NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Air Defense Article Index : Current 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

China Offers Iran A Reasonable Facsimile

May 12, 2009: Iran, desperate for some modern anti-aircraft weapons, has been trying to buy the Russian S-300 system. Blocked from doing that, Iran is now seeking to purchase the Chinese made HQ-9 system. This could get interesting. Earlier this year, Russia admitted that, two years ago, they signed a contract to sell S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems to Iran. The S-300 has not been delivered because Western nations have told Russia and China that if they arm Iran with modern weapons, there will be consequences. China has an incentive to back off here, because a stronger Iran threatens China's oil supplies. Russia, however, would benefit by Iranian attempts to shut down oil shipments from the Gulf (if only temporarily, to make a political point), as the price of oil would shoot up, to the benefit of Russian oil sales.

Until recently, it was all rather murky as to why Russia was not delivering those S-300 systems to Iran. There were mixed messages, with Iran indicating that it was getting S-300s, and Russia denying there was any deal. What was happening was that Russia was obviously holding off, while squeezing more and more favors and concessions out of the West. Iran is not happy about not getting its missiles, but Iran doesn't have the clout to force the sale to happen. How the recent Russian admission, that the deal exists, fits into all this is unclear. It probably has to do with what concessions Russia hopes to get out of the West, and the United States in particular. Russia has a long list of desired concessions. For one, Russia does not want the United States to go forward with installing an anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Russia also does not want any more nations on its borders joining NATO. So the haggling continues, even as it emerges from the shadows.

Meanwhile, China has begun offering its HQ-9 system to foreign customers, as the FD-2000. The Russians are not happy with this, given the stolen S-300 technology in the HQ-9. Russia has been pointed in warning China not to export weapons containing stolen Russian tech. But the Chinese have done it, apparently believing there's really nothing the Russians can do about it. But in this case, the Russians can just ship the long promised (and partially paid for) S-300s to Iran.

A decade ago, China began introducing the HQ-9 for use by its army and navy (on ships). Over a decade of development was believed to have benefitted from data stolen from similar American and Russian systems. The HQ-9 missile is similar to the U.S. "Patriot," while the radar apparently derived much technology from that used in the Russian S-300 system. The HQ-9 missile has a max range of about 100 kilometers, weighs 1.3 tons and has a passive (no broadcasting) seeker in the missile.

Most of the systems used by the army are mobile. Army HQ-9 brigades have a brigade headquarters (with a command vehicle, and four trucks for communications and maintenance), six battalions (each with a missile control vehicle, a targeting radar vehicle, a search radar vehicle and eight missile-launch-vehicles, each carrying four missiles in containers).

Neither the S-300 or HQ-9 have been tested in combat. Most earlier Russian designed air defense systems performed poorly in combat. Even the Russian SA-6 missile systems, that Egypt used in 1973, which were initially a surprise to the Israelis, were soon countered, and did not stop the Israelis from getting through. While the best sales technique is to push the products track record, you have to do just the opposite with Russian anti-aircraft missiles. Thus the Russians, and now the Chinese with their FD-2000, emphasize low price, impressive specifications, good test results and potential.

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article INDIA-PAKISTAN: Taliban Head For The Hills


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Chris    HQ-9...   5/12/2009 6:26:31 PM
Meanwhile, China has begun offering its HQ-9 system to foreign customers, as the FD-2000. The Russians are not happy with this, given the stolen S-300 technology in the HQ-9. Russia has been pointed in warning China not to export weapons containing stolen Russian tech. But the Chinese have done it, apparently believing there's really nothing the Russians can do about it. But in this case, the Russians can just ship the long promised (and partially paid for) S-300s to Iran.
 
China has been stealing technology from the Russians for as long as they have been doing business with them.  Anyone who thinks they won't do the same to the US is dreaming.
 
IMO - a complete moritorium on sending our manufacturing techniques and jobs to China is of strategic importance.
 
 
Quote    Reply

YOURDUMB       5/18/2009 10:09:38 PM
how exactly was the technology of HQ-9 stolen from the Russian? so the Chinese are stupid and cannot design or make any weapon then how come they were so much more advanced than the west for more than 5 centuries. i can easily accuse somebody of stealing my technology, why not? if i wanna to act like a three year old.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege       6/20/2009 6:22:52 PM
China build their own technology capabilities but to narrow the gap to USA or other top military tech nations, you have to steal or get help.
China is still roughly 10 to 15 years late of USA for technological level
Which still means they can field a system similar to US Patriot missile system used in Gulf war on their own technology.
But this system would not be very efficient because USA or other top military tech nations ECM have done also progress since and a 1992 Gulf war Patriot system or a Chinese equivalent would be quite unefficient.
It is probably why Chinese have a passive seeker on HQ-9 since an active seeker would be more easily jammed.So even while being 15 years late to technology state of art, the system would have a minimum efficiency.
Military technology is a permanent race and it is difficult to run faster than the others to narrow the gap unless you spend much more than them.But nobody spend more than USA.
 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy