China had signed a $3 billion contract to procure six S-400 divisions amounting to eight missile launchers.


China To Get S-400 Missile Defense Systems From Russia On Time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

Zarvan said:


> Russia will deliver S-400 Triumf Mobile Multiple Anti-Aircraft Missile systems to China on time.
> 
> Rosoboronexport General Director Anatoly Isaikin Tuesday said that the company will honor its contract with China to deliver S-400 missile defense systems on time.
> 
> “China was the first country that we signed a contract with on the delivery of the S-400 and this contract will undoubtedly be fulfilled on time,” Isaikin told journalists without specifying the delivery dates or any other details of the contract.
> 
> Russia signed a contract to sell upgraded version of S-300 missile defense system to China in April this year. China had signed a $3 billion contract to procure six S-400 divisions amounting to eight missile launchers.
> 
> 
> China To Get S-400 Missile Defense Systems From Russia On Time



Chinese members would jump up and claim that is a fake contract. China never buy Russian SAM again.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> Chinese members would jump up and claim that is a fake contract. China never buy Russian SAM again.


Well ... news said China to get Su-35 too.


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> Chinese members would jump up and claim that is a fake contract. China never buy Russian SAM again.


When did we claim we never buy Russian SAM? Only the lada sub, SU-35 deal are all fake. Dont forget we still have a development agreement with Russian fo heavy helo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

Beast said:


> When did we claim we never buy Russian SAM? Only the lada sub, SU-35 deal are all fake. Dont forget we still have a development agreement with Russian fo heavy helo.



So why is China buying S 400?


----------



## BoQ77

Beast said:


> When did we claim we never buy Russian SAM? Only the lada sub, SU-35 deal are all fake. Dont forget we still have a development agreement with Russian fo heavy helo.



@cnleio , beast think that the contract could be real.
Btw, S-400 is only the improved S-300, as another name of it is S-300PMU3.
- The max engagement range of missiles for export variant would be 250km at 30,000m altitude ( depends on missiles type ).
- FYI, Vietnam get the improved radar and those missiles, in another word, Vietnam get S-400 ( export variant ) already.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> @cnleio , beast think that the contract could be real.
> Btw, S-400 is only the improved S-300, as another name of it is S-300PMU3.
> - The max engagement range of missiles for export variant would be 250km at 30,000m altitude ( depends on missiles type ).
> - FYI, Vietnam get the improved radar and those missiles, in another word, Vietnam get S-400 ( export variant ) already.


... @BoQ77 , here only u trust ur words ... Vietnam get S-500 too. 

BTW i don't remember when did i say China need buy S-400 from Russia, yes i ever wish Su-35 to PLAAF but not said S-400. Ths, don't make me wrong !


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

BoQ77 said:


> @cnleio , beast think that the contract could be real.
> Btw, S-400 is only the improved S-300, as another name of it is S-300PMU3.
> - The max engagement range of missiles for export variant would be 250km at 30,000m altitude ( depends on missiles type ).
> - FYI, Vietnam get the improved radar and those missiles, in another word, Vietnam get S-400 ( export variant ) already.



This is just to learn man! 

Mark my words, by 2030, Russia will be importing weapon systems from China.



cnleio said:


> ... @BoQ77 , here only u trust ur words ... Vietnam get S-500 too.
> 
> BTW i don't remember when did i say China need buy S-400 from Russia, yes i ever wish Su-35 to PLAAF but not said S-400. Ths, don't make me wrong !



May be you wrote the reverse? Perhaps you meant that China shouldn't need to buy Su 35, but can buy S 400?


----------



## mike2000 is back

hmmmmmmm.............surprising.



Bussard Ramjet said:


> This is just to learn man!
> 
> Mark my words, by 2030, Russia will be importing weapon systems from China.
> 
> 
> 
> May be you wrote the reverse? Perhaps you meant that China shouldn't need to buy Su 35, but can buy S 400?



Maybe, but yes its both, to learn and catch up. Russia afterall, still has quite a lead over China militarily. The syrian intervention is just another example. Not many countries in the world are capable/have experience of projecting power far away from their neighbourhood, much less waging an expeditionary war away from their neighbourhood. I think in the coming decades the Chinese will slowly learn and catch up though.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

Bussard Ramjet said:


> May be you wrote the reverse? Perhaps you meant that China shouldn't need to buy Su 35, but can buy S 400?


Su-35 is a good fighter ... China should buy some from Russia to add our fighter numbers, 700x not enough.


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

cnleio said:


> Su-35 is a good fighter ... China should buy some from Russia to add our fighter numbers, 700x not enough.



It is hard to integrate different fighters. 

Plus, China should wait to develop home grown options, and investing the money in home based R and D.



cnleio said:


> Su-35 is a good fighter ... China should buy some from Russia to add our fighter numbers, 700x not enough.



Also, why are you against S 400 then?


----------



## Dungeness

cnleio said:


> Well ... news said China to get Su-35 too.




Either case, Chinese members here will not create a thread like this one:

Alarm bells for China, Pakistan; India eyes S-400 Triumf air defence missile systems


----------



## cnleio

Bussard Ramjet said:


> It is hard to integrate different fighters.
> Plus, China should wait to develop home grown options, and investing the money in home based R and D.


Of course China did R&D ... i say quickly adding fighter numbers for PLAAF, Su-35 is a good choice to purchase.



Bussard Ramjet said:


> Also, why are you against S 400 then?


HQ-9 is good enough, spend our money to R&D new missiles.


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> Of course China did R&D ... i say quickly adding fighter numbers for PLAAF, Su-35 is a good choice to purchase.
> 
> 
> HQ-9 is good enough, spend our money to R&D new missiles.



I don't think S-400 is the bad choice for China, just like S-300.
Er ... The article refered to some improved S-300 systems too.
Yes. improved S-300 is also good for China.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> I don't think S-400 is the bad choice for China, just like S-300.
> Er ... The article refered to some improved S-300 systems too.
> Yes. improved S-300 is also good for China.


I don't think we need S-400 coz China R&D HQ-9B & HQ-26 for next long-range SAM.


----------



## Luca1

cnleio said:


> I don't think we need S-400 coz China R&D HQ-9B & HQ-26 for next long-range SAM.


Ha-26 could be years away for China...



Dungeness said:


> Either case, Chinese members here will not create a thread like this one:
> 
> Alarm bells for China, Pakistan; India eyes S-400 Triumf air defence missile systems



So China would not call out the names of its potential enemy when its looking at buying foreign military systems, unlike The new supa powa?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dungeness

Luca1 said:


> Ha-26 could be years away for China...
> 
> 
> 
> So China would not call out the names of its potential enemy when its looking at buying foreign military systems, unlike The new supa powa?




No, we don't do that. This is just not is our blood. It is nothing to brag about.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> I don't think we need S-400 coz China R&D HQ-9B & HQ-26 for next long-range SAM.



You should write and send letter to China MoD for that.
The article said about how they proceed the signed contract, not proceed to sign the contract.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> You should write and send letter to China MoD for that.
> The article said about how they proceed the signed contract, not proceed to sign the contract.


I ever read news said China to buy Su-35 and also signed contract in Moscow, at last nothing happened.
This isn't a China official article/news, i don't know whether it's true.


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> I ever read news said China to buy Su-35 and also signed contract in Moscow, at last nothing happened.
> This isn't a China official article/news, i don't know whether it's true.



We wish that ( S-400 deal ) a fake, but it looks like a real one.


----------



## Beast

mike2000 is back said:


> hmmmmmmm.............surprising.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, but yes its both, to learn and catch up. Russia afterall, still has quite a lead over China militarily. The syrian intervention is just another example. Not many countries in the world are capable/have experience of projecting power far away from their neighbourhood, much less waging an expeditionary war away from their neighbourhood. I think in the coming decades the Chinese will slowly learn and catch up though.


It's not abt not having the mean. It's more about the political will. I don't think PLAAF JH-7A is in anyway inferior to Su-24. So as J-11BS or J-16 to Su-30MKK.



Bussard Ramjet said:


> So why is China buying S 400?


Half of S-400 development fee is paid by China. It is no surprising China is first customer of S-400. You expect China paid for the development not to buy any of them?


----------



## BoQ77

Beast said:


> It's not abt not having the mean. It's more about the political will. I don't think PLAAF JH-7A is in anyway inferior to Su-24. So as J-11BS or J-16 to Su-30MKK.
> 
> 
> Half of S-400 development fee is paid by China. It is no surprising China is first customer of S-400. You expect China paid for the development not to buy any of them?



cnleio : do you hear about this? why you think this a fake contract? you want to pay for nothing? no buy


----------



## mike2000 is back

BoQ77 said:


> cnleio : do you hear about this? why you think this a fake contract? you want to pay for nothing? no buy



Well, S-400 missile defence system is quite an advanced missile defence system. So China will obviuosly like to get its hands on it. Afterall, China didnt pay for the development costs for nothing, it just means they know they are still quite a few things they need to learn from the soviets(sorry i meant from the Russians.lol). So i dont see whats the big deal here. Its always good to learn from those who are ahead of you so you can catch up faster, instead of burying your head in the sand, doesnt help at all. So i dont see what makes you think this is some kind of big news or whatever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio doubt abt this deal and of course the shared development cost. he think this is fake deal.
to him the money is for domestic project of hq26 or similar.


----------



## lcloo

There are still many SAM battalions deploying old missiles like HQ-2, some of these are deployed fro defence of Beijing. Even though these HQ-2 missiles have been modernised, they are still old liquid fuel designs which need time to fill the fuel before it can be fired. These need replacement ASAP by all means. This is where both HQ-9 and S-400 system comes in.

Difference of S-400 and HQ-9 is that S-400 is a missile system deploying a few different types of missiles with different range - long range/medium range/ short range, under a single command centre, while HQ-9 is a single type missile system.

Since S-400 system R & D is partly finance by China, there is no reason not to buy them. And also why not take possession of finished missile system and study them for future development of Chinese SAMs, after all having paid for the R & D money China should use the technology for current and future development.


----------



## BoQ77

lcloo said:


> There are still many SAM battalions deploying old missiles like HQ-2, some of these are deployed fro defence of Beijing. Even though these HQ-2 missiles have been modernised, they are still old liquid fuel designs which need time to fill the fuel before it can be fired. These need replacement ASAP by all means. This is where both HQ-9 and S-400 system comes in.
> 
> Difference of S-400 and HQ-9 is that S-400 is a missile system deploying a few different types of missiles with different range - long range/medium range/ short range, under a single command centre, while HQ-9 is a single type missile system.
> 
> Since S-400 system R & D is partly finance by China, there is no reason not to buy them. And also why not take possession of finished missile system and study them for future development of Chinese SAMs, after all having paid for the R & D money China should use the technology for current and future development.



it is weird that some argue that this is fake deal, others said that is real and even further to jointly develop.
to be frank, this is the first time I heard about China payment for developing S400. any source for this? I guess None.


----------



## Kurlang

*China to Receive First S-400 Systems In 2016*


MOSCOW: First supplies of S-400 Triumph long-range anti-aircraft missile systems to China are planned no earlier than in a year or a year-and-a-half, a source from the Russian system of military-technical cooperation told Tass on Thursday.

“Supplies are planned no earlier than in a year, or more likely, in a year-and-a-half,” the source said. The signing of a contract for the supply of S-400 to Beijing was officially announced in the spring of 2015.

“I would not disclose the contract details, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of the Russian newest air defence system, which only emphasizes the strategic level of our relations,” Director General of arms exporter Rosoboronexport Anatoly Isaykin said in April.

It became known later that India was planning to purchase 12 S-400 air defense missile systems.

The S-400 Triumph is a Russian-made long-and medium-range antiaircraft missile system designed to destroy all modern and advanced aerospace targets at a distance of up to 400 kilometers (248.5 miles).

The S-400 Triumph (NATO reporting name: SA-21 Growler) was developed as an upgrade of the S-300 series of surface-to-air missile systems. The system entered service in April 2007 and the first S-400 was deployed in combat in August 2007. Russia set up four S-400 regiments defending national airspace in the Moscow region, the Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, and the Eastern Military District.


----------



## libertycall

China has deployed the powerful HQ-9 air and missile defense system to Woody Island—also known as Yongxing—in the Parcel archipelago, marking a new level of escalation in Beijing’s quest to control the South China Sea. The disputed island—which has been inhabited by about 1,000 Chinese citizens since 1956—is also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan.

The addition of the HQ-9—which was first reported by Fox News on February 17—would greatly increase the People’s Liberation Army’s air defense capabilities in the region. Like the Russian-made Almaz Antey S-300 air defense system, the HQ-9 has the ability to render vast swaths of territory into virtual no-fly zones. Only the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber can safely operate in the vicinity of an HQ-9 for any length of time.

Like the S-300P—on which it was partially based—the HQ-9 has a range of roughly 120 miles and can engage targets flying at 90,000ft. *However, there are significant differences between the Russian and Chinese systems. Indeed, according to the Claremont and George C. Marshall Institute’s Missile Threat project, the Chinese system incorporates technology from the U.S. Patriot missile defense system. Further, some sources suggest that the HQ-9—unlike its American and Russian contemporaries—uses active electronically scanned array radar technology.

According to Missile Threat, the Chinese developed much of the HQ-9’s technology from a Patriot battery Beijing acquired from Israel. As such, it is possible that the HQ-9’s guidance system is modeled on the Patriot’s. Which means that the HQ-9 might use the Patriot’s “track-via-missile” guidance system—allowing the HQ-9 interceptor to fly directly at an incoming missile. The HQ-9—like the Patriot—would either explode as it nears the target or directly hit the incoming missile. Either way, the incoming target is either destroyed or knocked off its trajectory.*

The HQ-9 is competitive with Russian and American air defense systems—indeed, NATO member Turkey had intended to purchase a variant of the weapon until the deal eventually fell through late in 2015. However, the very fact that the HQ-9 could compete for an international missile tender against American, Russian and European systems—and win—is an indication of just how capable the Chinese weapon is. 

Look Out, America: China's Missile Deployment Is Only the Beginning | The National Interest Blog

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## C130

China is buying the S-400 so that should answer your question.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## libertycall

C130 said:


> China is buying the S-400 so that should answer your question.



Is that because the S-400 *system* is superior in all aspects or superior in some but not all aspects?


----------



## C130

libertycall said:


> Is that because the S-400 *system* is superior in all aspects or superior in some but not all aspects?



I can't speak for it's anti-missile capability, but everything else is superior.

S-500 in development is to improve that


----------



## madmusti

HQ-9 = S-300 Copy nothing else so S-400 and above should be better - those are facts !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## libertycall

madmusti said:


> HQ-9 = S-300 Copy nothing else so S-400 and above should be better - those are facts !



But the HQ-9 uses AESA radar unlike the S-400?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nik141993

libertycall said:


> But the HQ-9 uses AESA radar unlike the S-400?


Who told you S 400 don't use AESA


----------



## libertycall

nik141993 said:


> Who told you S 400 don't use AESA





> Unlike the PESA radars of the US MIM-104 Patriot/Russian S-300/S-400 systems, the HQ-9 uses a state-of-the-art AESA radar. The naval HQ-9 appears to be identical to the land-based variant. Its naval type HHQ-9 is equipped in the PLAN Type 052C Lanzhou class destroyer in VLS launch tubes.[7]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9#cite_note-SinoNavHQ9-7

HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nik141993

libertycall said:


> HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Here read the whole article carefully

S-400 (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## libertycall

nik141993 said:


> Here read the whole article carefully
> 
> S-400 (missile) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



It doesn't mention AESA.


----------



## cerberus

libertycall said:


> HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Пять преимуществ С-400 над Patriot — Антон Валагин — Российская газета


----------



## libertycall

cerberus said:


> Пять преимуществ С-400 над Patriot — Антон Валагин — Российская газета




Sorry, I can't read Cyrillic, or understand Russian even if I could.


----------



## nik141993

libertycall said:


> Sorry, I can't read Cyrillic, or understand Russian even if I could.


Search properly start with nebo m VHF radar


----------



## cerberus

@nik141993






















8 x 8 BAZ-6909 is also intended as a host vehicle for the 9T243M transloader/transporter, and was also used for the prototypes of the advanced NNIIRT 55Zh6M Nebo M VHF-Band and L-Band Counter-VLO radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## libertycall

@cerberus thank you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Economic superpower

HQ-9 is equivalent to S-300.

S-400 is the best in the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EastSea

Technology, china has copied from Russian. comparation is not reasonable.


----------



## C130

Zhu Rong Zheng Yang said:


> Russian S-400 is definitely way better than HQ-9, and more importantly even MUCH more superior than the United Satan THAAD. ( don't even mention americese patriot-3, it is good ONLY against the old SCUD missiles )
> 
> 1) What important is ... ... it does NOT matter if any China weapon platform is inferior to our Close Friend Russian weapon. ~ It shall be acknowledged publicly that without the Russian immense help, China Military tech will not be at the level where they are today ... ...these quickly. ~~ My Giga appreciations towards our Close Friend Russian Brothers and Russian Sisters for helping China counter americese aggressions.
> 
> 2) Anyone who is not gullible will realize that USA is a maliciously hidden enemy of China since year 1900. ... ...
> What important is ... ... China weapon platform MUST be much more SUPERIOR than all the USA United Satan of Americese weapons, --- superior especially economically.
> 
> ===
> 
> I wish the USAF will stubbornly and continuously send their overhyped F-22s to probe China ADIZ.
> I would like to enjoy the outcome of F-22 smacked by HQ-9.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Seeing the Coward Marijuana Addicted americese pilots
> squeezed like some Cockroaches until their
> innards splattered all over the floor*




HQ-9 and S-400 are better than PAC-3, but not THAAD in destroying ballistic missiles

PAAC-4 with the Stunner interceptor will be on the same level of HQ-9 







and yes the F-22 is over hyped and HQ-9 will destroy it every time.


----------



## libertycall

C130 said:


> HQ-9 and S-400 are better than PAC-3, but not THAAD in destroying ballistic missiles
> 
> PAAC-4 with the Stunner interceptor will be on the same level of HQ-9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yes the F-22 is over hyped and HQ-9 will destroy it every time.





On that subject I've been reading this article:



> State-run Chinese media is claiming that the People’s Liberation Army has been able to track the U.S. Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor stealth fighters over the East China Sea. While the Chinese report might be easily dismissed as propaganda—it is not beyond the realm of possibility. In fact—it’s very possible that China can track the Raptor. Stealth is not a cloak of invisibility, after all. Stealth technology simply delays detection and tracking.



Revealed: China's Radars Can Track America's Stealthy F-22 Raptor | The National Interest Blog

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jkroo

Zhu Rong Zheng Yang said:


> *To all true patriotic Zhong Guo Ren ~ Long de Chuan Ren* ... ...
> 
> 1) Firstly, ... ...do you notice that China enemies are always trying to sabotage Russian---China alliance by posting or writing that China only know how to steal and copy Russian weapons.
> 
> 2) Next, a few stupid Chinese posters show up by posting that Chinese weapon is superior than Russian weapons ... ... and insulting the Russian high tech achievements.
> 
> 3) This *Divide--and--Conquer* tactic has been practised by the enemies of China since at minimum year 1776.
> 
> 4) All of us ( non HanJian ) shall be smart enough --- NOT to fall into these malicious *Divide--and--Conquer* tactic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *@EastSea*
> 
> 
> I have noticed that some Vietnamese are so willing to act and behave like hired ( narcotic addicted american ) slaves.
> Why is that ??


I d like to recommend you that try to add some ids to the ignore list. You just can't persuade anybody in the forum.

Have a nice stay.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

madmusti said:


> HQ-9 = S-300 Copy nothing else so S-400 and above should be better - those are facts !



There is no evidence that the HQ-9 was developed from the S-300.



C130 said:


> HQ-9 and S-400 are better than PAC-3, but not THAAD in destroying ballistic missiles
> 
> PAAC-4 with the Stunner interceptor will be on the same level of HQ-9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yes the F-22 is over hyped and HQ-9 will destroy it every time.



THAAD, PAC-3, and HQ-9/S-400 belong to their own respective classes. The THAAD is an endoatmospheric kinetic-energy interceptor, the PAC-3 is an anti-ballistic SAM, and HQ-9/S-400 purely SAMs designed to defend against AC.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## xunzi

S-400 has longer range and is equipped for anti-aircraft. Think of it like a air defense weapon. The HQ-9 has shorter range but more powerful accurate detection which can hit incoming aircraft AND missile. That's why we bought the S-400, mainly for air defense.

S-500 is where Russia will take the next leap to coverage both air and missile defense. All-in-one system is the way to go.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## C130

libertycall said:


> On that subject I've been reading this article:
> 
> 
> 
> Revealed: China's Radars Can Track America's Stealthy F-22 Raptor | The National Interest Blog



stealth doesn't mean it's completely invisible!! it just means it's invisible until it get's close enough to a radar source to spot it.

So for the Chinese to track the F-22 that would mean the F-22 would have to fly within 30KM (my guessing) of it's most powerful radars.

the U.S knows where most if not all Chinese radars are and the ones they don't know about the F-22 can sniff out and avoid. and let SEADS do their job. in knocking them out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Irfan Baloch

C130 said:


> China is buying the S-400 so that should answer your question.


do note the comparison is with S-300 not the one you quoted.


----------



## C130

Irfan Baloch said:


> do note the comparison is with S-300 not the one you quoted.




the title says HQ-9 vs S-400 which is better  my comment was regarding the title comparison

but comparing the HQ-9 and S-300 is tricky.

reading the wikipedia article

HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I would say HQ-9 is superior to the S-300PMU2, but less so against the S-300VM


----------



## cirr

The HQ-9 SAM is now in its 2nd iteration：HQ-9B for ship-borne and HQ-9G for land-based。

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

C130 said:


> the title says HQ-9 vs S-400 which is better  my comment was regarding the title comparison
> 
> but comparing the HQ-9 and S-300 is tricky.
> 
> reading the wikipedia article
> 
> HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> I would say HQ-9 is superior to the S-300PMU2, but less so against the S-300VM



I read that the purchased S-300 batteries located in the most important sites of China like 1. Beijing 2. Nanjing 3. Shanghai areas 
S-400 would be the same - very important site protectors.
S-400 compared to S-300 : new radars and new missiles.

China buys S-400 means their radars and missiles still under the S-400 leverage, not sure they are higher or lower than S-300

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Providence

S-400 > S-300 > Copy of S-300. 'nough said !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xunzi

Economic superpower said:


> HQ-9 is equivalent to S-300.
> 
> S-400 is the best in the world.


Russia has the best anti-aircraft defense. China has better anti-missile defense. Let put it that way so people can understand the difference between air defense vs missile defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BoQ77

How about SM-6?
SamP/T



xunzi said:


> Russia has the best anti-aircraft defense. China has better anti-missile defense. Let put it that way so people can understand the difference between air defense vs missile defense.


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> How about SM-6?
> SamP/T


They are all comparable to HQ-9 upgraded version A and B.

Our missile program is getting more sophisticated now. I certainly believe we have surpass Russia and right there with the US as evidence by the competition we have with our US partner in racing for hypersonic missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

xunzi said:


> They are all comparable to HQ-9 upgraded version A and B.
> 
> Our missile program is getting more sophisticated now. I certainly believe we have surpass Russia and right there with the US as evidence by the competition we have with our US partner in racing for hypersonic missile.



How China intercept an aerial target like aircraft or missile at altitude 31km ?


----------



## siegecrossbow

S-400 is a generation ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zhu Rong Zheng Yang

xunzi said:


> They are all comparable to HQ-9 upgraded version A and B.
> 
> Our missile program is getting more sophisticated now. . and right there with the US as evidence by the competition we have with our US partner in racing for hypersonic missile.




With all due respect, ... ... please forgive me before hand ... ...
Inferiority Complex attitude such as yours is the downfall of China in front of China heinous enemy USA.

Russia Tech R&D is in downtime now. Wait until Russia Tech R&D is flying high again.
Even, if it is true that China has surpassed the Russian, why do you need to gloat in front of China friend?

What matter is for China to surpass USA.
Where have you been ?

*In terms of Hypersonic HGV tech ... ... China is most definitely way ahead of USA*.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jammersat

none of them are good enough , in the face of agile planes like the f-22 or f-35 , maybe they can bring down an f-117 , or a b-2 but they can't bring down the raptor , the only thing that can bring em down are good planes that can counter them in the air , which the chinese seem to be working on , how much i don't know


----------



## Irfan Baloch

C130 said:


> the title says HQ-9 vs S-400 which is better  my comment was regarding the title comparison
> 
> but comparing the HQ-9 and S-300 is tricky.
> 
> reading the wikipedia article
> 
> HQ-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> I would say HQ-9 is superior to the S-300PMU2, but less so against the S-300VM


must be a typo in the title because the article he quoted is talking about S-300 and HQ-9.


----------



## DavidSling

C130 said:


> HQ-9 and S-400 are better than PAC-3, but not THAAD in destroying ballistic missiles
> 
> PAAC-4 with the Stunner interceptor will be on the same level of HQ-9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yes the F-22 is over hyped and HQ-9 will destroy it every time.



Stunner missiles as part of David Sling interception system


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> How China intercept an aerial target like aircraft or missile at altitude 31km ?


HQ-19



Zhu Rong Zheng Yang said:


> With all due respect, ... ... please forgive me before hand ... ...
> Inferiority Complex attitude such as yours is the downfall of China in front of China heinous enemy USA.
> 
> Russia Tech R&D is in downtime now. Wait until Russia Tech R&D is flying high again.
> Even, if it is true that China has surpassed the Russian, why do you need to gloat in front of China friend?
> 
> What matter is for China to surpass USA.
> Where have you been ?
> 
> *In terms of Hypersonic HGV tech ... ... China is most definitely way ahead of USA*.


It is not about the inferiority complex but about the reality. If you know me, the word inferiority complex doesn't exist in my dictionary. I'm more of a realist supremacist and I can assure you our PLA has the same mentality.

Remember when we thought we understand how the world works and was the best during the peak of Ming Dynasty? We stop learning and close ourselves from technology exchange and the rest is history. That lesson taught us to be an opportunistic predator and to demonstrate our prowess selectively. The typical example I can make of is the US-Soviet Rocket competition. Even though the Soviet N1 rocket started the race with more successful 1st launch than the American. They got chased down and was beaten by the Saturn V rocket. Despite showing the American rocket is better, it didn't stop the American from trying to get their hand on the Soviet N1/L3. This lesson is to teach us to be aggressively pursuing our own technological prowess but at the same time never stop getting our hand on the foe best technology.

Both of our HGV and US HGV program are still in development. While we enjoy more test success, it doesn't mean anything until it is fully deploy. I strongly advice anyone from making a false impression that we are ahead of this monster, the USA. They don't become a monster by talking big but by action, which mean deploying and in operation. Therefore the best conclusion I have made is some field Russia is ahead of us, some field we are ahead. With USA, their field is ahead of us more and some is close or we are slightly ahead but not noticeable.

So let come back to this topic.

Russia is best at air defense.
US is best at missile defense.

China is in the middle of those, better than Russia in missile defense but not in air defense.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## BoQ77

xunzi said:


> HQ-19
> 
> .



We have very little info of HQ-19. Is it the same class of SM-6, HQ-9, THAAD ... especially weight, dimension, ?


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> We have very little info of HQ-19. Is it the same class of SM-6, HQ-9, THAAD ... especially weight, dimension, ?


It's THAAD in development.


----------



## BoQ77

xunzi said:


> It's THAAD in development.


in development?

so is it available to intercept something now?

same weight , dimension to THAAD?


----------



## Zarvan

Well I think HQ-9 is better than S 300 but can't say about S 400. Yes China is buying S 400 but China many times buy things to make a copy of that. So I can see Chinese version of S 400 coming really soon. By the way according to some websites Morocco is shown as operator of HQ 9 !!!! Can any Chinese member confirm it ?

*



*

*HQ-19 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor*
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 [THAAD counterpart], HQ-26 [SM-3 counterpart] and HQ-29 [PAC-3 counterpart] are designed primarily for Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities. While the HQ-9A air defense variant of the HQ-9 series is very well attested, the remaining theater missile defense interceptors are poorly attested, and verge on being little more than rumors.

The only official document that clearly states the designation HQ-19 is a document entitled "The needs analysis propulsion system of tactical missiles and direction of development for solid propellant engine", dating from 2000 and written by the Institute 41 CCAC Group (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation). This paper analyzes firstly the risks and types of conflict that China may face up to 2010 (The document is dated 2000, and speaks of "in 10 years"), and gives types of tactical missiles to develop a priority to deal with these external threats. In subsection 3.4, a priority is given to the need for an anti-missile system capable of intercepting high altitude heads ballistic missile whose range is 3000km, phase re-entry. And in response to this paragraph 3.4, in section 4.4 it is clearly stated "Developing solid propellant engines that meet the needs of anti-missile systems area at high altitude," a concept close to American THAAD ( Terminal High Altitude Area Defense).

Finally, in paragraph 5.4 of the document, it gives the status of the development of the HQ-19 motor - a solid propellant engine demonstration with a specific impulse of 260s, mass ratio of 0.85 and able to provide the necessary power for maneuverability 60g to track down the head of ballistic missile, a "completed the design phase, fabrication and testing", "testing validated the carbon fiber shell and propellant N-15B."

The HQ-19 missile is a project launched in the late 1990s. In 1995 the Chinese started serious studies of a kinetic kill vehicle KKV under Program 863. In 1986, to meet the global challenges of new technology revolution and competition, four Chinese scientists, WANG Daheng, WANG Ganchang, YANG Jiachi, and CHEN Fangyun, jointly proposed to accelerate China’s high-tech development. With strategic vision and resolution, the late Chinese leader Mr. DENG Xiaoping personally approved the National High-tech R&D Program, namely the 863 Program. Implemented during three successive Five-year Plans, the program has boosted China’s overall high-tech development, R&D capacity, socio-economic development, and national security. In April 2001, the Chinese State Council approved continued implementation of the program in the 10th Five-year Plan. As one of the national S&T program trilogy in the 10th Five-year Plan, 863 Program continues to play its important role.

In 1999, the first Chinese KKV made the suspension tests successfully flight, China became the second country in the world to have mastered the technology. The first test of V & V was held in 2003 with success. It was in final certification. HQ-19 has a KKV of about 35kg, the system performance would be similar to the US THAAD. Another R & D document mentions a technology demonstration at the HQ-19 engines in 2000, led by the Academy 4 CCAC group. The demonstration also validated "hull carbon fiber" and "rocket N-15B".



*S-400 Triumf*
It is believed by some that the Russian S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missile system was a joint development program, but others say that HQ-19 has nothing to do with S-400 [according to one source, "and I say this with certainty." China has shown interest in acquiring Russia’s newest long-range SAM, the S-400 TRIUMF, but a contract has not been signed yet and Russian officials have stated China would not receive the S-400 until at least 2017. This SAM can target aircraft, cruise missiles, and tactical and medium-range ballistic missiles.

The deployment of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system will substantially improve China's air defense capability, military experts said as Russian media reported 16 April 2015 that China has bought the cutting-edge weapon.

"The S-400 is definitely one of the top anti-aircraft weapons in the world. It will greatly supplement the People's Liberation Army's air defense system, which now has some loopholes in long-range, high-altitude defense of airplanes or ballistic missiles," said Wang Ya'nan, deputy editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge magazine.

"The system has multiple types of missiles with various ranges, enabling it to safeguard a very large area of airspace. Some of its missiles are even specifically designed to intercept ballistic missiles," Wang said. "Moreover, some of its launch tubes can store and launch several different missiles, which makes it very convenient and fast to use."

Russia has a long history of developing anti-aircraft and missile defense weapons, so the S-400 is a concentration of some of the most advanced missile technologies Russia has, such as an active electronically scanned array radar, according to Wang. "China still lacks experience in the development of long-range air defense systems, especially those that can intercept ballistic missiles. There is no shortcut because the development of such sophisticated weapons requires a great number of experiments and tests. It is a matter of time and resource input," he added.

According to Russian media reports, the S-400 is a new-generation, anti-aircraft weapon system capable of engaging any aerial target, including airplanes, helicopters and drones, as well as cruise and tactical ballistic missiles, with a maximum speed of 4.8 km per second. The system's 40N6 missile can destroy airborne targets at ranges up to 400 km.

Anatoly Isaikin, chief executive of the Russian state-run arms trader Rosoboronexport, confirmed on Monday that China has a contract with his company for the purchase of the S-400 air defense systems. "I will not disclose the details of the contract, but yes, China has indeed become the first buyer of this sophisticated Russian air defense system. It underlines once again the strategic level of our relations," Isaikin told the Russian newspaper Kommersant.

China clinched the deal in September at a cost of more than $3 billion for the delivery of at least six S-400 battalions, Moscow Times reported. Currently, China relied on its domestically developed HQ-9 and the Russian-made S-300 missile system, according to Western military observers.

Du Wenlong, a senior researcher at the PLA Academy of Military Science, said the operational ranges of modern military aircraft and missiles are much longer than their predecessors, so an effective defense system must have long-range missiles that can hit aircraft as well as cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles. "Our air force has deployed the Russian S-300 systems, which are good at dealing with aircraft, but their performance in intercepting cruise missiles and tactical ballistic missiles is not very satisfactory," he said. "After we commission the S-400, it can work with the HQ-9 and S-300 to form a fully covered air defense network."

Zhao Zhihua, a senior missile researcher at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp, a major developer of China's missiles, said that through the introduction of the S-400, China can gain a lot of experience and expertise on how to operate a missile defense system. "Operating such a complex system will go beyond our current knowledge and experience, which in turn will teach us things that we don't know, so it is worthy spending big money buying it," he previously told the Ordnance Industry Science and Technology magazine.


HQ-19 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiqiu

HQ-9 launching

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## S10

HQ-9, in its current state, is about on par with S-300PMU2.


----------



## 帅的一匹

S10 said:


> HQ-9, in its current state, is about on par with S-300PMU2.


With better hit target accuracy.


----------



## BoQ77

wanglaokan said:


> With better hit target accuracy.



How you know about its accuracy compared to S-300PMU2 ?


----------



## desimorty

> HQ-9 = S-300 Copy nothing else so S-400 and above should be better - those are facts !
> 
> Source: HQ-9 versus S-400 - which is better?


Some of it is based on the S-300 or whatever China could get from the backstabing Ukrainians whom also sold China the Y-20 designs and other toys and designs before the fallout with Russia.
S-400 is an entire system. The S-400 India is going for is a mix of Isreal radar, Indian stuffing and new S-500 missiles of Russia.



> HQ-9 and S-400 are better than PAC-3, but not THAAD in destroying ballistic missiles
> 
> PAAC-4 with the Stunner interceptor will be on the same level of HQ-9
> 
> Source: HQ-9 versus S-400 - which is better? | Page 2


The russians are working on it. The S-400 has the range, ie 400 km with a certian missile and slant range. Only good for keeping USAF transport aircraft out of Russian skies but the system itself can be upgraded, ie like the S-300 to S-400 upgrade so to the S-500 which will be a new missile mostly with THAAD eq. 
Star Wars had begun in the 2000s.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## phantomrush

xunzi said:


> Russia has the best anti-aircraft defense. China has better anti-missile defense. Let put it that way so people can understand the difference between air defense vs missile defense.


Stop talking nonsense.
You do not even know that such a missile.
A-35 is about time 1960
A-135 is about time 1980
A-235 missile defense system is the 21st century.
What kind of missile defense system in the form of HQ-9 can you say ???






This is a test of new missile for the A-135.
A-235 tried to experience Russia in landfills, but eventually had to use landfill Saryshagan. Only there is all the necessary equipment for such tests.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

Economic superpower said:


> HQ-9 is equivalent to S-300.
> 
> S-400 is the best in the world.



Mention that there're many variants of S-300, S-400.
domestic variants of Russia is the best of its class while export variants are trimming features

S-300PMU1/2 is the export variants, HQ-9 selectively copy most from S-300PMU1/2. When Economic Superpower stated HQ-9 is equivalent to S-300, he may imply S-300 export variant.

Even we can't make sure HQ-9 is better than S-300PMU2, so it's even harder to compare to domestic S-300 variants.

Same to S-400.



xunzi said:


> Russia is best at air defense.
> US is best at missile defense.
> 
> China is in the middle of those, better than Russia in missile defense but not in air defense.



If consider S-400 is superior in Air defense, we can't simply call owners of it as "best at air defense"
Weapons are only a part of air defense system.

Vietnam is also the traditional buyer of Russian weapon, and S-300 , but now they did buy Israeli SAM. In the warship deal, ie. Sigma class, the Aster 15/30 of SAMP/T is also in the list.
We wish someday getting the weapons from US too.

About weapons, USA or even Israel, Europe, has more flexible air defense / missile defense systems.
Lighter missile, more missiles on one mobile launcher, higher altitude, more precise interception, faster velocity... especially THAAD, SM-3 ( which also has Japan share )
All of them tell us a fact, they are flexible than bulky, heavy interceptors.


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Mention that there're many variants of S-300, S-400.
> domestic variants of Russia is the best of its class while export variants are trimming features
> 
> S-300PMU1/2 is the export variants, HQ-9 selectively copy most from S-300PMU1/2. When Economic Superpower stated HQ-9 is equivalent to S-300, he may imply S-300 export variant.
> 
> Even we can't make sure HQ-9 is better than S-300PMU2, so it's even harder to compare to domestic S-300 variants.
> 
> Same to S-400.
> 
> 
> 
> If consider S-400 is superior in Air defense, we can't simply call owners of it as "best at air defense"
> Weapons are only a part of air defense system.
> 
> Vietnam is also the traditional buyer of Russian weapon, and S-300 , but now they did buy Israeli SAM. In the warship deal, ie. Sigma class, the Aster 15/30 of SAMP/T is also in the list.
> We wish someday getting the weapons from US too.
> 
> About weapons, USA or even Israel, Europe, has more flexible air defense / missile defense systems.
> Lighter missile, more missiles on one mobile launcher, higher altitude, more precise interception, faster velocity... especially THAAD, SM-3 ( which also has Japan share )
> All of them tell us a fact, they are flexible than bulky, heavy interceptors.



LOL does Vietnam has a ship that can fit long range sea based SAM like Naval variant of S-300? *S-300F (SA-N-6)*

SM-3, THAAD flexible? they are only for missile defense, that is why US is still equipping destroyers with SM-2s.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> LOL does Vietnam has a ship that can fit long range sea based SAM like Naval variant of S-300? *S-300F (SA-N-6)*
> 
> SM-3, THAAD flexible? they are only for missile defense, that is why US is still equipping destroyers with SM-2s.



No. Vietnam still doesn't have that ship. There's a deal with Aster-30 may come with next warships. As I know China currently has less than 10 ships could do that
SM-3, THAAD is a higher class for missile defense.

Let's talk about SM-6.

Btw, Does China has a ship that can fit HQ-19 anti ballistic missile?


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> No. Vietnam still doesn't have that ship. There's a deal with Aster-30 may come with next warships. As I know China currently has less than 10 ships could do that
> SM-3, THAAD is a higher class for missile defense.
> 
> Let's talk about SM-6.
> 
> Btw, Does China has a ship that can fit HQ-19 anti ballistic missile?



I prefer to talk to you about something Vietnam currently have, after all war with USA is not likely because both countries are nuclear power, however, conflict with Vietnam is many more times likely to happen. and since Vietnam is also owner of S-300, it is only fair to bring Vietnam into this discussion. 

What does Vietnam have to defend of a massive missile strike, be conventional or nuclear, ballistic or cruise missile. since it has very limited counter attack ability, it needs a good defense system.

what is Vietnam doing in this area?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> in development?
> 
> so is it available to intercept something now?
> 
> same weight , dimension to THAAD?


Same size , weight and everything. It is a top classify weapon system. Not many people know about the HQ-19 except the US intelligentce. According to them, we have conduct all successful test and I believe deployment will soon arrive no latter than 2020s.




phantomrush said:


> Stop talking nonsense.
> You do not even know that such a missile.
> A-35 is about time 1960
> A-135 is about time 1980
> A-235 missile defense system is the 21st century.
> What kind of missile defense system in the form of HQ-9 can you say ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a test of new missile for the A-135.
> A-235 tried to experience Russia in landfills, but eventually had to use landfill Saryshagan. Only there is all the necessary equipment for such tests.


A-135 is not comparable to THAAD or HQ-19 for one simple fact that it is a silo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

xunzi said:


> Same size , weight and everything. It is a top classify weapon system. Not many people know about the HQ-19 except the US intelligentce. According to them, we have conduct all successful test and I believe deployment will soon arrive no latter than 2020s.
> .



I guess you should be high rank military official.


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> If consider S-400 is superior in Air defense, we can't simply call owners of it as "best at air defense"
> Weapons are only a part of air defense system.
> 
> Vietnam is also the traditional buyer of Russian weapon, and S-300 , but now they did buy Israeli SAM. In the warship deal, ie. Sigma class, the Aster 15/30 of SAMP/T is also in the list.
> We wish someday getting the weapons from US too.
> 
> About weapons, USA or even Israel, Europe, has more flexible air defense / missile defense systems.
> Lighter missile, more missiles on one mobile launcher, higher altitude, more precise interception, faster velocity... especially THAAD, SM-3 ( which also has Japan share )
> All of them tell us a fact, they are flexible than bulky, heavy interceptors.


What the hell are you trying to say? LOL

Russia develop their anti-aircraft system because of the overwhelming numerous superiority of the US aircraft. They have master that system so well that they become a world leader in air defense. Though like I said, the US have a different approach to air defense and unilaterally work on missile defense, breaking the treaty with Russia. Think of it as the US undercut Russia.

So go back to what I said, US better in missile defense, Russia better in aircraft defense.



BoQ77 said:


> I guess you should be high rank military official.


Like I told you, not many people know about the HQ-19 just like not as many know the exact progress of WS-15 engine. Our PLA is very secretive when it comes to national security tech secret. The last time we demonstrated successful KKV test (Kinetic Kill Vehicle), the 2nd country in the world to do so, was in 1999. 

I strongly believe by 2020s, these WS-15, HQ19, SSBN 96 program will be acknowledged to the public just like the DF-41.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> What does Vietnam have to defend of a massive missile strike, be conventional or nuclear, ballistic or cruise missile. since it has very limited counter attack ability, it needs a good defense system.
> 
> what is Vietnam doing in this area?



Vietnam has no nuclear weapon now and then.
A massive ballistic or cruise missile or air strike?

The first : hiding our assets, as you see the 2 first squadrons of Su-30MK2 of Vietnam located in Southern provinces, and almost no one know where our S-300 brigades stationed.
Defend by what we got : S300, S-125 TM2, Igla-S, S-75, Surface to Air Python and Derby ( SPYDER ), Sosna-R

It's not new for Vietnam to defend such threats. You may know that US ever drop million tonnes of bombs and missiles to North of Vietnam and Laos. I'm not sure how many tonnes China could deliver to Vietnam land, but it's limit if the delivery by missiles.



xunzi said:


> What the hell are you trying to say? LOL
> 
> Russia develop their anti-aircraft system because of the overwhelming numerous superiority of the US aircraft. They have master that system so well that they become a world leader in air defense. Though like I said, the US have a different approach to air defense and unilaterally work on missile defense, breaking the treaty with Russia. Think of it as the US undercut Russia.
> 
> So go back to what I said, US better in missile defense, Russia better in aircraft defense.



It doesn't mean US has worse air defense system.
How about naval SM-6 and newly developed Arrow-3 ?


----------



## xunzi

BoQ77 said:


> It doesn't mean US has worse air defense system.


There is no system in this world that better than S-400 right now.


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Vietnam has no nuclear weapon now and then.
> A massive ballistic or cruise missile or air strike?
> 
> The first : hiding our assets, as you see the 2 first squadrons of Su-30MK2 of Vietnam located in Southern provinces, and almost no one know where our S-300 brigades stationed.
> Defend by what we got : S300, S-125 TM2, Igla-S, S-75, Surface to Air Python and Derby ( SPYDER ), Sosna-R
> 
> It's not new for Vietnam to defend such threats. You may know that US ever drop million tonnes of bombs and missiles to North of Vietnam and Laos. I'm not sure how many tonnes China could deliver to Vietnam land, but it's limit if the delivery by missiles.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean US has worse air defense system.



not many long range precision guided weapons were used in the Vietnam war era. I am not aware ballistic or cruise missile being used. 

I don't think China will only use missiles as only weapon in case of war, however in recent conflicts, missiles has played major role in first wave of SEAD operations. 

Besides the two sets of S-300, most of other systems were introduced in 60s era, SPYDER is battlefield air defense the range of interception is too short to intercept any high speed object like ballistic or cruise missiles, given too little reaction time. 

I have to assume the S-300 is tasked with protecting major cities like Hanoi and Hochiminh, but wouldn't that leave your military installations like runways and ports vulnerable to strike?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

xunzi said:


> There is no system in this world that better than S-400 right now.



You should focus on 40N6 missile. But anyway S-400 is unproven platform.
US has many assets : SM-3, SM-6, Stunner...

Let compare Stunner alone with 40N6.

A S-400 is improved S-300 with new missile 40N6.

I heard that, Vietnam improved their S-300 with new missile and radar from S-400 system.


----------



## DavidSling

xunzi said:


> There is no system in this world that better than S-400 right now.


Loled , how do u know ? Have you tested them all ? Im sure the west has as much as good air defense systems if not better .....
Any way , theres no system in the world that can give the answer to all aerial threats , u need multiple systems and technologies in order to achieve this goal.
For example Israel's multilayer air defense systems


----------



## phantomrush

xunzi said:


> Same size , weight and everything. It is a top classify weapon system. Not many people know about the HQ-19 except the US intelligentce. According to them, we have conduct all successful test and I believe deployment will soon arrive no latter than 2020s.
> 
> 
> 
> A-135 is not comparable to THAAD or HQ-19 for one simple fact that it is a silo.


This is not a full-fledged missile defense. If only because the speed of the rocket is very small and it does not have time in the entry point Ballistic warheads in the atmosphere. These complexes except that the anti-missile North Korea will go. No more.


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> *not many long range precision guided weapons were used in the Vietnam war era*. I am not aware ballistic or cruise missile being used.
> I don't think China will only use missiles as only weapon in case of war, however in recent conflicts, missiles has played major role in first wave of SEAD operations.



We all know that ballistic missiles are unguided weapons.
SEAD used in Vietnam.

And the situation at the time, why they must use long range ballistic missiles while they could just fly over and drop the bombs or shoot short range guided missile ?




> Besides the two sets of S-300, most of other systems were introduced in 60s era, SPYDER is battlefield air defense the range of interception is too short to intercept any *high speed object like ballistic or cruise missiles*, given too little reaction time.
> I have to assume the S-300 is tasked with protecting major cities like Hanoi and Hochiminh, but wouldn't that leave your military installations like runways and ports vulnerable to strike?



I don't think long range cruise missiles are high speed object. SPYDER or even Manpads, could easily shot them down if it was tracked.

Yeah our military installations was damaged heavily in Vietnam War. It's not new to see our runways and ports damaged or blocked.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> We all know that ballistic missiles are unguided weapons.
> SEAD used in Vietnam.
> 
> And the situation at the time, why they must use long range ballistic missiles while they could just fly over and drop the bombs or shoot short range guided missile ?
> 
> Yeah our military installations was damaged heavily in Vietnam War.



Hmm, the tactics have changed since the Vietnam war, cruise missiles were used extensively in gulf war, and Kosovo. and the 2nd gulf war. no need to send your pilots and planes into harms way until you have suppressed some of the enemy air defense. 

for ballistic missiles, US do not process MRBM or IRBM, which are ideal to use against fixed military installations like runways, ports, fuel depots, and China is well known to equip MRBM and IRBM with conventional payload to use against potential non-nuclear state. 

while cruise missile is easier to intercept than ballistic missile, it is harder to detect, with no airborne early warning, it is not easy to track a ballistic missile on land.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> Hmm, the tactics have changed since the Vietnam war, cruise missiles were used extensively in gulf war, and Kosovo. and the 2nd gulf war. no need to send your pilots and planes into harms way until you have suppressed some of the enemy air defense.
> for ballistic missiles, US do not process MRBM or IRBM, which are ideal to use against fixed military installations like runways, ports, fuel depots, and China is well known to equip MRBM and IRBM with conventional payload to use against potential non-nuclear state.
> while cruise missile is easier to intercept than ballistic missile, it is harder to detect, with no airborne early warning, it is not easy to track a ballistic missile on land.



The big point I want to tell you, the total payload of China MRBM ( 600kgs / 1x DF-21 ) which could use against the southern neighbor is very small, and not enough for "teach a lesson " idea.
If you want to discuss more on this please create another thread, ok?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> The big point I want to tell you, the total payload of China MRBM ( 600kgs / 1x DF-21 ) which could use against the southern neighbor is very small, and not enough for "teach a lesson " idea.
> If you want to discuss more on this please create another thread, ok?



I said nothing about "teach a lesson", DF-21 is not only be the only weapon used in case of a conflict, it i will be all missiles in our inventory. including CJ-10, DF-15, DF-16, afterall Vietnam is not a big area to cover. 

or you don't want to bring Vietnam into this discussion even Vietnam is one of the owner of S-300 system? 

What's with the frustration?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> I said nothing about "teach a lesson", DF-21 is not only be the only weapon used in case of a conflict, it i will be all missiles in our inventory. including CJ-10, DF-15, DF-16, afterall Vietnam is not a big area to cover.
> 
> or you don't want to bring Vietnam into this discussion even Vietnam is one of the owner of S-300 system?
> 
> What's with the frustration?



But you want to bring ballistic and cruise missile here. which is derailment.
You think it's big, but let estimate the total payload of your CJ-10, DF-15, DF-16, DF-21 and tell me the number.

Let count the craters in the picture,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> But you want to bring ballistic and cruise missile here. which is derailment.
> You think it's big, but let estimate the total payload of your CJ-10, DF-15, DF-16, DF-21 and tell me the number.
> 
> Let count the craters in the picture,



It is only fair you wanted to further discuss SM-6, THAAD, and HQ-9

High explosive warhead on Ballistic missile is very effective to damage runway due to velocity and angle, not because of its payload weight, and you only need to target the runway choke points with precision to disable it, no need for anti-runway munition.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> It is only fair you wanted to further discuss SM-6, THAAD, and HQ-9
> 
> High explosive warhead on Ballistic missile is very effective to damage runway due to velocity and angle, not because of its payload weight, and you only need to target the runway choke points with precision to disable it, no need for anti-runway munition.



Your way isn't any new.


----------



## BoQ77

Bottom line:

HQ-9 isn't better than S-300
S-400 is superior in everyway, 

and China decided to buy both S-300 and S-400 ( and S-500 if possile )


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Bottom line:
> 
> HQ-9 isn't better than S-300
> S-400 is superior in everyway,
> 
> and China decided to buy both S-300 and S-400 ( and S-500 if possile )



Get your facts straight, HQ -9 was developed after we bought S-300, not the other way around. so HQ-9 is better than S-300. 

Bottom line, 

HQ-9 is more than enough to counter VN and Philippines in SCS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> Get your facts straight, HQ -9 was developed after we bought S-300, not the other way around. so HQ-9 is better than S-300.
> 
> Bottom line,
> 
> HQ-9 is more than enough to counter VN and Philippines in SCS.



your bought S-300 isn't the best S-300.
The best S-300 come with 40N6 missiles.

About deployment in Woody
1. Ever you seen VN, PH challenged your occupied island in Paracel ? No, it's not about VN, PH
2. [In the news] The Deployment attracted other big rivals, like Japan, Australia, India...



> Heydarian said the U.S. and its allies are running out of time and that a concerted effort is needed in the region, including greater diplomatic pressure and more regular joint patrols by the U.S. and its allies such as Australia, Japan and India.


'Chinese missiles' in South China Sea seen as escalation of tensions | The Japan Times


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> your bought S-300 isn't the best S-300.
> The best S-300 come with 40N6 missiles



you are wrong again. . 40N6 missile is developed on S-300 platform but was introduced with S-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> Get your facts straight, HQ -9 was developed after we bought S-300, not the other way around. so HQ-9 is better than S-300.



Your argument is illogical. it could be worse or better, but that's comparison to export variant of S-300 to China.
We all know the fact that "Russian export variant" is always worse than domestic variant



sicsheep said:


> you are wrong again. . 40N6 missile is developed on S-300 platform but was introduced with S-400.



Do you mean, there's no S-300 come with 40N6? actually S-400 could be assigned as improved S-300 variant, S-300 PM3

Russian S-300 missile systems capable of targeting near space 'enter service' — RT News

While we know HQ-9 is harmless to flying objects at 28,000m altitude.


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Do you mean, there's no S-300 come with 40N6? actually S-400 could be assigned as improved S-300 variant, S-300 PM3
> 
> Russian S-300 missile systems capable of targeting near space 'enter service' — RT News
> 
> While we know HQ-9 is harmless to flying objects at 28,000m altitude.



LOL you referred to S400 in your previous post, now you are calling it S-300 PM3? playing words game now?

Export version or not, if HQ-9 better than S-300 PMU2 , then it is good enough for the role it plays in PLA,

also VN does not anything can fly at 28000 m .

oh and Su-30MKI was the most advanced Sukoi from it was in service up until 2012. so yes, many export variant of Russian systems are more advanced than domestic version, you you dont know it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> if HQ-9 better than S-300 PMU2 , then it is good enough for the role it plays in PLA,
> also VN does not anything can fly at 28000 m .



thread about which is better, not about "good enough"
As my previous, HQ-9 in Woody has nothing to do with Vietnam assets.



> oh and *Su-30MKI was the most advanced Sukoi from it was in service up until 2012*. so yes, many export variant of Russian systems are more advanced than domestic version, you you dont know it.



Your statement is false again.


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Your statement is false again.



Su-30MKI was more advanced than any Sukoi in service with Russian air Force for a while, apparently you dont know this. so ..I am right if you can't prove me wrong.



BoQ77 said:


> thread about which is better, not about "good enough"
> As my previous, HQ-9 in Woody has nothing to do with Vietnam assets.
> .



but you haven't decided which version of S-300 we are comparing to, if compared to PMU2, HQ-9 is better, because we no longer purchase S-300 after the mass production of HQ-9, we also showed its capabilities in Turkey.

You are welcome to prove me wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> but you haven't decided which version of S-300 we are comparing to, if compared to PMU2, HQ-9 is better, because we no longer purchase S-300 after the mass production of HQ-9, we also showed its capabilities in Turkey.
> 
> You are welcome to prove me wrong.



So you stated HQ-9 is better than PMU2, let prove it.


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> Get your facts straight, HQ -9 was developed after we bought S-300, not the other way around. so HQ-9 is better than S-300.
> 
> Bottom line,
> 
> *HQ-9 is more than enough to counter VN and Philippines in SCS.*



How HQ-9 counter the KH-31PD missiles that has range 250km? And Club-S / both in Vietnam inventory


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> So you stated HQ-9 is better than PMU2, let prove it.



Read my previous post. 



BoQ77 said:


> How HQ-9 counter the KH-31PD missiles that has range 250km? And Club-S / both in Vietnam inventory
> View attachment 295878



More than enough, S-300/HQ-9 generation of SAM is designed to counter standoff weapons like the KH-59, and American 
AGM-154, KH-31 range is too short and would put its launch platform in range of the SAM for 3 -5 minutes before the SAM is within weapons range, let alone the radar. 

Land attack version of the club-s is not even that good, it is an subsonic missile, so it is even easier to intercept.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> More than enough, S-300/HQ-9 generation of SAM is designed to counter standoff weapons like the KH-59, and American
> AGM-154, KH-31 range is too short and would put its launch platform in range of the SAM for 3 -5 minutes before the SAM is within weapons range, let alone the radar.
> 
> Land attack version of the club-s is not even that good, it is an subsonic missile, so it is even easier to intercept.



1. Do you mean S-300 could hit Flankers at distance of 250km ?
mention that I wrote KH-31P-D
2. So Club-S is harmless to facilities on island. Ok


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> 1. Do you mean S-300 could hit Flankers at distance of 250km ?
> mention that I wrote KH-31P-D
> 2. So Club-S is harmless to facilities on island. Ok



just show me an article when did Vietnam acquire KH-31P-D lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nang2

BoQ77 said:


> 1. Do you mean S-300 could hit Flankers at distance of 250km ?
> mention that I wrote KH-31P-D
> 2. So Club-S is harmless to facilities on island. Ok


The 2nd point is valid. The moment Vietnam club s lands on any facility on Chinese islands, much more will be expected on Vietnam soil.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> just show me an article when did Vietnam acquire KH-31P-D lol.



We don't make press conference to state "we have new weapon"
We showed old ones once we have next gen weapons.


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> We don't make press conference to state "we have new weapon"
> We showed old ones once we have next gen weapons.



yeah but Russians do, I am not gonna discuss about weapons you acquired in your dreams.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

nang2 said:


> The 2nd point is valid. The moment Vietnam club s lands on any facility on Chinese islands, much more will be expected on Vietnam soil.



the 2nd one is response to sicsheep claim "HQ-9 is more than enough to handle VN, PH".
it doesn't express the act of unilaterily attack by Vietnam.

Btw, it'd happen when we met no return point. For example, a HQ-9 battery shoot our airliner flying over within 50 kilometers offshore of Triton ...

Btw, Vietnam soil received millions ton of bombs in the past. It's not new.



sicsheep said:


> just show me an article when did Vietnam acquire KH-31P-D lol.





sicsheep said:


> yeah but Russians do, I am not gonna discuss about weapons you acquired in your dreams.



Oh dude, any article is more valuable than my posted image and clip?


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> the 2nd one is response to sicsheep claim "HQ-9 is more than enough to handle VN, PH".
> it doesn't express the act of unilaterily attack by Vietnam.
> 
> Btw, it'd happen when we met no return point. For example, a HQ-9 battery shoot our airliner flying over within 50 kilometers offshore of Triton ...
> 
> Btw, Vietnam soil received millions ton of bombs in the past. It's not new.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dude, any article is more valuable than my posted image and clip?



The image /clip show clearly it is not a D Variant as it has the same small fuselage, it is instead the KH-31P. Try harder. 




Kh-31P (right) with R-27 (left) and Kh-59 (middle) atMAKS Airshow, Zhukovskiy, 1999

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> The image /clip show clearly it is not a D Variant as it has the same small fuselage, it is instead the KH-31P. Try harder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kh-31P (right) with R-27 (left) and Kh-59 (middle) atMAKS Airshow, Zhukovskiy, 1999


Did they notice press on those delivery flights?


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Did they notice press on those delivery flights?



again those on Vietnamese Su-30, are not the PD variant. 















'

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep

Now this picture of the KH-31 AD in your picture, clearly have a longer fuselage, note the 2 sets of stabilizer are much further away from each other than a non-D variant of KH-31 due to stretch of the fuselage. 

This is non D-Variant. 





Now these are the D-Variant, ones have longer range. 




















Now you tell me what's on Vietnamese Su-30 LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


>



You posted KH-31AD variant


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> You posted KH-31AD variant



The picture in your post #87 was AD variant too, this is from the same air show just from another angle. LOL

like I said, D variant have longer fuselage. you should stop embarrassing yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> You are wrong. The picture in post #87 is PD variant,
> Look at it again.
> 
> I'm surprised that you confused between PD and AD variant.



OK, why don't you post a picture of PD variant from the side, and post its source.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

sicsheep said:


> OK, why don't you post a picture of PD variant from the side, and post its source.



Why you think Vietnam can't have KH-31PD ?


----------



## sicsheep

BoQ77 said:


> Why you think Vietnam can't have KH-31PD ?









длина ракета means Missile Length, now please read it....

I am not saying Vietnam can't or can have it, just that there is no evidence of it.





Дальнобойная модульная ракета Х-31 MMS-2011 / 

Long-range modular missile Kh - 31 MMS-2011

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## adnan12345

s-400 missile is better


----------



## BoQ77

You didn't notice the P variant shorter than the variant in my photo.


----------



## Deino

*Guys ... could You stay on topic please ! The Kh-31 and its diferent versions and even more if Vietnam or China has what subtype is not the topic.*

Deino


----------



## TaiShang

*China Becomes First Foreign Buyer of S-400 as Moscow and Beijing Team Up Against US Encroachment*

Russia is selling China its most advanced air defense system. Could this be a signal of growing military ties between the two economic partners?

Russia has confrimed that it has received advance payment from China for S-400 systems. As TASS reports:

The deliveries of S-400 air defense systems to China under this contract may begin in the first quarter of 2017, Chemezov said.

A source in the system of Russia’s military and technical cooperation earlier told TASS that Beijing would receive the first S-400 antiaircraft missile systems no sooner than in twelve or eighteen months.

China’s deal to purchase S-400 Triumf systems was officially announced in the spring of 2015. Russia’s state arms seller Rosoboronexport Head Anatoly Isaikin didn’t disclose at the time the details of the contract, the number of S-400 systems that would be purchased by China or the timeframe of the deliveries.

*According to media reports, the deal involves no less than six S-400 battalions worth a total of $3 billion.*

*The S-400 Triumf is the most advanced Russian medium- and long-range antiaircraft missile system that went into service in 2007.*

As many as 16 regiments of the Russian Army are expected to be armed with S-400 systems by the end of 2016.

*China has become the first foreign customer of S-400 antiaircraft missile systems.*

*The fact that China is the first nation to purchase the S-400 (remember, Iran purchased the S-300, and the systems haven't even been delivered yet) indicates that Moscow sees Beijing as a long-term political and military partner.* Indeed, while the extent of Russia's "alliance" with China has been somewhat overstated, it seems that the growing economic ties between the two nations have facilitated closer military cooperation as well.

And we're already seeing how China and Russia are working together to protect their mutual security interests:

The foreign ministers of China and Russia are opposing the possible deployment of an advanced American missile-defense system in South Korea.

Amid escalating tensions over North Korea's nuclear arsenal, Washington and Seoul last week began formal talks on deploying the sophisticated THAAD system.

*Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told a news conference Friday after meeting with Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov that putting the system in South Korea would "inflict direct harm to the strategic security interests of China and Russia."*

*And as the US continues to provoke China in the South China Sea,* *we expect further cooperation between Russia and China on political and military matters.* Common economic and security interests have driven China and Russia together -- and Beijing's purchase of the S-400 is a perfect example.

How's that US "pivot to Asia" working out?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

it's a win-win deal for both countries: Russia get money, China need more upgraded military equipment. It's become a necessity that China and Russia to cooperate on defense technology if both want to catch up US. One of the reason that US is more advance in military is due to the fact it cooperate with EU and Japan to exchange technology, share the burden of the development cost. If Russia and China work solo, both will advance in turtle speed and will always lag behind US.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TaiShang

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> it's a win-win deal for both countries: Russia get money, China need more upgraded military equipment. It's become a necessity that China and Russia to cooperate on defense technology if both want to catch up US. One of the reason that US is more advance in military is due to the fact it cooperate with EU and Japan to exchange technology, share the burden of the development cost. If Russia and China work solo, both will advance in turtle speed and will always lag behind US.



The relations are just improving further. It seems, China has become Russia's largest oil customer replacing Germany just as Russia became China's largest energy partner, replacing Saudi Arabia.

Thanks in part to the US, China-Russia partnership has only been elevated in recent years.


----------



## HAIDER

Russia started production of anti-aircraft missile systems (AAMS) S-400 for China.

This was announced on Tuesday, February 14 Director of International Cooperation and Regional Policy "Rostec" Victor treasure, who heads the Russian delegation at the India opened the exhibition "Aero India 2017".

The fact that China has signed a contract for the purchase of S-400 systems, was officially announced in April 2015. The composition of the cash transaction and its amount is not disclosed. Treasure also reported that the C-400 in the Russian Federation intend to buy a few countries. "I wish a lot. A number of countries have expressed a desire.
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/90248/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Eagle

*Game Changer: China Will Soon Have S-400 Air Defense Systems Defending Its Skies*
© Sputnik/ Sergey Malgavko
MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE
15:56 15.02.2017(updated 18:14 15.02.2017) 

*Rostec State Corporation Director for International Cooperation Victor Kladov says that production of the S-400 Triumf anti-aircraft systems slated for China is already underway. Speaking to Radio Sputnik, military expert Oleg Ponomorenko explained why the cutting-edge missile systems will be a game changer for the Chinese military.*

On Tuesday, speaking to reporters at the Aero India 2017 international exhibition in Bengaluru, Kladov confirmed that the China-bound S-400 missile systems are currently in the manufacturing stage. "Right now, there is an operating contract signed with China for the supply of S-400 systems, [and] they are in the production phase," the company official said.







© RIA NOVOSTI.
Russia's Contract to Sell S-400 Missile Systems to China at Production Stage - Rostec

Kladov added that "a number of countries have expressed interest" in the Russian-made air defense system, but stressed that "production capacity is limited."


Last June, Rostec General Director Sergei Shemezov said that the S-400s slated for China would be delivered no earlier than 2018, adding that the first priority was to arm Russia's own military. China has officially confirmed the purchase of at least three regiments (six divisions) of S-400s for its air defense forces. Each division consists of eight launchers, 112 missiles, as well as the necessary command and support vehicles.

In 2015, India announced that it too would like to purchase several battalions of the mobile surface-to-air missile system along with thousands of missiles. Moscow concluded an agreement to supply the systems to India last October following a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the BRICS summit in Goa.







© SPUTNIK/ SERGEY GUNEEV
Russia to Hold Negotiations on S-400 Deliveries to India During Aero India 2017 - Rostec

In November, Turkey said that it too was negotiating with Moscow on the supply of S-400s, and in July, Vietnam also indicated that it was interested.

The S-400 is Russia's next-generation air defense system, capable of carrying four different types of missiles capable of destroying aerial targets at short, medium, long and very-long ranges between 40 and 400 km. The weapon is designed to be able to track and destroy all enemy air objects, including airplanes, helicopters, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles flying at speeds of up to 4,800 m per second; they are also capable of targeting ground objectives.

Designed by the Almaz/Antein Air Defense Concern, and built by the Fakel Machine-Building Design Bureau, the S-400 began to be introduced into the Russian military in 2007. As of 2016, Russia had received 39 divisions, or 312 launchers.





© SPUTNIK/ ALEXANDER VILF
S-400 Triumph/SA-21 Growler medium- and long-range surface-to-air missile systems at 2015 military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of Victory in the 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War. Moscow, Red Square.

News of China's interest in the S-400 began to circulate in 2011. In 2012, sources close to the Russian Federal Services for Military-Technical Cooperation, which regulates military-technical cooperation with other countries, said that negotiations on the purchase of one division (consisting of eight launchers) were underway. In 2014, that number was increased to four divisions. According to the latest reports, China is looking to purchase six divisions, at a total cost of $3 billion.

According to experts, the S-400's range of up to 400 km will allow Beijing to comfortably control its own airspace from attack, and to secure control over the airspace of neighboring countries and territories, including Taiwan and the Senkaku Islands, a group of islands in the East China Sea controlled by Japan but claimed by Beijing, as well.







© SPUTNIK/ DMITRIY VINOGRADOV
Middle Eastern Countries Interested in Russian Arms Showcased in Syria - Rostec

Speaking to Radio Sputnik, security analyst Oleg Ponomarenko, an expert at the Moscow-based Center for Strategic Studies, explained why the delivery of S-400s to China has a number of benefits for Russia.


*"In particular, this is an opportunity, with the help of a foreign partner, to carry out production and finance the development of next-generation systems," Ponomarenko said. "Also, it's a great advertisement for these weapons," he added.*

"Therefore, I see only benefits here. Even the Americans…have complementary things to say about our SAM systems, and are quite right to do so, because the systems have many advantages [over their competitors]," the expert noted.





© SPUTNIK/ DMITRIY VINOGRADOV
An S-400 air defence missile battery deployed for combat duty at the Hmeymim airbase to provide security of the Russian air group's flights in Syria.

China would also benefit tremendously from acquiring the defensive weapons, Ponomarenko added. "If we consider, for example, the [security] environment around China, these systems can provide invaluable assistance in the event of any conflict, both with potential overseas aggressors, and regional ones."

Pointing to the S-400's technical characteristics, the expert pointed out that the system can work not only with its own missiles, "but can interface with other surface-to-air missile systems, which carry out defense nearer to the inner limit of detection." 

Accordingly, Ponomarenko noted that "this system can very well change the balance of forces in the theater of military operations. Its technical characteristics, detection range and targeting range will not allow enemy aircraft to even approach the area of combat operations."





© SPUTNIK/
The S-400 Triumf Mobile Multiple Anti-Aircraft Missile System (AAMS)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Star Expedition

Russia is a stable and trustworthy ally.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

theman111 said:


> china could hack and steal the information of s 400 why buy it?


you mean the NSA/CIA/FBI could hack and steal under false flag ops

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Star Expedition

Beautiful art.
We should equip 100 sets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

theman111 said:


> thats why all world complain about china hacks



The world never complained and its only USA the big liar complained. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/22/edward-snowden-us-china

Who knows better than a CIA contractor working directly inside the pentagon and know all the secret?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## samsara

*FSMTC confirmed the start of the S-400 contract fulfillment to China*

TASS - April 26, 2017

_China became the first foreign buyer of this system, the signing was announced in the spring of 2015_






S-400 launcher © Valery Sharifulin / TASS​*MOSCOW, April 26. / TASS /*. The Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation has confirmed the start of the contract on the S-400 to China. This was reported by TASS in the press service of the Russian FSMTC.

Earlier media quoted the general director of Rosoboronexport, Aleksandra Miheeva said that Russia has started the execution of the contract to supply S-400 to China.

"FSMTC confirms that" Rosoboronexport "is acting in accordance with the terms of the signed contract".

China has become the first foreign buyer of the S-400, the signing was announced in the spring of 2015. According to media reports, the total value of the transaction amounted to about $3 billion.

S-400 "Triumph" (SA-21 Growler, according to NATO classification) - Russian anti-aircraft missile system of large and medium-range missiles. Designed to destroy all the modern and advanced air and space attack. The system can affect aerodynamic targets at ranges of up to 400 km and 60 km - tactical ballistic targets flying at a speed of up to 4.8 km / s: cruise missiles, tactical aircraft and strategic aircraft, combat units ballistic missiles. SAM radar detection means provide air targets at ranges of up to 600 km. The 48N6E3 surface-to-air missile can affect aerodynamic target at altitudes of 10 to 27 kilometers, and ballistic targets -. 2 to 25 kilometers.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

S-400 is design for land, if China integrate S-400 into Zubr as my previous thread, it will have a devastating range and the speed and mobility will make it as sea interceptor.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/china-zubr-s-400-devastator.482605/


----------



## Brainsucker

With only 4 missiles / vehicle that the S-400 has, I don't think that it's enough for the country who operate it to repel the enemy strike with Tomahawk. Just like what the USN showed us recently in Syria that they can launched 50 tomahawk in one air-strike mission to Syria, you will require a lot of this type of anti air missiles to protect your strategic area from the enemy attack.

The problem is, how many vehicles that you will need to cover your entire sky from a barrage of Tomahawk from 4 or 5 Arleigh Burke Destroyer? It is easier to protect the entire air space with several destroyer at the sea, because these destroyers can carry more anti air missiles than any mobile land element can do. But it means you have to ensure that the enemy can't control your near sea territory from the beginning. But that means that the enemy won't launch Tomahawk because they can't do it.


----------



## XDescendantX

@Brainsucker 

Why didn't the Russians shoot down any Tomahawks, given their sophisticated AA equipment, in Syria?
https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the...ven-their-sophisticated-AA-equipment-in-Syria

I was going to say China should just buy one S400 and reverse engineer it. But Russia probably knows this already and told China they have to spend a certain amount of $ if they want this system so China was forced to buy a couple of these air-defense systems.


----------



## Stuttgart001

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> S-400 is design for land, if China integrate S-400 into Zubr as my previous thread, it will have a devastating range and the speed and mobility will make it as sea interceptor.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/china-zubr-s-400-devastator.482605/


As far, the missile 40N6 with 400km range is not available .
These other missiles are the same as S-300PMU.
S-400 may improve its tech some fields, but not enough to be recognized as a leap compared to S-300, therefore needn't be too excited.



XDescendantX said:


> @Brainsucker
> 
> Why didn't the Russians shoot down any Tomahawks, given their sophisticated AA equipment, in Syria?
> https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the...ven-their-sophisticated-AA-equipment-in-Syria
> 
> I was going to say China should just buy one S400 and reverse engineer it. But Russia probably knows this already and told China they have to spend a certain amount of $ if they want this system so China was forced to buy a couple of these air-defense systems.


China did want to purchase few of S-400, but Russia disagreed.
The same is the SU-35 deal, which was that China would only like to buy 4 jets at first.

These two deals happened during the period when Russia experienced depression, for which China must buy something to support Russia .


----------



## Jlaw

Brainsucker said:


> With only 4 missiles / vehicle that the S-400 has, I don't think that it's enough for the country who operate it to repel the enemy strike with Tomahawk. Just like what the USN showed us recently in Syria that they can launched 50 tomahawk in one air-strike mission to Syria, you will require a lot of this type of anti air missiles to protect your strategic area from the enemy attack.
> 
> The problem is, how many vehicles that you will need to cover your entire sky from a barrage of Tomahawk from 4 or 5 Arleigh Burke Destroyer? It is easier to protect the entire air space with several destroyer at the sea, because these destroyers can carry more anti air missiles than any mobile land element can do. But it means you have to ensure that the enemy can't control your near sea territory from the beginning. But that means that the enemy won't launch Tomahawk because they can't do it.


The Russian were given advance notice to evacuate the area. All the equipment and fighters were moved. 59 tomahawk were sent but only 23 hit their intended target. Within 24 hrs the Syrian fighters were taken off from the same "damaged" runway. 
You people think Yankee toys are god like.


----------



## Brainsucker

XDescendantX said:


> @Brainsucker
> 
> Why didn't the Russians shoot down any Tomahawks, given their sophisticated AA equipment, in Syria?
> https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the...ven-their-sophisticated-AA-equipment-in-Syria
> 
> I was going to say China should just buy one S400 and reverse engineer it. But Russia probably knows this already and told China they have to spend a certain amount of $ if they want this system so China was forced to buy a couple of these air-defense systems.



Do I question the quality and capability of S400? No. I just mentioned the quantity. And for that www.quora.com is, thank, but no thanks. Whatever they write there is only an assumption. If you ask a question why don't the Russian intercept American's Tomahawk, then my answer is I don't know. They have their own reason. My concern is more about the quantity of missiles that the S400 battalion can carry. If a division can bring only 8 launchers, then they are not enough. As the United States can launch 50 or more Tomahawk in an attack operation. An anti missile dome will require more than a 8 missile launcher vehicles that can only bring 32 missiles.


----------



## ao333

I'm curious. Why is China buying S-400 now? It's a decade old, and will be obsolete export-wise as soon as the S-500 arrives. Is it because the HQ-9 has not been a successful copy? It has no foreign operators thus far, not even Pakistan, and this is the type of weapon they need the most.


----------



## C130

ao333 said:


> I'm curious. Why is China buying S-400 now? It's a decade old, and will be obsolete export-wise as soon as the S-500 arrives. Is it because the HQ-9 has not been a successful copy? It has no foreign operators thus far, not even Pakistan, and this is the type of weapon they need the most.



China has passed Russia long ago in the field of weapons manufacturing and aerospace, but they still buy Su-35 to S400 as a gesture of friendship.



Brainsucker said:


> Do I question the quality and capability of S400? No. I just mentioned the quantity. And for that www.quora.com is, thank, but no thanks. Whatever they write there is only an assumption. If you ask a question why don't the Russian intercept American's Tomahawk, then my answer is I don't know. They have their own reason. My concern is more about the quantity of missiles that the S400 battalion can carry. If a division can bring only 8 launchers, then they are not enough. As the United States can launch 50 or more Tomahawk in an attack operation. An anti missile dome will require more than a 8 missile launcher vehicles that can only bring 32 missiles.


why would you use S-400 to shoot down Tomahawks???






but it get's worse. I can see Chinese using S400 to shoot at MALDs, LMAO wasting big missiles for a freaking decoy.


----------



## Stuttgart001

ao333 said:


> I'm curious. Why is China buying S-400 now? It's a decade old, and will be obsolete export-wise as soon as the S-500 arrives. Is it because the HQ-9 has not been a successful copy? It has no foreign operators thus far, not even Pakistan, and this is the type of weapon they need the most.


S-400 is not obsolete . S-500 has different usage from S-400.


----------



## ao333

Stuttgart001 said:


> S-400 is not obsolete . S-500 has different usage from S-400.



The S-500 does everything that the S-400 can, but better. S-500 also has ABM and CMD capability. The reverse is not true. The only reason the S-400 won't be phased out is because it's cheaper per pop. From a reverse-engineering perspective, there's no reason to buy a S-300 upgrade, with no new features.

You guys either have problems upgrading your own S-300 copies or the Russians are forcing you to buy this by leveraging your need for their engines.


----------



## Stuttgart001

ao333 said:


> The S-500 does everything that the S-400 can, but better. S-500 also has ABM and CMD capability. The reverse is not true. The only reason the S-400 won't be phased out is because it's cheaper per pop. From a reverse-engineering perspective, there's no reason to buy a S-300 upgrade, with no new features.
> 
> You guys either have problems upgrading your own S-300 copies or the Russians are forcing you to buy this by leveraging your need for their engines.


S-500 is not suitable for countering aircraft, drones, cruise missiles.
You could see the tube of S-500,which is much larger than S-400's,which means the missile is much larger with more range, higher speed.
You could see the SAM 2, SAM3,SAM6 in US and HQ9,HQ19 in China.

Using ICBM to do IMBM 's job is not a good idea.


----------



## Globenim

ao333 said:


> The S-500 does everything that the S-400 can, but better.



No it can't and it is not better at everything.
The S500 is a larger specialized complement to the S400.
It cant and wont replace the role of S400.


----------



## Shahzaz ud din

*Russia Confirms: It plans to start shipping the S-400 air defense missile system in China recently*
2017-12-09 18:24:12 Sina Aspect  Author: Missy military first I have something to say 
Russian media said that Sergey Chemezov, general manager of the Russian state technology group, said it planned to start shipping the S-400 air defense system to China recently.

According to the Russian satellite network reported on December 7, Chemezov in response to a reporter's question, said: "S-400 ... ... is in the production. We are all in accordance with the contract."

Reported that the S-400 "Triumph" is the latest long-range air defense missile system. It is used to destroy aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, including medium-range missiles. The S-400 can also be used to combat ground targets. S-400's maximum range of up to 400 km, to destroy high-altitude targets up to 30 km. The Russian military installed the missile system in 2007. S-400 "Triumph" air defense missile (NATO named SA-21 Growler) is a new generation of long-range air defense missile systems.

Reported that the system can be used in the strong electronic interference, day and night, regardless of geographical and climatic conditions.

The S400 "Triumph" air defense missile system includes: combat control units with radar detection facilities, up to 6 air defense missile systems, each equipped with a radar station with a total of 12 launchers; 2 anti-aircraft missiles; ancillary facilities: Highly radar and mobile towers.

S400 "Triumph" air defense missile anti-aircraft aerodynamic range of the largest over 250km, minimum 3km. The maximum kill target height of 27km, a minimum of 0.01km. Killing tactical missile target range: up to 60km, minimum 5km. Kill target speed up to 4800m / s. The system is adjusted from the state of the march to the deployed state for 5 minutes, and the system is adjusted from the deployed state to the battle-ready state for 3 minutes. Ground device life of at least 20 years, 15 years of anti-aircraft missiles. A set of air defense missile systems can shoot up to 6 targets at the same time.







　　(Special Statement: The contents of the above articles only represent the author's own point of view, does not represent Sina point of view or position. For content, copyright or other issues, please contact the Sina within 30 days after the publication of the work.


----------



## 星海军事

The backwards confidentiality system and publicity strategy may be account for the upcoming rumour, saying the next-gen SAM of China is an S-400 knockoff, which has already happened on HQ-9 and S-300.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> The backwards confidentiality system and publicity strategy may be account for the upcoming rumour, saying the next-gen SAM of China is an S-400 knockoff, which has already happened on HQ-9 and S-300.



Can you elaborate? I thought the next-gen SAM was the following: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-05/27/content_29520150.htm


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> Can you elaborate? I thought the next-gen SAM was the following: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-05/27/content_29520150.htm



That's it. Actually the one mentioned in the article is one of the main forces of the next-gen SAM.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

SinoSoldier said:


> Can you elaborate? I thought the next-gen SAM was the following: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-05/27/content_29520150.htm



This SAM will get bad publicity because of S-400. They will say that this system is a S-400 copy. I think China should publish this SAM first before they allow S-400 to come.


----------



## Beast

Brainsucker said:


> This SAM will get bad publicity because of S-400. They will say that this system is a S-400 copy. I think China should publish this SAM first before they allow S-400 to come.


Bad publicity is only for commoner and those with no basic military knowledge. When comes to country to country sales and dealing. Many countries top commander are very rational and would want demonstration and in depth explanation. They are not easy fool by those fake western articles which spread malicious lies. China has already exported their missile system and if they feel Chinese HQ-9 is copy of inferior. I doubt they would buy it in the first place.

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/78081

https://www.kaskus.co.id/thread/54d...stan-dan-uzbekistan-beli-hq-9-sam-dari-china/


----------



## Figaro

星海军事 said:


> The backwards confidentiality system and publicity strategy may be account for the upcoming rumour, saying the next-gen SAM of China is an S-400 knockoff, which has already happened on HQ-9 and S-300.


HQ-9 is not a S-300 knockoff or exact copy ... it is influenced by the S-300 but to call it a "copy" would be very exaggerated. If anything, it incorporated elements of the PATRIOT SAM system. I think the HQ-9 is more of a hybrid than a "copy" ...



Beast said:


> Bad publicity is only for commoner and those with no basic military knowledge. When comes to country to country sales and dealing. Many countries top commander are very rational and would want demonstration and in depth explanation. They are not easy fool by those fake western articles which spread malicious lies. China has already exported their missile system and if they feel* Chinese HQ-9 is copy* of inferior. I doubt they would buy it in the first place.
> 
> http://www.eurasianet.org/node/78081
> 
> https://www.kaskus.co.id/thread/54d...stan-dan-uzbekistan-beli-hq-9-sam-dari-china/


The HQ-9 is not a copy of the S-300 ...


----------



## Beast

Figaro said:


> HQ-9 is not a S-300 knockoff or exact copy ... it is influenced by the S-300 but to call it a "copy" would be very exaggerated. If anything, it incorporated elements of the PATRIOT SAM system. I think the HQ-9 is more of a hybrid than a "copy" ...
> 
> 
> The HQ-9 is not a copy of the S-300 ...


Hi, are you ok? Why are you quoting and make them stupid expression? Can you read my post properly.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> That's it. Actually the one mentioned in the article is one of the main forces of the next-gen SAM.



Thanks. Could you elaborate a bit on the difference between the HQ-19, HQ-29, HQ-26, and the above missile? Are some of them the same system?


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> Thanks. Could you elaborate a bit on the difference between the HQ-19, HQ-29, HQ-26, and the above missile? Are some of them the same system?


Both HQ-19 and HQ-26 were meant for anti-ballistic missile. I don't think HQ-29 exists, as for now.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> Both HQ-19 and HQ-26 were meant for anti-ballistic missile. I don't think HQ-29 exists, as for now.



Interesting, the HQ-26 seems to be the missile spotted in testing on a PLAN weapons trial ship.

Didn't the HQ-29 (aka Project 8102) win the National Science & Technology Progress award (2nd place) in 2014?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> Interesting, the HQ-26 seems to be the missile spotted in testing on a PLAN weapons trial ship.
> 
> Didn't the HQ-29 (aka Project 8102) win the National Science & Technology Progress award (2nd place) in 2014?
> 
> View attachment 441979



Why do you think it is HQ-29?


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> Why do you think it is HQ-29?



I think the text "HQ-29" was mentioned in a few papers. Are you saying that its designation may be different, or that such a missile (PAC-3 counterpart and SAM) does not exist at all?


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> I think the text "HQ-29" was mentioned in a few papers.



Really? Could you show me any of those papers? 



SinoSoldier said:


> Are you saying that its designation may be different, or that such a missile (PAC-3 counterpart and SAM) does not exist at all?



There is a model possesses some of the distinctive features of PAC-3.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> Really? Could you show me any of those papers?
> 
> 
> 
> There is a model possesses some of the distinctive features of PAC-3.



I do admit that I couldn't relocate the papers bearing the specific designation "HQ-29", but there is plenty of evidence that such a project exists. Whether the name is "HQ-29" or not doesn't matter too much.

The woman who participated in the program was named 李芸. 
The first flight of the missile is documented here: http://military.china.com/important/64/20120316/17096029.html

This is her research paper on altitude-control lateral rocket thrusters: http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/periodical/xdfyjs200706009

Video overviewing the development of a _low-end terminal interceptor_: www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAWNNApAJ5I

The lateral thrust rockets of the "HQ-29" (or HQ-XX):















=====

In summary, I think that you and I are referring to the same system, i.e. a low-end interceptor or SAM that can target aircraft or short/medium-range ballistic missiles like the PAC-3MSE/ERINT. We only differ on the designation (if not HQ-29, then I wonder what it is called).


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> I do admit that I couldn't relocate the papers bearing the specific designation "HQ-29", but there is plenty of evidence that such a project exists. Whether the name is "HQ-29" or not doesn't matter too much.
> 
> The woman who participated in the program was named 李芸.
> The first flight of the missile is documented here: http://military.china.com/important/64/20120316/17096029.html
> 
> This is her research paper on altitude-control lateral rocket thrusters: http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/periodical/xdfyjs200706009
> 
> Video overviewing the development of a _low-end terminal interceptor_: www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAWNNApAJ5I
> 
> The lateral thrust rockets of the "HQ-29" (or HQ-XX):
> 
> View attachment 442070
> 
> View attachment 442071
> 
> View attachment 442072
> 
> 
> =====
> 
> In summary, I think that you and I are referring to the same system, i.e. a low-end interceptor or SAM that can target aircraft or short/medium-range ballistic missiles like the PAC-3MSE/ERINT. We only differ on the designation (if not HQ-29, then I wonder what it is called).



I suppose you are better than many of the Chinese military fans at information gathering. 

The new model shares some of the features with PAC-3 while they are highly different. You are half right about its designation.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> I suppose you are better than many of the Chinese military fans at information gathering.



Thanks, but much of the credit goes to OSINT expert Henri Kenhmann (I'm sure you are aware of his blog). 



星海军事 said:


> The new model shares some of the features with PAC-3 while they are highly different. You are half right about its designation.



So, can we safely assume that, unlike the PAC-3MSE, this new HQ-XX has an anti-aircraft role as well?


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> Thanks, but much of the credit goes to OSINT expert Henri Kenhmann (I'm sure you are aware of his blog).
> 
> 
> 
> So, can we safely assume that, unlike the PAC-3MSE, this new HQ-XX has an anti-aircraft role as well?




PAC-3 MSE has a non-negligible ability in anti-aircraft, and yes, the main purpose of the next-gen SAM will still be anti-aircraft.


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> PAC-3 MSE has a non-negligible ability in anti-aircraft, and yes, the main purpose of the next-gen SAM will still be anti-aircraft.



Thanks again for the information. It would be one of the very few SAMs that use a kinetic kill vehicle, then.


----------



## The Ronin

Russia’s TASS News Agency reported that Russia has started delivering its S-400 surface-to-air missile systems to China under the terms of a contract signed in 2014.

The TASS news agency cited an unnamed source in the Russian military-industrial complex as saying that Russia has begun delivering S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems to China.

“The contract was launched, the first regimental batch sent to China,” said the source.



According to the source, the batch of new S-400 includes a command post, a radar station, power and auxiliary equipment, spare parts, tools, accessories and other elements of the system.

The contract signed with China does not provide for either the transfer of technology or the licensed production of these systems.



The S-400 anti-aircraft system is designed to engage aerodynamic targets at a range of up to 400km and ballistic missiles up to 60km away. The system can use at least four interceptor missile types suited to different targets. An S-400 unit can engage up to 36 targets simultaneously.

http://defence-blog.com/army/tass-russia-begins-delivering-s-400-to-china.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

The Ronin said:


> Russia’s TASS News Agency reported that Russia has started delivering its S-400 surface-to-air missile systems to China under the terms of a contract signed in 2014.
> 
> The TASS news agency cited an unnamed source in the Russian military-industrial complex as saying that Russia has begun delivering S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems to China.
> 
> “The contract was launched, the first regimental batch sent to China,” said the source.
> 
> 
> 
> According to the source, the batch of new S-400 includes a command post, a radar station, power and auxiliary equipment, spare parts, tools, accessories and other elements of the system.
> 
> The contract signed with China does not provide for either the transfer of technology or the licensed production of these systems.
> 
> 
> 
> The S-400 anti-aircraft system is designed to engage aerodynamic targets at a range of up to 400km and ballistic missiles up to 60km away. The system can use at least four interceptor missile types suited to different targets. An S-400 unit can engage up to 36 targets simultaneously.
> 
> http://defence-blog.com/army/tass-russia-begins-delivering-s-400-to-china.html


@cirr , @Beast , @ChineseTiger1986 , @Deino are China is getting s-400 from Russia i think you rejected s-400 in the past, can somebody clarify me


----------



## Beast

pakistanipower said:


> @cirr , @Beast , @ChineseTiger1986 , @Deino are China is getting s-400 from Russia i think you rejected s-400 in the past, can somebody clarify me


I think there is a poster that say it’s very well. S-400 like Su-35 will be delivered in limited numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Beast said:


> I think there is a poster that say it’s very well. S-400 like Su-35 will be delivered in limited numbers.


And we all know why ....


----------



## YeBeWarned

Han Patriot said:


> And we all know why ....



why ?


----------



## The Ronin

Yep looks like it's true. both link mentioned above and down here is pretty reliable.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/jan..._first_s-400_air_defense_missile_systems.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Beast said:


> I think there is a poster that say it’s very well. S-400 like Su-35 will be delivered in limited numbers.


Maybe to put some money in Russian pockets



Starlord said:


> why ?


To put some money in empty Russian pockets


----------



## Zarvan

S-400 based on MZKT chassis
Got a news tip for our reporters? | Found a typo? Please let us know! | Subscribe to newsletter. 


Russia’s TASS News Agency reported that Russia has started delivering its S-400 surface-to-air missile systems to China under the terms of a contract signed in 2014.

The TASS news agency cited an unnamed source in the Russian military-industrial complex as saying that Russia has begun delivering S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems to China.

“The contract was launched, the first regimental batch sent to China,” said the source.

More: Photos: Russia deploys more S-400 air defence missile systems to Crimea

According to the source, the batch of new S-400 includes a command post, a radar station, power and auxiliary equipment, spare parts, tools, accessories and other elements of the system.

The contract signed with China does not provide for either the transfer of technology or the licensed production of these systems.

More: Erdogan: Turkey and Russia signed document on supplies of S-400

The S-400 anti-aircraft system is designed to engage aerodynamic targets at a range of up to 400km and ballistic missiles up to 60km away. The system can use at least four interceptor missile types suited to different targets. An S-400 unit can engage up to 36 targets simultaneously.

http://defence-blog.com/army/tass-russia-begins-delivering-s-400-to-china.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

*Oh come on ... is it really necessary to start yet another thread exactly one post above the already existing one !!! 

Take this as a warning. *


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

pakistanipower said:


> @cirr , @Beast , @ChineseTiger1986 , @Deino are China is getting s-400 from Russia i think you rejected s-400 in the past, can somebody clarify me



To help Russia's military industrial complex and to balance the trade.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

I'd imagine that the Chinese wish they'd gotten these sooner, now that their HQ-29 seems to be on the verge of entering service (if it hasn't done so already).


----------



## UKBengali

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> To help Russia's military industrial complex and to balance the trade.




I think another reason is for China to make a comparison between it's technology and that of Russia.
Since China was behind till very recently it would make sense to compare it's technology with the best that Russia has to offer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chhatrapati

UKBengali said:


> I think another reason is for China to make a comparison between it's technology and that of Russia.
> Since China was behind till very recently it would make sense to compare it's technology with the best that Russia has to offer.


Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.


----------



## UKBengali

SOUTHie said:


> Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.



What does Russia have that is anywhere near the Type-55 destroyer that China is building?
What does Russia have that is anywhere near the J-20 fighter that is in operation?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 925boy

SOUTHie said:


> Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.


If Russia is really "miles ahead" then why does Russia show strategic insecurity about China's military capability/prowess? I'm talking about military d eployments Russia does near China such as Iskander and stuff. If China was no military threat(partly based on military tech available and used) then why does Russia sometimes show insecurity? i agree Russia is ahead of China in military technology but i think China has almost caught up, or is making up for that disadvantage in other ways.


----------



## Kompromat

400km is the max range, the operational range will be lower.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

SOUTHie said:


> Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.


Then why don't have destroyed compare to type-52 with AESA and why they don't build stealth jets comparable to j20 and j31 Su-57 just a flattened flankers with worst stealth features among all 5th gen jets, in submarines, missiles and jet engine fields they slighty ahead but rest i agree with you they have technologies and experience to build top class weapons

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 星海军事

Horus said:


> 400km is the max range, the operational range will be lower.


I am afraid the "400 km" 40N6 is not ready for export yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beast

Starlord said:


> why ?


China is involved in S-400 development and funding part of it. As everybody knows, you can never get any money back from Russian once your money goes in. Same like IL-76 deal of USD 1.6billion paid but not able to deliver. Instead 10 refurbished one will act as compensation.

China will always have a backup plan for a real plan. Buying a few limited of these S-400 will ensure the money is not totally wasted. Not saying S-400 is not good but intergrating these unit into Chinese military network will be a challenge.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ARMalik

pakistanipower said:


> @cirr , @Beast , @ChineseTiger1986 , @Deino are China is getting s-400 from Russia i think you rejected s-400 in the past, can somebody clarify me



So why do you need clarification; I thought you knew every thing? This is what happens when you use too many emoji of


----------



## Ultima Thule

ARMalik said:


> So why do you need clarification; I thought you knew every thing? This is what happens when you use too many emoji of


Sorry bro My mistake bro don't take it too personal but they having s400 in limited numbers they have sufficiently HQ-9 they invest s400 project

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Safriz

So
...Agni-5 is now irrelevant?


----------



## ARMalik

pakistanipower said:


> Sorry bro My mistake bro don't take it too personal but they having s400 in limited numbers they have sufficiently HQ-9 they invest s400 project



I am just joking around with you...all good.


----------



## IblinI

UKBengali said:


> I think another reason is for China to make a comparison between it's technology and that of Russia.
> Since China was behind till very recently it would make sense to compare it's technology with the best that Russia has to offer.


This is really close to the truth, we have just been catching up from the last ten years, better not to be overconfident before all those home made new system deliver to PLA and forms solid ability.



شاھین میزایل said:


> So
> ...Agni-5 is now irrelevant?


My friend, imagine when your country has the concern to deal with US strategic force, either another Agni-5 or 6 or 7,does it really matter that much? The country was and is going to focus on the US and Jap mainly without a doubt.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yukihime

throughout time, ancient people kept wondering about a few basic questions:
1. why the sun keeps shining
2. why apple keeps falling down from the tree to the ground
3. why all the worlds strongest powers would like to collect other people's goods

when they are friends, they get the best from you:
Sovremennyy class destroyer
china buys more russian S-300
Sukhoi Begins Su-35 Deliveries to China

whey they are not friends, they try harder to get the best from you:
AMERICAN FLANKERS
US buys Su-27 fighters from Ukraine for ‘aggressor’ training

when you corrupts, others take over and make yours shin better:
*‘We Need To Hold Our Noses,’ Buy Russian RD-180 Engines: SecDef*

why?
why?
why it is like that in this world?
... or why not?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

UKBengali said:


> I think another reason is for China to make a comparison between it's technology and that of Russia.
> Since China was behind till very recently it would make sense to compare it's technology with the best that Russia has to offer.



China has managed to develop the much more complicated technology like the DN-3.

To compare the S-400 to the DN-3 is like to compare the conventional sub to the nuclear sub.

China's reason to purchase of the S-400 was purely geopolitical just like the purchase of the Su-35, and China can undoubtedly develop the SAM equal or superior to the S-400 on its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## yantong1980

SOUTHie said:


> Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.



There's understanding between Russia and China that Su-27 case will not happen again. I'm more believed that China want to 'learn' from compare theirs and Russian counterpart hardware. Russian war tech like S-400 and Su-35 are already tested on Syrian theater. Own and operating these hardware will give Chinese better understanding for creating their own system. S-400 export was 'copy' (of course degrade) of original S-400 that operated by Russia, so what the point for China to 'straight copy' anything from copy of original while China do not want ruin their strategic relationship with Russia? Do you ever think about it? The fact is there's no totally 'decades, thousand miles or copy these or that'. Your comment nothing than 'copy and paste' from media.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IblinI

UKBengali said:


> What does Russia have that is anywhere near the Type-55 destroyer that China is building?
> What does Russia have that is anywhere near the J-20 fighter that is in operation?


What comes first is always Economic, without cash, nothing can be done.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## YeBeWarned

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> China has managed to develop the much more complicated technology like the DN-3.
> 
> To compare the S-400 to the DN-3 is like to compare the conventional sub to the nuclear sub.
> 
> China's reason to purchase of the S-400 was purely geopolitical just like the purchase of the Su-35, and China can undoubtedly develop the SAM equal or superior to the S-400 on its own.



What is DN-3 ?


----------



## HannibalBarca

*A storm has damaged parts of a Russian S-400 missile defense system as it was being shipped to China.*
*The damaged components will be transported back to Russia for evaluation before being delivered to China at a later date.*

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A storm has damaged parts of a Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system while it was being shipped to China, RIA news agency said on Friday, quoting a Russian official.

China became the first foreign buyer of the system from Russia under a contract signed in 2014.

The vessel has brought back the damaged components to Russia's port of Ust-Luga for evaluation, Mariya Vorobyova, spokeswoman for the military and technical cooperation service told RIA.

They would be delivered to China at a later date, she said.

She gave no details about the damaged components but described them as secondary.

Russia also signed a deal to supply the S-400 missile system to Turkey late last year.

(Reporting by Polina Devitt; editing by Richard Balmforth)

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-st...00-system-on-its-way-to-china-ria-2018-1?IR=T


----------



## LeGenD

DN-3 is a Chinese ASAT weapon. It can be used to intercept a ballistic missile with relevant modifications.

*Full name:* Dong Neng-3

FYI:

https://tiananmenstremendousachievements.wordpress.com/tag/dn-3/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ew-missile-capable-destroying-satellites.html


----------



## juj06750

Again, its russian state media

let just wait . and we will see

Chinese state media officially never say it bought long-time controversial SU35 and S400

we make much better weapons than russia now

we don't need any more russian weapons

some say china is just leasing them for trials

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

HannibalBarca said:


> ...




*Please not always a new thread if there is one already !!!*


----------



## HannibalBarca

Deino said:


> *Please not always a new thread if there is one already !!!*


Where...


----------



## Deino

HannibalBarca said:


> Where...




I just merged them, but it was exactly two posts above your new thread.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Deino said:


> I just merged them, but it was exactly two posts above your new thread.


Well... It's an incident about S-400... I can understand it's similar...but not many could see "this incident" happen...with this current title...
Anyway...


----------



## Deino

HannibalBarca said:


> Well... It's an incident about S-400... I can understand it's similar...but not many could see "this incident" happen...
> Anyway...




yes, but it is related to the S-400 and as such fits nicely into the regular thread. Otherwise others would like to post each and every new report about each and everything in separate threads and I try to keep a streamlined system here in order to not to have to many threads.


----------



## HannibalBarca

Deino said:


> yes, but it is related to the S-400 and as such fits nicely into the regular thread. Otherwise others would like to post each and every new report about each and everything in separate threads and I try to keep a streamlined system here in order to not to have to many threads.


Now that you changed the title of this thread... I understand the move.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Thanks for your understanding !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Starlord said:


> What is DN-3 ?



China's ASAT/ICBM interceptor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> China has managed to develop the much more complicated technology like the DN-3.
> 
> To compare the S-400 to the DN-3 is like to compare the conventional sub to the nuclear sub.
> 
> China's reason to purchase of the S-400 was purely geopolitical just like the purchase of the Su-35, and China can undoubtedly develop the SAM equal or superior to the S-400 on its own.


Totally agree. Both the Su-35 deal and the alleged S-400 deal were made in 2014, just one year after Xi Jinping took office. And what better way to promote Sino-Russian geopolitical alliance than to buy some Russian equipment. We all know that Russia's economy was tanking back in 2014 and lacked friends due to the Crimean annexation. Since one of Xi Jinping's first foreign policy priorities was to enhance bilateral relations with Russia, it makes sense that an arms deal would be in place. And note how both systems have been advertised to China for almost a decade ... why would China suddenly sign two deals immediately after Xi's presidency. The answer is geopolitics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

As I said before integrate S-400 on Zubr-class LCAC, it will have a devastating effect on eastern sea, or SCS, the high mobility of this ship combined with amazing range of S-400, China can then set the mobile ADIZ


----------



## Brainsucker

Figaro said:


> Totally agree. Both the Su-35 deal and the alleged S-400 deal were made in 2014, just one year after Xi Jinping took office. And what better way to promote Sino-Russian geopolitical alliance than to buy some Russian equipment. We all know that Russia's economy was tanking back in 2014 and lacked friends due to the Crimean annexation. Since one of Xi Jinping's first foreign policy priorities was to enhance bilateral relations with Russia, it makes sense that an arms deal would be in place. And note how both systems have been advertised to China for almost a decade ... why would China suddenly sign two deals immediately after Xi's presidency. The answer is geopolitics.



Totally disagree. 

Yes, China has already has the capability to make a good Jet Fighter and SAM that is not even inferior compared to SU-35 and S-400. But China is vast. They need a lot of SAM and Jet Fighter. And the threat that they face is a country with the strongest air power in this world. And even a country like China has limitation on their production capacity of building SAM and jet-fighter. Plus SU-35 and S-400 are capable weapon. 

With the current PLA need for more advanced weapon, and with a very change-able political climate today, We can't deny that China will need more fire power than they have today. So, if SU-35 and S-400 can add the fire power that China need to defend their interest today, why not they do it? It is what we call practical thinking. Pride is the last thing that China should have in order to defend their interest.

So it is not about China can't build a good Jet-Fighter and SAM, it is all about the number that more Jet-Fighters that PLAAF can sortie today.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Grandy

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> As I said before integrate S-400 on Zubr-class LCAC, it will have a devastating effect on eastern sea, or SCS, the high mobility of this ship combined with amazing range of S-400, China can then set the mobile ADIZ



Zubr-class LCAC is not big enought to fit with large S-400

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

3 Years to deliver a complex S-400 system to China is reasonable wait time.
Takes time to assemble the macines and Test it

So it was a natural wait time , not delayed or not too soon

S-400 makes sense for China, becasue it adds a different unexpected layer of defence in their
*"Dragon's Layer defence"
*
It would not be suprising to see China/Russia to collaboration on Stealth Killer SAM down the line


----------



## 帅的一匹

The price Russia quote China for S400 is only half of India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

SOUTHie said:


> Actually, the Russians initially doubted their S-400 will be copied by the Chinese. There was a debate over it and finally, they arrived at a conclusion that S-400 is too complex to be copied. And no, when it comes to defense tech, Russia is miles ahead. Be it Naval vessels, Fighters, missiles, you name it.


apart from high thrust turbofan engine and the number of nukes```I cant think any others that they are ahead of us```in fact in terms of electrical propulsion system, integrated power management system, diesel engine, Gas turbine, radar, semiconductor, Aegis combat system, stealth fighter, drone, AI and new material, NMD, TMD, rail gun and etc``` we are infact miles ahead of Russia, and the gap is ever widing```

your funny Indian delusion bares no weight of fact as simple as that

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chhatrapati

rcrmj said:


> apart from high thrust turbofan engine and the number of nukes```I cant think any others that they are ahead of us```in fact in terms of electrical propulsion system, integrated power management system, diesel engine, Gas turbine, radar, semiconductor, Aegis combat system, stealth fighter, drone, AI and new material, NMD, TMD, rail gun and etc``` we are infact miles ahead of Russia, and the gap is ever widing```
> 
> your funny Indian delusion bares no weight of fact as simple as that



Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country. Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> The price Russia quote China for S400 is only half of India.


China paid for half of S400 development fee.



SOUTHie said:


> Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country. Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.


Typical self denial. There are many Chinese defence hardware sold which user has no problem trusting made in China product. A hint (UCAV).

Let me ask you some simple question. How many new type of destroyer had Russian launched since Soviet Union? Zero. How is new Chinese destroyer looks anything similar to Russian one? Same as LDP, replenishment ship, frigate and corvette. Care to answer me?

Russian weapon export market will not hold much edge longer. The Chinese are edging closer.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## alphapak

SOUTHie said:


> Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country. Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.



China has 2 fifth Gen Fighter programs at the same time whilst
Russia is struggling with one. As for India they can't assemble 
a 3th Generation Teja fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Chhatrapati

Beast said:


> Let me ask you some simple question. How many new type of destroyer had Russian launched since Soviet Union? Zero. How is new Chinese destroyer looks anything similar to Russian one? Same as LDP, replenishment ship, frigate and corvette. Care to answer me?
> 
> Russian weapon export market will not hold much edge longer. The Chinese are edging closer.


Russians practically don't have to do any power projection right now. They are well within their limit to protect their boundary and also, they are not in a good economic shape.
Russian export market will hold much longer as long as there are buyers. Since not many countries make such weapons.



alphapak said:


> China has 2 fifth Gen Fighter programs at the same time whilst
> Russia is struggling with one. As for India they can't assemble
> a 3th Generation Teja fighter.


And anyone cares to buy? At least put a quotation?

Russia already has enough resources for it. Russians don't boast about it much. India assembled enough jets, more than any in South Asia. And don't make it about India you Pakistani. Tejas is not the topic here.

Poor obsessed guy, please do look at your own threads in which you look at Russian fighters, claims Russia will sell their fighters to you and so and so. Please don't make such threads when you have superior Chinese jets. Buy their fifth gen hyper power jets.


----------



## rcrmj

SOUTHie said:


> Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country. Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.


yet again to funny and deluded Indian, none of the above that has remote connection to facts. and stereotypes carry no weight of reality, and this cannt be more suitable to extremely ignorant and primitive Indian.

here are the facts: most countries (including your white masters) trust Chinese stuff, so we are the biggest exporter of high tech end products;

secondly, there are loads good threads regarding Chinese CV, aircraft and weapon system development, but i guess techniqual and common sense discussions are not suitable to ignorant Indian;

and lastly, regarding the S-400, yes they are offering a small number of it to us with a unit price that is a fraction to what was offered to India with much lager quantity, I guess primitive factor driven *SP 12* doesnt have any leverage on international arm dealings```can you tell me why? 



SOUTHie said:


> Russians practically don't have to do any power projection right now. They are well within their limit to protect their boundary and also, they are not in a good economic shape.
> Russian export market will hold much longer as long as there are buyers. Since not many countries make such weapons.
> 
> 
> And anyone cares to buy? At least put a quotation?
> 
> Russia already has enough resources for it. Russians don't boast about it much. India assembled enough jets, more than any in South Asia. And don't make it about India you Pakistani. Tejas is not the topic here.
> 
> Poor obsessed guy, please do look at your own threads in which you look at Russian fighters, claims Russia will sell their fighters to you and so and so. Please don't make such threads when you have superior Chinese jets. Buy their fifth gen hyper power jets.


and another reason that Russia is still one of the biggest arm exporters is due to primitive countries like India, cant even produce a bullet but have to rely on virtually everything on Russia```so they can rape you off like innocent Indian girls in your slums, fact

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## seesonic

SOUTHie said:


> *Russians practically don't have to do any power projection right now.* They are well within their limit to protect their boundary and also, they are not in a good economic shape.



Oh my 

I know indians wants to project its power but lacks the capability. However, indian critic Russians capability where indians have to buy aircraft carriers, 5th generation airplane, strategic movers from the Russians? 








SOUTHie said:


> Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country.* Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment* (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.



The chinese should buy Indians products. Lots of trust 

In November 2005, a Dhruv *crash-landed* in Andhra Pradesh, causing the entire fleet to be grounded; the subsequent probe found a fault with the helicopter's tail rotor blades, which has since been corrected.[23][24]

On 2 February 2007, during rehearsals prior to Aero India, a HAL Dhruv of the Sarang helicopter display team of the Indian Air Force *crashed*, killing co-pilot Squadron Leader Priye Sharma and injuring the pilot Wing Commander Vikas Jetley.[125] After being in a coma for almost four years, Vikas Jetley died in January 2011.[126] The helicopter team continued to perform in the air show.[127]

In October 2009, an Ecuadorian Air Force Dhruv *flew into the ground* near Quito while attempting formation flight with two other helicopters. The remaining six aircraft were grounded during the investigation, which later concluded pilot error to be the cause.[128]

In February 2010, an Indian Air Force Dhruv was forced to make a *crash landing* after suffering a loss of power while rehearsing for the "Vayu Shakti" air show; both pilots survived.[23]

On 14 December 2010, a Dhruv *crashed *in Jammu injuring all 9 personnel on board.[129]

On 22 December 2010, a Dhruv *crashed *in Leh injuring both pilots.[129]
On 21 April 2011, four army personnel were killed when a Dhruv *crashed *in north Sikkim. Initial reports pointed to weather as the cause, but a court of inquiry was established to ascertain the exact cause.[130]

On 19 October 2011, an Indian Border Security Force (BSF) Dhruv (VT-BSH) crashed in north-east India, resulting in the deaths of the three crew on board.[131] The cause of the crash was found to be pilot error due to spatial disorientation.[132]

On 15 January 2012, a BSF Dhruv (VT-BSN) crashed on the runway at Raipur airport during a test flight; there were no deaths but all five of the crew on board were injured.[133] Investigation by DGCA has concluded that the crash was caused by pilot error.[134] Inadequacies in training of flight crew had been identified.

On 5 April 2012, a Dhruv was heavily damaged by Maoists who fired upon the helicopter [135]
On 13 May 2013, a Dhruv *crashed *in Siachen injuring the pilot and co-pilot [136]
On 19 December 2013, a Dhruv armed with weapons made an emergency landing in Karnataka.[137]
On 22 February 2014, an Ecuadorian Air Force Dhruv often used as a presidential transport *crashed *in the Chimborazo region. The pilot Captain Fabian Pazos Narvaez survived, but three military officials were killed. The incident is under investigation.[138][139]

On 25 July 2014, an Indian Air Force Dhruv *crashed *near Sitapur in Uttar Pradesh, India. All seven on board were killed. It had been tracked from the ATC of a Delhi air force station until contact with the aircraft was suddenly lost. A mayday call from the pilots appeared to highlight a mechanical failure as the cause. The IAF ordered a court of inquiry to establish the cause of the crash.[140]

On 13 January 2015, an Ecuadorian Air Force Dhruv *crashed *injuring 2 crew members [141]
On 28 January 2015, an Ecuadorian Air Force Dhruv *crashed *injuring 4 crew members [141]
On 11 February 2015, an Indian Army Dhruv *crashed *in Jammu&Kashmir, killing 2 crew members.[142]
On 4 July 2017 and Indian Air Force Dhruv *crashed *in Arunachal Prasesh killing all 4 crew members onboard [143]

On 5 September 2017 several Indian Army (IA) personnel, including two generals, survived with only minor injuries from the *crash *in India’s Himalayan region of Ladakh.[144]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_Dhruv#Incidents_and_accidents[/QUOTE]

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Chhatrapati

rcrmj said:


> yet again to funny and deluded Indian, none of the above that has remote connection to facts. and stereotypes carry no weight of reality, and this cannt be more suitable to extremely ignorant and primitive Indian.
> 
> here are the facts: most countries (including your white masters) trust Chinese stuff, so we are the biggest exporter of high tech end products;
> 
> secondly, there are loads good threads regarding Chinese CV, aircraft and weapon system development, but i guess techniqual and common sense discussions are not suitable to ignorant Indian;
> 
> and lastly, regarding the S-400, yes they are offering a small number of it to us with a unit price that is a fraction to what was offered to India with much lager quantity, I guess primitive factor driven *SP 12* doesnt have any leverage on international arm dealings```can you tell me why?


High end is not military grade weapons or support systems. You send small support equipment, phones, other com devices, and computers (including with others).

And they are offering it to you with low range missiles, with the max range being 250 KM which you are buying and since you can't buy anything above 350, you can't get the other 40N6 missile. You are not a member of MTCR. Also, India's deal is not yet finalized. So, you are just shooting blanks. 



rcrmj said:


> and another reason that Russia is still one of the biggest arm exporters is due to primitive countries like India, cant even produce a bullet but have to rely on virtually everything on Russia```so they can rape you off like innocent Indian girls in your slums, fact



What India buys are mostly jet engines parts, guns, radars, heavy artillery. I am yet to see anyone looking for Chinese jets other than some countries who just sport a military. (With the exception of Pak for obvious reasons).


----------



## rcrmj

SOUTHie said:


> High end is not military grade weapons or support systems. You send small support equipment, phones, other com devices, and computers (including with others).
> 
> And they are offering it to you with low range missiles, with the max range being 250 KM which you are buying and since you can't buy anything above 350, you can't get the other 40N6 missile. You are not a member of MTCR. Also, India's deal is not yet finalized. So, you are just shooting blanks.
> 
> 
> 
> What India buys are mostly jet engines parts, guns, radars, heavy artillery. I am yet to see anyone looking for Chinese jets other than some countries who just sport a military. (With the exception of Pak for obvious reasons).


yet another tipical Indian reply, lol, their 40N6 is still in development, to India, its a seller's market, you have "0" say on any of these top deals. the Russian, French and American are raping you off as a fact```

India is not just buying jet engines parts, guns, radars, heavy artillery, you are virtually buying everything from bits to holistic systems, because you make hardly any that worth a mention for a modern army..even your joke LCA is an assembly of western and Russian sub-systems, and labled as indigenous```

and regarding your S400 deal with Russia, believe me, it will end-up like another joke as usual, there would be only two out-comes: 1, your incompetent officials ruined it; 2, Russia rips you off as always``

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Chhatrapati

rcrmj said:


> yet another tipical Indian reply, lol, their 40N6 is still in development, to India, its a seller's market, you have "0" say on any of these top deals. the Russian, French and American are raping you off as a fact```


Still development? Dude you are still shooting blanks. The 40N6 is operational and it's not a planned weapon system. Now, you are crying about it, when India has not finalized the deal and you base your claims on media comments. 



rcrmj said:


> India is not just buying jet engines parts, guns, radars, heavy artillery, you are virtually buying everything from bits to holistic systems, because you make hardly any that worth a mention for a modern army..even your joke LCA is an assembly of western and Russian sub-systems, and labled as indigenous```
> 
> and regarding your S400 deal with Russia, believe me, it will end-up like another joke as usual, there would be only two out-comes: 1, your incompetent officials ruined it; 2, Russia rips you off as always``


Says a Chinese troll.  Sure.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

If it helps protect Euro Asia / China / Russia
Pakistan could technically host 3-4 Systems of S-400 inside Pakistan

Under an agreed upon framework of greater security
For greater good of security in region

To create a proper shield and tracking for un identified objects

And Tu-160 is more then welcomed to stop by refuel in Karachi airport and carry it's routine patrol







Just refuel in Karachi 

Aviation fans would be delighted to the the Russian Bird stop over regularly in Pakistan 

It's good to stop by stretch some legs , by walking around at airport relaxing and then carrying on after 1-2 hours resting

We will have few Sukhois there in airbase anyways , so the visitor plane can just stop by have some tea and then continue journey around Iran back to Russia

And few S-400 systems in Pakistan would also work out well for greater security


----------



## rcrmj

SOUTHie said:


> Still development? Dude you are still shooting blanks. The 40N6 is operational and it's not a planned weapon system. Now, you are crying about it, when India has not finalized the deal and you base your claims on media comments.
> 
> 
> Says a Chinese troll.  Sure.


to deluded and ignorant Indian, fact = false/propaganda````40N6 is not operational as simple as that. and also for India to finalize anything, it is hard to not to have few dramas during the whole Marathon, and this is also a fact to primitive factor driven India

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Genesis

rcrmj said:


> too deluded and ignorant Indian, fact = false/propaganda````40N6 is not operational as simple as that. and also for Indian to finalized anything, it is hard to not to have few dramas during the whole Marathon, and this is also a fact to primitive factor driven India



Dude you are wasting your time. I literally seen Indians claiming to shoot J-20 out of the sky with Brahmos. What do you say to that? What is the response there?

Just laugh and move on, all you can do really.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## english_man

These Indians should check their facts first before commenting here....as Brahmos is an anti-ship missile not a surface to air missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## dy1022

LoL indians !

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 艹艹艹

Starlord said:


> why ?


HQ-9B


----------



## Imran Khan

so when pakistan can buy s-400 copy brothers?


----------



## Figaro

english_man said:


> These Indians should check their facts first before commenting here....as Brahmos is an anti-ship missile not a surface to air missile.


Many Indian posters cannot even get their own weapons straight. I guess this is what happens when you slap an Indian label on a mediocre Russian missile ...



SOUTHie said:


> Funny you still have to rely on Russian designs for aircraft, and engines, and the jets that look similar to other countries. You are miles ahead of Moscow (in time zone). Appreciate your gut to come here and claim you are some technologically advanced country. Most countries do not trust Chinese made stuff when it comes to defense equipment (The thread is about S-400, don't jump topics and claim we did this and that like a kid). That's why Russians still own a major chunk of defense deals around the world, together with the US and other western countries.


You really are butt hurt aren't you? Do you even know why Russia and America have really big arms footprints? It's because of the geopolitical partnerships forged during the Cold War. They bad a lot more clout than China ... which was a very latecomer for advanced arms exports. Even then, China is in roughly 3rd place when it comes to exports

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chhatrapati

Figaro said:


> You really are butt hurt aren't you? Do you even know why Russia and America have really big arms footprints? It's because of the geopolitical partnerships forged during the Cold War. They bad a lot more clout than China ... which was a very latecomer for advanced arms exports. Even then, China is in roughly 3rd place when it comes to exports


Lol! Are you slow? I'm not talking about how Russia become largest arms dealer but chimchoms comparing theirs with Russian defense equipment. Meanwhile, they import Russian arms. Chinese export mainly to the countries who can neither get frontline defense equipment or who are denied western equipment because of arms control or sanctions slapped on them. Pakistan is the largest importer of Chinese made stuffs and some African dictators South American communists and so on.


----------



## seesonic

SOUTHie said:


> Lol! Are you slow? I'm not talking about how Russia become largest arms dealer but chimchoms comparing theirs with Russian defense equipment. Meanwhile, they import Russian arms. Chinese export mainly to the countries who can neither get frontline defense equipment or who are denied western equipment because of arms control or sanctions slapped on them. Pakistan is the largest importer of Chinese made stuffs and some African dictators South American communists and so on.



Didnt knew that KSA, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand are all slapped with sanctions

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

SOUTHie said:


> Lol! Are you slow? I'm not talking about how Russia become largest arms dealer but chimchoms comparing theirs with Russian defense equipment. Meanwhile, they import Russian arms. Chinese export mainly to the countries who can neither get frontline defense equipment or who are denied western equipment because of arms control or sanctions slapped on them. Pakistan is the largest importer of Chinese made stuffs and some African dictators South American communists and so on.


Calm down dude. There's no need for this language ... It only serves to undermine your point. Yes China imports some Russian arms. We get it. But it is a very niche amount compared to what China's domestic industry churns out. Meanwhile, Indias military is not only heavily dependent on Russia but almost completely reliant on a huge basket of foreign nations. That means in an event of war, India will have an extremely difficult time recouping losses ... which Western country will continue to sell arms to a losing India??? And regarding China's foreign customers, you should do more research before saying stupid stuff. Last time I heard, India was begging for Sri Lanka or whatever to purchase it's 10th generation LCA superfighter ... this is what happens when you try to sell half baked low quality domestic goods. India cannot even provide for it's own military, let alone to international customers. A country which cannot even design/produce a suitable light machine gun or parachute isn't exactly the best salesman ...



Imran Khan said:


> so when pakistan can buy s-400 copy brothers?


There probably won't be a S-400 copy ... So never. Pakistan has little need for a HQ-9 type system ...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Akasa

According to a very reliable poster, the Chinese are on the verge of fielding their HQ-XX (previously known as "HQ-29") system that should have similar capabilities. More details on the HQ-XX can be found on the following links.

https://www.eastpendulum.com/hq-29-nouveaux-elements-sur-le-pac-3-chinois

http://www.janes.com/article/71045/china-develops-ultra-fast-anti-missile-interceptor-says-report

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JSCh

*China receives first regimental set of S-400 systems — source*
April 03, 11:28UTC+3
*Two sea vessels have delivered the first regimental set of S-400 Triumf long-range anti-aircraft missile systems to China*




© Vitaliy Nevar/TASS​
MOSCOW, April 3. /TASS/. Two sea vessels have delivered the first regimental set of S-400 Triumf long-range anti-aircraft missile systems to China. The missing equipment that had been earlier damaged while being shipped by a third vessel will be sent to the customer in the summer, a military-diplomatic source told TASS.

"Two vessels have delivered the first regimental set of S-400s from the port of Ust-Lug, Leningrad Region, to China within the time limit established by the contract. It includes a command post, radar stations, launching stations, energy equipment and other property. It lacks the equipment that was onboard the third vessel," the source said.

"The work continues, and the missing equipment is expected to be delivered to the customer in the summer," the source specified.

In January, the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation reported that after a storm in the English Channel the third vessel returned to the port of shipment for inspection of the support equipment and assessment of the damage under the specified insurance event.

The Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation declined to comment on the information provided by the source.

*The contract with China*
In November 2014 it emerged that Russia signed a contract with China to deliver S-400s, and in November 2015 Russian Presidential Aide for Military-Technical Cooperation Vladimir Kozhin confirmed the signing of the contract. China became the first foreign client for these anti-aircraft systems. In June 2016, Rostec CEO Sergey Chemezov reported that the Chinese army would receive the systems not earlier than in 2018.

The S-400 Triumf is a Russian long-and mid-range anti-aircraft missile system designed to hit attack and reconnaissance aircraft (including aerial vehicles based on stealth technology) and any other air targets under conditions of intensive enemy fire and electronic countermeasures.



TASS: Military & Defense - China receives first regimental set of S-400 systems — source


----------



## AsianLion

S-500 is better!


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Russia has delivered all the necessary components to China for its first S-400 Triumf missile air defense system regiment, and Beijing does not plan to waste in any time in testing the new interceptor-based systems, according to reports.

"It is planned that in late July-early August the unit of the People's Liberation Army, which underwent training in Russia, will carry out the firing against a simulated ballistic target at a Chinese firing ground," The Diplomat reported Friday, citing defense sources.

China became the first international buyer of Triumf in 2015 when Rosoboronexport chief executive Anatoly Isaykin announced the deal in April of that year. The Triumf is a mobile aerial defense system designed to pick off aircraft, cruise missiles or ballistic missiles within a range of some 250 miles, the International Business Times has reported.

China's acquisition of S-400 units includes the first delivery, which happened last week, as well as a second S-400 to be delivered by year's end. The deal was reported to be worth $3 billion.

"It is still unknown when the first S-400 unit will enter the service with the PLA, although a rapid induction, as evidenced by the recent announcement of the test firing, can be expected," The Diplomat report said.

Approximately 10 countries are considering procuring Russia's S-400 air defense systems, the head of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, Dmitry Shugayev, said in April 2018. "Many countries in the world have shown interest in this air defense system [S-400], first of all countries in the Middle East and North Africa… There is broad range of air defense weapons on the global market, yet the demand for Russian hardware remains stable. It is hardly likely that Russia will surrender this market to its rivals," Shugayev told the Interfax news agency.

In related S-400 news, US lawmakers are up in arms about the sale of an S-400 to Turkey, particularly because reports indicate the S-400s are capable of collecting data on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet, which is considered one of the most expensive weapons programs in military history.

A leaked draft of the next National Defense Authorization Act (or NDAA, a measure that is renewed by Congress annually) states that, if passed with the current language intact, the act "prohibits the delivery of F-35 aircraft to Turkey until the delivery of a report, which would include an assessment of a significant change in Turkish participation in the F-35 program, including potential elimination of such participation."

The Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank known to demonize Russia, noted in a July 25 analysis: "the Russian-made surface-to-air missile system poses a unique threat to American aircraft: the S-400's radar is able to act as a platform to collect electronic and signals intelligence from the F-35."

"If the [S-400] radar operates in Turkey, alongside the F-35, Moscow could potentially gain useful knowledge about the jet and be able to detect the jet at greater ranges, potentially giving Moscow useful data about NATO's future frontline fighter," according to the Atlantic Council.

https://sputniknews.com/military/20...ia-China-Ready-Test-S-400-Air-Defense-System/

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## GeraltofRivia

Cannot wait to test the new toy


----------



## Deino

*threads merged!

Guys ... I just merged altogether 12 threads with more or less the same content and all related to the S-400!

Is that really necessary??*


----------

