PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems

00CuriousObserver

Senior Member
Registered Member
This is HQ-9C according to Adorable Dolphin

HQ-9B/C from Yongxing. Geolocation credit to @type36512

M5FMMsE.png

jw7msGK.png

pqpcJXl.png
 

Gloire_bb

Colonel
Registered Member
So, theory that HQ-20 is a direct replacement to HQ-12/S-300PMU sets for now has some merit.

Also, interesting that PLA covers S-400 batteries directly; maybe they decided to go the Russian way, including SHORAD directly into SAM units, not just attaching them.
 

Tomboy

Captain
Registered Member
So, theory that HQ-20 is a direct replacement to HQ-12/S-300PMU sets for now has some merit.

Also, interesting that PLA covers S-400 batteries directly; maybe they decided to go the Russian way, including SHORAD directly into SAM units, not just attaching them.
Though, isn't HQ-12 in a completely different class to S-300PMU2? AFAIK S-300PMU2 is more in class with HQ-9 while HQ-12 is a medium range air defense.
 

Gloire_bb

Colonel
Registered Member
Though, isn't HQ-12 in a completely different class to S-300PMU2? AFAIK S-300PMU2 is more in class with HQ-9 while HQ-12 is a medium range air defense.
Yes, but it's older as well.

I am not OSINT bro and I can't say if it's the case in practice, but it probably made sense to first move older high-tier SAMs to secondary directions, where they're in turn replaced by more appropriate secondary systems and not just HQ-9 rotation.

HQ-12 was not so much medium range(it's more towards long, especially for 2000s-2010s) as it was a cheaper/simpler HQ-2 replacement. As such it wasn't better for secondary positions per se, but it was possible to procure enough of them from domestic manufacturing for reasonable money.

HQ-20 is actually better for the role - way more ammo (LACM intercept), can provide ABM, range is matched to stealth aircraft engagement capabilities(which it has); finally, no huge minimum range of S-300/HQ-9 series, you can pack one system instead of two and expect things to be covered for the time being (or, in a brave new drone world, rather 2 instead of 3). It doesn't need HQ-11, and overall has much smaller footprint.

Much like S-350, which is all the exact same logic (it replaces older rearline S-300PM batteries in the rear).
 

Gloire_bb

Colonel
Registered Member
FljRhjnagAQbBOC
FljRifCaEAE2L5U

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Maybe should better go to export topic, but overall, two notions:
(1)HQ-16FE is proposed with LY-70 in yet another example of (apparently) integrating SHORADs into SAM battery structure;
(2)new radar
(3)it's TBH difficult to understand role difference between upgraded HQ-16FE(army air defense) and HQ-19(PLAAF). They're kinda the same, just different branches?
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
(3)it's TBH difficult to understand role difference between upgraded HQ-16FE(army air defense) and HQ-19(PLAAF). They're kinda the same, just different branches?

Uh, what?

Granted that I'm not well-versed in SAM systems, but HQ-19 and HQ-16FE certainly aren't in the same league/tier.

HQ-19 is basically a THAAD (if not also -ER)-counterpart, whereas HQ-16FE is basically in the same category (albeit perhaps not a direct counterpart) as the PAC-2/3 MSE.
 
Top