Russia sells S-400 systems to China


taxiya

Colonel
Registered Member
This aged incredibly poorly. No further analysis required.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
This Maria is hilarious. :D The luring Russia against China or putting wedge between China and Russia was a so old trick propagated by western media more than a decade ago (2008ish). And yet she still picked it up in 2020, dusting it, then try to sell it. They never give up. :rolleyes:

This one particularly reminds me something.
The biggest crack involves New Delhi’s suggestion that Moscow join the US-led Indo-Pacific grouping, which is widely seen as anti-China
Didn't Obama/Clinton "offered" China to be the 2nd in command (hatchet man) of the US led world order in the early 2000s? Chimarica purposed by some US think-tank. Now they (or just New Delhi) "offered" Russia the same position. I wonder if they (or just Modi) really think others are as stupid as themselves.

I am seeing Modi saying "I have put on a leash around my neck, it feels great, I suggest you get one too."
 

ougoah

Colonel
Registered Member
Russia sold it to India and sells it to China now, isn't strange? . Anyways my love and respect with China

China bought S-400 back in the 2000s and well before India.

When it comes to military topics, particularly Chinese related ones, there is SOOOOOOOOOOO^n much false information on the english speaking internet. Part of it is emotional fanboys talking out of their asses, part of it is Indian politically motivated fake news, and some of it is just an accumulation of misunderstandings combined with the former categories.

For instance. Did you know that China received full delivery of S-400 before India has even began taking delivery on a single gram of S-400? I bet you heard otherwise. The truth is S-400 deliveries to China have completed.

Did you know that China were in talks with Russia and placed order for S-400 back in the 2000s? Not after India unless it's something we're not aware of. I'm sure India may have had backdoor talks with Russia.

The S-400 isn't really all that impressive but certainly worth studying just like Pantsir was and is worth studying for the US. So much so that the US go out of their way to procure or capture "adversary" equipment whenever and whatever they can. It doesn't mean S-400 is the best and the best China currently operates but it's likely to be way up there if not at the top for the narrow range of purpose it's designed for. The US captured and took home to test some Pantsir S-1 units and in the past many other Soviet and Russian equipment from rifles to missiles to fighters to helicopters and even submarines! This doesn't mean they wanted to copy it. Studying it and learning how to defeat certain things is more than half the value. There's still always the chance you could learn a thing or two worth applying while you're at it.

Okay it's got a great range of capabilities and feature a combination of different individual missiles all a part of the S-400 system. Some stuff carry over from S-300 variants but the most high profile element is the supposed 400km range SAM. It's marketing nonsense. There is no way the missile is useful at 400km from the launch site. The radars can barely provide fire control at half that range against any decently modern, low RCS target. Anti-stealth?? LOL well testing that claim is one out of many reasons why China bought some and seeing as it's been years since any second order and any copying of those radars, I would assume those claims are bogus. You can test a tiny stealthified drone with appropriate shaping and materials if you think J-20 isn't going to be an accurate simulation of F-22 or F-35 RCS. It's easy to test the claims of the S-400 anti-stealth and they certainly don't work as claimed... I mean even UHF radars have a good effect on this but useless in real application. Again just like the Su-35, not a great deal was purchased. For reverse engineering? errrgh try to understand things better if one believes this. Maybe there are a few things the Russians have done differently that's definitely worth applying but you'll not see a Chinese version of the S-400 in its entirety like we have for the Su-27SK -> J-11A and then J-11B platforms. At most they apply some worthwhile notes to any newer HQ-9 standard blocks (read non BMD range enhanced HQ-9 variant). Chinese radar systems and ground based radars don't really lag Russia any more if even that. Naval radars are well ahead, I can see Russian OTH and early warning stuff being ahead but SAMs... nahhh. No need. Have UHF VHF radars for the "anti-stealth" hype. Chinese used own radars for ASAT test back in 2000s. Own SAMs operate on Chinese radars including BMD ones and the recent anti-HGV test interception.

All in all, the S-400 for China represents a great opportunity to learn and adopt anything there is to learn (one is left to wonder and assume), test and evaluate a widely export available (Turkey, India) SAM that is the height of Russian SAM capability at the moment. S-500 is BMD focused and totally different kind of tool. It also means they are used as yet another unintegrated, independent layer of air defence for China. They have placed most of the S-400s around Beijing alongside integrated Chinese AD systems as sort of another supplement and redundancy that's engineered in slightly different ways (therefore potentially covering any technical and electronic gaps left by Chinese AD like HQ-16 and HQ-9 series).

As a BMD, the S-400 isn't capable of midcourse interception IIRC. For that China uses HQ-19, HQ-26, and HQ-29 or whatever other and overlapping missiles they have. The Russians themselves use S-500 and other Cold War era BMD projects that have continued development as the Soviet equivalent of Nike Ajax projects. For terminal phase interception, S-400 is probably pretty good as well as HQ-9 but with better reach and energy = better mechanical interception performance. But with this, even a well positioned mid range missile could potentially do okay if it's missile range is within reach of re-entry vehicle.

S-400 is suspected to be good for engaging larger targets at the more extreme end of its advertised range. The 40N6E here beats out the longest publicly disclosed standard (non BMD type) HQ-9 variant range. No SAM is really that great at swatting fighters out of the sky to be honest. Unless the attacker is an idiot. Not even 4th gens you can track at basically max range. When used in this manner, SAMs are good A2AD weapons and slow down enemy progress because they need to perform SEAD/DEAD. S-400s also probably pretty crap against cruise missiles and newer stealthy cruise missiles with sophisticated terrain following, radar avoidance, and attack angle paths... not slamming it but all SAMs are basically not great against terrain hugging stealthy cruise missiles with good EW. So SAMs being used at really long ranges are mostly only okayish for large, ideally clumsy targets like AWACS and tankers. Of course, a fighter that strays well within the NEZ of a long range SAM like S-400's 40N6E or 48N6E3, has a very low chance of surviving unless they can make use of terrain.

All that said, S-400 is a much overhyped but very capable and probably world leading SAM system for the purposes it's designed for. It does anti-aircraft, interceptions of whatever, A2AD, tracking and targeting, equal if not better than the best long range SAMs around the world - Patriot improved, PAC3, HQ-9A/B/C, S-300xyz, Aster 30. So given the chance to buy, yeah of course China would buy at least a few to study, a few to test, a few to actually use in defence. Even the US would LOVE to get its hands on some. They're sensitive enough about it to ban F-35 sale to Turkey simply because Turkey will be familiar with S-400.
 
Last edited:

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
China bought S-400 back in the 2000s and well before India.
When it comes to military topics, particularly Chinese related ones, there is SOOOOOOOOOOO^n much false information on the english speaking internet. Part of it is emotional fanboys talking out of their asses, part of it is Indian politically motivated fake news, and some of it is just an accumulation of misunderstandings combined with the former categories.

For instance. Did you know that China received full delivery of S-400 before India has even began taking delivery on a single gram of S-400? I bet you heard otherwise. The truth is S-400 deliveries to China have completed.

Did you know that China were in talks with Russia and placed order for S-400 back in the 2000s? Not after India unless it's something we're not aware of. I'm sure India may have had backdoor talks with Russia.
What is your source for the claim that PRC "bought" the S-400 in the 2000s? First time I hear this.

In the first page of this thread, it is posted that the PRC signed the contract with Russia in 2014 for the delivery of six divisions/regiments of S-400. However, a TASS publication in 2018 stated that the PRC is only due 2 regiments. The shipment of the first S-400 regiment was completed in Spring 2018. The shipment of the second regiment was completed in December 2019. With that, the contract would appear to have been fulfilled.
 

ougoah

Colonel
Registered Member
What is your source for the claim that PRC "bought" the S-400 in the 2000s? First time I hear this.

In the first page of this thread, it is posted that the PRC signed the contract with Russia in 2014 for the delivery of six divisions/regiments of S-400. However, a TASS publication in 2018 stated that the PRC is only due 2 regiments. The shipment of the first S-400 regiment was completed in Spring 2018. The shipment of the second regiment was completed in December 2019. With that, the contract would appear to have been fulfilled.

My mistake you are right that China bought it in 2010s not 2000s. S-400 barely came out in late 2000s. It seems so long ago now it sure feels like 2000s to me. Growing older time seems to fly. Think I conflated Su-35 purchase talks with S-400.

Yeah so the deliveries have long been delivered and completed. No follow up orders made so far just like Su-35 despite MANY online claims saying China is still buying Su-35s and Russian Al-31 engines this year and last year. Indian deliveries have not yet started. Again lots of online statements by proclamation claiming China has been banned S-400 by Russia (lol) and India is taking deliveries. Anyway that's the internet for you. More misinformation and blind leading the blind than actual information.

I was wrong about when China signed S-400 purchase formally. Put that down to misremembering.
 

BoraTas

Junior Member
Registered Member
China bought S-400 back in the 2000s and well before India.

When it comes to military topics, particularly Chinese related ones, there is SOOOOOOOOOOO^n much false information on the english speaking internet. Part of it is emotional fanboys talking out of their asses, part of it is Indian politically motivated fake news, and some of it is just an accumulation of misunderstandings combined with the former categories.

For instance. Did you know that China received full delivery of S-400 before India has even began taking delivery on a single gram of S-400? I bet you heard otherwise. The truth is S-400 deliveries to China have completed.

Did you know that China were in talks with Russia and placed order for S-400 back in the 2000s? Not after India unless it's something we're not aware of. I'm sure India may have had backdoor talks with Russia.

The S-400 isn't really all that impressive but certainly worth studying just like Pantsir was and is worth studying for the US. So much so that the US go out of their way to procure or capture "adversary" equipment whenever and whatever they can. It doesn't mean S-400 is the best and the best China currently operates but it's likely to be way up there if not at the top for the narrow range of purpose it's designed for. The US captured and took home to test some Pantsir S-1 units and in the past many other Soviet and Russian equipment from rifles to missiles to fighters to helicopters and even submarines! This doesn't mean they wanted to copy it. Studying it and learning how to defeat certain things is more than half the value. There's still always the chance you could learn a thing or two worth applying while you're at it.

Okay it's got a great range of capabilities and feature a combination of different individual missiles all a part of the S-400 system. Some stuff carry over from S-300 variants but the most high profile element is the supposed 400km range SAM. It's marketing nonsense. There is no way the missile is useful at 400km from the launch site. The radars can barely provide fire control at half that range against any decently modern, low RCS target. Anti-stealth?? LOL well testing that claim is one out of many reasons why China bought some and seeing as it's been years since any second order and any copying of those radars, I would assume those claims are bogus. You can test a tiny stealthified drone with appropriate shaping and materials if you think J-20 isn't going to be an accurate simulation of F-22 or F-35 RCS. It's easy to test the claims of the S-400 anti-stealth and they certainly don't work as claimed... I mean even UHF radars have a good effect on this but useless in real application. Again just like the Su-35, not a great deal was purchased. For reverse engineering? errrgh try to understand things better if one believes this. Maybe there are a few things the Russians have done differently that's definitely worth applying but you'll not see a Chinese version of the S-400 in its entirety like we have for the Su-27SK -> J-11A and then J-11B platforms. At most they apply some worthwhile notes to any newer HQ-9 standard blocks (read non BMD range enhanced HQ-9 variant). Chinese radar systems and ground based radars don't really lag Russia any more if even that. Naval radars are well ahead, I can see Russian OTH and early warning stuff being ahead but SAMs... nahhh. No need. Have UHF VHF radars for the "anti-stealth" hype. Chinese used own radars for ASAT test back in 2000s. Own SAMs operate on Chinese radars including BMD ones and the recent anti-HGV test interception.

All in all, the S-400 for China represents a great opportunity to learn and adopt anything there is to learn (one is left to wonder and assume), test and evaluate a widely export available (Turkey, India) SAM that is the height of Russian SAM capability at the moment. S-500 is BMD focused and totally different kind of tool. It also means they are used as yet another unintegrated, independent layer of air defence for China. They have placed most of the S-400s around Beijing alongside integrated Chinese AD systems as sort of another supplement and redundancy that's engineered in slightly different ways (therefore potentially covering any technical and electronic gaps left by Chinese AD like HQ-16 and HQ-9 series).

As a BMD, the S-400 isn't capable of midcourse interception IIRC. For that China uses HQ-19, HQ-26, and HQ-29 or whatever other and overlapping missiles they have. The Russians themselves use S-500 and other Cold War era BMD projects that have continued development as the Soviet equivalent of Nike Ajax projects. For terminal phase interception, S-400 is probably pretty good as well as HQ-9 but with better reach and energy = better mechanical interception performance. But with this, even a well positioned mid range missile could potentially do okay if it's missile range is within reach of re-entry vehicle.

S-400 is suspected to be good for engaging larger targets at the more extreme end of its advertised range. The 40N6E here beats out the longest publicly disclosed standard (non BMD type) HQ-9 variant range. No SAM is really that great at swatting fighters out of the sky to be honest. Unless the attacker is an idiot. Not even 4th gens you can track at basically max range. When used in this manner, SAMs are good A2AD weapons and slow down enemy progress because they need to perform SEAD/DEAD. S-400s also probably pretty crap against cruise missiles and newer stealthy cruise missiles with sophisticated terrain following, radar avoidance, and attack angle paths... not slamming it but all SAMs are basically not great against terrain hugging stealthy cruise missiles with good EW. So SAMs being used at really long ranges are mostly only okayish for large, ideally clumsy targets like AWACS and tankers. Of course, a fighter that strays well within the NEZ of a long range SAM like S-400's 40N6E or 48N6E3, has a very low chance of surviving unless they can make use of terrain.

All that said, S-400 is a much overhyped but very capable and probably world leading SAM system for the purposes it's designed for. It does anti-aircraft, interceptions of whatever, A2AD, tracking and targeting, equal if not better than the best long range SAMs around the world - Patriot improved, PAC3, HQ-9A/B/C, S-300xyz, Aster 30. So given the chance to buy, yeah of course China would buy at least a few to study, a few to test, a few to actually use in defence. Even the US would LOVE to get its hands on some. They're sensitive enough about it to ban F-35 sale to Turkey simply because Turkey will be familiar with S-400.
I wouldn't talk down the S-400 that much. It is still the most capable land-based SAM. That 400 km is probably the effective range as the ballistic range of the 40N6 is over 700 km. And VHF radars are both underrated and overrated at the same time. They are overrated because they don't make stealth ineffective. They are just better suited. They are underrated because their resolution is actually not that low. They practically pinpoint the target. What they cannot achieve is being accurate enough to guide missiles 30 meters close to the target. This is not a big deal anymore because modern SAMs don't use command guidance for the terminal phase. An IIR sensor on the missile would solve the accuracy problem. Also, triangulation of multiple radars can solve it too. I actually believe that the advertised anti-stealth range of 100-150 km is true and I am usually skeptical of Russian claims.

In my opinion, the S-400's deficiencies are its centralized nature and lack of long-range active radar-guided missiles. NASAMS 2 and S-350 are much better against stealthy targets and cruise missiles with their decentralized and modular nature. Terrain-hugging and stealth are much less valuable when you don't know where the radar(s) is and you don't know how many radars are there.
 

ougoah

Colonel
Registered Member
I wouldn't talk down the S-400 that much. It is still the most capable land-based SAM. That 400 km is probably the effective range as the ballistic range of the 40N6 is over 700 km. And VHF radars are both underrated and overrated at the same time. They are overrated because they don't make stealth ineffective. They are just better suited. They are underrated because their resolution is actually not that low. They practically pinpoint the target. What they cannot achieve is being accurate enough to guide missiles 30 meters close to the target. This is not a big deal anymore because modern SAMs don't use command guidance for the terminal phase. An IIR sensor on the missile would solve the accuracy problem. Also, triangulation of multiple radars can solve it too. I actually believe that the advertised anti-stealth range of 100-150 km is true and I am usually skeptical of Russian claims.

In my opinion, the S-400's deficiencies are its centralized nature and lack of long-range active radar-guided missiles. NASAMS 2 and S-350 are much better against stealthy targets and cruise missiles with their decentralized and modular nature. Terrain-hugging and stealth are much less valuable when you don't know where the radar(s) is and you don't know how many radars are there.

If you read my entire post carefully you'll see that I did not talk down the S-400. I stated it is one of if not the best overall SAM system. Certainly the most modern if you don't count PAC-3, Patriot, and HQ-9 upgrades.

I don't think VHF/UHF radars have been integrated with SAM systems anywhere in the world? and even if they are, if it's such a task as to simply apply IIR sensors as a solution for terminal phase and VHF for guidance and course correction, I don't think anyone would bother with developing 5th gen fighters. I expect the Japanese and Koreans at least to understand this well enough to use against the J-20, Chinese stealth UAVs, and upcoming H-20 while scaling back their orders and development of their own 5th gen fighters. It's probably been tried and applied but far from good enough.

The triangulation brute forcing method has been hinted at to work but who knows. Still depends on networked nodes all working well and undisturbed.

I thought S-400 had ARH? anyway surely an upgrade to be done. HQ-9 is receiving/received ARH variant.

100km to 150km range of detection and presumably providing targeting solutions of stealth aircraft are offered for certain AWACS and powerful ship borne AESAs like the 346A. I don't know if the S-400's claim is believable but maybe. That's probably partly why China bought them. We know they have the means to test out those claims. It's not hard for China to manufacture a flying UAV with 0.0001m^2 RCS.
 

BoraTas

Junior Member
Registered Member
If you read my entire post carefully you'll see that I did not talk down the S-400. I stated it is one of if not the best overall SAM system. Certainly the most modern if you don't count PAC-3, Patriot, and HQ-9 upgrades.

I don't think VHF/UHF radars have been integrated with SAM systems anywhere in the world? and even if they are, if it's such a task as to simply apply IIR sensors as a solution for terminal phase and VHF for guidance and course correction, I don't think anyone would bother with developing 5th gen fighters. I expect the Japanese and Koreans at least to understand this well enough to use against the J-20, Chinese stealth UAVs, and upcoming H-20 while scaling back their orders and development of their own 5th gen fighters. It's probably been tried and applied but far from good enough.

The triangulation brute forcing method has been hinted at to work but who knows. Still depends on networked nodes all working well and undisturbed.

I thought S-400 had ARH? anyway surely an upgrade to be done. HQ-9 is receiving/received ARH variant.

100km to 150km range of detection and presumably providing targeting solutions of stealth aircraft are offered for certain AWACS and powerful ship borne AESAs like the 346A. I don't know if the S-400's claim is believable but maybe. That's probably partly why China bought them. We know they have the means to test out those claims. It's not hard for China to manufacture a flying UAV with 0.0001m^2 RCS.
There is a Russian radar complex called Nebo-M. One of the radars in the complex is a swimming pool sized AESA VHF that claims an enormous 1800 km maximum range though it doesn't specify against what. It also claims relocatability in 40 minutes. It can be interfaced with the S-400. And I don't think this rules out stealth as a valuable technology. Getting engaged from 150 km away is still much better than getting engaged from 600 km away.

Only the 40 and 120 km ranged missiles of the S-400 have ARH. They had to have ARH because the S-400's low-altitude search radar uses the L band.
 

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
I wouldn't talk down the S-400 that much. It is still the most capable land-based SAM. That 400 km is probably the effective range as the ballistic range of the 40N6 is over 700 km. And VHF radars are both underrated and overrated at the same time. They are overrated because they don't make stealth ineffective. They are just better suited. They are underrated because their resolution is actually not that low. They practically pinpoint the target.
If the reported capabilities of the Nebo SVU VHF radar are true: 0.5 deg accuracy in azimuth, 1.5 deg in elevation and 200m in range then it could be used to deliver an ARH missile like the 40N6 within a box where active radar seeker would find the target, even at the extreme range of 400km. This is quite remarkable, if not incredible, because it matches the performance of the S-band 64N6E Big Bird PESA radar in the S-300/S-400 systems.

1617551636000.png

The RLM-M Nebo M improves upon this even further, exceeding the performance of the Big Bird! I am sure there are some caveats not mentioned, because an AESA with just 14 elements along horizontal axis and 6 along vertical axis (total of 84 elements) cannot trivially match an array with 2500 elements. For starters, the UHF array will have a beamwidth of about 7.5 deg horizontally, whereas the Big Bird will have a 2 deg beam. My guess is that it achieves this by rotating the antenna and integrating a large number of samples across a full 7.5 deg sweep of a boresight beam and computing an estimate of the signal center of mass and most likely target position. This might work for a small number of widely separated objects in angle (so that only one target falls within the full sweep of the wide beam at the same range bracket). Two planes (or a plane and a decoy) flying wide apart but still within the beamwidth could fool the radar into guessing the target is in the middle, whereas there is only empty air. At 400km, a 7.5deg beam is 52km wide.

While a VHF/UHF radars are able to negate a substantial degree of stealth in fighter sized aircraft, they have little effect against large stealth bombers like the B-2.

Finally, the aggressor will always employ electronic attack aircraft together with stealth aircraft. Jamming VHF/UHF radars is typically easier than higher frequency radars. A VHF radar is limited to the range of 30 to 300 MHz (max. bandwidth: 0.27 GHz). That makes it a far easier task to jam than an X-band radar that operates within a 4GHz (8GHz-12GHz) frequency range. Finally, their poor angular resolution makes them susceptible to geometric spoofing techniques.

There's a good chance that a pack of F-35s following a Growler could kill a loner Nebo radar with their SDBs without ever being detected. But in a large defense network of multiple radars and AEW aircraft, a VHF radar is a welcome asset as it further complicates enemy attack plans.
In my opinion, the S-400's deficiencies are its centralized nature and lack of long-range active radar-guided missiles.
The 40N6 missile is an active-radar homer. Intermediate range (200km and 250km) missiles are SARH and <120km range are ARH.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: W20

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
There is a Russian radar complex called Nebo-M. One of the radars in the complex is a swimming pool sized AESA VHF that claims an enormous 1800 km maximum range though it doesn't specify against what. It also claims relocatability in 40 minutes.
Maybe like a children's pool :). I think the Nebo-M antenna is about 12m wide (24 elements at 0.5m spacing?). It could be more if the spacing is larger: it seems that the width of the truck is about 4 elements wide. I saw one claim of 16m. It's impressive how they manage to fully fold it when on the move.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: W20

Top