PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems

ougoah

Brigadier
Registered Member
Plus a lot of that 200km+ range is useless if detection isn't catching up with missile range. In fact detection and guidance range has been reduced significantly with proliferation of stealthy planes and munitions. So much of that energy and mass is wasted.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
HQ-16. This from LKJ86 at PakDef. What's cool about these shots is that they are high res. You can see the spokes on the tail fins of the missile, something that I don't see with the Russian variety. I speculate that those tail spokes may have something to do with mid phase guidance. Another is that it may have a TVC control at the end, just like the export version LY-80 has shown in expos.

670172e1ly1fs0gdv3ytkj21kw23v1l5.jpg

670172e1ly1fs0gdy7u6qj21kw23vx6y.jpg
 

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Pretty much any vertically launched SAM is going to have vectored vanes for thrust control, as it's the best way to turn the missile right after being fired. More efficient than waiting for missile to attain enough speed for its own fins to be able to turn it.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Which is true. The Russian 9M38 and 9M317 ("Buk") are all slant launched and didn't have TVC controls on the back.

It serves to highlight that the HQ-16 system is now an entirely different system from the Buk systems, from the launch systems to the surveillance and fire control radars. The only resemblance between the two are the missile bodies, layouts and dimensions.

On to the next...

I am not sure what missile system this is, but it looks like its based on the SD-10 missile. Could this be the domestic counterpart to the SD-50? Images from LKJ86 at PakDef.

670172e1ly1fs0gdtju9hj21kw11xqv9.jpg 670172e1ly1fs0gdy2oroj21kw16o1l8.jpg 670172e1ly1fs0ge1ivzqj21kw16ob2n.jpg
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
Which is true. The Russian 9M38 and 9M317 ("Buk") are all slant launched and didn't have TVC controls on the back.

It serves to highlight that the HQ-16 system is now an entirely different system from the Buk systems, from the launch systems to the surveillance and fire control radars. The only resemblance between the two are the missile bodies, layouts and dimensions.

On to the next...

I am not sure what missile system this is, but it looks like its based on the SD-10 missile. Could this be the domestic counterpart to the SD-50? Images from LKJ86 at PakDef.

View attachment 47193 View attachment 47192 View attachment 47191
Most likely it is the HQ-64 SAM which is derived from the Italian Aspide. The missile containers and vehicles are dead giveaways.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Which is true. The Russian 9M38 and 9M317 ("Buk") are all slant launched and didn't have TVC controls on the back.

It serves to highlight that the HQ-16 system is now an entirely different system from the Buk systems, from the launch systems to the surveillance and fire control radars. The only resemblance between the two are the missile bodies, layouts and dimensions.

On to the next...

I am not sure what missile system this is, but it looks like its based on the SD-10 missile. Could this be the domestic counterpart to the SD-50? Images from LKJ86 at PakDef.

View attachment 47193 View attachment 47192 View attachment 47191

yeapp. some people would like to say that HQ-16 was a copy of the BUK .... in reality is HQ-16 original design was inspired by the BUK but then totally different sysytem, in my opinion is much more advanced .... and I believe the range now is over 70kms .... and potentially could achieve 120kms in later variant with improved solid fuel

Funny that China was the inventor of gun powder and it seems China still way behind in solid fuel tech compared to the few western countries (the US, British and France)
 

by78

General
A photo of HQ-9's mobile CIC. I wonder if the blue lighting has been manipulated.

(2048 x 1367)
28274972477_e69954f58e_k.jpg
 

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
Which is true. The Russian 9M38 and 9M317 ("Buk") are all slant launched and didn't have TVC controls on the back.[...]

However, the naval version, of which the hq-16 is a derivative, is vertically launched and DOES have TVC controls on the rear.
 

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
However, the naval version, of which the hq-16 is a derivative, is vertically launched and DOES have TVC controls on the rear.

The 9M317 ones on the Admiral Grigorovich do have TVC controls, and an entirely different fin arrangement. The arm launched Shtil like on the Sovremenny, the Talwars and the Type 052B doesn't have TVC controls.

On other things not related.

From LKJ86 on Pakdef, differences on HQ-9 and 9B. I wonder where is HQ-9C?

img-5605b8e33d1cfea1e460b4c8751df08f.jpg



HQ-17, China's version of the Tor M1. The idea is similar but the radars on the vehicles are different.


img-fed65fb68b0c76b65e104b7bcb156f60.jpg img-668d10e5e8aa8dd6b69842d81735fa1d.jpg img-2430df8630690674f25c24ede5dc8da5.jpg img-10d9f40704de6451355624716a4fccbc.jpg
 
Top