S-300 uses command guidance. What's the use when all you have to do to break lock is to dip below the radar horizon? Fuel certainly is not a problem for the Islanders. Sure it's one more monkey range, but it's a pretty small one. Besides, what makes you so sure there won't be a fratercide problem? PLA's C4I isn't that advanced, and even the US vector off fighters when the battle space becomes too crowded.
Almaz S-300: China's "Offensive" Air Defense
- Thread starter crazyinsane105
- Start date
RedMercury
Junior Member
I assume you mean mountain range. 
Do you have any numbers, like height in meters? From wikipedia, the visible horizon (to objects on the ground) is roughly sqrt(13h) where h is height of observer in meters and result is in kilometers.
standing on a 100 meter tall hill, one could potentially see 36 km.
standing on a 1000 meter tall mountain, one could potentially see 113 km.
For example, for line of sight to a significant part of Taiwan island, say, from Haitan Island, it requires about 250 km range or ~5000 meters high vantage point, which is quite a big mountain! That little bump on the relief map where Haitan Island probably won't cut it Tried finding actual numbers, but nothing in the first few pages of google
But for objects near the ground, like airplanes, you can add their elevation to h. So, from 1000 m tall mountain, looking for 100m high objects, would be about sqrt(13*(1000+100)) ~= 120 km.:nana:
Do you have any numbers, like height in meters? From wikipedia, the visible horizon (to objects on the ground) is roughly sqrt(13h) where h is height of observer in meters and result is in kilometers.standing on a 100 meter tall hill, one could potentially see 36 km.
standing on a 1000 meter tall mountain, one could potentially see 113 km.
For example, for line of sight to a significant part of Taiwan island, say, from Haitan Island, it requires about 250 km range or ~5000 meters high vantage point, which is quite a big mountain! That little bump on the relief map where Haitan Island probably won't cut it
Tried finding actual numbers, but nothing in the first few pages of google But for objects near the ground, like airplanes, you can add their elevation to h. So, from 1000 m tall mountain, looking for 100m high objects, would be about sqrt(13*(1000+100)) ~= 120 km.:nana:
Using google earth i'd say haitan's highest peak is just under 400 m. That'd give a true line of sight of 73 km. Thing is, radio waves propagate through atmosphere in not completely straight way, and with sea surface one can as a rule of thumb add bit over 15% to that line of sight for radar range. radar range would then be 87 km against a target at sea level. equation i've been using is: NM= 1.3 * sqroot (h) with h being in feet. nm is nautical miles. For true line of sight just replace the 1.3 value with 1.09 one. Analguous to your equation i've come up with km= sqroot (18.8 * H in meters)
One has to keep in mind, however, its not that easy to manouver half a dozen s300 batteres with their huge trucks on top of a hill covered with a forest.
One has to keep in mind, however, its not that easy to manouver half a dozen s300 batteres with their huge trucks on top of a hill covered with a forest.
I don't think it would be a wise idea to use S-300PMU-S-300PMU2's as an offensive missiles... Remember China still weren't able to protect the whole nation with these kind of latest and modern SAM's.
I just wonder if the HQ-9 is better than S-300PMU? Can anybody give an answer? Or is it as good as S-300PMU?
If it was not atleast as good as S-300PMU's I think China should aquire more or aquire the latest versions to provide more defense coverage for the whole country... (160 launchers currently wasn't enough)
I just wonder if the HQ-9 is better than S-300PMU? Can anybody give an answer? Or is it as good as S-300PMU?
If it was not atleast as good as S-300PMU's I think China should aquire more or aquire the latest versions to provide more defense coverage for the whole country... (160 launchers currently wasn't enough)
One interesting thing to note is that we can't see any targeting radars on 052c destroyer, which allegedly has hq9 missiles. There are two answers to that questions. A) its phased arrays work in dual bands, one for long range air surveillance, but can also quickly switch to narrow beams of higer precision wavelengths for targeting. That is something no country has implemented yet, though i've read next version of US Spy radars will have precisely that ability.
B) HQ9 guidance is active. Most probably active radar. While it raises the cost of each missile a bit, technologically it is perfectly doable and within reach for PLA. Taiwanese skybow 2 SAM is reported to have active guidance.
So, with active guidance and much newer electronics it seems safe to assume (sadly, we can only assume) HQ9 is superior to old s-300pmu. As far as later variants go... its too hard to tell. But then again, we can't even quantify the effecitveness of pmu as its never been used in combat, let alone its younger brothers.
BTW, one doesnt need defense coverage for the whole country. Having a SAM umbrella over empty fields or forests or small villages is a waste of resources. That being said, current number of around 20 s300 batteries plus handful (around 4?) hq9 batteries is still not enough. As long as hq2 needs to be used, i dont think the number will be enough.
B) HQ9 guidance is active. Most probably active radar. While it raises the cost of each missile a bit, technologically it is perfectly doable and within reach for PLA. Taiwanese skybow 2 SAM is reported to have active guidance.
So, with active guidance and much newer electronics it seems safe to assume (sadly, we can only assume) HQ9 is superior to old s-300pmu. As far as later variants go... its too hard to tell. But then again, we can't even quantify the effecitveness of pmu as its never been used in combat, let alone its younger brothers.
BTW, one doesnt need defense coverage for the whole country. Having a SAM umbrella over empty fields or forests or small villages is a waste of resources. That being said, current number of around 20 s300 batteries plus handful (around 4?) hq9 batteries is still not enough. As long as hq2 needs to be used, i dont think the number will be enough.
Awesome pic, that correlates closely with Google Earth analysis by Sean O'Connor
Not necessarily, all corners of the country...
But at least there must be batteries stationed along all the border provinces. So that those provinces will not be used as attacking point for enemy aircrafts, etc. Since undefended provinces, can be weak points.
At the same time also installing batteries on strategic and important areas for additional defense.