Obviously only mass stingers can stop mass cruise missiles at best, please stop with the ridiculous statements. You asked originally what was teh current answer the US has to cruise missiles, I really don't understand that question it's much the same as many other nations on the missile front but the drone question is more interesting.
PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
If you can't see the resemblance and look at the timing and patterns from other systems I can't just give you common sense nor is it my job to. As to your original question here is part of the drone solution,
Define fast moving. Stingers are part of current and future shorad plans so at least sub sonic cruise missiles are a target. Here from the companies website. It didn't take me long to find.
Wasn't aware the manpad version was capable of intercepting cruise missiles, assuming subsonic ones. The vehicle mounted ones may? It would need some sort of search track and fire control radar/s so I was thinking manpad stinger and FN-6.
There is none thats why you can’t describe them lol
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Are you saying HQ9 is the copy of S-300 Far from it In Turkey missile competition in 2013 FD2000 a dumb down version of HQ-9 score perfect score of 5 missile 5 hit beating patriot, Aster 30 and S-300
But because pressure from US and EU and Chinese refusal to give the source , in the contract was scuttled
Well he's sort of right from his own perspective. The first HQ-9 was heavily influenced by the S-300PMU and most of it was a direct copy. China eventually changed the radars units a little and @Tam should be able to explain more of the details since he's familiar. Since then, the HQ-9 series have evolved to become something quite different from where the S-300 evolved, S-400.
Without PLA buying and reverse engineering S-300, the first HQ-9 (or whatever PLA's long range SAM would be called) would likely be something very different. Even the missiles were nearly identical when the "family line" branched off. Not sure why this is important though.
Without PLA buying and reverse engineering S-300, the first HQ-9 (or whatever PLA's long range SAM would be called) would likely be something very different. Even the missiles were nearly identical when the "family line" branched off. Not sure why this is important though.
quote from the article “Chinese sources credit Chinese engineers with developing the HQ-9 on their own.” While the so called western source is from And supposedly they copied the Patriot too according to your source lol
From what I saw the missiles clearly have different dimensions and fin configurations so I don’t know where this direct copy comes from.
