What's new

HQ-9 Surface to Air Missile and Pakistan Air Force

All weapon systems cost money. The Chinese do not sell you things for free and you dont have the money.

Emm..soft loan like before, PAF must have paid its dues.

Any idea exactly how many aircrafts are there in a PLAAF regiment?

You have refused to elucidate upon your cat in Naswarville. :angry:
 
Saying that Wikipedia is not a trusted source has been trend here in PDF now ! Sorry Guys What Wikipedia says is almost correct in terms of Missile System used !

Here, I just put your name in the sources..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9#External_links
gyd.png


Would you still trust it?
 
near sargodha :P

sarj.jpg

Turns out to be nothing more than Gutter pipes.. would that not be great.

I also removed Pakistan Air Force and Bangladesh Air force from the users in the article. Took me 5 minutes to register the account and do it.
 
I think Pakistan SUPARCO, NESCOM, KRL-GIDS and PAC should look into making air to air, air to surface, surface to surface and surface to air missiles on their own; although we have produced some of it but we need to look towards more.
 
Turkey dismisses NATO allies’ bids, selects Chinese firm for air defense system tender

Ankara leans toward selecting Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems while NATO allies look shocked by the possibility of the decision

The US Patriot air defense system, which is seen in the photo, is one of the systems competing for Turkey’s long-range anti-missile and air defense systems.
The US Patriot air defense system, which is seen in the photo, is one of the systems competing for Turkey’s long-range anti-missile and air defense systems.
Turkey’s western allies look puzzled by a looming decision by Ankara to select Chinese long-range anti-missile and air defense systems which they think cannot be integrated into the NATO-sponsored early warning architecture currently deployed on Turkish soil.

“That would certainly leave many of us speechless,” said one senior diplomat from a NATO country. “Turkey has every right to choose its own air defense system but we do not quite understand the logic of opting for a Chinese system with no interoperability with the existing [NATO] assets.”

A NATO ally defense attaché in Ankara said that deploying a Chinese air defense system to protect Turkish airspace could have political repercussions. “Questioning Turkey’s geopolitical trajectory would then be legitimate,” he said.

Turkey’s defense procurement officials are about to wrap up their assessment on four rival solutions in a multibillion dollar program to build advanced long-range anti-missile and air defense systems, strongly leaning toward the Chinese bid. One defense official said that the government had come to the conclusion that the Chinese proposal was technologically satisfactory, allowed sufficient levels of technology transfer and was much cheaper than rival solutions. He said that the decision to select the Chinese contender was awaiting final approvals from Defense Minister Ismet Yilmaz and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Turkey in January restructured the $4 billion program, dubbed T-LORAMIDS, which had originally been constructed as an off-the-shelf purchase.

The contenders’ off-the-shelf bids would remain valid, but the country’s procurement office, the Undersecretariat for Defense Industries (SSM), would ask bidders to submit parallel, co-production solutions. Erdoğan had given orders for the launch of feasibility studies on the “potential co-production” of the system.

The same month, SSM wrote to the bidders and asked them to send letters of intent for any co-production deal. The bidders are a U.S. partnership of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, offering the Patriot air defense system; Russia’s Rosoboronexport, marketing the S-300; China’s CPMIEC (China Precision Machinery Export-Import Corp.), offering its HQ-9; and the Italian-French consortium Eurosam, maker of the SAMP/T Aster 30. T-LORAMIDS, has been designed to counter both enemy aircraft and missiles. Turkey presently has no long-range air-defense systems.

Integration problem worries

Western diplomats warn that Turkey may be deprived of the capability to integrate the Chinese-Turkish system into Turkey’s mostly NATO-owned early warning assets.

“I cannot comment on how the [U.S.] administration would react to that. But I can tell you that integrating a Chinese or Chinese-Turkish air defense system into NATO assets may not be a good idea,” a U.S. diplomat said.

Defense sources admit that U.S. officials had warned the “procurement bureaucracy” several times about the potential difficulties in achieving interoperability if Turkey decided to go for a Chinese or a Russian architecture.

“I see that the Turks remain defiant. But I do not think it would be practically possible to integrate neither the air defense nor the anti-missile components of the planned Turkish-Chinese architecture into NATO radars,” a London-based Turkey specialist said. “The Turks would have the same problem if they chose the Russian system, but I think for the Americans China represents a more direct threat.”

About half of Turkey’s network-based air defense picture (radars) have been paid for by NATO, according to a defense official. They are part of the NATO Air Defense Ground Environment. “Turkey can always decide to build a standalone system. But in that case, abstracting the air defense system from NATO assets would mean that Turkey will lose half of its radar capabilities,” said one defense analyst.

He said Turkey would need interface data to make its own air defense architecture interoperable with NATO assets, primarily data on the Identify Friend and Foe system. “This is top secret and cannot be installed into any Chinese system,” the analyst said.

Another major question, he said, is “how would Turkey have in its possession a made-in-China IFF system, and how would that system be integrated into its fleet of F-16 aircraft?”

“There is an important degree of incompatibility here and all in all any Chinese-Turkish co-production program would look problematic,” he said.
July/02/2013
 
Thru this deal, Turkish is able to grasp advance , high tech air defence system without going thru many years and money on studying since I believe the Chinese offer high level of tech transfer which Russian, Euro and American refuse to do so.

I believe, Turkish will soon come out an own domestic version of FD-2000 in few years time after the tech transfer but intergrated with NATO system.
 
The Hatf IX, Nasr, is a solid fuelled battlefield multi tube ballistic missile (BRBM) system developed by NESCOM. I think it is possible with a little bit effort to convert it into surface to air defence missle and then can be integrated with chinas manufactured radar system.
actually that's a very good idea.....but i think surface to air missiles are totally different from land attack ballistic missiles.....they will have to change all the "stuff" inside the missile..?
 
I think there is global war happening customers are free to choose their choice of defences
 
I think Pakistan SUPARCO, NESCOM, KRL-GIDS and PAC should look into making air to air, air to surface, surface to surface and surface to air missiles on their own; although we have produced some of it but we need to look towards more.

I am researching to find out if Pakistan is working on internal R&D projects to create a two layered anti-Missile system (or ABM directly). Talibans now have the basic rockets / missiles as reported today, with ranges like 20-30 km's. Per the history, it might be a real future threat to Pakistan.
So, some system sort of modeled like Israel's Arrow and Barak based on Chinese FT /HQ9 and SD-10 (hi - lo/medium) would make sense? I'd welcome expert opinions and internal knowledge about such a project.
 
You are too innocent. You know that asking for or leaking information is breach of security.

you got him lol
I am researching to find out if Pakistan is working on internal R&D projects to create a two layered anti-Missile system (or ABM directly). Talibans now have the basic rockets / missiles as reported today, with ranges like 20-30 km's. Per the history, it might be a real future threat to Pakistan.
So, some system sort of modeled like Israel's Arrow and Barak based on Chinese FT /HQ9 and SD-10 (hi - lo/medium) would make sense? I'd welcome expert opinions and internal knowledge about such a project.
I can give you a little secret
posting on an 8 year old dead thread is called Necroposting in web terms.
specially when the post is irrelevant or adds nothing to subject matter of the dead thread.

as for any other inside information about our secret defence projects.. try Wikipedia
 
you got him lol

I can give you a little secret
posting on an 8 year old dead thread is called Necroposting in web terms.
specially when the post is irrelevant or adds nothing to subject matter of the dead thread.

as for any other inside information about our secret defence projects.. try Wikipedia

While I appreciate the input, will you also point me to any thread where any anti-missile / ABM systems may be getting discussed? Thanks again.
You are too innocent. You know that asking for or leaking information is breach of security.

Didn't "ask" or "leak" anything. Just trying to do some research on a public website open to the www (whole wide world) :)
Boss,
I couldn't wait before any of assets leaks something.

And to surprise you, I'm no 'asset" lol. I posted on an old thread. Point me to something with ongoing discussion. Thanks
 
While I appreciate the input, will you also point me to any thread where any anti-missile / ABM systems may be getting discussed? Thanks again.


Didn't "ask" or "leak" anything. Just trying to do some research on a public website open to the www (whole wide world) :)

It is world wide web my dear where you can search without asking for internal information. If an information do not exist on web, that means it is not meant to be by the source. And if you are found to ask for it, it means you have other intention. Knowing too much is also a liability, you know and asking for too much, is more than personal knowledge.
 
Back
Top Bottom