PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems

Three more images of HQ-29 ABM.

Blitzo said:

Considering the likely capability of this weapon, dual pack would be potent.

"not even tri pack" makes it sound like the desirable or attainable goal would be quad pack, which is just silly -- this isn't a simple MR SAM, this should be a proper high end SAM capable of long range engagements against air breathing targets while also having the capability to target probably fairly high performance aeroballistic missiles.

Click to expand...

Dual pack certainly offers a substantial increase to magazine depth, it is just unfortunate that so much of the VLS space would be wasted in a dual-pack configuration relative to a tri-pack configuration.

FriedRiceNSpice said:

Dual pack certainly offers a substantial increase to magazine depth, it is just unfortunate that so much of the VLS space would be wasted in a dual-pack configuration relative to a tri-pack configuration.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, it nicely complements HQ-9B - not as supplement, but actual high altitude complement. It's still a full on MSE missile.
Cut a bit more - and you're with PAC-3/9M96/HQ-16C class weapon, which is a performance choice between lower(HQ-16C/9M96*) and higher(PAC-3) altitude performance.
HQ-9C does not look like a choice, it can do both equally, yet imrpove ammo depth at most useful engagement distances.

*i mean yea, 9m96 keeps both thrusters and aerodynamic surfaces - which sort of does both...but this way you still get drag/weight/volume of two solutions, while having less thrusters. HQ-9C will likely both fly way further and be a much better ABM with better performance and footprint..