China to get S-400 from russia in 2017

[S10]

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

 

[帅的一匹]

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

With better hit target accuracy.

 

[BoQ77]

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.

 

[phantomrush]

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.

 

[BoQ77]

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.

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]

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.

 

[BoQ77]

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]

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?

 

[xunzi]

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.

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.

 

[BoQ77]

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]

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.

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.

 

[BoQ77]

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.

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]

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]

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?