PLA missile defense system

Bltizo said:

Would it be wise to have such a large missile (KT) as a long term ASAT/ABM system?
The US used a modified SM-3 to respond to China's ASAT test - and the SM-3 is far smaller than the KT-1 I believe...

...So was this test of a new indigenous system of a S-300/PMU/PMU-2/HQ-9 - and was it a complete system like THAAD or PAC-3, or just a one off modification like the 2007 ASAT test?

Click to expand...

One must take into account the altitude of the interception too. China's ASAT test was carried out at an altitude of more than 800 km - much more than the SM-3 test. As for the reported test, no mention was made as to the type of rockets used or the height of the interception.

Funny that some critics would like to assume that Chinese military test, whether it's the surveillance planes or missile tests, are just one-off experiments.

rhino123 said:

To track and intercept a mid-course ballistic missile when you already know it is there and had the knowledge on when or where it had been launched and where and when it would reach the mid-course is one thing (nevertheless a great feat) however to track and hit a missile that was fired from unknown source, with little time to act (react) and limited knowledge on where it will hit, would be much harder. And until China process such capability, she is still very vulnerable to ballistic missiles strike.

Click to expand...

For the missile defence system to be effective, it'll have to be able to response to a variety of scenarios. I'm sure the engineers would have tried to take all this into account during the design and the testing of the system. Besides this, the defence system would have to be at the correct place and time, to be within range of the target missiles in the mid-launch phase.

Quickie said:

One must take into account the altitude of the interception too. China's ASAT test was carried out at an altitude of more than 800 km - much more than the SM-3 test. As for the reported test, no mention was made as to the type of rockets used or the height of the interception.

Funny that some critics would like to assume that Chinese military test, whether it's the surveillance planes or missile tests, are just one-off experiments.

Click to expand...

I think details will come as the days pass - when the ASAT test first occured weren't the facts scarce as well? Well I hope that details will eventually come out...

I think the Pentagon spokeswoman said it was exo atmospheric, which suggests a target like the DF-21 at least.

the Chinese said the report was to test the "technology", so it should have been tested under fairly ideal conditions, just so they'll know that if a missile is being fired at them China will theoretically have to capacity to intercept it at midcourse. its the difference btw a soldier who completed basic training and a soldier who completed a variety of professional development trainings. but even takin that into account China is still way up there compared to the rest of the world. what some of the Chinese military fans noticed was that this is exactly 3 years after the anti-satellite test...lol

pla101prc said:

what some of the Chinese military fans noticed was that this is exactly 3 years after the anti-satellite test...lol

Click to expand...

Wow that's freaky...

Maybe in 2013 we'll see the test of a anti missile laser

So far the anti-missiles test for all nations are against single entry ballistic missiles, are there any developement for missile shield against MIRV system, or was it particularly possible to intercept those?

how many countries have indigenous NMD?
and how many countries have purchased NMDs? i'm just curious

will china be the 2nd nation to develop its own system?

also im very glad to hear this news.

if you think about it, in the past 10 years china had made a lot of advances and large leaps that would be considered scary.

type 99
AEGIS
awacs
ASAT
j-10
df-31
df-31a
NMD

Bltizo said:

Would it be wise to have such a large missile (KT) as a long term ASAT/ABM system?
The US used a modified SM-3 to respond to China's ASAT test - and the SM-3 is far smaller than the KT-1 I believe...

Click to expand...

KT-1 is no bigger than US's own ground base interceptor:

The Chinese Foreign Affair spokeswoman said the test caused no debris in space orbit, this mean the point of intercept must be in the inner space. so what is the likely attitude of intercept, can a modified HQ-9 do that?