Pakistan's response to S-400

[nadeemkhan110]

The Original Topic is what should / could be

Pakistan's response to S-400

options are:
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 counterpart of THAAD
HQ-29 (tested in 2013) and HQ-30 (up coming) counterpart of Patriot PAC-3

 

[CriticalThought]

options are:
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 counterpart of THAAD
HQ-29 and HQ-30 (up coming) counterpart of Patriot PAC-3

Would you like to summarize the details of these systems for us? Shed some light on the capabilities of their radars and missiles, as well as costs.

 

[nadeemkhan110]

Would you like to summarize the details of these systems for us? Shed some light on the capabilities of their radars and missiles, as well as costs.

HQ-19 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor
China carried out a fourth land-based mid-course missile interception test within its territory on 05 February 2018 and "achieved the desired test objective". As usual, the government announced that the "test is defensive in nature and not targeted against any country".

The HQ-9B, HQ-19 [THAAD counterpart], HQ-26 [SM-3 counterpart] and HQ-29 [PAC-3 counterpart] are designed primarily for Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities. While the HQ-9A air defense variant of the HQ-9 series is very well attested, the remaining theater missile defense interceptors are poorly attested, and verge on being little more than rumors.

The Red Flag-19 system also includes a multi-purpose solid phased array radar for early warning. It is reported that the X band phased array radar can detect targets at a distance of 4,000 km, covering the northern fringe of the South Asian subcontinent to the vast areas of the hinterland of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. The information is provided to the Red Flag-19 interception system via the command-and-control system.

During the 2013 and 2014 interception tests, the Red Flag-19 missile successfully reproduced the situation of USA Standard 3 intercepting the USA-193 at that time. At a height of over 200 km, it approached a relative speed of 10,000 m / Intercept simulation of intercontinental missiles hit the target.

On January 11, 2010, China conducted a pilot land-based mid-section anti-missile interception test in China. On January 7, 2010, the United States announced that it will sell the "Patriot" missile system to Taiwan. Some experts speculated that the Chinese missile test is very It may be related to arms sales by the United States to Taiwan. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the trial is defensive and "not aimed at any country".
On January 27, 2013, China again conducted a land-based mid-section anti-missile interception technology test in China, which achieved the desired goal. This experiment is defensive and does not target any country.
On July 23, 2014, China conducted a ground-based ABM technology test in China, which achieved the desired goal.
China carried out a fourth land-based mid-course missile interception test within its territory on 05 February 2018 and "achieved the desired test objective".
In December 2016, some mainland Chinese sources broke the news that China's newest land-based mid-plane anti-missile system has become combat-capable: the Red Flag-19 air defense missile had officially entered the PLA's military service. By one account, the Chinese developement process usually requires that a SRBM be fired 9 times before being validated and admitted to active service, whereas for a larger MRBM the program budget might only support 4 trials. American practice also requires more tests for smaller missiles than large ones, but a larger strategic missile like an SLBM or ICBM would require 20 tests, while smaller rockets would require some multiple of this number.

On July 23, 2016, the suspected red flag -19 (HQ-19) made a public appearance. When introducing the PLA's missile test expert Chen Deming, the "military program" of CCTV disclosed the first land-based mid-flight anti-missile interception test screen and intercepted missile warheads. The paper published in China on Demand Analysis of Tactical Missile Power Units and the Development of Solid Rocket Engines suggests that the Red Flag-19 anti-missile system is intended to be targeted at India's 2,500-kilometer long range medium-range ballistic missiles and requires effective interception of 3,000 kilometers Range of medium-range ballistic missile reentry warhead ability.

According to another judgment, the red flag -19 kinetic energy interceptor uses a side-window infrared seeker similar to THAAD. The window design can reduce the impact of atmospheric friction and heat on the infrared sensor detection, giving the missile the interception capability in the atmosphere. Side-window infrared seeker gives the red flag -19 in the atmosphere a high attack accuracy, and can use a lighter kinetic energy interceptor to increase the interceptor's shot height and range.

China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation Second Institute developed the endo- and exo-atmospheric Red flag-19 anti-missile missiles, belonging to the People's Liberation Army ground-based missile defense system.

The Red Flag-19 kinetic energy interceptor is improved from the 863-805 engineering interceptor, and based on it, the guidance technology of infrared imaging is introduced. It adopted a composite guidance system, which can be used to intercept ballistic missile reentry warhead within a range of 3000km. Red Flag-19 is equipped with high-acceleration solid engine, which uses carbon fiber shell and the application of in-situ synthesis of composite materials. The mass ratio is 0.85, with a firing duration of 260s and 60g maneuver ability to intercept the warhead target.

the red flag -19 power for the two solid rocket engine at the beginning of the study on the selection of imported T-800 carbon fiber as the shell material. The second engine is a cone engine with a maximum diameter of about 0.4 meters and a weight of about 100 kilograms. The N-15B solid high-energy propellant is used. The working pressure exceeds 10 MPa and the specific impulse exceeds 250 seconds.

The only official document that clearly states the designation HQ-19 is a document entitled "The needs analysis propulsion system of tactical missiles and direction of development for solid propellant engine", dating from 2000 and written by the Institute 41 CCAC Group (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation). This paper analyzes firstly the risks and types of conflict that China may face up to 2010 (The document is dated 2000, and speaks of "in 10 years"), and gives types of tactical missiles to develop a priority to deal with these external threats. In subsection 3.4, a priority is given to the need for an anti-missile system capable of intercepting high altitude heads ballistic missile whose range is 3000km, phase re-entry. And in response to this paragraph 3.4, in section 4.4 it is clearly stated "Developing solid propellant engines that meet the needs of anti-missile systems area at high altitude," a concept close to American THAAD ( Terminal High Altitude Area Defense).

Finally, in paragraph 5.4 of the document, it gives the status of the development of the HQ-19 motor - a solid propellant engine demonstration with a specific impulse of 260s, mass ratio of 0.85 and able to provide the necessary power for maneuverability 60g to track down the head of ballistic missile, a "completed the design phase, fabrication and testing", "testing validated the carbon fiber shell and propellant N-15B."

The HQ-19 missile is a project launched in the late 1990s. In 1995 the Chinese started serious studies of a kinetic kill vehicle KKV under Program 863. In 1986, to meet the global challenges of new technology revolution and competition, four Chinese scientists, WANG Daheng, WANG Ganchang, YANG Jiachi, and CHEN Fangyun, jointly proposed to accelerate China’s high-tech development. With strategic vision and resolution, the late Chinese leader Mr. DENG Xiaoping personally approved the National High-tech R&D Program, namely the 863 Program. Implemented during three successive Five-year Plans, the program has boosted China’s overall high-tech development, R&D capacity, socio-economic development, and national security. In April 2001, the Chinese State Council approved continued implementation of the program in the 10th Five-year Plan. As one of the national S&T program trilogy in the 10th Five-year Plan, 863 Program continues to play its important role.

In 1999, the first Chinese KKV made the suspension tests successfully flight, China became the second country in the world to have mastered the technology. The first test of V & V was held in 2003 with success. It was in final certification. HQ-19 has a KKV of about 35kg, the system performance would be similar to the US THAAD. Another R & D document mentions a technology demonstration at the HQ-19 engines in 2000, led by the Academy 4 CCAC group. The demonstration also validated "hull carbon fiber" and "rocket N-15B".

HQ-29 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 [THAAD counterpart], HQ-26 [SM-3 counterpart] and HQ-29 [PAC-3 counterpart] are designed primarily for Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities. While the HQ-9A air defense variant of the HQ-9 series is very well attested, the remaining theater missile defense interceptors are poorly attested, and verge on being little more than rumors.

HQ-29 is believed to be an equivalent to the American PAC-3 MSE / ERINT in terms of technology used (one hundred solid mini-thrusters pulse around the head of the missile, very different from 9M96 C-400 where the Russian thrusters side are to the center of gravity of the missile as Aster). The development project would be launched in 2003, the technology of thruster and control combined active flight was controlled between 2005 and 2007. His first shot of V & V was held in 2011 with success, his chief engineer, Yun Lee, a woman CASIC group was distinguished. The official newspaper of the Chinese Aerospace published an article on it after the first test. The system will be delivered to the army before the end of the 12th Five Year Plan.

To the kinetic interceptor with lateral impulse thrust and aerodynamic force, it is required to solve the problem of combined fire ofmotors for attitude control. First amodel of combined fire of motors for attitude control is developed, and then on the basis of this model a firing rule of attitude control motor is designed and an analysis on the energy consumption efficiency is made under the condition of different position d istribution of attitude controlmotors, finally the simulation result proves the feasibility of this firing rule and have some reference in future.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Actually sea-skimming is much harder to master than terrain hugging. Sea keeps changing hence you need a real time scan and navigation to keep it below radar threshold and not take dip in the seas. Meanwhile the ground features are constant and a pre-fed way-point navigation can manage terrain avoidance by managing altitude. Brahmos uses a G3oM along with INS for navigation, and can work through a very heavily jammed environment.

options are:
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 counterpart of THAAD
HQ-29 (tested in 2003) and HQ-30 (up coming) counterpart of Patriot PAC-3

And these systems are going to stop both s400 radar from tracking our aircrafts and a variety of s400 missiles from hitting them.

a stroke of genius

 

[nadeemkhan110]

And these systems are going to stop both s400 radar from tracking our aircrafts and a variety of s400 missiles from hitting them.

a stroke of genius

for protecting our aircrafts we need to do something like this and our drones are coming in an year or two

 

[LeGenD]

EMP works only in movies. In real life, it can cause only temporary disruption of radiowaves and nothing more. In today's world we have so much of electromagnetic waves from mobile phones, radio, satellites etc taht the gadgets are well adjusted to cope with some extra waves from EMP.

A nuclear blast may produce EMP with intensity in the 20,000 - 50,000 volts per meter (v/m) range. It will infiltrate many devices and fill each with excess current, disrupting or even destroying them in the process. It will also overload power transmission and/or telecommunications equipment over a large space.

EMP hardening is possible but extremely costly. An item worth 1 USD would jump to like 3000 USD after EMP hardening treatment. Few countries can afford these measures.

Russia was informed of the strikes and hence Russia did not respond by its SAM. It was not that Russia fired S300/S400 and it missed

Russia opposed any act of aggression against Syrian regime, and would activate its EW equipment prior to strikes. It is another thing that American cruise missiles proved much resilient.

Terrain hugging is not simple. There is about 1km area near LOC where the terrain is clear and any babur missile that moves across will be detected here. Also, there are AEWACS that can find terrain hugging missiles.

The biggest defect of terrain hugging missile is that it relies heavily on GPS and taht the terrain can change quickly like by growing of trees or construction of buildings. So, these terrain hugging missiles must always maintain a margin of error and fly several meters above ground to avoid getting hit by obstacles. Along with slow speed of Babur, the missile flying at 100meter can be detected and shoot down easily

TERCOM - ever heard of it?

FYI: https://science.howstuffworks.com/cruise-missile3.htm

EMP bursts from tactical nukes is the easy and effective way. And you don;t even have to penetrate the AD environment of the S-400 to create that...
Adding more longer range Anti Rad missiles to the inventory is another easy counter measure.

While having an indigenous Hyper sonic cruise missile show up is another thing, and well its kinda close and will be tested soon. Remember the indian scientist caught for stealing brahmos tech, that's just one of the many ...and it obviously did not start yesterday...

EMP is a double-edged sword. It does not distinguish between friend and foe.

 

[randomradio]

When India buys a weapon, it will be thought to be the best one in the world.
Now, India has bought the "best" air defense system S-400, and got the "best" missile Brahmos.
So, the question is: Can S-400 intercept Brahmos? Or can Brahmos destroy S-400?

The S-400 can intercept supersonic cruise missiles, but the capability is yet to be tested against Brahmos.

India also has SPYDER SAM systems and can HQ-9 Intercept and destroy Brahmos?

HQ-9 with an active seeker may have a chance. With semi-active seeker, little chance. But it's untested capability.

 

[CriticalThought]

HQ-19 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor
China carried out a fourth land-based mid-course missile interception test within its territory on 05 February 2018 and "achieved the desired test objective". As usual, the government announced that the "test is defensive in nature and not targeted against any country".

The HQ-9B, HQ-19 [THAAD counterpart], HQ-26 [SM-3 counterpart] and HQ-29 [PAC-3 counterpart] are designed primarily for Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities. While the HQ-9A air defense variant of the HQ-9 series is very well attested, the remaining theater missile defense interceptors are poorly attested, and verge on being little more than rumors.

The Red Flag-19 system also includes a multi-purpose solid phased array radar for early warning. It is reported that the X band phased array radar can detect targets at a distance of 4,000 km, covering the northern fringe of the South Asian subcontinent to the vast areas of the hinterland of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. The information is provided to the Red Flag-19 interception system via the command-and-control system.

During the 2013 and 2014 interception tests, the Red Flag-19 missile successfully reproduced the situation of USA Standard 3 intercepting the USA-193 at that time. At a height of over 200 km, it approached a relative speed of 10,000 m / Intercept simulation of intercontinental missiles hit the target.

On January 11, 2010, China conducted a pilot land-based mid-section anti-missile interception test in China. On January 7, 2010, the United States announced that it will sell the "Patriot" missile system to Taiwan. Some experts speculated that the Chinese missile test is very It may be related to arms sales by the United States to Taiwan. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the trial is defensive and "not aimed at any country".
On January 27, 2013, China again conducted a land-based mid-section anti-missile interception technology test in China, which achieved the desired goal. This experiment is defensive and does not target any country.
On July 23, 2014, China conducted a ground-based ABM technology test in China, which achieved the desired goal.
China carried out a fourth land-based mid-course missile interception test within its territory on 05 February 2018 and "achieved the desired test objective".
In December 2016, some mainland Chinese sources broke the news that China's newest land-based mid-plane anti-missile system has become combat-capable: the Red Flag-19 air defense missile had officially entered the PLA's military service. By one account, the Chinese developement process usually requires that a SRBM be fired 9 times before being validated and admitted to active service, whereas for a larger MRBM the program budget might only support 4 trials. American practice also requires more tests for smaller missiles than large ones, but a larger strategic missile like an SLBM or ICBM would require 20 tests, while smaller rockets would require some multiple of this number.

On July 23, 2016, the suspected red flag -19 (HQ-19) made a public appearance. When introducing the PLA's missile test expert Chen Deming, the "military program" of CCTV disclosed the first land-based mid-flight anti-missile interception test screen and intercepted missile warheads. The paper published in China on Demand Analysis of Tactical Missile Power Units and the Development of Solid Rocket Engines suggests that the Red Flag-19 anti-missile system is intended to be targeted at India's 2,500-kilometer long range medium-range ballistic missiles and requires effective interception of 3,000 kilometers Range of medium-range ballistic missile reentry warhead ability.

According to another judgment, the red flag -19 kinetic energy interceptor uses a side-window infrared seeker similar to THAAD. The window design can reduce the impact of atmospheric friction and heat on the infrared sensor detection, giving the missile the interception capability in the atmosphere. Side-window infrared seeker gives the red flag -19 in the atmosphere a high attack accuracy, and can use a lighter kinetic energy interceptor to increase the interceptor's shot height and range.

China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation Second Institute developed the endo- and exo-atmospheric Red flag-19 anti-missile missiles, belonging to the People's Liberation Army ground-based missile defense system.

The Red Flag-19 kinetic energy interceptor is improved from the 863-805 engineering interceptor, and based on it, the guidance technology of infrared imaging is introduced. It adopted a composite guidance system, which can be used to intercept ballistic missile reentry warhead within a range of 3000km. Red Flag-19 is equipped with high-acceleration solid engine, which uses carbon fiber shell and the application of in-situ synthesis of composite materials. The mass ratio is 0.85, with a firing duration of 260s and 60g maneuver ability to intercept the warhead target.

the red flag -19 power for the two solid rocket engine at the beginning of the study on the selection of imported T-800 carbon fiber as the shell material. The second engine is a cone engine with a maximum diameter of about 0.4 meters and a weight of about 100 kilograms. The N-15B solid high-energy propellant is used. The working pressure exceeds 10 MPa and the specific impulse exceeds 250 seconds.

The only official document that clearly states the designation HQ-19 is a document entitled "The needs analysis propulsion system of tactical missiles and direction of development for solid propellant engine", dating from 2000 and written by the Institute 41 CCAC Group (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation). This paper analyzes firstly the risks and types of conflict that China may face up to 2010 (The document is dated 2000, and speaks of "in 10 years"), and gives types of tactical missiles to develop a priority to deal with these external threats. In subsection 3.4, a priority is given to the need for an anti-missile system capable of intercepting high altitude heads ballistic missile whose range is 3000km, phase re-entry. And in response to this paragraph 3.4, in section 4.4 it is clearly stated "Developing solid propellant engines that meet the needs of anti-missile systems area at high altitude," a concept close to American THAAD ( Terminal High Altitude Area Defense).

Finally, in paragraph 5.4 of the document, it gives the status of the development of the HQ-19 motor - a solid propellant engine demonstration with a specific impulse of 260s, mass ratio of 0.85 and able to provide the necessary power for maneuverability 60g to track down the head of ballistic missile, a "completed the design phase, fabrication and testing", "testing validated the carbon fiber shell and propellant N-15B."

The HQ-19 missile is a project launched in the late 1990s. In 1995 the Chinese started serious studies of a kinetic kill vehicle KKV under Program 863. In 1986, to meet the global challenges of new technology revolution and competition, four Chinese scientists, WANG Daheng, WANG Ganchang, YANG Jiachi, and CHEN Fangyun, jointly proposed to accelerate China’s high-tech development. With strategic vision and resolution, the late Chinese leader Mr. DENG Xiaoping personally approved the National High-tech R&D Program, namely the 863 Program. Implemented during three successive Five-year Plans, the program has boosted China’s overall high-tech development, R&D capacity, socio-economic development, and national security. In April 2001, the Chinese State Council approved continued implementation of the program in the 10th Five-year Plan. As one of the national S&T program trilogy in the 10th Five-year Plan, 863 Program continues to play its important role.

In 1999, the first Chinese KKV made the suspension tests successfully flight, China became the second country in the world to have mastered the technology. The first test of V & V was held in 2003 with success. It was in final certification. HQ-19 has a KKV of about 35kg, the system performance would be similar to the US THAAD. Another R & D document mentions a technology demonstration at the HQ-19 engines in 2000, led by the Academy 4 CCAC group. The demonstration also validated "hull carbon fiber" and "rocket N-15B".

HQ-29 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor
The HQ-9B, HQ-19 [THAAD counterpart], HQ-26 [SM-3 counterpart] and HQ-29 [PAC-3 counterpart] are designed primarily for Anti Ballistic Missile capabilities. While the HQ-9A air defense variant of the HQ-9 series is very well attested, the remaining theater missile defense interceptors are poorly attested, and verge on being little more than rumors.

HQ-29 is believed to be an equivalent to the American PAC-3 MSE / ERINT in terms of technology used (one hundred solid mini-thrusters pulse around the head of the missile, very different from 9M96 C-400 where the Russian thrusters side are to the center of gravity of the missile as Aster). The development project would be launched in 2003, the technology of thruster and control combined active flight was controlled between 2005 and 2007. His first shot of V & V was held in 2011 with success, his chief engineer, Yun Lee, a woman CASIC group was distinguished. The official newspaper of the Chinese Aerospace published an article on it after the first test. The system will be delivered to the army before the end of the 12th Five Year Plan.

To the kinetic interceptor with lateral impulse thrust and aerodynamic force, it is required to solve the problem of combined fire ofmotors for attitude control. First amodel of combined fire of motors for attitude control is developed, and then on the basis of this model a firing rule of attitude control motor is designed and an analysis on the energy consumption efficiency is made under the condition of different position d istribution of attitude controlmotors, finally the simulation result proves the feasibility of this firing rule and have some reference in future.

According to this information, 9B, 19, 26, and 29 are all anti-ballistic systems. This is a very important area, so thanks for adding this info to the thread. But I am very concerned especially about Brahmos, and stand-off weapons in general. Secondly, I am concerned about the increased response time to a cold start type scenario because we will lose precious time in countering Indian air defence.

they will stop our and they will stop their missiles
for protecting our aircrafts we need to do something like this and our drones are coming in an year or two

You know, a drone swarm in tight formation can be decimated using old school anti-aircraft guns. A more loosely formed swarm would need much more precise targeting, but what if the enemy releases his own swarm to meet the incoming swarm head on? Finally, if the swarm is at a distance and either in enemy territory (from the perspective of the side being attacked) or where collateral damage isn't a concern, then thermobaric explosions will take very good care of them. Everything has its strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Fawadqasim1]

they will stop our and they will stop their missiles
for protecting our aircrafts we need to do something like this and our drones are coming in an year or two

Please read this thread carefully https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...indias-s-400-abm-system-akash-s-muham.578995/
And we were discussing hq9 family of missiles
Not futuristic drones.
They can be countered with very simple and straightforward methods.

According to this information, 9B, 19, 26, and 29 are all anti-ballistic systems. This is a very important area, so thanks for adding this info to the thread. But I am very concerned especially about Brahmos, and stand-off weapons in general. Secondly, I am concerned about the increased response time to a cold start type scenario because we will lose precious time in countering Indian air defence.



You know, a drone swarm in tight formation can be decimated using old school anti-aircraft guns. A more loosely formed swarm would need much more precise targeting, but what if the enemy releases his own swarm to meet the incoming swarm head on? Finally, if the swarm is at a distance and either in enemy territory (from the perspective of the side being attacked) or where collateral damage isn't a concern, then thermobaric explosions will take very good care of them. Everything has its strengths and weaknesses.

Should I give you a hint s400 is an off road mobile system which can be deployed and moved with in 5 minutes.I hope you will get the Idea.

 

[CriticalThought]

Please read this thread carefully https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...indias-s-400-abm-system-akash-s-muham.578995/
And we were discussing hq9 family of missiles
Not futuristic drones.
They can be countered with very simple and straightforward methods.


Should I give you a hint s400 is an off road mobile system which can be deployed and moved with in 5 minutes.I hope you will get the Idea.

Actually, no, I don't get the idea. How about you stop talking in riddles and state clearly what you wan to say?

 

[Fawadqasim1]

Actually, no, I don't get the idea. How about you stop talking in riddles and state clearly what you wan to say?

The speed of these drones cannot be more than a few hundred kilometres per hour so They are slow. To reach a s400 truck which is say 270 Kms away they will take 10s of minutes.Say 25
Minutes and this calculation is for futuristic fast drone not the current ones which will take about an hour so the question is how can you hide a swarm of hundreds of drones from the enemy ?they will be alerted within minutes of the swarm entering their borders. They will have 10s of minutes to move the truck or trucks to the camouflaged shelter's. The main use of this type of makeshift camouflaged shelters is to deceive
The the optical/thermal/radar recognition of the
Launcher or truck. A standard procedure followed by all strategic forces including ours
Who uses off road mobile launchers.
in simple words they are and will be too slow
For an off road mobile system.
sorry for my clumsy posts i am posting via a mobile phone.

 

[CriticalThought]

The speed of these drones cannot be more than a few hundred kilometres per hour so They are slow. To reach a s400 truck which is say 270 Kms away they will take 10s of minutes.Say 25
Minutes and this calculation is for futuristic fast drone not the current ones which will take about an hour so the question is how can you hide a swarm of hundreds of drones from the enemy ?they will be alerted within minutes of the swarm entering their borders. They will have 10s of minutes to move the truck or trucks to the camouflaged shelter's. The main use of this type of makeshift camouflaged shelters is to deceive
The the optical/thermal/radar recognition of the
Launcher or truck. A standard procedure followed by all strategic forces including ours
Who uses off road mobile launchers.
in simple words they are and will be too slow
For an off road mobile system.
sorry for my clumsy posts i am posting via a mobile phone.

Well, every weapon has pros and cons. Drones also have pros and cons. It is up to the battle commander how a particular weapon is used. Imagine a fast flyer that reaches close to the S-400 radar and release the swarm very close to the physical system.

 

[lightoftruth]

the only way to defeat s4oo is to purify and strengthen your faith and love for ALLAH ALMIGHTY and strengthen your faith and love for HIS Last Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (P.B.U.H) and implement Islam in your life Help will come from ALLAH ALMIGHTY and Angels will arrive and will defeat enemy like it happened in 1965

 

[randomradio]

First and foremost, Pakistan needs a solid air defence system. Such a system should take into account threats from both the East and the West.

This won't help you defeat the S-400.

Second, Pakistan needs to upgrade its EW capabilities.

This has to be developed indigenously, but it's not particularly helpful. Jamming one type of radar will make you vulnerable to the ESM of the S-400, and also other radars. This will reduce the engagement into attrition warfare and obviously will not go in favour of Pakistan.

And last but not least, we need a kinetic response that will make most Indian air defence redundant.

This is also something Pakistan cannot merely procure. This has to come through indigenous development. And by the time such weapons become available to Pakistan for exports, the S-400 will have become outdated.

Lastly, Pakistan needs to upgrade its cruise missile program to target the hypersonic range.

This is a 20-year development program. Not something that will be available to defeat the S-400. But the S-400 will come with the capability to defeat hypersonic cruise missiles pretty soon.

What Pakistan needs is the ability to find the S-400 first. This requires advanced stealth drones the size of the JF-17 at the minimum, but with a flying wing design. These drones will have to be packed with enough gear that can find the S-400s without being detected themselves. This is again something that Pakistan cannot merely procure with money, it has to be developed indigenously.

Of course, a well-networked remote sensing satellite system is required to complement the drones. This will allow you to keep watch on the SAM site so that any relocation of the SAM can be monitored. This is again something Pakistan will have to develop indigenously. Pakistan will also need the ability to protect these satellites and also launch more satellites in case the existing ones become unavailable. You do not need advanced launch vehicles for this purpose, a modified IRBM that can lift a 50-200Kg satellite into LEO is plenty.

Lastly, 5th gen or higher fighter jets capable of penetrating the S-400's defences and defeating it. A lot of firepower will be necessary. It will be a mess, and you will lose jets, but with only a 4th gen fleet you will stand no chance.

 

[LeGenD]

You know, a drone swarm in tight formation can be decimated using old school anti-aircraft guns. A more loosely formed swarm would need much more precise targeting, but what if the enemy releases his own swarm to meet the incoming swarm head on? Finally, if the swarm is at a distance and either in enemy territory (from the perspective of the side being attacked) or where collateral damage isn't a concern, then thermobaric explosions will take very good care of them. Everything has its strengths and weaknesses.

Russian forces experienced a swarm drone attack in Syria in 2018, and easily nuetralized them with their defenses.

FYI: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/11/swa...s-attacks-russian-military-base-in-syria.html

---

American solution is entirely different in design and complexity. Watch this:

Those are not ordinary drones. Each drone is intelligent and can be programmed independently. However, they are optimized for Cooperative Engagement Capability (CNC).

FYI: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2578439/u-s-military-unleashes-swarm-of-tiny-intelligent-micro-drones/

Now that is scary stuff.