Turkey soon to decide who wins the multibillion dollar contract.

[Jigs]

Thanks.

But what is your prefference?

MBDA Aster 30 SAMP/T. They are offering full tech and it is also a nato compatible system. So they fit our needs the best i believe.

The system can intercept BMs with 600km range . The missiles can engage targets at 120kms. System can track 100 targets and engage 16 at once.


If the Chinese are offering a advanced version like the HQ-9B with full tech transfer that would also be a good option

 

[Obambam]

MBDA Aster 30 SAMP/T. They are offering full tech and it is also a nato compatible system. So they fit our needs the best i believe.

The system has a 600km range radar. The missiles can engage targets at 120kms. System can track 100 targets and engage 16 at once.


If the Chinese are offering a advanced version like the HQ-9B with full tech transfer that would also be a good option

You can either go with the NATO allies and have no operational issues with the system or go with China/Russia who offers a different system that may hinder future operations with NATO. However, buying from China or Russia will pave way for further military cooperations.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

MBDA Aster 30 SAMP/T. They are offering full tech and it is also a nato compatible system. So they fit our needs the best i believe.

The system has a 600km range radar. The missiles can engage targets at 120kms. System can track 100 targets and engage 16 at once.


If the Chinese are offering a advanced version like the HQ-9B with full tech transfer that would also be a good option

lol, hey Man. One question. How many missiles do the Aster 30 has?

If I remember the luncher only carries 6 missiles. How can it engage 16 targets at the same time???

Also, do you know that the world's most advanced SAM the S-400 can only engage 6 at a time. This makes total sense as well. Because S-400's luncher only carry 4 missiles. To me it is not important how many target it can track or engage that matters it is the range, the accruacy of the missile and speed of the missile. S-400 has a max speed of march 10!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_(SAM)


There is also a naval variant of HQ-9 called HHQ-9 onboard China's most advanced destoryer 052D. HHQ-9 has exptional agialty and accuracy.


The current Chinese HQ-9A's engage and detection radar is very advanced. It can detect 8 and engage 4 makes total sense as well because just like S-300PMU2 each unit only carry 4 missiles!!!!!!!


BTW, do not tell me Aster 30 carry 30 missiles. lol NOT POSSIBLE!
So what is the point that it can engage 16 targets?? lol again

You see it is not that HQ-9A's sensor is not advanced, in fact it is very advanced but it has to make sense in reality.

Finially. Aster 30's missiles are a lot, I mean a lot smaller than S-300 and HQ-9A's missile. HQ-9A's missile is over 7 meters long which is why it has a long range of 200KM. It can also intercept ballittic missile in very high altitude, in fact in 2010 China's NMD (National Missile Defence) project used HQ-9B as its core defence missile system.

Peace out.

 

[Jigs]

lol, hey Man. One question. How many missiles do the Aster 30 has?

If I remember the luncher only carries 6 missiles. How can it engage 16 targets at the same time???

Also, do you know that the world's most advanced SAM the S-400 can only engage 6 at a time. This makes total sense as well. Because S-400's luncher only carry 4 missiles. To me it is not important how many target it can track or engage that matters it is the range, the accruacy of the missile and speed of the missile. S-400 has a max speed of march 10!!!! There is also a naval variant...://www.army-technology.com/projects/aster-30/

 

[siegecrossbow]

Regardless of how far China advances in the competition I am just happy that we are finally confident enough to compete with the best in the world (the U.S, Europe, and Russia) in the field of Surface to Air Missiles.

 

[Archdemon]

MBDA Aster 30 SAMP/T. They are offering full tech and it is also a nato compatible system. So they fit our needs the best i believe.

The system can intercept BMs with 600km range . The missiles can engage targets at 120kms. System can track 100 targets and engage 16 at once.


If the Chinese are offering a advanced version like the HQ-9B with full tech transfer that would also be a good option

120kms? it is about 43,000kmh the speed of medium orbit satellite

 

[farhan_9909]

the best option is S-300 followed by the Hq-9

 

[Jigs]

120kms? it is about 43,000kmh the speed of medium orbit satellite

Typo. I meant 120km range. Thanks for not contributing to the topic though

 

[karaislam]

i want s400.russians had offeref us before.we wont get s300 while there is better one around.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

It is as a battery not as one vehicle.

A SAMP/T battery includes: command and control vehicle, Arabel radar and up to six Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL) vehicles, each with eight missiles and a store of reload missiles.

So actually 6x8=48 missiles and the system can launch 16 of them at targets.


You can read about the system here

Aster 30 SAMP/T Surface-to-Air Missile Platform / Terrain, Europe - Army Technology

Oh I see. You are talking about a WHOLE Batery. So that means S-400 one batery has 12 lunchers can also engage 12*6=72 targets.

HQ-9A one batery has 12 lunchers can engage 12*4=48 targets.

Before I was talking about one luncher which consist its independent radar for tracking ang engaging plus 4 missile. Which makes perfect sense.

You also said that Europe is willing to offer complete ToT. To me this means that their system is not top notch. Will USA offer F-22 with complete Tot? lol, no. In fact they ban the export. Currently in india's MRCA, Sweden's JAS Gripen, which is the least capable, this is why Sweden is offereing complete Tot, because otherwise they will not be able to compete. Jigs, you want China to offer HQ-9B with compete Tot. WOW, this is not possible.

I also doubt Aster's ballstic missile interception capability. As Europe never developed such a system before. Russia's S-300V is good, but HQ-9B is much much better at least as good as S-400.

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

i want s400.russians had offeref us before.we wont get s300 while there is better one around.

Russia is not gonna offer S-400. Because Turkey never bought S-300 before. Turkey must buy S-300 first before it can get a hold of S-400.

Just like Chinese will not offer HQ-9B, unless Turkey gets HQ-9A. It supprised me already, because before it was FT-2000 which is water down HQ-9A. HQ-9B is the state of the art right now, in fact Chinese national missile defense system uses it as its core interceting missile.

Also, it seems that Turkey is taking a bit longer to make the desicion. I think it is due to the fact that Chinese and Russian offer are very good. Before Turkey always gets USA system in a hurry.

One last thing. The 4 billion dollars is actually not on China's top concern. China wants a strategic ally in Europe and Middle East region which is why Turkey is important. China values this parternship which is why it showed major interests at the begining of the competition. Russia did not even make an offer at first, it was not until Turkish PM visisted Russia that Russia finially offered the S-300. I doubt Russia's offer is as good as China's.

 

[ovarel]

we are also looking for some non-western partners..so i hope the relations will get better..on the other hand,i dont know the system of russia and china will be compatible with nato standards..

 

[AerospaceEngineer]

we are also looking for some non-western partners..so i hope the relations will get better..on the other hand,i dont know the system of russia and china will be compatible with nato standards..

HQ-9A is actually similar to PAC-3 in terms of electrioncs. It usese the same control and command system as PAC system. It will be easier to intergrate HQ-9A into NATO system than S-300PMU2.

Also, the Chinese are very proud of HQ-9A it has great anti jamming capability, in fact there is no airborn system capable of jamming HQ-9A's radar.

Here is a Chinese source if you can read Chinese:

ÖйúHQ9Aµ¼µ¯À×´ï¿ÉѹÖÆÅ·ÃÀ×îÏȽøÕ½»ú_¾üÊÂƵµÀ_лªÍø

 

[ovarel]

HQ-9A is actually similar to PAC-3 in terms of electrioncs. It usese the same control and command system as PAC system. It will be easier to intergrate HQ-9A into NATO system than S-300PMU2.

Also, the Chinese are very proud of HQ-9A it has great anti jamming capability, in fact there is no airborn system capable of jamming HQ-9A's radar.

Here is a Chinese source if you can read Chinese:

ÖйúHQ9Aµ¼µ¯À×´ï¿ÉѹÖÆÅ·ÃÀ×îÏȽøÕ½»ú_¾üÊÂƵµÀ_лªÍø

lol no man i cant read chinese..thanks for the info though...

 

[Jigs]

Oh I see. You are talking about a WHOLE Batery. So that means S-400 one batery has 12 lunchers can also engage 12*6=72 targets.

HQ-9A one batery has 12 lunchers can engage 12*4=48 targets.

Before I was talking about one luncher which consist its independent radar for tracking ang engaging plus 4 missile. Which makes perfect sense.

Why would you have one launcher in a air defense system. That doesn't make much sense. Countries buy these to set up networks over certain areas not just one. Also i think you are saying the radar can guide ever singe missile in a battery at once to their targets. I think your a bit confused on that.

You also said that Europe is willing to offer complete ToT. To me this means that their system is not top notch. Will USA offer F-22 with complete Tot? lol, no. In fact they ban the export. Currently in india's MRCA, Sweden's JAS Gripen, which is the least capable, this is why Sweden is offereing complete Tot, because otherwise they will not be able to compete. Jigs, you want China to offer HQ-9B with compete Tot. WOW, this is not possible.

Your speculation. I believe they are offering full TOT because of the contract involved. China won't win if full TOT is not involved i can almost guarantee that. Because that would mean china is trying to compete with the U.S. at the same game. Turkey would just pick up the PAC-3 with no TOT if that was the case. Unless your saying China has surpassed the U.S. in SAMs

I also doubt Aster's ballstic missile interception capability. As Europe never developed such a system before. Russia's S-300V is good, but HQ-9B is much much better at least as good as S-400.

During testing it intercepted a wide range of targets at different speeds and altitudes without error. So i am inclined to disagree that its interception ability is doubtful. Unless you want to provide info otherwise
* 8 April 1997: interception of a C22 target simulating a subsonic antiship missile, flying at 10 metres, at a distance of 7 kilometres.
* 23 May 1997: Direct impact on an Exocet anti-ship missile of the first generation, at 9 kilometres, to protect a distant ship (7 kilometres).
* 13 November 1997: interception of a C22 target in very low flight in a strong countermeasures environment. In this test, the Aster was not armed with its military warhead so that the distance between the Aster and the target could be recorded. The C22 was recovered bearing two strong cuts due to the fins of the Aster missile.
* 30 December 1997: Interception of a live C22 target by an Aster 30 at a distance of 30 kilometres, an altitude of 11,000 metres, and a speed of 900 km/h. The Aster climbed up to 15,000 metres before falling on the target at a speed of 2880 km/h. The closest distance between the Aster and the C22 was four metres.
* 29 June 2001 : Interception of a Arabel missile in low altitude, in less than five seconds.
* In 2001 : Interception by the Aster 15 of a target simulating an aircraft flying at Mach-1 at an altitude of 100 metres.
* In 2002-2003 : Trial of Aster 15 from Sylver A43 launcher with EMPAR and SAAM-it system onboard Italian experimental ship Carabiniere F 581
* In 2004-2005 : Trial of Aster 30 from Sylver A50 launcher with EMPAR and PAAMS(E) system onboard Italian experimental ship Carabiniere F 581
* On 3 April 2008, the Republic of Singapore Navy frigate RSS Intrepid shot down an aerial drone off the French port of Toulon during an exercise.