I'm fine with people believing this quote as long as they take the sauce with the goose and also accept DoD's estimate for the range of the HHQ-9, which is far shorter than what fanbois have been claiming.
PLAN Anti-ship/surface missiles
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
3M-54T: 660 km don't exist as Russian domestic version
A YJ-18 with a range of 660 km don't exist the max possible is to 540 km but arguable coz 1/ do same size than Klub 2/ on wiki we see 220 - 540 3/ quite sur don't exist domestic Russian Klub 4/ Russian don't have a 3M-54T 5/ even with treaty limitations logicaly the max range can't x 3 !!! but for fans possible...
And logicaly the warhead is to 300 kd as brahmos the A air launced different have 300 kg as Onyx more big than Klub/YJ-18.
And logicaly the warhead is to 300 kd as brahmos the A air launced different have 300 kg as Onyx more big than Klub/YJ-18.
Last edited:
What was it for HQ9A in the reports? 120 km or so? That's about what export variant was marketed with... They also mention future variants in 2016 report: "In fall 2014, China signed a contract for delivery of Russia’s extremely long-range SA-X-21b (S-400) SAM system (400 km), and is also expected to continue research and development to extend the range of the domestic CSA-9 SAM to beyond 200 km."
Iron Man get right but exist 2 range 125 km in general as for export FD-2000 and 200 km at less for HHQ-9B eventualy a 2nd HQ-9 variant used by Air Defense Forces and maybe a HHQ-9A to 150 difficult !
Iron Man what are the claims from fanbois
?Yes, based on concentric ring drawings in the reports it is clear that DoD believes the range of HHQ-9(A?) is on the order of 120-125km, compared to the 150km range of the Rif-M system. Now whether that applies only to the HHQ-9 found on the 052C or also to the HHQ-9 version on the 052D is unclear. It is also unclear to me if DoD believes these are even two different missiles to begin with. As for the quote about developing the "CSA-9" SAM to beyond 200km, it is possible the reference is to something like the HHQ-19 or even HHQ-26, or possibly to an "HHQ-9C" missile.
200km of course. And anyone who says otherwise is obviously anti-China bias!!Iron Man what are the claims from fanbois
If there is something like an "HHQ-9B" it is possible the range could have been upgraded, like to 150km or more.
Tam
Interesting capable intercept BM mainly SRBMs up to 25 km last S-300 40 km, S-400 60 km
but i think more but 540 km ???
Interesting capable intercept BM mainly SRBMs up to 25 km last S-300 40 km, S-400 60 km
Pretty well guessed
but i think more but 540 km ???
Last edited:
Important thing to consider is that these values are actually given in some sort of context. (most figures for other SAMs are rarely given context). 125 km figure is against jet aircraft. That can of course mean supersonic fighter jets, but it may also theoretically mean subsonic jetliners. I also remember one other promo poster for fd-2000 with same figures but against images of targets. And the 125 km reach was against a photo of flanker. Now that doesn't HAVE to mean much, but IF true - it'd mean effective reach against a subsonic airliner would be greater. And reach against a turboprop perhaps greater still.
MBDA is explicit on their website about Aster 30, having 70 km reach against fighter planes and 120 km reach against slower planes.
Some graphs for historical SAMs such as S200 show that its 240 km total reach is for slow fliers, while a evading jet fighter can more than halve that figure.
I've also read a book on Patriot SAM where 150 km range is cited as doable but not useful, while 100 km is a limit where fighter jets can be downed.
Sadly, these last two SAM claims obviously do not come from an official source.
MBDA is explicit on their website about Aster 30, having 70 km reach against fighter planes and 120 km reach against slower planes.
Some graphs for historical SAMs such as S200 show that its 240 km total reach is for slow fliers, while a evading jet fighter can more than halve that figure.
I've also read a book on Patriot SAM where 150 km range is cited as doable but not useful, while 100 km is a limit where fighter jets can be downed.
Sadly, these last two SAM claims obviously do not come from an official source.
Tam
Interesting capable intercept BM mainly SRBMs up to 25 km last S-300 40 km, S-400 60 km
Pretty well guessed
This has more to do with the way the radar can find, track and engage the targets rather than the missiles themselves. S-300 and S-400 uses the same group of missiles 48N6 and 40N6 family but the big difference is the radars, the S-400 batteries are using AESA radars, which also includes UHF/VHF long wave AESA while S-300 family are PESA.
Since HQ-9, S-300/400, PAC family are using TVM and SARH, your effective distance has nothing to do with the missile's kinetic performance but how far the radar illuminating beam can travel. So even if the missile itself can travel 200km, if the radar can only engage and illuminate certain targets from 125km, then that is the effective range of the missile. That is why the literature uses slant range, which you will also note for HQ-16 and HHQ-16.
The S-300 and S-400 family uses big radars --- Tomb Stone, Flap Lid, Big Bird, Grill Pan --- are considerably bigger than the PAC's MPQ-53 and the AEGIS SPY-1D. Flap Lid is said to have over 10,000 elements.
FD-2000 is said to use HT-233 or H-200 engagement radars. I don't know the number of elements, I remember reading 3,000 in one article, 5,000 in another. I think the earlier version of the radar might have been a PESA (see Carlos Kopp article), but it may have shifted to an AESA later on, to match with the Type 346. The performance quoted is tied with the HT-233 or H-200 radars or at least to what they are allowed to export; don't know if this applies to later versions with AESA and/or domestics version. It may probably not reflect what's on the Type 052C/D or Type 055, as I suspect not only do they have their own performance parameters, there might be progressive versions of the Type 346 as well.
But of course, once the missiles get active guidance, with emitters on the missiles themselves, no need for shipboard illuminators, has the ability to engage targets beyond the horizon, then the effective range of the missile becomes more of the missile's flight and kinetic performance.