China won Turkey's missile defense competition
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
That is a great image! Even more so because i just spent over an hour looking for various images, comparing tire sizes, canister lengths etc, etc. I even managed to find the website of the maker of the truck and found truck's height, which was also quite helpful. And I was about to come here and write that to the best of my ability, the length of the the hq9 canister seems to be 7 meters. And since large missile for s300, which is 7,5 meter long, fits in a 8 meter long canister,
i was about to write that i guesstimate hq9 missile to be around 6,5 meters long.
This image corroborates my measurements, which is superb!
Also, it would mean that misssile diameter at its thickest is around 0,4 perhaps 0,45 meters. (i cant find high res enough image to be more precise there). But the missile's body gently tapers towards the radome (more gently than s300 missiles) and nearing the radome it could very well be little under 0,4 meters wide.
Here's another assumption, related to range.
Last development of 5v55 missile achieved 120 km range, and that was with 7 meter long missile, not much wider than hq9, back at the end of 1980s and beginning of 1990s. Then we had the early 48n6 missile, introducing a wider body 7,5 meters long. it achieved 150 km range. it was offered around 1992. but based on similar tech as late 5v55 variant. at the end of 1990s the improved 48n6 missile came, with it the system was quoted to have 195 km range. with s400 we saw further development of 48n6 missile and with it the system is usually quoted to reach 250 km.
Roughly speaking, if one was to use hq9 sized and styled missile and use late 5v55 tech with it, in early 90s one could expect range of around 100 km. (since half a meter longer and 5 cm wider 48n6 added 30 km over 5v55 using same tech level) Using similar progression of tech as the s300 missile families, one could expect late 1990s tech to improve that to around 130 km. Then using the progression that we saw come with s400 system, same missile might be able to reach some 162 km.
But it is important to note that this is merely a rough ballpark figure. So many more things influence range, and officialy quoted range itself is often subject to arbitrary decisions and interpretations, requirements etc.
i was about to write that i guesstimate hq9 missile to be around 6,5 meters long.
This image corroborates my measurements, which is superb!
Also, it would mean that misssile diameter at its thickest is around 0,4 perhaps 0,45 meters. (i cant find high res enough image to be more precise there). But the missile's body gently tapers towards the radome (more gently than s300 missiles) and nearing the radome it could very well be little under 0,4 meters wide.
Here's another assumption, related to range.
Last development of 5v55 missile achieved 120 km range, and that was with 7 meter long missile, not much wider than hq9, back at the end of 1980s and beginning of 1990s. Then we had the early 48n6 missile, introducing a wider body 7,5 meters long. it achieved 150 km range. it was offered around 1992. but based on similar tech as late 5v55 variant. at the end of 1990s the improved 48n6 missile came, with it the system was quoted to have 195 km range. with s400 we saw further development of 48n6 missile and with it the system is usually quoted to reach 250 km.
Roughly speaking, if one was to use hq9 sized and styled missile and use late 5v55 tech with it, in early 90s one could expect range of around 100 km. (since half a meter longer and 5 cm wider 48n6 added 30 km over 5v55 using same tech level) Using similar progression of tech as the s300 missile families, one could expect late 1990s tech to improve that to around 130 km. Then using the progression that we saw come with s400 system, same missile might be able to reach some 162 km.
But it is important to note that this is merely a rough ballpark figure. So many more things influence range, and officialy quoted range itself is often subject to arbitrary decisions and interpretations, requirements etc.
andyhugfan
Banned Idiot
^ This is why I like sinodefenceforum.com
Remember the drama about the new Canadian helicopters, when Sikorsky was chosen despite the fact that their craft didn't meet the requirements?
Actually, let me correct some errors. Ausairpower, which can be pretty wild when it comes to western stuff, does use pretty good russian sources for russian equipment. Looking better at the s300 family, it would appear that 5v55 missiles were larger, and that chinese expo diagram actually quotes the same length for those missiles: 7,25 m. Auspower also says they're wider than i thought - 0,508 m.
Also, the matter of range of 5v55 missiles is a bit unclear. but now i'm leaning towards ausairpower site's claim that 5v55 family did only 90 km range. it was 48n6 family that introduced longer range, starting with 150 km.
basically:
PMU variant (based of soviet PS) used 5v55 missiles. that was the first export model, back at the very end of cold war. 90 km range.
Then came PMU1 variant (based on soviet PM), using 48n6 missiles. came in 1993. range 150km
Then came PMU2 (not based on anything from Soviet union) at the end of 1990s, using the same body of 48n6 missile. range 200km.
Then s400 came at the end of 2000s, using the same body of 48n6 missile, range 250 km.
So, with late 5v55 tech, hq9 sized/shaped missile should actually have no more than 70 or so km range. But, as we know, various improvements in missile trajectory and guidance can greatly add to range, much more so than mere improvements in rocket propellant or bigger motors.
48n6 weren't that much bigger missiles. I'd say roughly 16-17 % bigger, volume wise than 5v55.
Yet they didn't improve range just by such amount, they improved it by 65% over latest 5v55.
By that logic, theoretical hq9 which back in late 80s has 70 km range, with 48n6/pmu1 equivalent tech should achieve close to 105 km range. With pmu2 tech that might increase 30%, like pmu1 to pmu2 increased. That's 135 km.
With s400 tech, that may still increase by 25%, like s400 did over pmu2. for hq9 sized missile that might be around 170 km.
Once again, so many more factors come into play here and these increases are illustrative only, as i am sure the comparisons cant be made linearly like i did here. But as a rough guesstimate of hq9's range, it may be useful.
Also, the matter of range of 5v55 missiles is a bit unclear. but now i'm leaning towards ausairpower site's claim that 5v55 family did only 90 km range. it was 48n6 family that introduced longer range, starting with 150 km.
basically:
PMU variant (based of soviet PS) used 5v55 missiles. that was the first export model, back at the very end of cold war. 90 km range.
Then came PMU1 variant (based on soviet PM), using 48n6 missiles. came in 1993. range 150km
Then came PMU2 (not based on anything from Soviet union) at the end of 1990s, using the same body of 48n6 missile. range 200km.
Then s400 came at the end of 2000s, using the same body of 48n6 missile, range 250 km.
So, with late 5v55 tech, hq9 sized/shaped missile should actually have no more than 70 or so km range. But, as we know, various improvements in missile trajectory and guidance can greatly add to range, much more so than mere improvements in rocket propellant or bigger motors.
48n6 weren't that much bigger missiles. I'd say roughly 16-17 % bigger, volume wise than 5v55.
Yet they didn't improve range just by such amount, they improved it by 65% over latest 5v55.
By that logic, theoretical hq9 which back in late 80s has 70 km range, with 48n6/pmu1 equivalent tech should achieve close to 105 km range. With pmu2 tech that might increase 30%, like pmu1 to pmu2 increased. That's 135 km.
With s400 tech, that may still increase by 25%, like s400 did over pmu2. for hq9 sized missile that might be around 170 km.
Once again, so many more factors come into play here and these increases are illustrative only, as i am sure the comparisons cant be made linearly like i did here. But as a rough guesstimate of hq9's range, it may be useful.
Politics are always important in these matters. The Netherlands will buy 40 F-35 or less for EUR 4.5b because the US wants at least four of them to be contributed to some future US operation in Africa or Asia and they will sacrifice to that end the submarine department of the Navy. And that while Rotterdam is the largest port in Europe and protecting shipping on the oceans is more important to The Netherlands than wars like those against Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya.
It was always clear that Turkey will have to knuckle under to US wishes. The main proponent of EU membership for Turkey was the US. When the trouble in Syria begun Erdogan reasoned, quite sensibly, that the Assad regime could only survive a few months against US supported Saudi and Qatar sponsored terrorism. Well, as Bob Dylan sung, the times they a changin. The EU is in economic trouble and its weak governments are afraid of extremist parties that are morbidly anti-Muslim. So no EU membership for Turkey for the next twenty(?) years. The Syria project of the US has been derailed and the economic costs to Turkey of the continuing Syrian situation is very considerable. Turkey is heavily in debt to Saudi Arabia but even so the Turks might well think that Iran will soon come in from the cold and a change of policy is necessary. In twenty years Turkey might well be a long established member of SCO and buying an important Chinese missile system might be a first step in that direction. Cultural relations between Turkey and Xinjian without terrorism will also not be a problem.
It was always clear that Turkey will have to knuckle under to US wishes. The main proponent of EU membership for Turkey was the US. When the trouble in Syria begun Erdogan reasoned, quite sensibly, that the Assad regime could only survive a few months against US supported Saudi and Qatar sponsored terrorism. Well, as Bob Dylan sung, the times they a changin. The EU is in economic trouble and its weak governments are afraid of extremist parties that are morbidly anti-Muslim. So no EU membership for Turkey for the next twenty(?) years. The Syria project of the US has been derailed and the economic costs to Turkey of the continuing Syrian situation is very considerable. Turkey is heavily in debt to Saudi Arabia but even so the Turks might well think that Iran will soon come in from the cold and a change of policy is necessary. In twenty years Turkey might well be a long established member of SCO and buying an important Chinese missile system might be a first step in that direction. Cultural relations between Turkey and Xinjian without terrorism will also not be a problem.
It doesn't matter so much if the contract gets cancelled at some point due to political pressure. Fact remains a NATO country selected hq9 system when competing with high tech systems from other countries. That alone means a lot for future Chinese military exports.
Keep in mind the following unknowns before we commit too deeply to one view of this transaction:
1. Nations have announced the final winner of an arms Import competition and then changed its mind. Sometimes they intended to change their mind even before they announced the initial decision for political reason. For exampe, turkey could have announced the selection of Chinese missile not as a mere spiteful tat, but as proactive means to pressure west and NATO to offer better packages here and in the future, and/or pursue near and missile eastern policy with more consideration for Turkish interests.
2. We know turkey's unspoken objective is to build her own competitive arms industry. we don't know exactly what the shortcomings of turkish domestic missile industry exactly are that prompted them to seek foreign solution. So we don't know exactly which parts of HQ-9 are really of the most value to turkey's real long term goal of a competitive domestic missile industry. Turkey may in fact have access through other channels to many other aspects of missile technology, form it's own industry, or from Europe, Russia or the US, that are equal to or better than what is offered with HQ-9. In this case, the decision favoring HQ-9 may be based solely on the least cost method to acquire a particular subset of technologies in the HQ-9 which the Turkish needs for their own armament industry, and not necessarily based on an all-aspect-considered superiority of HQ-9 in meeting the nominal operational requirements.
We have already seen that with regards to the many civilian aircraft co-production arrangements with potential dual use technologies, especially targeting China's weakness in engine development.
Conversely, the more other countries collaborate in withholding a truly key technology from china, the more china will be willing to pay a premium to acquire this technology, wether through domestic development or through incentivizing foreign players to break ranks, and the more draconian the immediate opportunity cost for the players participating in the technological embargo.
Ultimately money talks and it would be difficult to sustain any ambargo against an opponent whose financial powers rival your own. It only partially worked during the Cold War because the autarchic Soviet Union had little real financial power to speak of relative to the United States, and the US was successful in pinching off any potential sources of new cfinancial strength for the Soviet Union, such as Siberian natural gas exports, before they can develop.
Ultimately money talks and it would be difficult to sustain any ambargo against an opponent whose financial powers rival your own. It only partially worked during the Cold War because the autarchic Soviet Union had little real financial power to speak of relative to the United States, and the US was successful in pinching off any potential sources of new cfinancial strength for the Soviet Union, such as Siberian natural gas exports, before they can develop.
Last edited: