China developing new generation of SAM


tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
we have no evidence that HQ-18 and HQ-19 are what you are saying it is. How do you expect them to clone S-300V and S-400 if they don't have it?
 

maozedong

Banned Idiot
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


this article,(文/刘尔琦 作者为中国航天科工集团第二研究院党委书记)The author is the party secretary of 2nd institute, China Aerospace Science and Industry Research Group, Published in "Observation magazine" (瞭望),the last picture show Tor M1, should be domestic, but it dosn't mention HQ-17 or HQ-18.
there are speculation about China devolop HQ-18,19 in chinese internet.my last post from some one's source, just for reference, he also say HQ-19 is only a project,he provide a russia SAM for reference,I post these to see people's oppinion.



Tor M1
 
Last edited:

RedMercury

Junior Member
Post #51 has some mis-labeling: First photo shows the purported HQ-16, the second photo shows the purported HQ-17 and it looks to be a higher resolution photo of the one in the article in post 50. Last photo is likely of a Russian system, see the Russian flag and red beret of the soldier in the lower right. This was probably a placeholder since no actual photo was available. The labels were just copied incorrectly from the blog article in the link . The article states that the HQ-16 was jointly researched by Russia and China and will be deployed by both.

Note that the 2nd photo has PLA markings. The TLAR is clearly different from the 9K330 TLAR (maybe a clone of the TLAR exported to China?). This suggests the indigenized HQ 17 has entered service (perhaps only in trial numbers).
 
Last edited:

Ambivalent

Junior Member
The first photo is of an old 2K12 Kub. TOR-1M uses a solid fuel rocket, while the missle on this photo clearly has four air intakes arranged behind the nose for the rocket/ramjet. The middle photo is TOR-1M and the lower photo is S-300V.
 

tphuang

Brigadier
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


this article,(文/刘尔琦 作者为中国航天科工集团第二研究院党委书记)The author is the party secretary of 2nd institute, China Aerospace Science and Industry Research Group, Published in "Observation magazine" (瞭望),the last picture show Tor M1, should be domestic, but it dosn't mention HQ-17 or HQ-18.
there are speculation about China devolop HQ-18,19 in chinese internet.my last post from some one's source, just for reference, he also say HQ-19 is only a project,he provide a russia SAM for reference,I post these to see people's oppinion.

[qimg]http://cimg2.163.com/cnews/2007/11/19/2007111909253796923.jpg[/qimg]

Tor M1
I'm sure that such projects exist, but we don't know exactly what their requirements are. In fact, a while ago Kanwa said that China approached Belarus for help with HQ-17,18,19. But the thing is, nobody knows HQ-18 and HQ-19 are. And these sources are just wild rumours.
 

challenge

Banned Idiot
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #58
[qimg]http://bbs.bovii.com/attachments/month_0806/20080621_f702a2a0b766200933d8zeT29tZQXGdG.jpg[/qimg]

HQ-17(TOR-M1)

[qimg]http://bbs.bovii.com/attachments/month_0806/20080621_fc99b487230d334ffbedbDc7jFtqZKXn.jpg[/qimg]

HQ-18(S-300V)

[qimg]http://bbs.bovii.com/attachments/month_0806/20080621_511896916bda5ad2dc82lWzLPpFPUjXG.jpg[/qimg]

HQ-19? (S-400)?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


just for reference.
the first picture was SA-6 "gainful" not Sa-17.
there is talk that Sa-15 will replace HQ-7 ,but during the military parade,old HQ-7 take part in the parade indicate that HQ-7 will continue to serve well into 2010.
 

Ambivalent

Junior Member
the first picture was SA-6 "gainful" not Sa-17.
there is talk that Sa-15 will replace HQ-7 ,but during the military parade,old HQ-7 take part in the parade indicate that HQ-7 will continue to serve well into 2010.
That's what I said, only I used the Russian designation 2K12 Kub ( Cube ), not the NATO code name SA-6.
 

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
The S-400 photo looks interesting -- I've only seen ones where the missile tubes are clustered together and not flat side-by-side. Does the launcher elevating platform extend the missiles out side-by-side like that for all S-300 style mobile launchers? Or is that some special non-standard configuration shown in the photo?
 

Top