Italian firms keen on missile defence system deal with Pakistan

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

Fancy big brand items (e.g. Typhoon, Aster 30, etc) aside, we should look at the smaller stuff too.

Consider the Elettronica EDGE Escort Jamming Pod. The EDGE is an electronic warfare (EW) jamming pod built on active phased-array transceivers, it has digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jamming capabilities. Imagine fitting a bunch of these onto the JF-17B and using it as a Growler-like platform.


http://www.idexuae.ae/exhibitor-press-releases/elettronica-at-idex-2017


http://www.elt-roma.com/product/edge

At the end of the day it's "Algorithm" vs "Algorithm" as similar devices are available to the contemporary folks. Think hard and you get the solution for every signal pattern can be potentially distorted by a counter measure especially at the near field conditions. Where flight times are in minutes, missiles with embedded small ECM can be distastrous for the ABM computational capability might not come up with the solution that fast!!! What are the hackers good for???

 

[YeBeWarned]

Yea the S-400 has more range, but Pakistan would look at several factors. Yes, it'll need a SAM that provides a sufficient cross-border buffer, but other aspects, such as mobility, affordability and maybe even innovation (e.g. linking SAMs to AEW&C when ground radars are switched-off).

The S-400 is the superior system, but it is very expensive, which will prevent Pakistan from buying more than a couple of systems. The S-350, FD-2000 and even SAMP/T to an extent would provide greater numbers of systems, providing redundancy in case some get knocked out in SEAD or DEAD ops, or to bolster certain areas on an emergency basis.

but to create a Buffer zone inside Indian territory , let say 80-100KM dont static SAM+radars will be a better option? its not like our HQ-16 will be moving with Armored columns for that we have FM-90s ..
from the looks of ASTER 30 its more like Patriot and static, HQ series is quite fast when it comes to move from one place to another ... Why would aster 30 be a good choice over FD-2000 ? except range what else it brings on table ?

It just has a longer range. Which doesn't automatically a better missile system make.

Of course its not , but we already have HQ-16, and HQ-9 is waiting for us in line , what will Aster 30 bring new to the table ? except diversity ..

 

[Penguin]

Of course its not , but we already have HQ-16, and HQ-9 is waiting for us in line , what will Aster 30 bring new to the table ? except diversity ..

Less single source reliance. Plus, possibly, better BMD? (< I'm speculating here)

The SAMP/T intercepted its first ballistic target at the DGA missile launch test centre (CELM) in Biscarosse in October 2010. The missile systems are now in series production and being offered for the export market.
MBDA is developing the ASTER block 2 missile for the SAMP/T launcher, which will have longer range and, with different trajectories, will be effective against future ballistic missile threats.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/aster-30/

HQ9 missile apparently has a limited anti ballistic missile capability
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9

SA-17 Grizzly: A new missile, the 9M317, which offered greater kinematic performance over the previous 9M38. The new missile, as well as a variety of other modifications, allowed the system to shoot down ballistic missiles and surface targets, as well as enlarging the "performance and engagement envelope" (zone of danger for potential attack) for more traditional targets like aircraft and helicopters.
The unified multi-functional 9M317 (export designation 9M317E) can be used to engage aerodynamic, ballistic, above-water and radio contrast targets from both land and sea. Examples of targets include tactical ballistic missiles, strategic cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, tactical, strategic and army aircraft and helicopters.
Probability of hitting of one rocket is:
Statically flying aircraft 0.7–0.9; Maneuvering aircraft with overdrive to 7–8 G 0.5–0.7; Tactical ballistic missiles 0.5–0.7; Anti-radar missiles 0.6–0.8; Cruise missiles 0.6–0.8.
The maximum range of fire against ballistic missiles is 20 km, and the maximum target speed is 1200 m / s. Its capacity of protecting against ballistic missiles are comparable with that of the Patriot PAC-2. However, the height is less.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system#HQ-16

As far as intercepting ballistic missiles is concerned, question is whether HQ16 is based on SA-17 or the earlier SA-11.

 

[princefaisal]

Chinese FD-2000 / HQ-9 Surface to Air Missile (SAM) System has already defeated U.S. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) and PAC-2 low to high-altitude surface-to-air (SAM), Russian S-300, and French-Italian Eurosam Samp-T in performance during T-LORAMIDS tender in Turkey. So better option is to get HQ-9 with TOT and then gradually upgrade it to HQ-19, HQ-26 levels.

 

[Gufi]

Yea the S-400 has more range, but Pakistan would look at several factors. Yes, it'll need a SAM that provides a sufficient cross-border buffer, but other aspects, such as mobility, affordability and maybe even innovation (e.g. linking SAMs to AEW&C when ground radars are switched-off).

With the advanced technology involved any deal seems moot at this point when it comes to long range SAMs from any European source and the Indian factor will prevent any deal with Russia. As China takes delivery and understands the intricacies of the S400 they will field a Chinese based version in the export market in the coming years. With easy financial terms it will be system to go for, because currently we can not afford to spend a billion plus dollars on a long range SAM. Currently a medium range SAM's umbrella is what we will have to make do with.
Also the advantages of a long range SAM while present, come behind the expensive upgrades to block 3 of JF 17 and purchasing a fifth generation platform, most probably the F 31. Also with the expensive task of upgrading to a main battle tank, improving our navy, and the rifle deal coming soon I do not see funds available for this purchase.
As Russia believes in the policy of Escalate to deescalate, so have we. Better to go step by step and understand that it will take a couple of years to get a proper air defence system in place.

By the way, I think pursuing the ASTER 30 is a good prudent step, especially with Pakistan's intention to build an advanced, multi layered air-defence network.

 

[waz]

I m fine bro, how are you? I have not seen you discussing things here like before, where were you?

It will be better to have combo of western and eastern tech for air defence, if HQ-9 (200km range) misses then Aster-30 (120km range) take it out.

Oh bro the discussions have improved a great deal in the last few months, hence I take part more.

Does anyone know the current state of play regarding acquiring the HQ-9?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

but to create a Buffer zone inside Indian territory , let say 80-100KM dont static SAM+radars will be a better option? its not like our HQ-16 will be moving with Armored columns for that we have FM-90s ..
from the looks of ASTER 30 its more like Patriot and static, HQ series is quite fast when it comes to move from one place to another ... Why would aster 30 be a good choice over FD-2000 ? except range what else it brings on table ?



Of course its not , but we already have HQ-16, and HQ-9 is waiting for us in line , what will Aster 30 bring new to the table ? except diversity ..

Note: I didn't say the Aster 30 would be a better choice than the FD-2000, but your observations are valid.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Note: I didn't say the Aster 30 would be a better choice than the FD-2000, but your observations are valid.

Of course i do know you didnt mean that ..
would you suggest a new SAM like Aster 30, in limited numbers or you think buying more HQ-16's will give us more benefits ?

 

[Penguin]

Chinese FD-2000 / HQ-9 Surface to Air Missile (SAM) System has already defeated U.S. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) and PAC-2 low to high-altitude surface-to-air (SAM), Russian S-300, and French-Italian Eurosam Samp-T in performance during T-LORAMIDS tender in Turkey. So better option is to get HQ-9 with TOT and then gradually upgrade it to HQ-19, HQ-26 levels.

Really?

The HQ-9 was a contender in Turkey's T-LORAMIDS program, and was reportedly selected as the winner in September 2013. The United States responded by blocking funds to integrate the Chinese system into NATO defenses. However, through 2013, there was no confirmation that the deal had been finalized. In February 2015, the Grand National Assembly of Turkey was informed by the Ministry of National Defence that the evaluation of bids was complete, and that the chosen system would be used by Turkey without integration with NATO; the system was not explicitly named. However, other Turkish officials reported that no winner had been selected. Later in the month, Turkish officials revealed that negotiations were ongoing with multiple bidders; the Chinese bid had not yet satisfied requirements concerning technology transfer. In March 2015, a China Daily article reported that it was "well-known that the Chinese FD-2000 system, a HQ-9 model for export, was chosen for the contract with Turkey in 2013" based on comments made by a CPMIEC representative at the 2015 Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition; the article was misleadingly called "Missile sale to Turkey confirmed." However, an anonymous CPMIEC executive told Global Times that “[t]he media read too much into this. There is no new information on the bid.” In November 2015, Turkey confirmed it would not purchase the HQ-9, opting for an indigenously developed system instead
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9#Export
See also http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/t-loramids.htm

Besides, winning a bid doesn't necessarily mean your system is better. You may simply have offered a better deal (e.g. cheaper, or more off-set included, or ToT).

 

[Zarvan]

Some people who are thinking if Pakistan would buy ASTER 30 than HQ 9 won't come they are totally wrong here. Both HQ-9 and Aster always were the part of the plan when they decided to focus on increasing our Air Defence capability. Keep an eye there are chances we may also get short range Air Defence systems from MBDA as well the South African system will eventually come. We are focused on developing our Iron Shield based on Multi Layer Air Defence Systems
@Penguin @waz @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[T-123456]

The United States responded by blocking funds to integrate the Chinese system into NATO defenses.

What funds?

 

[Saleem Hatoum2]

Calling it. Pakistan will not buy anything from Italy now.

why?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Any particular reason?

Inside joke. Whenever @Zarvan expresses his hopes about something - e.g. SCAR, Su-35, Typhoon, etc - the chances of it happening drop by 99.9%. I made the comment in response to someone tagging him (see here too).

 

[Zarvan]

Inside joke. Whenever @Zarvan expresses his hopes about something - e.g. SCAR, Su-35, Typhoon, etc - the chances of it happening drop by 99.9%. I made the comment in response to someone tagging him (see here too).

Aster 30 was always on our radar and Italy is offering it and by the way you need to check out the French delegation visit to Pakistan it included major defence guys and they were entertained over the weekend at PAC by Attaullah Esa Khan Khelvi

@waz

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Aster 30 was always on our radar and Italy is offering it and by the way you need to check out the French delegation visit to Pakistan it included major defence guys and they were entertained over the weekend at PAC by Attaullah Esa Khan Khelvi

@waz

Companies market these things all the time and the armed forces probably attend the presentations and see demonstrations time to time, doesn't make any of them a factor. We need to wait for official statements from one side or the other before saying things "will" happen. Sure, "could" or "maybe" are interesting and should be debated, but these aren't certainties.