HQ-9 test results from Turkish SAM (T-LORAMIDS) contract

[UKBengali]

So you make a claim stating something as fact but when asked to back that claim you retract by saying there is no absolute proof.


China having operational airborne AESA doesn't mean that they have an edge. By that virtue Russia has ground based AESAs, yet who is anyone to make the claim that one or the other is better? It should also be noted that Russia has a large number of AESAs that are in development.

China also has ground-based AESAs. Those were two examples where Russia does not have any equivalent yet, although Russia will soon have an airborne AESA AWACs if I am correct.

Russia does have AESA radars in development but China has more.

Simply China has more advanced civilian electronics technology and more resources than Russia.

My comment was not meant to put-down Russia but it cannot hope to compete with countries such as US and China.

 

[faithfulguy]

Come on, there is nothing as absolute proof here.

Where is Russia's equivalent to the AESA radars on the KJ-2000 AWACs and Type-052C destroyers?

China has much more experience in AESA radars than Russia has and has more resources to throw at this.

Russia is still ahead in areas like engines and nuclear submarines and maybe in SAM(although I am very dubious now that China has won the Turkish SAM competition) but China seems to have caught up or surpassed Russia in many other areas.

Fundamentally it is will be a two-way race between the US and China for the next few decades for cutting-edge military technology, as they are the only two countries that have the money, base civilian technology and the will to develop it.

As far as my comment on "base civilian technology" is concerned, Japan was able to develop an AESA radar for the F-2 fighter as it had a highly developed semiconductor industry. China is also getting to the stage where it's semiconductor technology is reaching world-class levels and so it can use this as a base to develop military avionics.

Just like the Soviets lagged the West in avionics, Russia will do the same due to both money but also due to the fact that they don't have an advanced civilian electronics industry to be able to use to develop their military avionics.

But for China to claim that its out in front of everyone except the US, it must be ahead of all major defense sector on everyone. As of now China is clearly behind Russia in nuclear subs, nuclear missiles, engine technology, space exploration, etc. Unless China can clearly break away from Europe and Russia and establish itself as #2 in all fields, there would not be a China/US competition.

I'm not saying that China should be in the same category as India here. But its also certainly not in the same category as the US. When it comes to the defense field, its the country that is trying to break away from the Russia and EU pack. So it must still work hard on areas that its behind such as nuclear sub, reactors, engine and AC and distinguish itself from all these European countries before any discussion can be made on how far BEHIND is China from the US. Do when China can equal or exceed EU/Russia in all major tech, than we can create a two column table and compare US vs China. Any such talk is even premature now.

 

[UKBengali]

But for China to claim that its out in front of everyone except the US, it must be ahead of all major defense sector on everyone. As of now China is clearly behind Russia in nuclear subs, nuclear missiles, engine technology, space exploration, etc. Unless China can clearly break away from Europe and Russia and establish itself as #2 in all fields, there would not be a China/US competition.

I'm not saying that China should be in the same category as India here. But its also certainly not in the same category as the US. When it comes to the defense field, its the country that is trying to break away from the Russia and EU pack. So it must still work hard on areas that its behind such as nuclear sub, reactors, engine and AC and distinguish itself from all these European countries before any discussion can be made on how far BEHIND is China from the US. Do when China can equal or exceed EU/Russia in all major tech, than we can create a two column table and compare US vs China. Any such talk is even premature now.

I totally agree.

My comment was more at the fact that US and the China are the only two countries that are investing in every single sector of military technology rather than the Chinese being any equivalent to the US now. Maybe in 2030 but not now of course.

 

[S10]

The problem with Russian industrial sector has two parts. The first is the breakup of USSR, which meant many research institutes/factories are scattered in former Soviet Republics. That forced the Russians to have to start rebuilding the lost capabilities. A prime example would be Ukraine, where a lot of shipyards were located but Russians had no further access to. The dissolution of USSR also caused a brain drain, where many experts went abroad to find better livelihood. That was one of the major reasons Chinese research and industrial capabilities had a major boost in the 1990's. Nearly all advanced programs had former-USSR experts as part of the team. With the brain drain, Russia lacked the funding to keep up with educating top tier scientists and technicians to replace them at the time.

The second problem is that they went through a period of de-industrialization from 1990's to mid-2000's. Russian industrial sector nearly caved in on itself. In many cases, it was broken up and sold cheaply to the Oligarchs, in a political climate of uncertainty and corruption. The country even defaulted in 1999, with massive amount of capitals fleeing the country, further hurting businesses. As the industrial sector shrunk, selling natural resources such as oil and natural gas became and more important part of the Russian economy, to a point where more than 50% of Russian government income is now dependent on it.

You may ask why doesn't Russia simply rebuild with all that oil revenue? First problem, oil price is in a constant flux and has been dropping for a while now. It stands at $102 per barrel at the moment. In order to fulfill the Russian budget, you can read below:

Russia will probably require an average Brent oil price of $117.8 a barrel this year to balance its budget, the fifth straight year it’s needed crude above $100 and compared with break-even prices of $90.3 for Saudi Arabia and $65 for Kazakhstan, Deutsche Bank AG said in a May 10 report.

Russia Faces Widening 2014 Budget Deficit, Siluanov Says - Bloomberg

Of course, you can't just rebuild your industry without facing competition. In terms of manufacturing, Russia does not have the low price advantage of Chinese goods in the mass produced consumer market. In the high end market where profit margin is higher, Russia cannot compete with United States or Europe. Even if Russia can meet its budget obligations in case oil price picks up, it still faces the problem of having no market other than its own to grow its industry again.

Simply put, without an industry, innovation and research become increasingly difficult. Long gone are the days where a single guy has a brilliant idea and revolutionized the world. In today's scientific environment, you need a team and the appropriate infrastructure to make major gains. That is the reason I do not consider Russia a future contender in technological advancement. In comparison, China has now surpassed United State in industrial output, something even the USSR at its height could not dream of doing. Chinese research budget is more than 10 times Russian's, and research paper output is just behind US. Surpassing Russia is an inevitability.

Don't get me wrong, Russia will remain a strong regional power with great influence on the international stage. It just won't be a major scientific power.

TL;DR version: Russia won't be able to stay ahead of China much longer. Even now, they're neck and neck.

 

[ptldM3]

I love the Chinese chest thumping and mentality of 'we are greater then everyone', 'we have surpassed everyone'.

Israel, German, France, and the UK are not on the same level of industrial power as China, they don't have the money that China has, they don't produce the same number of patents that China does. Yet Israel has world class radars, UAVs, and missiles. France has world class aircraft and electronics. The UK has world class engines and submarines and Germany has world class armor, engines, ect.

Funny Russia's economy, industrial output and scientific output is similar to the above mentioned nations yet the Chinese are spouting that they have surpassed Russia because of those factors.



All these countries are successful because they are innovators, they look to revolutionize and not just copy like China often does. They have experience and experienced individuals. China can have all the money in the world and all the patents in the world but at the end of the day it's defence firms and talented individuals that come into play. How much money an economy has is irrelevant since it doesn't dictate how much of a budget a defence firm will have.

On the contrary, Russia is the second leading exporter of arms with record breaking sales each year. Those companies have plenty of money. If needed they can get more money from the government. On top of that Russia has close ties with French companies that are willing to sell some of their most advanced products to Russia. Not to mention France and Russia just recently teamed up to built an IFV. this means that Russia has partners and can draw from experience obroad.

And sorry many modern Chinese tanks, aircraft, ect are still powered by either licensed copies or unlicensed copies of German, Russian, ukranian, and British engines. Funny considering that many in this thread have degraded the Europeans and Russian as being inferior.

 

[cabatli_53]

http:// news.ifeng.com/mil/2/detail_2013_10/12/30250811_0.shtml

Key points for those that don't read Chinese:

1. HQ-9 has shorter range than S-300, but has faster response time (15 seconds) and engage more targets simultaneously.
2. Against conventional air targets, HQ-9 has greater range than Patriot and Aster 30.
3. Cheapest bid amongst the four systems (S-300, HQ-9, Aster 30, Patriot)
4. Managed to successfully hit all 9 targets in 9 demonstration launches.

If the trials didn't give similar results like your source mentioned, Turkish officials never accept Chinese system against European and USA equivalents.

As Turkish official reports pointed out;

1-HQ-9 was cheaper among rivals.
2-China was the one which offers best ToT and Turkish production.
3-Success of trials of HQ-9 on designated scenarios.

 

[faithfulguy]

I love the Chinese chest thumping and mentality of 'we are greater then everyone', 'we have surpassed everyone'.

Israel, German, France, and the UK are not on the same level of industrial power as China, they don't have the money that China has, they don't produce the same number of patents that China does. Yet Israel has world class radars, UAVs, and missiles. France has world class aircraft and electronics. The UK has world class engines and submarines and Germany has world class armor, engines, ect.

Funny Russia's economy, industrial output and scientific output is similar to the above mentioned nations yet the Chinese are spouting that they have surpassed Russia because of those factors.



All these countries are successful because they are innovators, they look to revolutionize and not just copy like China often does. They have experience and experienced individuals. China can have all the money in the world and all the patents in the world but at the end of the day it's defence firms and talented individuals that come into play. How much money an economy has is irrelevant since it doesn't dictate how much of a budget a defence firm will have.

On the contrary, Russia is the second leading exporter of arms with record breaking sales each year. Those companies have plenty of money. If needed they can get more money from the government. On top of that Russia has close ties with French companies that are willing to sell some of their most advanced products to Russia. Not to mention France and Russia just recently teamed up to built an IFV. this means that Russia has partners and can draw from experience obroad.

And sorry many modern Chinese tanks, aircraft, ect are still powered by either licensed copies or unlicensed copies of German, Russian, ukranian, and British engines. Funny considering that many in this thread have degraded the Europeans and Russian as being inferior.

Before China can be compare with the US, its military industrial complex should easily surpass that of Russia and export much more than Russia does. China is definitely not any where close to that. Though it had made progress in many areas, China still has not distinguish itself from EU countries and Russia yet.

 

[ptldM3]

Before China can be compare with the US, its military industrial complex should easily surpass that of Russia and export much more than Russia does. China is definitely not any where close to that. Though it had made progress in many areas, China still has not distinguish itself from EU countries and Russia yet.

The Chinese make some pretty good products, it's hard to argue that but many here get instant hard ons and start pounding their chests claiming superiority once a shiney new Chinese product comes out.

Their biggest problem is that they see everything as one when in reality there is a multitude of different defence sectors that specialize in everything from metallurgy, to optics and everything in-between. It's quite funny when they make claims that they have surpassed Europe and Russia because for that to happen they would have to surpass those countries in hundreds or thousands of fields which would be impossible for any country to have a monopoly on every field in the defence sector. Not only that but they would have to have the engineering capacity to apply many of those fields into one platform.

No one country has the best of everything. It can be argued that the US has the most platforms that are either considered the best or they are up there with the best. One example, Germany is regarded as having the best tanks even better then the US.

Even South Africa has some cutting edge technology. This just comes to show that money is not the end all of things but just as important no one can simply dominate in everything like the Chinese here think.

 

[faithfulguy]

The Chinese make some pretty good products, it's hard to argue that but many here get instant hard ons and start pounding their chests claiming superiority once a shiney new Chinese product comes out.

Their biggest problem is that they see everything as one when in reality there is a multitude of different defence sectors that specialize in everything from metallurgy, to optics and everything in-between. It's quite funny when they make claims that they have surpassed Europe and Russia because for that to happen they would have to surpass those countries in hundreds or thousands of fields which would be impossible for any country to have a monopoly on every field in the defence sector. Not only that but they would have to have the engineering capacity to apply many of those fields into one platform.

No one country has the best of everything. It can be argued that the US has the most platforms that are either considered the best or they are up there with the best. One example, Germany is regarded as having the best tanks even better then the US.

Even South Africa has some cutting edge technology. This just comes to show that money is not the end all of things but just as important no one can simply dominate in everything like the Chinese here think.

What China need is to catch up and surpass the Europeans and Russians in all major fields and area. its true that the defense field is wide and complex, and no countries can be master of everything. But USA is far and away the one leader of defense industry. And I agree that US do not lead on everything. But US lead on everything that would distinguish itself as the best defense countries. China is certainly far and away from where US is right now. And I would say that overall, Russia and EU are certainly ahead of China overall in defense industry. But US has more concern about China over any one else because of their speed of improvement. They are the country that has the momentum in defense technology improvement. And where there is money, there is technical break through. If their economy continue to grow, which would fuel their technical growth, I would bet that they would be able to distinguish themselves as the clear challenger to US in the not so distant future.

 

[S10]

I love the Chinese chest thumping and mentality of 'we are greater then everyone', 'we have surpassed everyone'.

Israel, German, France, and the UK are not on the same level of industrial power as China, they don't have the money that China has, they don't produce the same number of patents that China does. Yet Israel has world class radars, UAVs, and missiles. France has world class aircraft and electronics. The UK has world class engines and submarines and Germany has world class armor, engines, ect.

Funny Russia's economy, industrial output and scientific output is similar to the above mentioned nations yet the Chinese are spouting that they have surpassed Russia because of those factors.



All these countries are successful because they are innovators, they look to revolutionize and not just copy like China often does. They have experience and experienced individuals. China can have all the money in the world and all the patents in the world but at the end of the day it's defence firms and talented individuals that come into play. How much money an economy has is irrelevant since it doesn't dictate how much of a budget a defence firm will have.

On the contrary, Russia is the second leading exporter of arms with record breaking sales each year. Those companies have plenty of money. If needed they can get more money from the government. On top of that Russia has close ties with French companies that are willing to sell some of their most advanced products to Russia. Not to mention France and Russia just recently teamed up to built an IFV. this means that Russia has partners and can draw from experience obroad.

And sorry many modern Chinese tanks, aircraft, ect are still powered by either licensed copies or unlicensed copies of German, Russian, ukranian, and British engines. Funny considering that many in this thread have degraded the Europeans and Russian as being inferior.

There is no chest thumping involved, just hard facts. The fact is that China has far surpassed Russia as an industrial powerhouse. It is also a fact that China devotes many times more funding and people towards research than Russia. While I don't expect China to lead Russian in every field, in terms of industry Russia is not in the same weight class. Switzerland has some cutting edge precision engineering technologies, but does that mean they are more advanced than United States overall? Of course not.

It's funny that not a single person in this thread has made a claim that Russian or European weapons are inferior, yet you are here making the accusation.

 

[zzzz]

Fundamentally it is will be a two-way race between the US and China for the next few decades for cutting-edge military technology, as they are the only two countries that have the money, base civilian technology and the will to develop it.

Fundamentally China is not even on the list of countries producing cutting edge military equipment, while countries who are in the list already in the race with the US for many decades. Just think a bit about your ridiculous claims before you make them.

Fundamentally China will run into serious trouble trying to keep its economy afloat in just 10 years, because world exports of oil are decreasing and it is very extreme and accelerating process.

 

[faithfulguy]

The Chinese make some pretty good products, it's hard to argue that but many here get instant hard ons and start pounding their chests claiming superiority once a shiney new Chinese product comes out.

Their biggest problem is that they see everything as one when in reality there is a multitude of different defence sectors that specialize in everything from metallurgy, to optics and everything in-between. It's quite funny when they make claims that they have surpassed Europe and Russia because for that to happen they would have to surpass those countries in hundreds or thousands of fields which would be impossible for any country to have a monopoly on every field in the defence sector. Not only that but they would have to have the engineering capacity to apply many of those fields into one platform.

No one country has the best of everything. It can be argued that the US has the most platforms that are either considered the best or they are up there with the best. One example, Germany is regarded as having the best tanks even better then the US.

Even South Africa has some cutting edge technology. This just comes to show that money is not the end all of things but just as important no one can simply dominate in everything like the Chinese here think.

What China need is to catch up and surpass the Europeans and Russians in all major fields and area. its true that the defense field is wide and complex, and no countries can be master of everything. But USA is far and away the one leader of defense industry. And I agree that US do not lead on everything. But US lead on everything that would distinguish itself as the best defense countries. China is certainly far and away from where US is right now. And I would say that overall, Russia and EU are certainly ahead of China overall in defense industry. But US has more concern about China over any one else because of their speed of improvement. They are the country that has the momentum in defense technology improvement. And where there is money, there is technical break through. If their economy continue to grow, which would fuel their technical growth, I would bet that they would be able to distinguish themselves as the clear challenger to US in the not so distant future.

 

[shuttler]

If the trials didn't give similar results like your source mentioned, Turkish officials never accept Chinese system against European and USA equivalents.

As Turkish official reports pointed out;

1-HQ-9 was cheaper among rivals.
2-China was the one which offers best ToT and Turkish production.
3-Success of trials of HQ-9 on designated scenarios.

It is the best that a procurement manger of any industry is looking for. The greatest value for money.
HQ-9 is 100% accurate on all trials. And it has can log on 8 (?) targets at the same time. But right now it looks like politics will over-ride the objectively favourable factors of HQ-9

 

[S10]

Fundamentally China is not even on the list of countries producing cutting edge military equipment, while countries who are in the list already in the race with the US for many decades. Just think a bit about your ridiculous claims before you make them.

Fundamentally China will run into serious trouble trying to keep its economy afloat in just 10 years, because world exports of oil are decreasing and it is very extreme and accelerating process.

Fundamentally your cutting edge military equipment just lost its bid to China in the Turkish competition, and not just based on price alone. I'd think about your claim first before you call others ridiculous.

Fundamentally, the naysayers have been telling doomsday stories of Chinese economy for the past 20 years. You need to find some new materials to sell. Every year, the potential reserve of raw oil grows.

 

[ptldM3]

Fundamentally your cutting edge military equipment just lost its bid to China in the Turkish competition, and not just based on price alone. I'd think about your claim first before you call others ridiculous.

Fundamentally, the naysayers have been telling doomsday stories of Chinese economy for the past 20 years. You need to find some new materials to sell. Every year, the potential reserve of raw oil grows.

Fundamentally, the S-300 was eliminated because of high price and fundamentally it was not the most advanced S-300 system let alone the most advanced air defence system Russia had to offer. The HQ-9 was the cheapest, available in the quickest time and offered technology transfer. The version of the S-300 that was offered to Turkey was not the most advances, if shuttler was correct that the HQ-9 can engage 8 targets simultaneously which your source claims is more then the S-300 then the S-300 system offered to Turkey was S-300P or PMU which engages between 4 or 6 targets, the PMU-2 engages 36 targets. There is a world of difference between S-300 versions, you can bet a NATO country would not receive the most advanced S-300 version.