Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Share

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Sep 28, 2013 5:07 pm

    As in title.. recently i feel very annoyed by a member in a forum.. keep calling XXX weapon system bad compared to others because it has less or no "kill" record.

    and now recently he praised China because it shot down more U-2 than Soviet (Which obviously no more U-2 overfly it since 1960..hence Soviet only have 1 kill)

    Other member also praised HQ-9 because it's said to have hit all targets during tests in Turkey Air Defense bid (Thus accepted by the Turks) compared to Patriot or S-300PMU-2 which missed some.

    In the other hand S-300PMU-2 did well in China
    VKO Article

    Can such simplified stuff be used and accurate ?

    from what i understand though.. such can't be a measure but conveying this to "that" faction are close to impossible somewhat.

    I really lost my "appetite" for discussion if someone start that scoring shits.. honest..and a thread started to dig into deep retardation after that..

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:53 pm

    The first question I would ask when told such things is: Where is the proof? Did Turkey say that or is he saying that? As well, who were the people using the system? How were the tests done? Did China get easier targets? Did they get same targets? Lots of questions not a whole lot of answers. What I read was the sole reasons for HQ-9 winning was that China is selling it for a Billion less (the deal) than what Russia and US offered., with full tech transfer.

    Reason why HQ-9 doesn't sell well, is because of lack of experience in China building quality equipment, or just complete knock-offs.

    One thing though, to remind some people though about HQ-9 that could very well make it better than S-300PMU-2 (PMU-2 is an old system compared to HQ-9) is that HQ-9 uses a two stage missile, similar to what the S-300V 9M82 missile is plus the setup of it is a cross mix between S-300V and Patriot as its FCR is similar to that on the Patriot than S-300, and its tracking radar is similar to that used by Thales AESA. Its computing power is also higher as it was only in recent years that Russia incorperated much more advanced digital systems into their S-300/400 systems. But to say that China does better because it shot down more of this or because it won one contract with a foreign country for its air defense system, is stretching the truth quite a bit. Some things to put into perspective:

    - If Chinese systems were better, they would have sold more, as their systems are usually cheaper too, even in regards to the Turkish bid.
    - If Chinese systems were better, they would not have been defeated by SU in 1969 conflict.
    - If Chinese systems were better, they would be more renound in their development of high tech products, which isn't the case,

    As well, for the competition:

    - Russia could have offered Nebo-M AESA Radar for Tracking and more modern FCR.
    - Russia could have offered S-300VM but they didn't.
    - Was S-300PMU-2 Using older equipment or newer digital systems? They could have offered far more advanced, subsystems if they wanted to, even if it isn't Russian product (Micron, Elvees, etc offers very advanced digital subsystems that are made and designed in Russia, while majority of Chinese are all import technology: Motorola, Qualcumm, Intel, AMD, Texas Insturments, etc).

    As for initial question, no, number of kills does not matter. What matters is so many factors. For instance:

    - How many flights of U-2 went over China vs Soviet Union, and When did China start being able to shoot them down? Wouldn't make much sense that China shot down more if they made knock-offs of same air defense system as Russia.
    - Did China Hesitate or not? Soviet Union has hesitated in the past in shooting something down, remember that kid who landed that small plane in Moscow? They had him locked but did not engage him.
    - In conflicts, did the enemy have proper training or not? This one is most easily debatable since China's only real recent conflict was the Sino-Vietnam war, which Vietnam stomped China pretty damn good, even though they just got out of a war with USA (1979 when Vietnam got out of war with USA in 1975). China's only real conflicts since was either their own people (Tienanmen) or people who have very little to defend themselves (Tibet). When China went to conflict with real power, they lost (Soviet Union - 1969 and Vietnam - 1979).

    What is more funny, is about how many kills you get should somehow determine how great a weapon is, which isn't true. Since equipment works one way or another, but it is how the person behind it, uses it. F-15's are great planes not because of their capabilities, but because of the pilots who flew them. Sorry, but I would take an American F-15 pilot over a Russian Su-27 pilot not because the jet, but because American pilots usually get far more flight training than Russian pilots. Su-27 is a great plane, and even Su-30 is better, which was proven multiple times in exercises to get multiple shot downs without being shot down themselves (they were Indian pilots vs American).

    This is only an example.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  TR1 on Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:49 pm

    Neither S-300 nor S-400 took part in any Turkey trials.

    The only source for the "trials" is some Chinese BS.

    Let's see if they have a better experience with the HQ-9 than Latin American countries had with Chinese radars.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:15 pm

    Regarding S-300 claim, it didnt go through trial? Got link?

    As well, not only did latin america have trouble it Chinese radar, Peru ultimately did not choose mbt-2000 due to poor quality.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  TR1 on Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:24 pm

    Lemme better ask, where is the proof of S-300 and Patriot missing during the trials?

    I have so far only seen sourceless claims by internet posters.

    Almaz-Anteii keeps tabs on all of its activity, nothing about firings in Turkey have ever surfaced.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:03 am

    Thats true. I have not read a single article stating the results of test.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:32 am

    sepheronx - few more things to consider


    1. FT-2000 (export variant of the HQ-9) and HQ-9 (original China version) uses single staged missile (all the pictures avaible sugest that and not a single picture of two staged missile exist)
    2. This is official about the system:







    Note much smaller range than even S-300PMU system (not taking in the account other like PMU1 and PMU2) and that is because of this:






    Note that missile itself for HQ-9 is smaller than those of S-300 system although FT-2000 uses technology from 5V55 class missile. Initial China design of the same system was very funny. Size of the missile was approx. 2 times 


    bigger for the same range (with only 2 missiles per TEL). But than Russians came in and save the day (along with Patriot technology theft) and now we have HQ-9. 


    3. Russian offer to Turkey was S-300VM (Antej-2500 from 2011)


    4. China price is below 3 bin $ (not stated how much below), Russian and EU (above 4 bin $), US (7.8 bin $)


    5. HT-223 guides less missiles at lesser range with lowest point of interception much higher  than those of 30N6


    6. Missile is with lesser range, lower speed.


    This is not a system that can be compared with S-300PMU2 or S-300VM Very Happy 


    Turkey went for the cheapest options because even FT-2000 wastly surpass everything they have and will make huge improvements and valuable AD netwoork. 

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sun Sep 29, 2013 3:41 am

    Thanks for the responses everyone. respekt 


    Viktor wrote:sepheronx - few more things to consider


    1. FT-2000 (export variant of the HQ-9) and HQ-9 (original China version) uses single staged missile (all the pictures avaible sugest that and not a single picture of two staged missile exist)
    2. This is official about the system:






    Some note.

    FT-2000 Is not HQ-9. HQ-9's export version is dubbed as "FD-2000". The FT-2000 system is a different design to HQ-9/FT-2000 by the fact it use passive anti radiation seeker to home in on enemy AEW/Jammer.

    As for the links..well so far the one where it said that Patriots and S-300 missed is here :
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b91_1380261032

    and only that.

    Other links didn't say a thing about miss or hit.
    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/chinese-contenders-selected-in-defense-ministrys-missile-air-defense-system-tender.aspx?pageID=238&nID=55234&NewsCatID=345dismisses

    The weirdest thing is of course why S-400 suddenly tested in Turkey while we know that Russia won't export S-400 for some time. But then..media sometime screwed up big time eh..

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 4:20 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:Some note.

    FT-2000 Is not HQ-9. HQ-9's export version is dubbed as "FD-2000". The FT-2000 system is a different design to HQ-9/FT-2000 by the fact it use passive anti radiation seeker to home in on enemy AEW/Jammer.
    Passive or active seeker or TVM guidance does not change the fact that its range is 100km.

    Missile of the HQ-9 system is smaller than those of S-300 and its tubes on TEL are smaller and its range is smaller. Everything is smaller Very Happy .



    FT-2000 is indeed a passive guided missile but that very same missile is used by the HQ-9 system missiles guided by different means. 

    Stealthflanker wrote:As for the links..well so far the one where it said that Patriots and S-300 missed is here :
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b91_1380261032

    and only that. 

    Other links didn't say a thing about miss or hit.
    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/chinese-contenders-selected-in-defense-ministrys-missile-air-defense-system-tender.aspx?pageID=238&nID=55234&NewsCatID=345dismisses
    It could be that article on liveleak is correct but that last line is inserted afterwards or something similar but in either case no data where released. 

    Stealthflanker wrote:The weirdest thing is of course why S-400 suddenly tested in Turkey while we know that Russia won't export S-400 for some time. But then..media sometime screwed up big time eh..
    Chronologicaly speaking:

    1. Russia offered S-300PMU2
    2. Turkey wants S-400
    3. Russia offers S-300VM from 2011 with 350km range Very Happy

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:04 am

    Stealthflanker wrote:As in title.. recently i feel very annoyed by a member in a forum.. keep calling XXX weapon system bad compared to others because it has less or no "kill" record.

    and now recently he praised China because it shot down more U-2 than Soviet (Which obviously no more U-2 overfly it since 1960..hence Soviet only have 1 kill)

    Other member also praised HQ-9 because it's said to have hit all targets during tests in Turkey Air Defense bid (Thus accepted by the Turks) compared to Patriot or S-300PMU-2 which missed some.

    Can such simplified stuff be used and accurate ?

    from what i understand though.. such can't be a measure but conveying this to "that" faction are close to impossible somewhat.

    I really lost my "appetite" for discussion if someone start that scoring shits.. honest..and a thread started to dig into deep retardation after that..
    Childish level of discussion but still what is interesting is that China AD network is almost exclusively based on Russian SAM systems or Russian technology based Chinese SAM systems Very Happy 

    HQ-9, HQ-16, KS-1A are all Russian technology based Chinese SAM system and add to that whole array of Russian SAM systems in China inventory and you get the picture. 

    On the other hand Russian SAM systems in Vietnam (not the most modern ones at the time) scored thousand or so kills to world most powerful state and its aviation. 

    Talk about Israel-Arab wars Very Happy 

    I wonder how many decades will pass till original China SAM systems get the credit to brag around with that many kills.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:18 am

    S-300pmu2 was mentioned multiple times, never seen s-300vm at all mentioned. As well, S-400 was talked about but never went as far. Thirdly. What evidence shows of it? Was video hq-9?

    That isnt a good article. We need to know more.

    Besides maybe fcr, no way hq-9 can be better than either.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:35 am

    sepheronx wrote:S-300pmu2 was mentioned multiple times, never seen s-300vm at all mentioned. 
    LINK

    Its being reported. 

    sepheronx wrote:As well, S-400 was talked about but never went as far.
    Until export version of the S-400 is done next best thing is S-300VM. So if you want to buy S-400, Russia will offer S-300VM with 350km range Very Happy 


    sepheronx wrote:That isnt a good article. We need to know more.

    Besides maybe fcr, no way hq-9 can be better than either.
    Everyone can write an article these days.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  sepheronx on Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:39 am

    Like TR1 said though, no evidence that they actually sent anything for testing to Turkey. Almaz Antey would have mentioned it on their news. As well, there would be far more links. As well, Almaz offered S-300VM, but even then, it was talked about, no word on its testing in Turkey as well.

    By all accounts, it seems that they are looking more at cost than anything, and using the excuse (if it was actually mentioned by Turkey) that it hit all targets may be a way to kind of convince the media that the system was the best buy, when price is really what matters most.

    Thanks for the links and information Viktor. Seems like it really is just a S-300PMU-2 with just Patriot style FCR system.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:44 am

    sepheronx wrote:Seems like it really is just a S-300PMU-2 with just Patriot style FCR system.
    But with the 2.5 times less range than S-300PMU2 Very Happy

    SOC
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 595
    Points : 650
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 38
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  SOC on Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:42 am

    Viktor wrote:Note much smaller range than even S-300PMU system (not taking in the account other like PMU1 and PMU2) and that is because of this:
    No, the S-300PMU has a range of between 75 and 90 km depending on the missile used. That advertisement shows a 100 km range. Not in the league of the S-300PM variants, but better than any S-300PT/PS/PMU.

    Plus, the actual range for the HQ-9 is between 125 and 150 km, with an effort being made to get it to 200 km. This thing (FT-2000) is just the passive-radar system they've advertised for years.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Sun Sep 29, 2013 4:18 pm

    SOC wrote:No, the S-300PMU has a range of between 75 and 90 km depending on the missile used.  That advertisement shows a 100 km range.  Not in the league of the S-300PM variants, but better than any S-300PT/PS/PMU.
    One more thing that is interesting is that HT-233 guides 6 missiles on 6 targets which is in line with older 30N6 version while 30N6E1 and E2 guides double the number of missiles 

    on the same number of targets. 

    SOC wrote:Plus, the actual range for the HQ-9 is between 125 and 150 km, with an effort being made to get it to 200 km.  This thing (FT-2000) is just the passive-radar system they've advertised for years.  
    China is making huge technology leaps foward and I dont doubt a slightest bit that they are working with longer range missiles. But when it comes about HQ-9/FT-2000/FD-2000 its

    100km for export monkey models and 125km for domestic version. LINK



    But when you look at it from the logical point of view, you will want that your passive guided missiles has the the biggest range of all missiles because with that kind of guidance you will 

    target ELINT and ECM that usually flys much further than any other plane. Because of that I suspect that all other missiles have even lesser range than FT-2000 and because of that 

    can only be compared with S-300PMU Very Happy

    I have no doubt that in the future we will se iterrations of HQ-9 with longer ranged missiles but still even than It would be interesting to know full extent of Russian involvement.


    And expected reaction from USA Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy 

    U.S. concerned about Turkey's choice of Chinese missile system

    I suspect that Turkey with this choice of not Russian but Chinese missile system broke the dam and paved the way for other NATO countries to do the same if they want to.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Viktor on Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:48 pm

    More info about HQ-9

    --------------------------------------------------
    September 26, 2013 , according to foreign media reports, the Turkish Defense Ministry announced that China Precision Machinery Import and Export Corporation FD-2000 air defense missile systems to beat Rosoboronexport 's S-400, MBDA Aster air defense missiles and the United States Locke Sid MIM-104 air defense missiles, Turkish Army T-Loramids obtain long-range air defense missile system orders, became the backbone of the Turkish defense .

    Mentioned here FD-2000 is the Chinese HQ-9 air defense missile export models. The first red flag -9 belong to China from the research area air defense missile , developed around 1980 to 1995 and a small amount of production delivered a preliminary experiment stereotypes troops trial . ( Sina Editor's Note: From now well documented data , Russia 's export S-300 model was first developed in the 1992 Moscow air show appearance , the introduction of China's first batch of S-300 is likely to be in 1993 , while the official media first reported S-300 column mounted participated in the exercise in 1996 after the incident than we began the development of a full red flag -9 missile late for nearly 15 years. red flag -9 perhaps in mid incorporates some of the later development of the concept and the Russian technology, but even the cottage is completely generic and two concepts ) .

    Red flag -9 using terminal active radar guidance , the operating frequency band for the G -band , playing the body length of 6.51 meters , compared to the Russian anti-aircraft missiles Sam -10 PMU series use 48N6 series 7.5 m smaller ; red flag -9 maximum range of approximately 125 km , the maximum shot high 18,000 m , the general objectives of the missile range is between 7 to 50 km , shot high between 1000 ~ 18000 m ; right cruise range from 7 to 15 km , the minimum shooting 25 meters high ; against ballistic missiles range of 7 to 25 km , shot high from 2000 to 15,000 meters , the maximum mobility 22G.

    The red flag -9 using ground-based SJ-212 phased array search , fire control radar, a previously Kay HILL ​​(KS-1) SAM SJ-202 phased array amplification improved version . Single antenna can cover 120 degrees azimuth, peak power 1MW, average power of 60kW, can simultaneously track the distance of 300 kilometers, altitude 7000 meters below the 100 aerial targets and automatic threat assessment , the most threatening of six elected target priority to the war, to reach the target from the radar missile engagement desired reaction time of about 12 to 15 seconds .

    HQ-9 air defense missile four mounted missile launchers are still with the Russian S-300 surface to air missiles similar to erecting storage rack is equipped with four missiles , launchers, also uses the missile launch tube ejected after ignition cold means of transmission . HQ-9 air defense missile system, the vehicle has a significant feature in common , that is, launch vehicle using domestic Tai'an 8 × 8 heavy-duty off-road chassis , the other is the use of a vehicle made ​​6 × 6 off-road chassis , which is from the appearance of rapidly red flag -9 distinguish the characteristics of long-range surface to air missiles .

    HQ-9 air defense missile system can control 6 missile attack last three to six targets ( using two bombs hit a machine can deal with three goals , while the goal is to deal with six six missiles each engagement a ) , on the with an air target can be repeated successively utilized two missile attacks, missile launch time interval of about 5 seconds .

    A complete red flag -9 brigade combat units from the six battalions , each battalion consists of a battalion -level control car, a fire control radar vehicle , eight four-mounted anti-aircraft missile launchers , each battalion there are 32 prepared projectiles , and brigade -level units and a brigade-level command vehicle , can simultaneously pick up each brigade combat 48 air targets ( average per fire control radar engagement 8 ) .

    Red flag -9 export version FD-2000 with the ground-based air defense missiles, reconnaissance , fire control radars replaced by a more advanced HT-233 ( also known KS-1A land-based air defense missile system uses ) . HT-233 is also a single antenna monopulse phased array search , fire control radar, using the C-band (300MHz) operation , each of the antenna array with 1000 or more phase shifters , the average power of 60kW, peak power 1MW, maximum search distance 120 km or more, for the aircraft to track the target distance 90 km , the beam scanning range of 120 degrees horizontal and vertical 65 degrees, can be linked with the brigade command center , simultaneously track up to 100 targets in the air , and assign them engagement 50 targets . ( Weygand )

    http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-10-11/0940743808.html
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





    So what have we here:


    - Missile range- 125 km 
    - Missile altitude- 18 km 
    - Minimal target altitude - 25m 
    - Shooting radar guides 6 missiles on 3 to 6 targets
    - Up to 8 batteries form one AD brigade 
    - Launching interval / 5sec
    - Engagement envelope:  7 - 50 km 

    - Active missile guidance
    - 5 min system

    Interesting thing is however that although missile range is given as 125km its effective range for the most targets (engagement envelope) is up to 50 km range (with high hit probability for most threats covered). 

    That reminds me of 9M96 missile issue where its missile range is cited as 120km but 60 km engagement envelope. As we can see, HQ-9 can in no way compare to S-300PM only older ones. 




    Last edited by Viktor on Fri Oct 11, 2013 2:54 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Sponsored content

    Re: Can number of "kills" be used to judge a system bad or good ?

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 2:07 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 2:07 am