What's new

China Reacts on India's Interceptor Test

HariPrasad

BANNED
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
14,055
Reaction score
-22
Country
India
Location
India
India interceptor missile test for strategic deterrence: China

Press Trust of India | Beijing
April 29, 2014
Last Updated at 19:53 IST



Read more on: India | China | National News | Information Technology | International News

Related News


India's successful test to intercept an incoming missile at high altitude has evoked mixed reactions among Chinese military and strategic experts who believe that advances made by India in anti-ballistic missile technology are aimed at strategic deterrence.

India's anti-missile test on Sunday intercepting targets outside the atmosphere is more aimed at "strategic deterrence", as this technology will make its enemies feel the strike power of their missiles is diminished, Wang Ya'nan, a senior editor at Aerospace Knowledge magazine, told state-run Global Times.

The Indian interceptor missile was test-fired from the launch complex-IV on Wheeler Island, just over a minute after the target missile was fired from a ship located nearly 70 km off the Paradip coast.

India is developing a two-tier missile defence system, which will destroy an incoming missile outside the earth's atmosphere, and if that fails, go on to intercept it within the atmosphere.

The missile is capable of destroying an incoming missile with a strike range of around 2,000 km outside the atmosphere.

While some Chinese military experts agreed that India has made progress in missile interception technology, others cast doubt over the significance of the latest launch.

"It's hard to conclude whether India's anti-missile technology has reached a certain level, as they also launched the target missile, so the launch time and ballistic data are all readily available," the daily quoted an unidentified Chinese missile expert.

He said China has developed relatively mature anti-ballistic missile capabilities based on Russia's S300 system which are ready for combat, but India is still experimenting with it.

China bid to sell its Red Flag-9 anti-missile system to Turkey last year in a potential USD 3.44 billion deal, although NATO then exerted pressure on Ankara to abandon the deal, which still hangs in the balance.

Song Zhongping, a former lecturer on missile technology and now military affairs commentator in Beijing, said India's new interceptor missile "could only be similar to the level of Chinese missiles in the 1990s".

He said that the target missile was not advanced and lacks effective evasive techniques which had made it easier for the interceptor to strike the target.

In real combat, however, it is hard for even the most advanced interceptors produced by the US, such as the Patriot missile, to hit Chinese missile targets, another missile expert said.

India has tested seven interceptor missiles in recent years of which six were successful.

The expert admitted China's anti-missile technology is at least 15-20 years away from the US, in terms of the response time,target accuracy and comprehensive information technology.

India interceptor missile test for strategic deterrence: China | Business Standard
 
. .
"It's hard to conclude whether India's anti-missile technology has reached a certain level, as they also launched the target missile, so the launch time and ballistic data are all readily available," the daily quoted an unidentified Chinese missile expert.

How else does this expert suggest we test our interceptor? Get Pakistan to launch a missile and then intercept it ? :crazy:
 
.
"It's hard to conclude whether India's anti-missile technology has reached a certain level, as they also launched the target missile, so the launch time and ballistic data are all readily available," the daily quoted an unidentified Chinese missile expert.

wrong.

"In an automated operation, radar based detection and tracking system detected and tracked the enemy's ballistic missile. The computer network with the help of data received from Radars predicted the Trajectory of the incoming Ballistic Missile," it said.

PDV that was kept fully ready, took-off from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Wheeler Island, about 100 km from here, once the computer system gave the necessary command for lift-off, the DRDO release said.


its no use if we use the data from target missile to intercept it.it'd be faking and only serve limited glory and no real purpose. probably,he thought just like his naive land,this intercept was faked. :lol:
 
.
In real combat, however, it is hard for even the most advanced interceptors produced by the US, such as the Patriot missile, to hit Chinese missile targets, another missile expert said.
Oh yeah! Let's all hail the invincible Chinese missiles! I just wonder how many fake parts they have? :lol:
"It's hard to conclude whether India's anti-missile technology has reached a certain level, as they also launched the target missile, so the launch time and ballistic data are all readily available," the daily quoted an unidentified Chinese missile expert.
The Hans seem pretty pissed off at India's leap in technology!! :P And that too with genuine parts!! :azn:
 
.
I wouldnt take chinese assessment on anything seriously.

might on copy paste machines and techniques though.
 
.
India has already demonstrated the capability of intercepting the maneuvering target. The video is already there on youtube.

Manoeuvring balistic target has been intercepted? At over 100 km?
 
.
Well I dunno why the Chinese are getting riled up. This is not aimed at China mainly cause a war between India and China is not happening. This is aimed at Pakistan if at all god forbid their govt fails and a hot headed regime comes to power and decides to play a little.
 
. .
Some of Chinese professional considered it's a failure test.

1) PDV is not KKV which means hit-to-kill. The accuracy of +/-0.05m rocket controlling (a must for KKV missile) is obviously out of India's industrial capacity. The declared 6 previous "successful" test are badly suspected.

2) Radar of PDV is from Russia, IR sensor are from Israel.

3) Better performed THAAD weights 900kg, HQ-9 1600kg. PDV weights 5000kg.

4) India territory is not big enough to test real anti-ballistic (range > 2000km ) missiles.
 
.
wrong.

"In an automated operation, radar based detection and tracking system detected and tracked the enemy's ballistic missile. The computer network with the help of data received from Radars predicted the Trajectory of the incoming Ballistic Missile," it said.

PDV that was kept fully ready, took-off from the Integrated Test Range (ITR) at Wheeler Island, about 100 km from here, once the computer system gave the necessary command for lift-off, the DRDO release said.


its no use if we use the data from target missile to intercept it.it'd be faking and only serve limited glory and no real purpose. probably,he thought just like his naive land,this intercept was faked. :lol:


Correct .

but that is an opinion of a Chinese scientist.

if you witness 2nd test of PAD (Out of only 2 carried out), you will see killer missile maneuvers a lot to intercept the target missile. This full operation was completely in autonomous mode without any manual human intervention.

Chinese will take some time to digest that.
 
Last edited:
.
Well I dunno why the Chinese are getting riled up. This is not aimed at China mainly cause a war between India and China is not happening. This is aimed at Pakistan if at all god forbid their govt fails and a hot headed regime comes to power and decides to play a little.

There is no hot headed regime coming in Pakistan. If there is a hot headed regime coming, it's in India.
 
.
Some of Chinese professional considered it's a failure test.

1) PDV is not KKV which means hit-to-kill. The accuracy of +/-0.05m rocket controlling (a must for KKV missile) is obviously out of India's industrial capacity. The declared 6 previous "successful" test are badly suspected.

First you mention PDV is not KKV, then point out it is not a good kkv system! Talk about oxymoron.

2) Radar of PDV is from Russia, IR sensor are from Israel.
Irrelevant. Proven and tested system.

3) Better performed THAAD weights 900kg, HQ-9 1600kg. PDV weights 5000kg.
Better performed - subjective. You have no idea about performance of any of the system. And then, you are comparing SAM to a 1 ton payload capable ballistic missile!

4) India territory is not big enough to test real anti-ballistic (range > 2000km ) missiles.
No ABM goes 2000 kms. And you don't need to have territory bigger than the range of missile - otherwise all Chinese intercontinental missiles are questionable, aren't they?

if you witness 2nd test of PAD (Out of only 2 carried out), you will see killer missile maneuvers a lot to intercept the target missile. This full operation was completely in autonomous mode without any manual human intervention.

What they questioned was manoeuvring of target missile in attempts of evasion, not the ABM.
He said that the target missile was not advanced and lacks effective evasive techniques which had made it easier for the interceptor to strike the target.
 
.
.
What they questioned was manoeuvring of target missile in attempts of evasion, not the ABM.


Killer missile will maneuver only if target missile maneuvers else it will not maneuver Much.

I don't know why some Indians here like to say: "China won't be able to digest that".

China has had multiple-megaton thermonuclear warheads, and ICBM's with 10,000+ km range, since the 1970's!

Such weapons are old news. China is now testing HGV:

China beats US to testing 9,127mph HYPERSONIC missile carrier - Daily Star


Have you ever seen any Indian scientist reacting unnecessarily over any of Chinese missile test. On the contrary chinese experts always pop up with some opinion of China being ahead of India by few decades.

Your first flown J15 is batter than Sukhoi, Your J20 is batter than F22, your J 31 is batter than F 35 etc. etc.

We know that your all of chinese weapons are better than the best. So tell your your expert not to compare hi fi chinese technology with that of ours and let us test our toys.

We know very well where we are and where our adversaries are.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom