Low Cost, Slightly Legal, Missile Protection

[sonicboom]

Low Cost, Slightly Legal, Missile Protection

April 3, 2010: China recently received the last of 15 battalions of S-300MPU anti-aircraft missile systems bought from Russia. Increasingly, however, China is using its own, locally designed and built, HQ-9 systems. These are also being pushed aggressively to export customers as well. Unlike the S-300, China can upgrade the HQ-9 and sell it to anyone. Thus, earlier this year, an HQ-9 anti-aircraft system successfully shot down a ballistic missile. This capability is important to many potential export customers. China offers HQ-9 for export as the FD-2000. The HQ-9 is roughly equivalent to the U.S. Patriot. While about 30 percent of Chinese long range antiaircraft systems are S-300, 70 percent are the Chinese designed and manufactured HQ-9.

A decade ago, China began introducing the HQ-9. Over a decade of development was believed to have benefitted from data stolen from similar American and Russian systems. The HQ-9 is deployed in ships as well. The radar apparently derived much technology from that used in the Russian S-300 system. The HQ-9 missile has a max range of about 100 kilometers, weighs 1.3 tons and has a passive (no broadcasting) seeker in the missile. The Patriot missile weighs a ton (for the 70 kilometer range version) and a third of a ton for the 20 kilometer range anti-missile only version. The S-300 missiles weigh 1.8 tons and have a range of 200 kilometers. Russia and the United States are debating how to deal with the growing Chinese use of stolen technology, especially for weapons systems that are exported and compete against the systems they are copied from. No one has a solution, and China denies all accusations.

Most of the systems used by the army are mobile. Army HQ-9 brigades have a brigade headquarters (with a command vehicle, and four trucks for communications and maintenance), six battalions (each with a missile control vehicle, a targeting radar vehicle, a search radar vehicle and eight missile launch vehicles, each carrying four missiles in containers).

Neither the S-300 or HQ-9 have been tested in combat. Most earlier Russian designed air defense systems performed poorly in combat. Even the Russian SA-6 missile systems, that Egypt used in 1973, which were initially a surprise to the Israelis, were soon countered, and did not stop the Israelis from getting through. While the best sales technique is to push the products' track record, you have to do just the opposite with Russian anti-aircraft missiles. Thus the Russians, and now the Chinese with their FD-2000, emphasize low price, impressive specifications, test results and potential.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hta.../20100403.aspx

[Neo]

Pakistan will most probably become the first export customer of the FD-2000 once the development is completed. Its only disadvantage is the relatively shorter range of 100km. What we want is at least 200km range to protect our cities from a nuclear ballistic missile.

[Neo]

China buys Russian air defence missile systems

* Both nations striving for strategic partnership
* Russian plan to fulfill Iranian contract unnerves Israel, US

MOSCOW: Russia has delivered 15 batteries of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to China, Interfax news agency reported on Friday, under a contract analysts said could be worth as much as $2.25 billion.

China is a major buyer of Russian weapons, and the two countries say they are trying to forge a strategic partnership, though senior Russian officials are privately concerned about an increasingly assertive China.

Russia has delivered 15 S-300 batteries to China, Interfax news agency quoted Igor Ashurbeili, director general of Almaz Antei which makes the missiles, as saying.

“We have implemented a contract to deliver to China the newest system S-300,” Ashurbeili said. He gave no details about the value of the deal. A spokesman for the plant was not immediately available for comment.

In Russia’s armed forces, an S-300 battery normally consists of four truck-mounted installations, each with four missiles held in metal tubes. Analysts said the contracts to deliver the S-300 to China were signed in the mid-2000s and that each battery usually costs about $120-$150 million. That indicates the value of the Chinese contract was about $1.80-$2.25 billion.

“The price for one S-300 battery varies between about $120 million and $150 million,” said Konstantin Makiyenko, deputy head at the Moscow-based CAST defence think tank. The S-300, known in the West as the SA-20, can shoot down cruise missiles and aircraft. The missiles have a range of 150 km or more and travel at over two km per second.

Russian arms exports rose to a post-Soviet record of $8.5 billion last year, with Algeria, India and China accounting for two thirds of deliveries. Syria, Venezuela, Malaysia and Vietnam accounted for another 20 percent of deliveries.

Iranian contract: Moscow has said it plans to fulfill a contract to supply the S-300, nicknamed “the favourite” in Russia, to Iran, unnerving Israel and the United States.

The possible sale to Tehran of the S-300, which could protect Iran’s nuclear facilities against air strikes, has become a sensitive issue in Russia’s relations with Israel. Russia has a more advanced air defence system, known as the S-400 “Triumph”, and Ashurbeili said the country’s armed forces were expected to receive the third battery of these “any day from now”. reuters

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...3-4-2010_pg4_3

[Mastankhan]

Hi,

Whatever system pakistan wants to purchase must be in the range of 200 km---pakistan should and must look or this system on a priority basis, but if they can't find any, then this system is a must purchase. 60 miles is better than 20 miles anytime of the day or night.

Pakistan's problem is that due to the neglect of major weapons purchases over a stretched period of time, pak is running around in circles to decide what is a priority weapons system and what is needed the most. There are so many loose ends that need to tied, that it becomes absolutely shocking to see how far behind the schedule the defence purchases have been.

It is a never ending trap that pak millitary keeps on stumbling onto all the time. There are a very few moments of glory but many more incidences of heart breaks and let downs.

The egyptians missile defence failed due to the total incompetence of their air force and airforce pilots. Also the israeli air force was far superior to what the egyptians coul;d put forward.

PAF on the other hand would put up a lot better face, if its fighter interceptors have the backing of a long range sam behind them.