PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
Bottom corner shows the radar vehicles. The HQ-16 uses a dual band radar set. While the new vehicle keeps the format of the previous, the radars might be new.
Looks like H(Red)-11 was just a typo, unless people also think H-9B is a thing.
SinoSoldier
Colonel
The FD-1000 SAM has been unveiled. It is unknown if it is related to the thin-tube system that was seen earlier.
The US just conducted a live-fire demonstration test of the Rapid Dragon-launched JASSM off the coast of Norway.
Does China have any land-based and/or sea-based ultra-long-range surface-to-air missiles (ULRSAMs) that have ranges upward of 1000-2000 (or above) kilometers, which would enable taking down the Rapid Dragon C-130s and C-17s before they could launch their stand-off payloads?
Even if the JASSMs and/or LRASMs were launched further out than the ULRSAMs' range, those missiles could be intercepted further out than it is presently available.
Similarly, this should work against B-52s and B-1Bs with their conventional/nuclear-tipped JASSMs and/or LRASMs as well.
Does China have any land-based and/or sea-based ultra-long-range surface-to-air missiles (ULRSAMs) that have ranges upward of 1000-2000 (or above) kilometers, which would enable taking down the Rapid Dragon C-130s and C-17s before they could launch their stand-off payloads?
Even if the JASSMs and/or LRASMs were launched further out than the ULRSAMs' range, those missiles could be intercepted further out than it is presently available.
Similarly, this should work against B-52s and B-1Bs with their conventional/nuclear-tipped JASSMs and/or LRASMs as well.
Last edited:
With China's advanced air defense system, they should theoretically be able to intercept JASSM and Storm Shadows. However, they need A LOT more interceptors and SAMs than they have right now. The PLA also need to avoid situations where they waste most of their SAMs on intercepting drones and first waves of HARMs, JASSMs, and subsequently run of ammo when trying to intercept the final blows (say F-35s and B-1Bs carrying JDAMs and JSOWs). Keep in mind that a single HQ-9B battery has only 32 missiles (4x8) at most on standby at any given moment. For a battery to be put out of action, you only need to knock out the AESA radar. Assuming you need 2 HQ-9s to intercept one JASSM, a squadron of F-35s would be more than enough saturate one battery with a combination of ARMs and standoff missiles.
Such weapons don't really exist? Longest range intercept capable missiles in the world are 300-500km range, such as late block HQ9, PL15, S400 etc.
LRASM or JASSM are not particularly fast, even if many are launched, there's a big window for interception during its travel. If a bomber takes off and launches them, the bomber had to originate from a base, this base can be striked in return by mostly even longer ranged and far faster PLA missiles.
Without a place to run back to, those bombers are fucked when they run into J-16/J-20 patrol units backed by UAVs.
When America attacks, China would flood Eastern Asia with drones, most of which have datalink. Some of which are stealthy. That means while the invader can see many radar signatures, they do not know which ones are real manned platforms. And while they're chasing the non stealthy signatures, there are stealth drones waiting to broadcast their positions, and stealth fighters waiting to snipe them.
I am quite sure that the new SAM launcher with 8 thin missiles is a part of HQ-9BE system (similarly to Russian launcher vehicles with 9M96 missiles that are part of S-400 system), as we can see only one placard describing HQ-9BE system, and the placard refers to all three vehicles, i.e. the radar, the "standard" launcher with 4 missiles and the new one with 8 missiles.