PLA Anti-Air Missile (SAM) systems

Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
bsdnf said:
HQ-19 should have mid-course intercept capability. In fact, it is equivalent to THAAD-ER, not just THAAD.

but more reliable choices are HQ-29(or HQ-26) and DN-3
Click to expand...
The HQ-19 should have midcourse intercept capability against MRBMs or IRBMs but not ICBMs. ICBM midcourse interception requires engagement altitudes of around 1000 km, and only three missiles in the Chinese inventory is theoretically capable of that: the SC-19, DN-2, and DN-3.

The SC-19 demonstrated this capability by intercepting a satellite that was orbiting 800 km above Earth in 2007. The same missile was also involved in the 2010 ABM test, suggesting that it is capable of BM interceptions, not just satellite ones.

Not sure about the HQ-29, the supposed KEI counterpart.
 
I

ismellcopium

Junior Member
Registered Member
Neurosmith said:
The HQ-19 should have midcourse intercept capability against MRBMs or IRBMs but not ICBMs. ICBM midcourse interception requires engagement altitudes of around 1000 km, and only three missiles in the Chinese inventory is theoretically capable of that: the SC-19, DN-2, and DN-3.

The SC-19 demonstrated this capability by intercepting a satellite that was orbiting 800 km above Earth in 2007. The same missile was also involved in the 2010 ABM test, suggesting that it is capable of BM interceptions, not just satellite ones.

Not sure about the HQ-29, the supposed KEI counterpart.
Click to expand...
1000km is only near apogee, shouldn't it likely have some capability against near-terminal ICBM RVs (the application it's intended for anyway) if it's capable of ASAT? Though I also can't remember if the ASAT claim for HQ-19 was ever mentioned by any official sources or just speculation.

Also, what is the precise relationship of SC-19 relative to these other systems? Admittedly the naming scheme for these ABMs is awful confusing.
 
Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
ismellcopium said:
1000km is only near apogee, shouldn't it likely have some capability against near-terminal ICBM RVs (the application it's intended for anyway) if it's capable of ASAT? Though I also can't remember if the ASAT claim for HQ-19 was ever mentioned by any official sources or just speculation.

Also, what is the precise relationship of SC-19 relative to these other systems? Admittedly the naming scheme for these ABMs is awful confusing.
Click to expand...
Right, but then it wouldn't be a midcourse intercept. You can still fire off low-tier interceptors against ICBMs in their terminal phase but the probability of a successful intercept would be quite low.

The reason why I can confidently assume that the SC-19 has ICBM midcourse interception capabilities is precisely that it managed to shoot down a satellite on the higher end of LEO (800 km in this case).

The DN-3 is supposedly a development of the SC-19 while the DN-2 is an ASAT missile capable of hitting GEO satellites.
 
Neurosmith

Neurosmith

Junior Member
Registered Member
ismellcopium said:
Anything above 100km is still midcourse....
Click to expand...
Sure. But if we are to go by merit rather than definition, the point at which the probability of an intercept is the greatest is when the missile is at its apogee. Hence the oversized missiles such as the GBI and the SC-19 (which is supposedly a derivative of the DF-21). Additionally, the midcourse phase isn't pegged at 100 km and can vary from missile-to-missile as well as trajectory-to-trajectory. You wouldn't expect an ICBM launched on a lofted trajectory to have only 100 km of a terminal phase.
 
tphuang

tphuang

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
I feel like Pakistan is better off investing in more maneuverable missiles for point defense capabilities against low flying missiles and drones. They are more economical and will probably address the threat from India better.
Click to expand...
btw, if you listen to guancha guy video on this

toward the end at least, they talked about HQ-19. This is actually a conscious decision by China to surround India and put pressure on India the way US had done with BMD expansion in Asia.

Hurin also talked about it here today

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1932726232245764401

It's about taking away India's nuclear deterrence against China and Pakistan. Now, you can intercept Indian ballistic missiles in boost phase.

I'm not sure this is actually a good idea since this will just encourage India to expand its nuclear arsenal, but then again maybe China has just so little respect in India's ability to do so that it thinks it can always neutralize it by taking away any launch platforms.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Senior Member
Registered Member
tphuang said:
btw, if you listen to guancha guy video on this

toward the end at least, they talked about HQ-19. This is actually a conscious decision by China to surround India and put pressure on India the way US had done with BMD expansion in Asia.

Hurin also talked about it here today

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1932726232245764401

It's about taking away India's nuclear deterrence against China and Pakistan. Now, you can intercept Indian ballistic missiles in boost phase.

I'm not sure this is actually a good idea since this will just encourage India to expand its nuclear arsenal, but then again maybe China has just so little respect in India's ability to do so that it thinks it can always neutralize it by taking away any launch platforms.
Click to expand...

Nuclear expansion isn't cheap (Beijing would know firsthand), and putting even more stress on an Indian procurement system which already has too many needs and not enough money is valuable. Forcing India to spend more on military when it really wants to focus on fast growth is also a bonus.

It's a good move in the abstract sense; I'm just surprised Pakistan agreed to it since they get stuck with most of the costs while China gets most of the gains. Maybe the J-35/KJ-500 part of the offer was conditional on their agreement.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top