Article Archive: Current 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Air Defense: Iran And The Chinese Gambit
   Next Article → PROCUREMENT: France Tries A Comeback
February 12, 2010: Iran, in response to Russia's refusal to deliver S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems it bought several years ago, announced that it had gone ahead and designed its own, which will have similar capabilities as the S-300. Now Iran regularly announces it has designed and built modern weapons (which it cannot buy because of three decades of embargos). These weapons rarely show up, although some are seen in prototype form. Meanwhile, the S-300, and similar systems, have not been delivered because Western nations have told Russia and China that if they arm Iran with modern weapons, there will be consequences.

But an "Iranian" S-300 might be more likely. That's because last year, Iran sought to purchase the Chinese made HQ-9 anti-aircraft missile system. China buys a lot of oil from Iran, and is considered an ally. China is believed to have secretly supplied Iran with a lot of military technology. By not delivering actual weapons, China avoids a confrontation with angry Western nations.

China has been offering its HQ-9 system to foreign customers, as the FD-2000, for several years now. The Russians are not happy with this, given the amount of stolen S-300 technology believed to be 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. China, in this case, may have followed past practice and quietly sold Iran the technology for the FD-2000, and let them build their own, and call it whatever they want.

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.

 

Next Article → PROCUREMENT: France Tries A Comeback
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4   NEXT
trenchsol       2/12/2010 6:44:59 AM
I guess that Russia can not afford to lose customer like China, no matter what they do. Yes, they steal, but they are more loyal than India, who buys from different suppliers.
 
DG

 
Quote    Reply

Skylark       2/12/2010 4:46:32 PM
     Wasn't the nuclear installation in Syria that Israel flattened defended by the S-300 missile system?  (I seem to remember that it was the case.)  If so, then Iran is far from secure if an attack is made on their nuclear facilities.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       2/12/2010 5:09:24 PM

     Wasn't the nuclear installation in Syria that Israel flattened defended by the S-300 missile system?  (I seem to remember that it was the case.)  If so, then Iran is far from secure if an attack is made on their nuclear facilities.

No, Syria does not have any S-300.  In fact, there weren't any SAMs within 100km of that facility when the Israelis flattened it.  I think that was intentional:  They must have been hoping that building it in the middle of nowhere would help it to go unnoticed.  Oops.
Don't worry, Iran is not about to start deploying any homemade S-300-equivalent SAM battalions any year soon.  I do agree that if they are even thinking about any such project, that they likely are trying to get as much help from the Chinese as possible, and the design is likely to bear a strong resemblance to the HQ-9.

 
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       2/12/2010 5:17:39 PM

     Wasn't the nuclear installation in Syria that Israel flattened defended by the S-300 missile system?  (I seem to remember that it was the case.)  If so, then Iran is far from secure if an attack is made on their nuclear facilities.

I've heard something like that, but I think that some journalist got it wrong. Or, maybe, not....
 
If Syria had S-300, then Iran would have it, too. Or, maybe, Iranians do have S-300, but only unofficially. If they payed for it and received nothing, they would have made much more noise by now, I think.
 
Nevertheless, I am sure that Israel is going to find the way past S-300, or anything else. 

DG

 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/12/2010 9:10:25 PM

I guess that Russia can not afford to lose customer like China, no matter what they do. Yes, they steal, but they are more loyal than India, who buys from different suppliers.

 

DG






 
That's because they can buy from different suppliers. ^^
 
Quote    Reply

Tonytitan    Bibi's trip   2/12/2010 10:25:11 PM
I seem to recall running across something regarding Benjamin Netanyahu's secret trip to Russia being about a possible hack of the S-300 by Isreal and Bibi's threat to put the hack on the Internet if the S-300 was delivered to Iran. Did I just dream this?
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       2/12/2010 11:09:17 PM

I seem to recall running across something regarding Benjamin Netanyahu's secret trip to Russia being about a possible hack of the S-300 by Isreal and Bibi's threat to put the hack on the Internet if the S-300 was delivered to Iran. Did I just dream this?


Well, it wouldn't surprise me if you did run across that on the internet someplace, but someone was dreaming for sure.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       2/13/2010 12:48:22 AM

No, Syria does not have any S-300.  In fact, there weren't any SAMs within 100km of that facility when the Israelis flattened it.  I think that was intentional:  They must have been hoping that building it in the middle of nowhere would help it to go unnoticed.  Oops.

According to some reports the Syrians had just sent their first batch of Pantsir-S1's to the site, and the Syrian Defense Minister claimed that they had engaged the Israeli's (later retracted).  The reports also said that the vehicles were poorly placed due to the need to conceal them from outside observers and that the surveillance radar either had not been deployed or was deliberately kept turned off for the same reason.
 
Quote    Reply

LB    We don't get to know everything   2/13/2010 3:08:55 AM
First there were reports in newspapers and all over the web in 2007 that Israel disrupted and/or jammed Syrian air defenses.  Secondly the Israeli PM did attempt to have a secret meeting with Putin but word leaked in Israel rather quickly.  See news from September 2009.   If anyone has a credible source as to what was discussed great otherwise it's all speculation.  Israel is obviously concerned about Iran's nuclear program and Russia selling them air defenses.  It would be interesting to know what leverage they think they might have.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/14/2010 5:39:52 AM
I'm starting to think, that pathetic as it is, the Iranian air defence is the best it gets within their army... except for their experiences in assymetrical warfare and terrorism.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4   NEXT