Pakistan would buy Chinese HD-1 supersonic missile

[Ultima Thule]

Not unless you get very high end stealth capability. Much more than what the F-35 offers. Unless, by the time you get it, the S-400 is superseded by something better.

There are still ways to counter the S-400 that no one here has brought up yet. I won't be speaking about it unless someone else brings it up. But even there, Pak has not made enough investment, but it's a very good option.

Supersonic Anti radiation missiles with range 300 Km will do the job and we have also multiple options supersonic suicide drones, ECM/EW, jamming, and tell me that your supersonic clone Brahmose is invincible/and invisible to our defenses but our supersonic missiles is trash in front of layered Indian defenses, what trash logic you have @randomradio

 

[randomradio]

Supersonic Anti radiation missiles with range 300 Km will do the job and we have also multiple options supersonic suicide drones, ECM/EW, jamming, and tell me that your supersonic clone Brahmose is invincible/and invisible to our defenses but our supersonic missiles is trash in front of layered Indian defenses, what trash logic you have @randomradio

No, Brahmos can also be intercepted by modern SAMs.

But we are developing hypersonic versions now.

 

[Ultima Thule]

No, Brahmos can also be intercepted by modern SAMs.

But we are developing hypersonic versions now.

No before 2025 @randomradio

 

[Basel]

You need hypersonic weapons now, not supersonic, and only if the Russians refuse to sell India the 77N6-N and 77N6-N1. HD-1 is too little too late for Pakistan, unless the Chinese are offering at least mach 5.

As for artillery, you can forget about using MBRLs to defeat SAMs, they won't even get close. You need it to fight the IA anyway. If you divert precious MBRLs towards SEAD missions, which doesn't work in the first place, the IA will simply push through elsewhere.

EW is not an option for Pakistan unless Pakistan actually starts developing its own resources. All your imports will be useless in a real war.

What you need is very, very high end stealth aircraft similar to what the Americans are working on through LRS-B and PCA. Without this, any sort of plan you have against SAMs is DOA.

You only talk about weapons but you don't know how they are utilized in field, tactics are also very important.

 

[randomradio]

You only talk about weapons but you don't know how they are utilized in field, tactics are also very important.

I agree with that. But the problem with SAMs is the counters to it are extremely tech heavy. Tactics work only when the SAM operators screw up, but without tech, nothing's going to happen against layered SAMs.

Even tech equivalency doesn't work, we saw how that worked against Israel in Yom Kippur. The only way the Israelis could defeat SAMs in Syria was by using next generation weapons. That's also why the Israelis do their utmost to maintain their advantage in the air versus their neighbours.

Google MACE XIII. NATO tested their ECM capabilities against Slovakian S-300s and pretty much all of them failed quite badly. It happened in 2012 versus an already obsolete S-300 from the Soviet era. It's because ECM is so unreliable that the US gave up on it for more than 2 decades.

SAMs have reached a point where SOWs are not entirely effective. The only real way to defeat them now is to operate outside the SAM's red lines. Which means, either don't get detected or be really, really fast or operate from outside the SAM rings. That's also why naval wars have become all about firepower and saturation attacks now. It's all about adding more firepower and then some more when it comes to ship designs.

If you recall even the Israelis lost one of their F-16Is to an obsolete S-200 SAM in Syria. In this case, the F-16 crew screwed up, that's why they lost their jet. But that's how capable these SAMs are in any case. Survival is entirely tech dependent, not tactics driven.

 

[Basel]

I agree with that. But the problem with SAMs is the counters to it are extremely tech heavy. Tactics work only when the SAM operators screw up, but without tech, nothing's going to happen against layered SAMs.

Even tech equivalency doesn't work, we saw how that worked against Israel in Yom Kippur. The only way the Israelis could defeat SAMs in Syria was by using next generation weapons. That's also why the Israelis do their utmost to maintain their advantage in the air versus their neighbours.

Google MACE XIII. NATO tested their ECM capabilities against Slovakian S-300s and pretty much all of them failed quite badly. It happened in 2012 versus an already obsolete S-300 from the Soviet era. It's because ECM is so unreliable that the US gave up on it for more than 2 decades.

SAMs have reached a point where SOWs are not entirely effective. The only real way to defeat them now is to operate outside the SAM's red lines. Which means, either don't get detected or be really, really fast or operate from outside the SAM rings. That's also why naval wars have become all about firepower and saturation attacks now. It's all about adding more firepower and then some more when it comes to ship designs.

If you recall even the Israelis lost one of their F-16Is to an obsolete S-200 SAM in Syria. In this case, the F-16 crew screwed up, that's why they lost their jet. But that's how capable these SAMs are in any case. Survival is entirely tech dependent, not tactics driven.

EW with good SIGINT and ELINT can screw any SAM network and US have proved it in battle field.

 

[randomradio]

EW with good SIGINT and ELINT can screw any SAM network and US have proved it in battle field.

Actually, they haven't. Even they admit their EW capabilities are sub par when it comes to defeating modern SAM threats.

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/01/most-important-technology-f-35/125228/

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/news/a22834/darpa-ai-defeat-enemy-radar/

 

[Akasa]

Official specifications of the HD-1A variant (air-launched):

Speed: Mach 2.2-3.5
Range: (not specified)
Warhead: 240 kg penetration/cluster/blast-fragmentation
CEP (INS + satellite): <20 m
CEP (INS + satellite + terminal IR): <10 m
Cruise altitude: 15 km
Skim altitude: 5-10 meters

Length: 6 m
Diameter: 375 mm (note: VLS-compatible if true)
Weight: 1200 kg
Less than 10 seconds between consecutive missile launches

This missile can strike both naval and ground targets.

 

[Dazzler]

Official specifications of the HD-1A variant (air-launched):

Speed: Mach 2.2-3.5
Range: (not specified)
Warhead: 240 kg penetration/cluster/blast-fragmentation
CEP (INS + satellite): <20 m
CEP (INS + satellite + terminal IR): <10 m
Cruise altitude: 15 km
Skim altitude: 5-10 meters

Length: 6 m
Diameter: 375 mm (note: VLS-compatible if true)
Weight: 1200 kg
Less than 10 seconds between consecutive missile launches

This missile can strike both naval and ground targets.
View attachment 516743

No mention of impact speed? Cruising speed is not hypersonic as the hype around it suggested.

 

[Akasa]

No mention of impact speed? Cruising speed is not hypersonic as the hype around it suggested.

There was never an expectation that the HD-1 would be hypersonic. Are you confusing it with the CM-401?

 

[Areesh]

We are at near the end of year 2018 and PDF members still take this joker @randomradio seriously and try to answer him with facts and reasoning

 

[CriticalThought]

We are at near the end of year 2018 and PDF members still take this joker @randomradio seriously and try to answer him with facts and reasoning

I find nothing wrong with the status quo.

 

[Areesh]

I find nothing wrong with the status quo.

Need to change. No need to pamper buffoonery.

 

[randomradio]

We are at near the end of year 2018 and PDF members still take this joker @randomradio seriously and try to answer him with facts and reasoning

Pray tell what have you contributed?

You simply don't like what I write, you have no arguments against what I write. That would fly in your country, but not elsewhere.

 

[Areesh]

Pray tell what have you contributed?

You simply don't like what I write, you have no arguments against what I write. That would fly in your country, but not elsewhere.

I stopped taking you seriously long ago. Want the same from other members too who are wasting their precious time and this forum's space on a jerk like you