Pakistan officially inducts HQ 9 Air Defence system

[Reichmarshal]

Not every man lives in Lahore or only Lahore supplies fighting men - most of them come from Rural areas so it you who are rather lame in doing everything to try and save Lahore. You have no point other than running from one tangent to another trying to justify saving a single city.
Plenty of infrastructure to support the war effort outside of the major urban cities. Don’t try to hide behind tangents of infrastructure and all population centers in order to justify your want to save Lahore

What Land route will you follow to get fuel from Iran? Pray tell.. Maulana Diesel’s route?

Whatever it takes to protect the strategic facilities there and the supply lines. Karachi city isn’t the only strategic asset in that geographic area. Plenty of facilities no one here can imagine existing that ensure deterrence and India utter destruction in case it decides to be stupid.

I don’t think congressional approval will come unless its a FMS deal and if India doesn’t provide the United States with greater initiative in the Quad besides lip service. FMF is completely out of the question for Pakistan now and likely forever unless drastic geopolitical change happens.

60% of our armed force come from the Pothar region n which has been the case since the tie of the british.

 

[Proud 2 Be a Pakistani]

Did Pakistan get HQ9A? There should be ToT and mass production of a capable SAM and a couple of BVR missiles.

I think it is based on B Version with certain modifications as per PA requirements.

 

[LeGenD]

Welcome development.

About time WE had something on the level of S-300.

Better than US Patriot system and comparable to Russian S-400

Excitment mein kuch bhi bol datay ho. Stop trolling.

 

[Great Janjua]

Welcome development.

About time WE had something on the level of S-300.


Excitment mein kuch bhi bol datay ho. Stop trolling.

Well, it's true to a certain degree. Turkish trials did show that. But s400 is a different machine.

 

[LeGenD]

Well, it's true to a certain degree. Turkish trials did show that. But s400 is a different machine.

Turkish findings are documented in following link:

The HQ-9: Dissecting Turkey’s Missile Defense Decision

Burak Bekdil, Turkey’s defense corespondent for Hurriyet Daily News and Jane’s Defence Weekly, reports that Turkey is “is strongly leaning toward adopting a Chinese long-range ant…

turkeywonk.wordpress.com

Patriot have advanced much further since those trials. Latest PAC-3 configuration is best in class.

 

[Great Janjua]

Turkish findings are documented in following link:

The HQ-9: Dissecting Turkey’s Missile Defense Decision

Burak Bekdil, Turkey’s defense corespondent for Hurriyet Daily News and Jane’s Defence Weekly, reports that Turkey is “is strongly leaning toward adopting a Chinese long-range ant…

turkeywonk.wordpress.com

Patriot have advanced much further since those trials. The latest PAC-3 configuration is the best in class.

As I know PAC is mostly effective against ballistic targets it is quite lacking in terms of aircraft engagement, PGM, the low spectrum, low signature type munitions. Plus it is not a true shoot and scoot system it also lacks angle of attack Hq9 renders 360 degrees firing capability. Therefore a country like Pakistan which is tough in terms of terrain and its unforgiving nature to systems like PAC 3, just does not cut above systems like Hq9 or s300. Yes we can assert with confidence countries like Saudi Arabia Qatar do favour the system because the environment is just for PAC 3

 

[iLION12345_1]

Welcome development.

About time WE had something on the level of S-300.


Excitment mein kuch bhi bol datay ho. Stop trolling.

Except it’s not in the class of S300. If we’re going to discuss the most modern version of the PAC, then it is only fair to discuss the most modern version of the HQ-9.

Turkish findings are documented in following link:

The HQ-9: Dissecting Turkey’s Missile Defense Decision

Burak Bekdil, Turkey’s defense corespondent for Hurriyet Daily News and Jane’s Defence Weekly, reports that Turkey is “is strongly leaning toward adopting a Chinese long-range ant…

turkeywonk.wordpress.com

Patriot have advanced much further since those trials. Latest PAC-3 configuration is best in class.

I’d refrain from calling it “best in class”. Each country designs their AD with their use case, terrain, doctrine as well as the kind of threats they expect to face in mind. The patriot will work the best for some, especially for the country that made it. S400 and 500 will work better for some. HQ-9 for some. So on. Price is a major factor too. Calling a more expensive system better than a less expensive one isn’t a fair comparison, then again we don’t know the prices of the HQ-9P system.

That being said, PAC-3 is more of an ABM, it won’t be as good as shooting down aircraft or other munitions as HQ-9 or S400.

 

[iLION12345_1]

As I know PAC is mostly effective against ballistic targets it is quite lacking in terms of aircraft engagement, PGM, the low spectrum, low signature type munitions. Plus it is not a true shoot and scoot system it also lacks angle of attack Hq9 renders 360 degrees firing capability. Therefore a country like Pakistan which is tough in terms of terrain and its unforgiving nature to systems like PAC 3, just does not cut above systems like Hq9 or s300. Yes we can assert with confidence countries like Saudi Arabia Qatar do favour the system because the environment is just for PAC 3

The Patriot isn’t perfect either given it’s record against Iraqi cruise missiles. (at the same time it performed well against Ballistic missiles). However for countries already working with US tech obviously the integration benefit is present (hence Qatar and KSA). It’s especially potent in US hands because then it acts as a layered system and not a standalone one. Just as S400 does for Russia and HQ-9 does for China (and will for Pakistan). These systems aren’t made to do all of the exact same things at the end of the day, and they definitely don’t cost the same. So comparisons are honestly not entirely fair.

 

[Ali_Baba]

The only advantage that the S400 has over the the HQ-9B is the missile range of its longer ranged missile and the ability of the S400 to fire different ranged missles from short, to medium to long range. This means that the missiles operate within the best range of its PK ratio.

The longer range S400 missile can go to 400km whereas the HQ9 maxes out at 250km.

The HQ9B has in my view better electronics, EW, ECCM capabilities than the S400. Do recall that the Chinese copied an early variant of the S300 series in China and both China and Russia built the HQ9 and S400 respectfully from the S300 series, so who do you think did a better job??

China for all things electronic - they have surpassed the Russians in this regard IMHO ... The HQ9 is not a monkey variant .. and the C variant which will come on line soon will suprass the only advantage that the S400 has -

 

[LeGenD]

As I know PAC is mostly effective against ballistic targets it is quite lacking in terms of aircraft engagement, PGM, the low spectrum, low signature type munitions. Plus it is not a true shoot and scoot system it also lacks angle of attack Hq9 renders 360 degrees firing capability. Therefore a country like Pakistan which is tough in terms of terrain and its unforgiving nature to systems like PAC 3, just does not cut above systems like Hq9 or s300. Yes we can assert with confidence countries like Saudi Arabia Qatar do favour the system because the environment is just for PAC 3

Patriot configurations involved in conflicts up to year 2003 were unable to intercept cruise missiles (true). Friendly fire incidents also occurred in 2003 (true); this was due to IFF errors while the Patriot was operating in autonomous mode (2 friendly incidents which resulted in loss of 2 jet fighters and 3 pilots in total - ouch). Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is very dangerous to jet fighters in fact.

Turkish assessment of the Patriot is in line with what they could observe in conflicts and trials up to year 2003.

Turkey tested HQ-9 as well but decided to wait for relatively better options. Turkey chose S-400 system eventually. Russia was also more receptive to Turkish conditions than USA (limited TOT and co-production factors).

My point is that Americans continued to develop Patriot further in passing years.

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration provides larger BMDS envelope than its predecessors and is capable of intercepting maneuverable airborne targets such as miniaturized TBMs, cruise missiles and UAVs. This configuration is offered with different types of interceptors in the present (same is true for the S-400 system).

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is also offered with 3 types of launch systems which can be equipped with 4, 8 and 16 missiles respectively. Russian and Chinese counterparts fall short in this case.

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is offered with an AESA radar system although its FOV is limited to 120 degree, but the battery can be configured with 2 or more radar systems for excellent situational awareness. Americans have tested Patriot/PAC-3 configuration in multi-radar format in fact.

Also, when it comes to intercepting cruise missiles in combat situations, the less WE talk about this the better. Both S-300 and S-400 variants and derivatives have nothing to show in this matter either.

I am FINE with Pakistan Army for inducting HQ-9; I would have done the same if I was in the shoes of COAS. I believe in 'something better than nothing' philosophy. Pakistan Army have limited choices in international markets in any case.

But I do not get the hype honestly.

The member whom I called out in this thread was due to his kindergarten level post which I removed and another gem which he posted. Come on now.

Let us appreciate what WE have but be humble as well.

 

[Akh1112]

Patriot configurations involved in conflicts up to year 2003 were unable to intercept cruise missiles (true). Friendly fire incidents also occurred in 2003 (true); this was due to IFF errors while the Patriot was operating in autonomous mode (2 friendly incidents which resulted in loss of 2 jet fighters and 3 pilots in total - ouch). Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is very dangerous to jet fighters in fact.

Turkish assessment of the Patriot is in line with what they could observe in conflicts and trials up to year 2003.

Turkey tested HQ-9 as well but decided to wait for relatively better options. Turkey chose S-400 system eventually. Russia was also more receptive to Turkish conditions than USA (limited TOT and co-production factors).

My point is that Americans continued to develop Patriot further in passing years.

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration provides larger BMDS envelope than its predecessors and is capable of intercepting maneuverable airborne targets such as miniaturized TBMs, cruise missiles and UAVs. This configuration is offered with different types of interceptors in the present (same is true for the S-400 system).

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is also offered with 3 types of launch systems which can be equipped with 4, 8 and 16 missiles respectively. Russian and Chinese counterparts fall short in this case.

The latest Patriot/PAC-3 configuration is offered with an AESA radar system as well although its FOV is limited to 120 degree, but the battery can be configured with 2 or more radar systems for excellent situational awareness. Americans have tested Patriot/PAC-3 configuration in multi-radar format in fact.

Also, when it comes to intercepting cruise missiles in combat situations, the less WE talk about this the better. Both S-300 and S-400 variants and derivatives have nothing to show in this matter either.

I am FINE with Pakistan Army for inducting HQ-9; I would have done the same if I was in the shoes of COAS. I believe in 'something better than nothing' philosophy. Pakistan Army have limited choices in international markets in any case.

But I do not get the hype honestly.

The member whom I called out in this thread was due to his kindergarten level post which I removed and another gem which he posted. Come on now.

Let us appreciate what WE have but be humble as well.

I don’t get why you don’t see the hype. It fills a significant gap that was present within our air defence, we have a very very well done shorad but the mid-long range gap was there and something that needed to be addressed.

meet the HQ-9, it does literally that, in fact, the system could be a dud, however what it does is add a whole other dimension to Indian military planners, now meaning they have to work around another means of defence, I.e meaning they may have to re think their strategy if they were to carry out strikes like last time for example, now there is another spanner in the works.

the Chinese have also developed hq-9, I don’t get what your point is, the difference is, they do things without all of the fanfare, unlike the west, who announces to the world what they had for lunch.

radars wise it’s pretty much evenly matched with patriot, however, has the advantage of being able to employ other radars alongside the typical ones, including VHF and Passive radars.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

If One Missile system has efficiency of 88% and another has efficiency of 85% it still means both systems are capable

This is a new horizon for Pakistan entering the Long Rang SAM , domain. It changes various tactics no doubt
Pakistan now has continued to develop multi layer protection over Pakistan's Airspace.


I would imagine the SPADA2000 was bought much earlier it is slightly improved range vs FM-90
But it seems we are moving in correct direction

Assumed the HQ-9 and Navy

** Hypothetical ranges, only the military knows exact ranges

The recently news of Acquisition of MBDA , missiles for Milgem , also creates small opportunity the same system may get bought to replace SPADA2000, it would be a nice addition , ASTER 30 some members called it would be nice supplementary system, used both at Sea and certain Land zones


The MBDA systems will expand the defensive Umbrella out to sea as well along the coastal range between Karachi and Gwadar, assumption that the HQ-9 and MBDA Navy Systems are comparable in altitude and ranges

** Hypothetical ranges, only the military knows exact ranges

 

[iLION12345_1]

I don’t get why you don’t see the hype. It fills a significant gap that was present within our air defence, we have a very very well done shorad but the mid-long range gap was there and something that needed to be addressed.

meet the HQ-9, it does literally that, in fact, the system could be a dud, however what it does is add a whole other dimension to Indian military planners, now meaning they have to work around another means of defence, I.e meaning they may have to re think their strategy if they were to carry out strikes like last time for example, now there is another spanner in the works.

the Chinese have also developed hq-9, I don’t get what your point is, the difference is, they do things without all of the fanfare, unlike the west, who announces to the world what they had for lunch.

radars wise it’s pretty much evenly matched with patriot, however, has the advantage of being able to employ other radars alongside the typical ones, including VHF and Passive radars.

He’s known to play advocate for everything American, often going to the extent of sounding biased, but he always explains his point with sources and knows what he’s saying, so I’ve learned not to put him with the usual bunch.

That being said, the usual underestimation of Chinese (or any non-western tech) is getting pretty old. Nobody doubts US’ lead over military tech, and rightfully so, but even after all of what China has made, still too often we see their tech called inferior for basically the sole reason of it being Chinese. Same goes for the S400 and S500 in this case. Too often they use “but it’s not combat proven” as a way of praising US weapons, but by that logic a WW2 plane is better than a Eurofighter. It’s just that US gets into the most wars.

 

[iLION12345_1]

If One Missile system has efficiency of 88% and another has efficiency of 85% it still means both systems are capable

This is a new horizon for Pakistan entering the Long Rang SAM , domain. It changes various tactics no doubt
Pakistan now has continued to develop multi layer protection over Pakistan's Airspace.


I would imagine the SPADA2000 was bought much earlier it is slightly improved range vs FM-90
But it seems we are moving in correct direction

View attachment 785889
** Hypothetical ranges, only the military knows exact ranges

The recently news of Acquisition of MBDA , missiles for Milgem , also creates small opportunity the same system may get bought to replace SPADA2000, it would be a nice addition , ASTER 30 some members called it would be nice supplementary system, used both at Sea and certain Land zones

SPADA 2000 was ordered in 2007 and delivered in 2013-14. PAFs version is SPADA-2000 plus, which was unveiled in 2005. Its range is unknown, but Given the original version had a 30ish KM range, it’s definitely longer than FM90.

The FM90 is older than the Spada 2000 plus. It was unveiled in 1998. Its maximum radar detection range was listed as 25 KM and maximum engagement range as 15KM. China hasn’t officially unveiled a new variant, so I’m not sure if the version PA has is the same from 1998 or not (likely the launchers are the same but maybe the missiles and definitely the sensors are upgraded).

 

[iLION12345_1]

If One Missile system has efficiency of 88% and another has efficiency of 85% it still means both systems are capable

This is a new horizon for Pakistan entering the Long Rang SAM , domain. It changes various tactics no doubt
Pakistan now has continued to develop multi layer protection over Pakistan's Airspace.


I would imagine the SPADA2000 was bought much earlier it is slightly improved range vs FM-90
But it seems we are moving in correct direction

View attachment 785889
** Hypothetical ranges, only the military knows exact ranges

The recently news of Acquisition of MBDA , missiles for Milgem , also creates small opportunity the same system may get bought to replace SPADA2000, it would be a nice addition , ASTER 30 some members called it would be nice supplementary system, used both at Sea and certain Land zones


The MBDA systems will expand the defensive Umbrella out to sea as well along the coastal range between Karachi and Gwadar
View attachment 785894

Another thing to add would be that Anza-II isn’t the only MANPADS in service. The RBS-70 BOLIDE and the FN-16 are the more capable MANPAD of the PA. Followed by large numbers Of Anza MK.2

PAF will hopefully procure its own Long-range SAMs soon as well, adding another layer to this defense.