Pakistan would buy Chinese HD-1 supersonic missile

[Vapnope]

Hell, US sent a full blown carrier battle group Task Force 74, led by the nuclear powered USS Enterprise, with several destroyers, an SSN, amphibious assault ships filled to the brim with marines, a refueler and an ammunition ship.
That doesn't look like pakistan was alone at all.
Russians also claim that the Brits sent the HMS Eagle in the Bay of Bengal whom the former chased out.
The Soviet naval assets also hindered the TF-74 and stopped the Americans from intervening.

However, since you are adamant on rejecting every legitimate link, how about a declassified US government source?
This declassified conversation between Kissinger and Nixon literally has them plotting to help Pakistan by providing military equipment and munitions through Iran and they are also freely discussing about Jordan sending 6-10 fighters to pakistan.

Have you read Conflict and Diplomacy by Jaswant singh and SP Bhatia? It has all the american papers you are referring to however what you are implying is exact opposite.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Small arms and 10 jets during those days was a big deal. You are purposefully diminishing the help pakistan got from your neighbours.

Eitherway, the point remains that pak was not "internationally alone" like you claimed.

Asfor the articles.
You are cherry picking at this point.
The Nixon-Kissinnger dialogue and the non quoted classified text in the link I provided makes it very clear that both Jordan and Iran helped pakistan.

just speculations nothing else may be may be not @CyclopS mostly internationally alone @CyclopS

Again, so what?
Pakistan's intention to capture or not capture Jammu and Kashmir has no bearing on whether the 71 war was a war or no.
Do stop changing the goal posts and replying with red herrings.

The point was during both instances Gibraltar and chengiz khan, the war was initiated by pakistan and that both ops were technically failures.

how pathetic your brain is, i'm replying to your countrymen @HariPrasad who is claiming that we were tried to capture IOK in 71 which is not true, and suddenly you jump in with your pathetic logic, so STFU @CyclopS

 

[Muhammad Omar]

The Range of CX-1 Iis 280 Km and Mach 3 speed and flight altitude 56K ft can it dodge S-400 ??

 

[Basel]

This is CX-1 not the OP mentioned missile.

License is generally for assembly. If Pakistan has some contribution to make for the development, then it may be given manufacturing right




This HD1 is solid fuel missile whereas Brahmos is liquid fuel. Solid fuel is always heavier than liquid fuel one. You can see it in any type of missile. So, its fliggt dynamics will be different from Brahmos.

Also, ISI is not great genius that can get the important information of Brahmos. Don't think too much about ISI getting all secret information on Indian items



There is no better defence to S400 than ballistic missile. This missile is just short ranged solid fuel missile. Why would China consider this as defence against S400?

HD-1 is said to have ramjet too, does Brahmos have it now??

 

[HariPrasad]

HD-1 is said to have ramjet too, does Brahmos have it now?

Brahmos has ramjet. HD-1:is an another paper missile like cxc1. The company which claims to make this missile makes ammunition only. China has no capability to make a missile like BRAHMOS nor they will be able to make it for coming few decades.

 

[LKJ86]

China has no capability to make a missile like BRAHMOS nor they will be able to make it for coming few decades.

What about YJ-12?

 

[HariPrasad]

What about YJ-12?

I don't know much about it but Chinese missiles are shitty and useless except some surface to surface missiles which are somewhat better though not top class. China lacks the tallent to make something highly sophisticated except stealing it. So I am not very impress with any Chinese weapon.

 

[LKJ86]

I don't know much about it.

If so, why do you get such conclusion?

 

[HariPrasad]

If so, why do you get such conclusion?

I have a faith in Chinese inability to produce any high tech defense stuff.

 

[LKJ86]

I have a faith in Chinese inability to produce any high tech defense stuff.

You are a good Indian.

 

[HariPrasad]

You are a good Indian.

You may be conclding good or bad from my opinion on some defence stuff which is not a good way to conclude it but let me tell you I am a good world citizen as well.

 

[LKJ86]

You may be conclding good or bad from my opinion on some defence stuff which is not a good way to conclude it but let me tell you I am a good world citizen as well.

 

[MimophantSlayer]

just speculations nothing else may be may be not @CyclopS mostly internationally alone @CyclopS

how pathetic your brain is, i'm replying to your countrymen @HariPrasad who is claiming that we were tried to capture IOK in 71 which is not true, and suddenly you jump in with your pathetic logic, so STFU @CyclopS

I am out.
In pdf, usually the person first to abuse has nothing new or meaningful to say and more logical fallacies are about to follow.

At this point you are arguing for the sake of arguing, you have no proof to support your claims only conjecture and rhetoric.

Pakistan had everyone's support back then, there's no use denying it.
It is now that you are becoming internationally alone.

As for "we innocent blameless pakistanis didn't try to capture Kashmir in 71", pray tell why did then PA capture Chamb then?

The Simla agreement (a matter of public record now) clearly states that pakistan would keep Chamb while we would keep the territories captured in the Kargil-Drass sector(a very wise strategic decision as it would later help us capture both Siachen and win us the Kargil War).

 

[Akasa]

In other words, the HD-1 would join the ranks of the CX-1 and CM-302 as systems that would allow India's immediate neighbors and rivals to hedge against the BrahMos threat.

Next step would be the miniaturization of these systems for aerial platforms but that might take a while.

 

[Ultima Thule]

I am out.
In pdf, usually the person first to abuse has nothing new or meaningful to say and more logical fallacies are about to follow.

At this point you are arguing for the sake of arguing, you have no proof to support your claims only conjecture and rhetoric.

Pakistan had everyone's support back then, there's no use denying it.
It is now that you are becoming internationally alone.

As for "we innocent blameless pakistanis didn't try to capture Kashmir in 71", pray tell why did then PA capture Chamb then?

The Simla agreement (a matter of public record now) clearly states that pakistan would keep Chamb while we would keep the territories captured in the Kargil-Drass sector(a very wise strategic decision as it would later help us capture both Siachen and win us the Kargil War).

Stick to the topic and very few were supporting us in 71, as for Chamb its part of aggression not try to capturing IOK case closed, and today we are not internationally alone, but in your wishful thinking yours @CyclopS