Do you have a link to the details of the trail? How was patriot or Aster involved?About the HQ-9 and 16, those are unsubstantiated claims. HQ-9 has publicly beaten competitors like patriot, Aster 30 and late S-300 variant.
China already have the HQ-9 and it’s variants for a long range missile. S-400 sale “proves” about as much about incapability to make a LRSAM as Gotland sale “proved” US incapability to make quiet submarines. If something is cheap, from an ally, usable and provide important details about potential adversaries, only an idiot would turn it down out of misguided pride.
Neither the Soviets nor the Americans have yet to field a missile in the class of the PL-15, or the PL-XX in advanced development.
Then there’s the question of missile smarts. Tbf, the S-400 “survived” the PLA’s jamming test regimen and hit a target cruise missile, but we don’t know if they threw all EW tricks at it or just a little bit.
No you don't. There is something called End Stage or Reentry Phase Interception, and that is what missiles like PAC-3, SM-3, SM-6 all rely on, and the same goes with the S-300 and S-400. Even THAAD intercepts on the reentry phase. Russia uses a different missile (A-135) that has midcourse interception. GMD is actually a missile on its own and this missile does midcourse intercept. But we know China blew up a satellite at 850km altitude using a ASAT kinetic kill vehicle. That's farther than any nation has gone in space for a kill.
China ASAT test in 2014
China ABM popped a missile in space in 2018.
[/QUOTE sm-3 is also a midcourse interceptor, also I don't think they can do too many of those asat tests they create a lot of orbital debris.
How do you know sm-3/6 can't intercept ballistic missile targets? The test targets are said to replicate a similar threat. Even if the pk is only like 50% it's better than nothing.Calling me unprofessional while you tout s300 and s400 BMD capabilities? Lol okay. Just because I didn't want to quote the designation because it's all rumours just like s500, doesn't mean it isn't there. If s500 is taken for granted as premier BMD in the series which is all based off rumours, then why not believe hq26 hq29 and dn3? At least China proved even 12 years ago it has ability to perfectly intercept one of the fastest moving small satellites in orbit... on the first attempt and test of the new asat missile. A capability Russia hasn't even made a big claim about being able to do yet and still they keep talking up their new weapons so it's not exactly for secrecy sake.
Seems like you understand eff all about ABM if you take s500 claims at face value but dismiss all others. Btw I got your designation numbers now. They are called hq26 and hq29. Been around for close to a decade now... As leaks even. Probably retired and replaced by better systems already.
For the US? Sm3 and sm6? They're certainly great missile but useful against only North Korea, India, Pakistan out of those nations with ICBM and SLBMs. Against latest China and Russia delivery systems, they may as well not bother. It's not even a matter of numbers anymore. This is exactly why Russia and China don't bother much about BMD. They can't defend against their only main nuclear rival the USA. Against India, what China's got is plenty enough.
No one claimed China had exclusivity on ground based midcourse defense
China doesn't field r37 and R33 because they've got much better stuff. Why wouldn't they buy these missiles if they were so good? The Chinese just keep thing sunder wraps for longer. Recall pakda super duper exoatmospheric bomber?? One reveals all but delivers low. The other just doesn't go around showing everything. Btw Chinese pl21 and plxx are the R34 range equivalents. Again, because we don't know the designation, it doesn't mean these missiles don't exist. Looks like China's already fielded a zircon like hypersonic ashm missile while Russians and Indians are drawing their's up and hyping up their renderings to everyone
How are stingers practically useless? Also the SA incident was because the patriot battery is not a 360 degree system and was attacked from an unexpected direction. As for small drones the US has lasers and jammers like the one on USS Pounce.I always knew the SA military in general was just a paper tiger. But their air defense systems are practically a mini-US air defense site. But seeing how they had a large Patriot SAM system near those oil fields and still couldn't do anything has me thinking.
I don't think the Patriot was made to handle low level, subsonic cruise missiles and drones. This whole episode has got me thinking on what Russia and China has to deal with SWARMS of drones and cruise missiles.
I know US doesn't have anything for short ranges except stingers which are extremely short ranges and practically useless.
How would that happen? We don't know how well the radar would do only that f-22/35 are within the same airspace and even su-57 did a photo op there.would it serve China's interests to send Syria more of their advanced AA defense systems, including anti-stealth ones?
China can then have an opportunity to test their stuffs under actual combat conditions, and make improvements accordingly.
OTOH, Russia may not like the idea of China interfering in their sphere of influence / back yard.
And China has a cordial relationship with Israel as well, so Syria may not be worth it to upset the relationship.
having said that, many people are quite upset by the bully tactics of Israel which just bombs its opponents at will and with impunity.
I sort of sympathizing with Syria, as it is just like China at late Qing era.
I myself would love to see a F35 in Israeli colors shot down by a Chinese SAM.
Have stingers been successful against swarms of cruise missiles and drones? Have lasers been proven?How are stingers practically useless? Also the SA incident was because the patriot battery is not a 360 degree system and was attacked from an unexpected direction. As for small drones the US has lasers and jammers like the one on USS Pounce.
Lasers are just starting to be tested but they did field one on the USS pounce in 2014. It seems to be able to deal with small uavs and boats are relatively short ranges. Stingers have been used in combat and its an older proven design. I don't see why the latest iteration of stinger would all of a sudden not work. Thankfully there hasn't been a scenario of massed missiles and drones in combat against the US.Have stingers been successful against swarms of cruise missiles and drones? Have lasers been proven?
If stingers were effective against mass attacks SA would have just used them insteadLasers are just starting to be tested but they did field one on the USS pounce in 2014. It seems to be able to deal with small uavs and boats are relatively short ranges. Stingers have been used in combat and its an older proven design. I don't see why the latest iteration of stinger would all of a sudden not work. Thankfully there hasn't been a scenario of massed missiles and drones in combat against the US.