PLA Anti-Air Gun systems

Every anti-air system has its role to play in the big picture.

If you guys remember, the reason why Egypt shut down the Isreili Air force so effectivelly in the early days of the Yom Kippur War of 1973 is because it created an air defence 'onion' The whole concept beeing that you have to peel it away bit by bit and at great loss. The only reason they got their asses handed to them is because they decided to advance outside the range of the onion.

The onion worked by using long and medium range missiles to force the IDF down to a low altitute where they would be under constant threat of MANPADS , SR-SAMS and AAA.

As well as that they uses systems to protect other systems. The Sa-6's protected the Sa-2's the Sa-9's Sa-8's defended the Sa-6's and the MANPADS and AAA defended the shorter ranged mobile missiles.

As well as causing the Isreilis to go in low and fast to avoid destruction (and therefore limiting range, sensor range and combat flexibility) the SAM belts also served to cause the Isreilis to suffer casualties from Egyptian Mig-21's because the Isreili pilots had their hands full avoiding ground launched weapons.

The only way the Isreilis could penetrate this onion was to launch complicated large scale raids using at times a quarter of their entire air force in order to knock out one battery of Sa-2 missiles and still suffering heavy casualties.

If China uses this system and substitutes the old soviet missiles for the new ones at its disposal today then its airspace becomes a very dangerous place to be. :coffee:

the ak-630 has a range of 9 km. thats very far. the type 730 has a 4 km hit range and a 1 km kill range. for point defence, thats a great job.

Click to expand...

We are talking about Ld-2000, not ak-630. According to sinodefence.com it has a maximum range of 3000M (3km) and engage targets at a distance of 1000-1500meters (1-1.5Km)

muyang523 said:

We are talking about Ld-2000, not ak-630. According to sinodefence.com it has a maximum range of 3000M (3km) and engage targets at a distance of 1000-1500meters (1-1.5Km)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

well, you said ciws in general were short ranged. and its not like china doesnt have the ak-630.

back to the layered defense...its a concept certainly well imployed on ships today. the ships feature long range missles(hq-9) for air cover, and ciws for point defense. if nesseacery, manpads caried by the crew could be used. i completely agree with chakos. there are many americans that think they can simply fly f-18s and b-52s into chinese airspace and start dropping bombs are completely mistaken. china is not iraq. slow flying b-52s wouldnt last a few minutes against s-300s and j-7 and j-8 interceptors. the f-18s would have a higher chance of living, but the deeper they go, they less likely thay are to live. su-27s would handle them as the f-18 pilots were doging missles. such deterence may not suceed, but the f-18s may not have enough fuel to return to the carrier. chinese subs can do a good job of keeping the cbg at distance. inevitably, many f-18 pilots will have to bail in taiwan strait. they can pray to be picked up by the taiwanese. the f-18s...china might hunt fallen f18s.

They won't sent F-18s or B-52s, more like F-117 and B-2s, although there's still a question of rather if China bought Anti-Stealth radar from Czech. About the Isrealis beating the Arabs SAM defence, didn't they sent UAV to help act as decoy for the missiles to be wasted?

Impressed by America's AQM-34 Ryan Firebee UAV, Israel secretly purchased 12 Firebees from the U.S. in 1970, modified them, and designated them Firebee 1241 UAVs. These Firebee 1241s played an important role in the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel, Egypt, and Syria, both as reconnaissance vehicles and as new kinds of UAVs: decoys. On the second day of the war the Israeli Air Force deployed their fleet of armed Firebees to lead attacks against Egyptian air defenses along the Suez. The Egyptians fired their entire inventory of surface-to-air missiles at the Firebees—43 missiles in all. The Firebees successfully evaded 32 of the missiles and destroyed 11 with their Shrike anti-radar missiles.

Click to expand...

Well if Isreal can do that, what makes the US not able to mass produce hundreds?
Don't forget the LD-2000 has 6 TY-90, which makes it's range increas eto 10 KM.
These are the main players though because they can also intercept ballistic missiles, I'm not going to explain them but just go to the link below to read about them..
FT-2000
Hongqi-2 (HQ-2)
Hongqi-9 (HQ-9)
Hongqi-10 (HQ-10)
Hongqi-15 (HQ-15)

no f-18s? thats the whole point of sending the carrier!!!
the b-2 would present a big threat. china might be able to find it, but shoioting it down is a different thing. im sure china and russia are working on improving the s-300(s-400?) or other missles to be able to seek out stealth planes.

f-117s? it cetainly very combat proven in attacking chinese buildings.

first of all, the PLA deploys 2 SHORAD

1) Tor-M1

2) FM-80/90

they actually deploy 3 if you count the HQ-61A, which is STILL in service in organic anti air elements.


second, S-300 itself is pretty damned old, the concept being conceived in the 60s and all. Of course PMU-x is relatively advanced.

the interesting thing is, AAA is very effective if you use them correctly. If the Iraqis actually had their radars up, their AAA would have done some serious damage to Allied air power.

Nope, AAA is to short ranged to deal with modern air launched stand of weapons. The fact that the Iraqis didn’t have any radar should tell you something about the effectiveness of fixed or ground based air defenses. The only way to win an air war is to take the fight to the enemy; you do that with aircraft not SAM or AAA. About the only thing that a 25mm or 37mm can be used for is as an ambush or base defense weapon. If use it as an ambush weapon, to take out low flying aircraft or helicopters, you likely have already lost the war anyways.

Actually, the Iraqis DID have their radars on during the first Gulf War. There were two problems: first, the allies had mapped out the radar sites and during the air war, the SAMs were the first ones to get hit. Second, their radar systems were jammed by the US aircraft. The reason the Chechs had faired so well was because they kept on turning their SAMs on and off and the allied planes weren't able to spot the SAM sites. Had the Iraqis done that, they would have faired much better. Also, yes, the S-300 is based off 60's tech, but the Patriot is also based off some pretty old tech as well. And even though the Patriot can't shoot down missiles, I can bet you it can shoot down planes without a problem.

I must say there are quite "interesting" wievs about AAAs. Anti-aircraft artillery are still very important elemnts of airdefence. You cannot use latest Iraq war as an example, cos the effectivines of Iraqi armed forces was gone even before the war started. To look AAAs use in modern warfare you have to find out other examples. The kosovo crises was a good one. VJ had very strong lowlevel anti-aircraft artillery and good C&C network to operate it. NATO knew this very well and didn't risk anything to go against it. Therefor NATO was forced to operate from high altitudes and even whit most modern guided weapons, the same ammount of succes cannot be obtained what you wouldget from closer-to-ground operations. We all know just how much damage VJ actually suffered...."forced to take cover" as it was bragged by NATO in western media...

Don't forget the Russians found that Mobile AAA were the best vehicles for Urban warfare. Tanks were too heavy, and could not elevate their guns high enough in winding streets where rebels on buildling rooftops were directly overhead.