Bluffer’s Guide: Fortress China

3. Tactical systems

The Chinese military, including curiously the armed police (PAP), deploy a wide variety of short-ranged air defence systems. Some are fixed-site but most are operated in a truly mobile fashion.

SA-15 ‘Tor’
China purchased a modest number of SA-15 systems in the 1990s. Typically quoted number is 36 systems. Some sources speculate that China may be license producing the type. The SA-15s in Chinese service are the M1 standard.

The launcher is completely self-sufficient with both surveillance and tracking/targeting radars on-mount, together with 8 vertically launched missiles.

HQ-64 (LY-60)
This is an indigenous system developed from the older HQ-61. The missile is based on the Italian Aspide which itself is a development of the Sparrow missile. The HQ-64 was widely publicized in the 1990s (together with the HQ-9 and KS-1), but only recently appears to have entered Chinese service. The Air Force (PLAAF) deploys the system, and possibly the army (PLA) also.

A typical battery follows the HQ-61 model with a single surveillance radar serving up to three fire-control radars, each able to direct two 4-round launchers. All components are truck mounted for good mobility.


A single unoccupied HQ-6x site has been found on Google Earth:




HQ-7
A Chinese copy of the French Crotale system, the HQ-7 is deployed by both the army and air-force. The system is highly mobile even in its towed ‘shelter’ version. The basic system has a range of 12km and provides modest defense against fast jet targets. The PLAAF shelter version:

Finding HQ-7 units deployed on Google Earth is virtually impossible due to their mobile nature and the adoption of camouflage nets, but the PLAAF deployed two batteries to protect the Olympic games and one of these was widely publicized. By chance it is caught on Google Earth and I also found the other battery. Although there are a few trappings of a comfortable holiday period token deployment, the sites nonetheless give rare insight into HQ-7 site layouts:





Another HQ-7 site at an air base:


China has developed successive improved versions of the HQ-7 with numerous prototypes and models at defense shows. The latest version, with an export designation FM-90 (In-service designation not known but logically HQ-7C), appears to have entered limited service. The FM-90 features a longer ranged missile (15km vs 12km) and a new six wheel launch vehicle:


A single FM-90 site has been found on Google Earth by Sean O’Connor. The site itself is clearly originally an HQ-2 site so the layout should not be regarded as typical for HQ-7:


HQ-61
The oldest indigenous SHORAD to be in service, the HQ-61 is now obsolete. The missile is similar in appearance to the Sparrow but is slightly larger and has the forward fins out-of-line to the rear fins. Range is about 10km. It is reportedly only used in Beijing military region but I suspect it is deployed in Shanghai also (see Google Earth below).


A single ‘field’ deployment is visible in historic data on Google Earth:




LD-2000
The land-based version of the naval CIWS Type-730 the LD-2000 combines a seven barreled 30mm Gatling gun with 6 TY-90 SAMs. The system is likely to have a similar overall capability to the US C-RAM but with extended range thanks to the 6km reach of the TY-90s. However rather than anti-mortar defenses the LD-2000 is more likely employed for point defense of key installations and facilities from cruise missiles, PGMs and fast jets at low altitude.




Hunter 2
Still in the mock-up stage, this system can be likened to the Israeli Spyder system, but using a Hummer mount more reminiscent of the US SL-AMRAAM. The system equates to ground launched PL-12 and PL-9 missiles and may be for export only. The PL-9 is not a great SAM (has been marketed before) although the active-radar guided PL-12 (SD-10) missile is much more credible and likely to have a range of about 25km when ground launched.



VB-6a
Another Chinese rip-off, this time of the US Avenger system. Possibly another export-only offering, this system is probably compatible with a wide range of Chinese MANPADs.



TY-90
Derived from the air-launched light SAM, the TY-90 SAM is a short range system probably in-service with the PLA. Range is only about 6km but some mounts include relatively advanced targeting systems. The below illustration is of a quad TY-90 mount used in conjunction with 23mm or 25mm AAA.



35mm SPAAG
This is a relatively recent system similar to the German Gupard. Like the Gupard the system employs twin 35mm cannon. The fore control appears to include a tracking radar as well as a phased array search radar and eletro-optical/IR passive devices.



Type-95 SPAAG
The Type-95 is the mainstay self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. The system has four 25mm cannon and four MANPAD missiles but uses a relatively basic search radar.



Type-88 SPAAG
China’s first successful self-propelled anti-aircraft tank, the Type-88 was all the same mediocre at best and never entered widespread service although some units remain in frontline service. The system is essentially a Type-74 twin 37mm gun mounted on an old tank chassis.
http://i40.tinypic.com/2a8pai8.jpg


Type-90
The 35mm Type-90 is a copy of the Swiss Oerlikon *** series auto-cannon. China has produced these in relatively substantial numbers and they are almost certainly the most potent towed AAA guns in Chinese service. China has produced various fire control radars derived from the SkyGuard system. Type-90s appear to only be used in mobile formations rather than fixed sites.


There have been various attempts to mount the Type-90 on various vehicles but the most recent and promising incorporates an electro-optical device and appears to have electronic muzzle fusing possibly hinting at ‘smart’ “AHEAD” style anti-missile ammunition. If that’s the case then this system probably represents a cheaper and possibly more effective counterpart to the LD-2000 (above):



Type-87
An indigenous 25mm cannon employing a mount closely modeled on the Russian ZU-23-2. Most are towed but the most interesting version is a self-propelled Air-Assault jeep with two MANPAD missiles also added. It’s not clear if this in service but it appears a very practical system.



Type-85
The Type-85 is a straight copy of the Soviet Zu-23-2 23mm AAA mount.

Type-59
The Type-59 is the Chinese version of the Soviet S-60 57mm AAA mount. It is employed mainly in static locations with six or 8 guns. Range is about 6km.




Type-74
A twin 37mm AAA system with an effective range of about 4km, the Type-74 is probably the most numerous AAA system. Like the Type-59 it is usually deployed in static locations but most of the units are kept in reserve during peace time. The system is of limited use against modern adversaries.













4. Anti-Stealth and countermeasures

China employs a range of “anti-stealth” and similar ‘asymmetrical’ air-defenses. These not only attempt to target stealth aircraft but also to shoot down or prevent cruise missile and precision guided weapons attack.

Foremost among these in my opinion are the anti-satellite program (“Space Denial”). These can disrupt/prevent GPS and spy satellites thus drastically improving the PLAs chances in any scenario with US. Also, because satellites are unmanned shooting them down is politically lightweight in times of limited warfare.
The main anti-satellite weapon of PLA is a ground based ASAT missile called KS-19 by western observers. The missile resembles a ballistic missile and is possibly based on the DF-21 or DF-25 missiles. The weapon was successfully tested in 2007 shooting down a satellite at over 500km altitude.

Another anti-satellite weapon that China is reported to employ is a very powerful laser. The US complained that China was dazzling their spy satellites with lasers – it’s only a question of ramping up the power and dazzling becomes destroying. The laser is probably not mobile.
Both of the above systems appear relevant should China develop anti-ballistic missile weaponry also.

Closer to earth, China uses long wavelength radars which are probably able to detect stealth aircraft in some conditions, although they are not fine enough to use for engagement by missiles. Another potential ‘anti-stealth’ system are the passive detection systems which appear to be deployed with HQ-9 SAM batteries. The main noted type is the DWL002 although similar but distinct trailer mounted systems are also in service.


On a cheaper front there’s the Bodyguard system designed to detect laser designators and dazzle them (another explanation is that they emit duplicate laser strobes to confuse the incoming weapon).


Air defense is also a role for the People’s Armed Police (PAP) and they conduct demonstrations of ciovic defense employing various countermeasures and even AAA. Among the curious systems employed is this MRLS, the exact role and effectiveness of which is open to question.





5. Beijing defenses
Beijing is the capital of China.

The remains of two belts of HQ-2 sites (The new “Great wall”) left over from the cold war remain active:


The defenses were modernized with S-300PMU SAMs in the 1990s.


Those were in turn partly replaced by the more capable S-300PMU-1s when they became available and now HQ-9 is also deployed.



Forgetting the old HQ-2s for a moment, the combined air-defense picture looks like this:





6. Shanghai defenses
Until the S-300 PMU-2s are deployed Shanghai is probably the best defended city in China.

The defenses were overhauled in about 2005:



Shanghai also has a belt of AAA sites on the north side. Curiously these dio not appear elsewhere. (Note: AAA sites in China are damn hard to find. These locations come courtesy of Top81.net. There could be many more sites maybe all over Shanghai buy I can’t find any others).




[u]7. Taiwan Straight defenses[u]
China caused quite a commotion by deploying the S-300 PMU-1s across from Taiwan. If they deploy PMU-2 missiles with their 195km range then the whole island will be within PLA SAM coverage.

What’s curious is that there appears to be gaps in the East coast air-defenses. It may be simply that Google Earth has more SAM sites yet to be discovered, but the implication is that China is not so concerned about Taiwanese counter-attacks.


Dianqian has a lot of AAA sites. I’m not sure why to be honest.


Also in the straights, the Taiwanese territory of Matsu Islands is also defended and heavily militarized:



8. Hong Kong defenses
A British territory until 1997, Hong Kong has not been heavily defended. It was not previously overlooked by HQ-2 sites as far as I can tell. Recently an HQ-9 site has been built on reclaimed land on the mainland side, covering the whole island although the mountainous island itself disrupts the arc of to medium altitude. Putting SAM sites in valleys is generally not a good thing militarily speaking.





Hope this was an interesting read. Comments and encouragement welcomed.

*Big Applause*

I'm impressed.

Nothing much to say, although Chinese AEW and FCR radars don't seem to be covered. No mention of the Type 730 CIWS land variant, or possibly the land variant of the HQ-16. Forgot to mention the FT-2000 (passive AR variant of HQ-9) and FT-2000A (passive AR variant of HQ-2).

Did get the LD-2000 in there somewhere.

HQ-16... I'd challenge ite existance. Same for FT-2000. I think that the FT-2000 is a reference to the Chinese inclusion of passive detection systems in conjunction with the standard HQ-9 but that's just my suspicion.

Superb planeman! Superb!

Excellent job!

Wow... this is fantastic! Worthy to go on sinodefence itself! Painstaking and thorough reseach along with a lot of your time must have gone into it. Also BTW, great CGI's you've created there, what program did you use?

Originally Posted by planeman

Did get the LD-2000 in there somewhere.

HQ-16... I'd challenge ite existance. Same for FT-2000. I think that the FT-2000 is a reference to the Chinese inclusion of passive detection systems in conjunction with the standard HQ-9 but that's just my suspicion.

HQ-16 is the missile system on the 054A. Or the 054A's is the naval version of it. That would be the Chinese equivalent of the Buk. Allegedly there are pictures in the CDF that claim to be the HQ-16. As a note, every land system has a naval equivalent in China or the other way around, even though the existence of the system has yet to be absolutely confirmed.

FT-2000 were advertised before, and it was the first export variant of the HQ-9 even before the HQ-9 was formally acknowledged. In other words, they were already trying to sell this variant even though the PLA has not officially acknowledged the HQ-9. The difference being the FT-2000 is a passive missile while the HQ-9 is an active system.

I'd agree if you said "HHQ-16" exists. HQ-16, still not convinced.

FT-2000 I hear what you are saying. I suspect that "passive homing" is referring to the passive arrays seen at HQ-9 sites rather than an anti-radiation missile like a HARM. Just my thoughts. At the time China was trying to sell FT-2000s the HQ-9 technology wasn't mature, they did the same with KS-1/A and LY-60. These systems entered widespread PLA use only years later. FT-2000 is a marketing brochure system IMO. Hell of a lot of defence products the world over are.

Great work!!! *applause*

Regarding the KS-1A SAM, looking at current trends, I strongly suspect future versions will employ box launchers instead of rail launchers.

Kinetically, the HQ-9 has a slant range of 100km, based on the brochures of the FT-2000. Not much of a difference from 90km but still I wonder where the 90km figure is cited from.

Slant range is not the same as ballistic range, which many missile articles and brochures quote. Slant range appears as the hypotenuse of a triangle made up of three points, the missile launcher, the target aircraft, and point of the ground the target aircraft is above it. This is the more relevant range type for this use since if the missile is a SARH, SAGG or TVM, the range is also determined by the radar line of sight, which would be identical.

Ballistic range is just how far you can throw the missile, and thus more related to flight range. Missile goes up, curves, reaches an apogee that starts going down. Where this missile lands is how far your ballistic range goes. This produces a nice number figure that goes better with marketing and advertising, since generally, ballistic range is about 2x of slant range. This range should not be relevant at all, unless its an SSM, or the SAM is an autonomous seeker that can engage targets under the radar horizon of the ground radar. By means of autonomous, it means the seeker may have independent guidance, like having a secondary IR seeker, or using a primary active guided (ARH) seeker, or if the seeker supports SAGG, which is a form of TVM, where the missile's seeker also takes the radar reflection, sends it back to the command post, and receives guidance instructions. As a note some SAMs are converted to SSM lites.

If the HQ-9 has any seeker that falls within the autonomous, OTH category, then it makes engagement at ballistic ranges possible. In which case, the potential ballistic range might be 180km to 200km.

If you study all the missile ranges, you probably would have a feel what the figures is slant or ballistic. HQ-2 range is slant range, but the 60 to 90km ranges I've seen quoted from other sources might be ballistic range. SM-2MR should have a slant range of 75 (quote on F100 class brochure) to 80km+ (Raytheon brochure), but the Block III version with the dual IR could engage beyond the horizon and at ballistic range (150 to 160km). The S-300 missiles uses SAGG, while the S-300V might be active, hence possible to engage at ballistic ranges.

Its possible the FT-2000 might also have been intended as a ground to ground kind of ARM, making use of the 200km ballistic range.

On the radar note, since someone posted the brochure for the SJ-321---and it is suspected the HT-233 is close to it---is that the radar is a C-band (G/H). That makes this radar closer to the MPQ-53 used in the Patriot in the way it works and guides. The S-300 uses a two tiered radar system where one radar (the type actually has a number of choices like Tin Shell, Clam Shell and Big Bird) is an S band type (E/F) used for aerial volume search, and the other is a target tracker, missile guidance radar (30N6 Flap Lid) that is an X-band type (I/J). The MPQ-53 uses C band as an all in one unit that does both search, target acquisition and guidance, although the range of C band is not as good as S or L bands, but I guess, these C or X-band radars can obtain initial target tracks from outside S or L band radars and thus the range parameter is not as important.

Great work, Planeman!

Perhaps it would be wise, when mentioning the mobile anti satellite rocket system, to point out that it is unlikely it could be used against high orbiting satellites - like communications and GPS satellites, as those are considerably higher up in the sky. Delta 2 rockets, used to deliver them to such orbits, are far heavier than the mentioned ASAT rocket, even if we discount the satellite payload.

Do launching SAMs from fixed bases not defeat the purpose of mobile air defense?

For peace time, there are probably plenty of reasons to leave SAM systems in prepared locations, for example, reduced wear and tear, maintenance, and fuel costs. Of course, these systems will be moved during alert or war.

I missed the HQ-16. No such system has been confirmed but the ship-based version is believed to be fitted to the Type-054A frigates. Probably a close relative to the Russian SA-17 "Grizzly" system but vertical launched and possibly using the 9M317ME missile. The missile is about the same size as the HQ-9 but being hot-launched would have a shorter missile container. A truck with suspected HQ-16 tubes was photographed. A basic 8-wheel truck can comfortably mount 6 (3 wide by 2 high) of missiles so a TEL is likely to carry six missiles. The missiles are semi-active radar homing and would have a range of about 50km (similar to HQ-12).



Radar may be on-mount as per illustration.