The Kashmir conflict 2025.

Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
Watched the Pakistani brief.
First of all: view claims with caution; officer directly said that proof of kill is dissapearence of blip. It's a very....famous way of overcounting since WW2, Russia and Ukraine did a lot of that before learning the hard way that no claim should be based off blip/loss of EM signature alone.

With that in mind - interesting number is that14 Rafales were identified. I.e. loss of the particular type is against this number.
For defense of french plane, I also consider Pakistani claim that they probably intentionally prioritized Rafales as very likely. The question is of course whether losses of other types in a more even targeting distribution would've higher. Hard to say that.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Tomboy

Tomboy

Junior Member
Registered Member
Gloire_bb said:
Oh, ffs. If we speak purely generation - in terms of generation HQ-9 in fact is ahead of S-400.
Because HQ-9 is a fully digital system based off S-300 series, S-400 is advanced development within S-300 series.
Yes, expanded and advanced, yes, deployed components of the system(primarily interceptors) are younger, but still.

S-400 by itself is not a generation of ADF systems(while HQ-9 arguably is, and, as similar as it is to S-300, which was obviously one of the finest SAM systems to work with - it is not a 1:1 copy of 1970s Soviet tech).
Overall, both of similar conceptual age probably, and should be judged as similar(i.e. relatively old concept/architecture with rather recently updated elements).
Click to expand...
What exactly is the HQ-9P anyways, it's definitely no HQ-9B nor is it one of the export variants of it. Specs of it seems more akin to the original HQ-9. So is it a much-downgraded HQ-9B or a slightly upgraded HQ-9?
 
T

Topazchen

Junior Member
Registered Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top