What's new

Pakistan officially inducts HQ 9 Air Defence system

cant believe this piece of sh*t was our pm several times
All of them are pieces of sh!t. Even our current PM although can speak loud but he too is a goofy chap with confused personality.

There should be a maximum age restriction upon our PM and President. They shouldn't be of more than 55 years of age at the oath taking CEREMONY. These old, corrupt, mentally unstable persons shouldn't be able to hold such a high ranking office. They already don't have any stake in our country as their families and wealth are settled abroad and even these people at the expiry of their mental capabilities become the PM President of our country. A younger leader would have a greater energy, enthusiasm and higher stakes in the country as he would know that he has to live in this country for at least a few more decades and he has some life left in him so he might be able to achieve something bigger.
 
.
Pakistan HQ9 radar package
HT-223 FCR
LD-JP Surveillance Radar

20211018_224328.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
Is it type 233 or 223, as there's no 223, I guess.
Also missing is the type 305, both versions. So no ATBM capability!
 
. .
Is it type 233 or 223, as there's no 223, I guess.
Also missing is the type 305, both versions. So no ATBM capability!
It is 233.

The Type 305 or more importantly the JSG600 and JPG 400 (both have ABM capability, they’re likely also the radars used with HQ-19) are offered with HQ-9BE, we don’t know what other radars PA has purchased with the system so it could be that PA has them (or it doesn’t). We Likely won’t know. We didn’t even “officially” know the system was here yet.
 
Last edited:
.
Russian radars had some issues. Don't know if thrt have resolved it yet. Issues were pointed out by Victor mirkovsky chief editor of fatherland magazine, that Pantsir have troubles in detecting slow moving small targets like UAVs and falsely tracking big birds as targets. He also pointed out that Pantsir performed poorly at Russian airbase in Syria, intercepting only 19% of the targets compared to Tor missile system with 80% success rate. Shortly after, his article was taken down in order not to ruin Pantsir's export market. Russia have a history of over exaggeration of its weapon systems capabilities.

But China has a unique advantage of incorporating the best of the west and the east, and make a unique weapon system with similar capabilities at affordable prices. And when militaries like Pakistan buy those systems it's the recognition of their effectiveness by itself as our military tend to do extensive trials before finalizing the order that too at the expense of the manufactures. And China is obviously well ahead in Radar tech from Russia and global leader in some of its missile techs (like BVRAAM, Anti ship ballistic and hypersonic missiles etc)
Everyone has a tendency to exaggerate their own products. But the Pantsir in this case would not be operating in isolation. Rather it would be part of a integrated air defence system.
 
.
Russian radars had some issues. Don't know if thrt have resolved it yet. Issues were pointed out by Victor mirkovsky chief editor of fatherland magazine, that Pantsir have troubles in detecting slow moving small targets like UAVs and falsely tracking big birds as targets. He also pointed out that Pantsir performed poorly at Russian airbase in Syria, intercepting only 19% of the targets compared to Tor missile system with 80% success rate. Shortly after, his article was taken down in order not to ruin Pantsir's export market. Russia have a history of over exaggeration of its weapon systems capabilities.

But China has a unique advantage of incorporating the best of the west and the east, and make a unique weapon system with similar capabilities at affordable prices. And when militaries like Pakistan buy those systems it's the recognition of their effectiveness by itself as our military tend to do extensive trials before finalizing the order that too at the expense of the manufactures. And China is obviously well ahead in Radar tech from Russia and global leader in some of its missile techs (like BVRAAM, Anti ship ballistic and hypersonic missiles etc)

Bad Example

The Pantsir was operating in isolation against one of the most advanced air force in the world who's EW is simply top notch. But the Pantsir under Pakistan's Air Defence data linked to PAF's other assets and watch how well it performs. Any weapon system operating in isolation will be vulnerable just like the example you gave of the Pantsir in Syria/Libya. Weapon systems operate their best when they are part of a collective defense network.
 
.
Why PaF, PA are looking for separate Air defence networks ? Why not a single air defence command which serve both PAF and PA needs and function on national level.

There is only one AD network. One that covers Pakwatan 100% and more.

Various assets / systems, of different services, plug in, and talk to each other.
 
. .
It will cover some, but they're not going to have the system where it can be hit by Pakistani missiles. Likewise the job of such systems in for Pakistan is airspace denial and some more. Our systems will also be able to target over the border.
My point is Indian S-400 can cover most if not large part of Pakistani territory while Pakistan does not have anything to extend anti-aircraft capability far into Indian territory. Pakistan may not be able to operate even the airborne radar to warn of approaching Indian aircraft.
This will be a big advantage for India in war.
 
.
Bad Example

The Pantsir was operating in isolation against one of the most advanced air force in the world who's EW is simply top notch. But the Pantsir under Pakistan's Air Defence data linked to PAF's other assets and watch how well it performs. Any weapon system operating in isolation will be vulnerable just like the example you gave of the Pantsir in Syria/Libya. Weapon systems operate their best when they are part of a collective defense network.
Tor was also working in the same environment as the pantsir. And how would you justify problems with radar or its software with environmental issues.

Pantsir is designed to protect vital assets like long range SAMs or military installations to counter threats in close range low level airspace using primarily its own low level radars specifically built for that purpose.

It isn't a missile truck that it's only purpose is to blindly fire missiles and piggyback the radars of other assets for successful interception through data link. How effective be the radar of S-300 say at altitude of 30 meters that too against smaller targets??? That's where pantsir has to play its role.
 
.
My point is Indian S-400 can cover most if not large part of Pakistani territory while Pakistan does not have anything to extend anti-aircraft capability far into Indian territory. Pakistan may not be able to operate even the airborne radar to warn of approaching Indian aircraft.
This will be a big advantage for India in war.
With the induction of HQ-9P and most probably PL-15 in JF-17 block 3, it greatly nullifies their advantage. Their own airborne radars would be forced to operate at least 200km+ distance if not more.

S400 are not delivered yet so far and As of today I am pretty sure that Pakistan's AD capability is superior than India. Block 3 is currently in production and I believe in PAF's ambition of always out range and outsmart IAF and their track record proves that fact
 
.
There is only one AD network. One that covers Pakwatan 100% and more.

Various assets / systems, of different services, plug in, and talk to each other.

I don't think Aside SPADA would be able to communicate with a non NATO system
 
. . .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom