Russia delivers S-300 air-defence batteries to China

[RAHUL INDIAN]

hey guys let the chinese syat happy with their propagnada....
their ABM better then S300...

when we all know its propaganda...then no need to reply so many times.... let them cry at the loudest pitch...the truth doesnt change.....the imp thing is just that no one should beleive their propaganda....and the best way to hide inferiority is by saying we are secret....

over n out...

 

[below_freezing]

hey guys let the chinese syat happy with their propagnada....
their ABM better then S300...

when we all know its propaganda...then no need to reply so many times.... let them cry at the loudest pitch...the truth doesnt change.....the imp thing is just that no one should beleive their propaganda....and the best way to hide inferiority is by saying we are secret....

over n out...

we'll see on the battlefield. if the indian army doesn't share the fate of the qing dynasty, i'll be surprised.

 

[deckingraj]

we'll see on the battlefield. if the indian army doesn't share the fate of the qing dynasty, i'll be surprised.

I hope you or I don't get to see it because surely you would get a painful surprise...On a serious note China and India are not going to war so no need to troll or indulge in d1ck comparison...


@ Question for Those who are not interested in trolling....

I know we make hue and cry about any major defence deals with Pakistan but how about China??? How would we react if Russia choose to sell S-300 SAMS to Pakistan...May i know why there is/was no reaction for similar sale to China??? Is it because SAMS are considered as defensive weapons??

 

[applesauce]

I hope you or I don't get to see it because surely you would get a painful surprise...On a serious note China and India are not going to war so no need to troll or indulge in d1ck comparison...


@ Question for Those who are not interested in trolling....

I know we make hue and cry about any major defence deals with Pakistan but how about China??? How would we react if Russia choose to sell S-300 SAMS to Pakistan...May i know why there is/was no reaction for similar sale to China??? Is it because SAMS are considered as defensive weapons??

err because india has no pull in russia vis-a-vis china while russia doent really have must business with pakistan but lots with india which is why u guys can try to stop sales to pak but not china

 

[Super Falcon]

and soon copies of S-300 will be sold to pakistan what a pitty for india they did what ever to stop pakistan getting russsian systems but some how we got T80UD ,IL78 and now INSHAHALLAH S-300

 

[Renegade]

err because india has no pull in russia vis-a-vis china while russia doent really have must business with pakistan but lots with india which is why u guys can try to stop sales to pak but not china

There is no need for India to have pull in Russia vis-a-vis China, as Russia itself sees the rise of China as threat to it in the near future. The Russians sold you quality stuff in the early 90's as they needed cash, there are no such sales happening now. The only euipment being sold now is not cutting edge stuff and even this likely to dry up in the future.

Russia chose India as a partner in the developement of the 5th generation fighter and there are many other areas of such cooperation. Why was China sidelined??

 

[Peregrine]

There is no need for India to have pull in Russia vis-a-vis China, as Russia itself sees the rise of China as threat to it in the near future. The Russians sold you quality stuff in the early 90's as they needed cash, there are no such sales happening now. The only euipment being sold now is not cutting edge stuff and even this likely to dry up in the future.

Russia chose India as a partner in the developement of the 5th generation fighter and there are many other areas of such cooperation. Why was China sidelined??

Hi,
you are wrong dude, Russia is Greedy like France, However in case of China, Russia has a lot to gain from them, not to mention China has way stronger economy than India, and as for your remarks regarding why China was sidelined, then sensible answer is this that unlike India, China is very capable of pursuing indigenous programs & with tremendous advancement China has shown recently it is obvious that they are not in need of Russian tech anymore. has Russia got ASBM?

 

[Renegade]

and soon copies of S-300 will be sold to pakistan what a pitty for india they did what ever to stop pakistan getting russsian systems but some how we got T80UD ,IL78 and now INSHAHALLAH S-300

If Pakistan could get the HQ-9 (S-300) you would have gotten it long ago, as soon as the Chinese had cloned the system. But since this has not happened till now, given Pakistans weakness in SAM systems & the urgency to upgrade them, there is very less likelyhood of it happening in the future.

As for the T-80UD and the Il-78, Pakistan has Ukranian stuff. These Ukranian systems are a hangover from the Soviet past, this technology is already more than two decades old and it is future is highly handicapped due to the inability of the Ukranian defence industry to produce anything credible on thier own & to make any effective impovements and upgrades for these systems.

So i seriously doubt your argument that these systems represent the cutting edge of the Russian arsenal, they are not even Russian they are Ukranian.

 

[Renegade]

Hi,
you are wrong dude, Russia is Greedy like France, However in case of China, Russia has a lot to gain from them, not to mention China has way stronger economy than India, and as for your remarks regarding why China was sidelined, then sensible answer is this that unlike India, China is very capable of pursuing indigenous programs & with tremendous advancement China has shown recently it is obvious that they are not in need of Russian tech anymore. has Russia got ASBM?

Russia has got ASBM. I am surprised by your ignorance. That being reason enough, not to take the rest of your argument seriously.

 

[Peregrine]

Russia has got ASBM. I am surprised by your ignorance. That being reason enough, not to take the rest of your argument seriously.

Hi
by thinking that u will have a good night sleep right? well i hate to break it to you but here it goes from Wikipedia
"China has developed the world's only anti-ship ballistic missile. It has successfully developed and tested the DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile, with a range of up to 3,000 kilometres (1,900 mi) or more, in 2005, according to the US Department of Defense"
Seriously i don't know if i am ignorant or not but you certainly have delusions of grandeur, yes that is a good reason not to take my argument seriously as you are devoided of any credible knowledge to back your fan boy dreams

 

[Renegade]

Hi
by thinking that u will have a good night sleep right? well i hate to break it to you but here it goes from Wikipedia
"China has developed the world's only anti-ship ballistic missile. It has successfully developed and tested the DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile, with a range of up to 3,000 kilometres (1,900 mi) or more, in 2005, according to the US Department of Defense"
Seriously i don't know if i am ignorant or not but you certainly have delusions of grandeur, yes that is a good reason not to take my argument seriously as you are devoided of any credible knowledge to back your fan boy dreams

Firstly as the discussion was centerd upon spaced based systems, i assumed that by ASBM you were referring to Anti-Satellite Ballistic Missiles.

Secondly, the details of the so called ASBM by China are not at all clear so we have no idea of the so called Chinese missiles capabilities. And since no other technologically adavnced nation has tried this concept, the very idea itself is suspect. Carriers by the very virtue of their mobility are hard to hit. The land based versions of Chinese ballistic missiles are itself compartively inaccurate, so i can imagine their effectiveness at sea, where the target itself is mobile.

Such attempts by the Chinese Navy itself show how much confidance they have in their fleet, to be able to take on the US Navy. Lastly i am sure that you must have heard of the AEGIS system deployed by the US Navy.

I hope this answers all the chest thumping.

 

[ptldM3]

Hi
by thinking that u will have a good night sleep right? well i hate to break it to you but here it goes from Wikipedia
"China has developed the world's only anti-ship ballistic missile. It has successfully developed and tested the DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile, with a range of up to 3,000 kilometres (1,900 mi) or more, in 2005, according to the US Department of Defense"
Seriously i don't know if i am ignorant or not but you certainly have delusions of grandeur, yes that is a good reason not to take my argument seriously as you are devoided of any credible knowledge to back your fan boy dreams

Wikipedia is often wrong because it takes sources from unreliable places, many times blogges. moreover, anyone can edit it, with that being said read the following, this is Gambit's find btw.


Co-orbital ASAT - Russia and ASAT

The principal and only dedicated ASAT system was referred to as the Co-orbital ASAT in reference to its engagement profile. Developed by the Kometa TsNPO under Academician Savin, the Co-orbital ASAT was based on the Tsyklon-2 booster and was tested 20 times in space during the period October, 1968-June, 1982. For each test a dedicated target vehicle was first placed into a low Earth orbit (the first two by the Tsyklon-2 from Baikonur and later targets by the Kosmos-3M from Plesetsk). The Co-orbital ASAT would then be launched from Baikonur on either a 1-revolution or a 2-revolution intercept. The interceptor was 1,400 kg with a principal diameter of 1.8 m and a length of 4.2 m, while the target was a 650-kg polyhedron with a diameter of 1.4 m.

If you read the source you would know that the Soviets carried out 20 tests starting in 1968 and ending in 1982.

 

[Peregrine]

Firstly as the discussion was centerd upon spaced based systems, i assumed that by ASBM you were referring to Anti-Satellite Ballistic Missiles.

Secondly, the details of the so called ASBM by China are not at all clear so we have no idea of the so called Chinese missiles capabilities. And since no other technologically adavnced nation has tried this concept, the very idea itself is suspect. Carriers by the very virtue of their mobility are hard to hit. The land based versions of Chinese ballistic missiles are itself compartively inaccurate, so i can imagine their effectiveness at sea, where the target itself is mobile.

Such attempts by the Chinese Navy itself show how much confidance they have in their fleet, to be able to take on the US Navy. Lastly i am sure that you must have heard of the AEGIS system deployed by the US Navy.

I hope this answers all the chest thumping.

Hi
what this really answered was that even despite knowing the reality that China is very capable of pursuing its indigenous programs, they successfully demonstrated their ASAT, which India doesn't have at all, many American officials have expressed concerns regarding ASBM but its no use to tell some who is in constant denial. however its really funny u deny the existence of ASBM & accept ASAT however you fail to comprehend this that even the western states have acknowledged that the missile for both programms is most probably DF-21 / CSS-5 .
So the point is u can enjoy living in delusions, but the whole world knows that China has made a remarkable advancement and it is not reliant on Russia as India is.

 

[Peregrine]

Wikipedia is often wrong because it takes sources from unreliable places, many times blogges. moreover, anyone can edit it, with that being said read the following, this is Gambit's find btw.


Co-orbital ASAT - Russia and ASAT




If you read the source you would know that the Soviets carried out 20 tests starting in 1968 and ending in 1982.

Hi
I know that Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and i wasn't even talking about Russian ASAT weapons. But my point still remains valid the deal was that if Russia acquired ASAT in 1960's so China did in 2007, and when did India acquire one? so that was my point China is not dependent on Russian technology as much as India is, You can deny it, its up to you

 

[Renegade]

Hi
what this really answered was that even despite knowing the reality that China is very capable of pursuing its indigenous programs, they successfully demonstrated their ASAT, which India doesn't have at all, many American officials have expressed concerns regarding ASBM but its no use to tell some who is in constant denial. however its really funny u deny the existence of ASBM & accept ASAT however you fail to comprehend this that even the western states have acknowledged that the missile for both programms is most probably DF-21 / CSS-5 .
So the point is u can enjoy living in delusions, but the whole world knows that China has made a remarkable advancement and it is not reliant on Russia as India is.

Your ignorance baffels me. The ASBM is not at all a proven technological platform. For the following reasons:

1. The accuracy of Chinese missiles is not good on land itself were the target is static, forget the ocean were the Carrier groups are very mobile.
2. The concept is grandoise in conception and its realisation requires technologies that China does not possess. No advanced technological nation went in for this kind of stuff. The Russians themselves relied primarily on Maritime Bombers carrying cruise missiles to neutralise American carrier groups.
3. The very idea by the Chinese Navy shows the in what poor light they hold their own sea based assets as against those deployed by the US Navy. China has no confidance in its ability to take on the US Navy based on conventional forces.
4. Locating sea based assets like Ships is very difficult in a vast ocean. How the hell is China going to locate these battle groups in the first place. You need to know were the traget is before launching, dont you?
5. I am sure that you have not heard of the AEGIS system deployed by the US Navy. Do some reading about it. Might open your eyes after all.

I have given you legitimate & clear points to validate my argument. Let me see you come up with an argument that is high on quality and low on rhetoric.