Mate, straight, simple question. If you were a Turk would you rather buy Patriots off the shelf or you would go for the one which provides ToT ?
As a Turk, I would never buy a Patriot PAC-3 for the purposes that the Turkish government stated - long-range, strategic air defense and ABM. Patriot's, which are excellent for their purposes and the only truly battle-tested air-defense systems from the 4 offered to Turkey, are mostly tactical and operational air-defense, whilst S-300 is more of a strategic air-defense.
As a Turk, I would never buy French/Italian stuff, period, because one of those countries, France, is inherently hostile to Turkey on racist grounds.
That leaves two real choices: buy from a former enemy Russia, or buy from China.
The advantages of Russian system (S-300VM):
1) the S-300 line of systems has been produced for the past three decades - a very long time to work out all the bugs and problems;
2) it is a fact that S-300's can integrate into NATO air-defense - if needed;
3) price is not as expensive as Western systems;
4) it is fact that it can be upgraded in the future, as well as work with S-400 Triumph;
5) S-300 is a known quantity. NATO and other countries are scared of it. NATO goes nuts to prevent Iran or Syria from acquiring it. Turkey went nuts years ago to prevent Greek Cyprus from acquiring it - so Greece got them instead (I think they got PMU-1 variant, not as new as PMU-2);
6) it's easier to negotiate with Russians, and to get some kind of ToT;
7) the best technical characteristics of all - the longest range and a believable 90%+ accuracy of kill ratio.
Disadvantage of Russian system:
1) more expensive than Chinese system;
2) less ToT;
3) Russia and Turkey have fought 11 or so wars in the past three centuries, and the suspicion towards each other lives on among the two militaries. Thus depending from Russia for S-300 missiles is not a good thing - and since Israel is not a friend anymore, therefore there is no one else who could create compatible missiles in case Russian supply ceases;
The advantages of Chinese system (FD-2000/HQ-9):
1) cheaper than even Russian system;
2) China is committed to continue improving it - and there is no doubt that Chinese spies will continue steal technology secrets, and Chinese engineers will continue quickly implementing them, whilst Chinese workers will quickly mass-produce them;
3) much greater ToT than anyone else;
4) it is less known to NATO and everyone else (except Russia and Iran, who know Chinese HQ systems well, Iran even has, supposedly, HQ-9B, the latest variant);
5) becoming closer friends with world's #2 economy;
6) it's unlikely that Turkey and China would fight any wars in the future, so a more friendly attitude among the two.
Disadvantage of the Chinese system:
1) You might be getting a greater ToT, but for a morally obsolete weapon design. The HQ series might be going in a totally different direction. For example, the S-500, despite being built by the same manufacturer as the maker of S-400, S-300, S-200, S-125, S-75, is nevertheless a completely new system that uses completely new and different principles. Same thing with difference between Patriot PAC-3 vs. PAC-2/PAC-1 - they are completely different. PAC-3 is not just newer and has greater range and accuracy, but the principle of its performance is completely different. Thus, getting greater ToT from China is completely misleading. They are already building HQ-9C and HQ-16 and HQ-19 - all of which are different, and more advanced than FD-2000.
2) FD-2000 is rather new. It's a good thing in terms of being shiny, new computer monitors, better air-conditioning and anti-radiation protection for personnel, but it has more bugs and more hidden problems that can only be straightened out after years and decades of development, testing and deployment. S-300's are a known quantity - many countries operate them, no complaints.
3) You don't know the true range and performance of the FD-2000. Why would all the analysts, including one's in Asia, doubt Chinese claims about 300km range, and instead say it has a range of 125km?
4) Despite great promise and great potential, at the end of the day Chinese copied ~80% from Russians, and ~20% from Americans (they also borrowed from passive radars of Kolchuga system of Ukraine - they bought several units back in the early 1990's). So instead of getting a Chinese knock-off, why not get the original from Russians? Keep in mind, that Chinese got 15 batteries (!!!) of S-300 PMU-2 as recently as March 2010 - despite having their own HQ-9B by then. And Chinese will be buying several S-400 Triumph in 2017, according to Russian government news. Which means Chinese technology, as of today, is still behind Russian. And if you want better than S-300VM - such as S-300PMU-2 or even S-400 - negotiate more and get it. Russians are selling it. They sold 3 S-300 PMU-2 to Azerbaijan (enemy of Russia's ally Armenia, which has 5 much older S-300PT and S-300PS), and are selling S-400 to China in 2017.
In any case, S-300 PMU-2 and even S-300VM (Antey 2500) are superior to FD-2000/HQ-9 - that's clear from all available literature. I've asked our Chinese friends to present reputable and authoritative sources that disprove that with concrete facts and arguments - but nothing, only some ******** nonsense in poor English that was Google translated.
