What's new

Modernizing PAK DEF.

Spada 2000 purchase is confirmed so to some extent medium level issue shall be addressed. As far as FT-2000 or some other high level weapon is concerned nothing has been signed or confirmed so far. Let's wait and see which system is selected. As far as low level coverage is concerned I think we already have decent low level systems in operation.

"The official said a former PAF chief had sent a summary to President Musharraf for the purchase of a high-altitude air defence system from a European country without transfer of technology, but the president rejected it."
Pakistan is only interested in long range SAM with transfer of technology and that none of European companies are willing to give.
FT-2000 is the best choice because it comes with transfer of technology and much of technology is that of S-300 and PAC-2.
 
.
Good Question never came to our minds what we are going to go up against, mosty AAG were a big problem not even that the one odd bullet comming from a soilder was more scary than the AAG's, I remember we were 6 Sabers and one of them just exploded figured that a bullet hit his tank because they were no AAG's at LOC, in 71 no never had a SAM fired at me mostly AAG's.

The fuel tanks in the wings of the Sabre were self-sealing.......and were thus bullet-proof in a manner.......that must be the external fuel tank that was hit by the bullet.....which can be jettisoned if it catches fire.........

However the self-sealing wing fuel tanks of the Sabre must have been very encouraging for the pilots to go into combat without the fear of fuel catching fire upon being hit....
 
.
"The official said a former PAF chief had sent a summary to President Musharraf for the purchase of a high-altitude air defence system from a European country without transfer of technology, but the president rejected it."
Pakistan is only interested in long range SAM with transfer of technology and that none of European companies are willing to give.
FT-2000 is the best choice because it comes with transfer of technology and much of technology is that of S-300 and PAC-2.

We should make sure that its not just a production ToT. Design part should also be included.

The production ToT should make sure that its includes 100% parts. Sometimes the countries give ToT of 70 to 80% parts and you still remain dependent.
 
.
FT-2000
Country: China
Basing: Land

Details

In a report to Congress on May 28, 2004, the U.S. Department of Defense highlighted the major improvements that China has made to its air and missile defense systems over the past few years, including “[the] development of an antiradiation SAM [surface-to-air missile], most likely intended to target AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System] aircraft and standoff jamming platforms.”(1)



The report was referring specifically to the FT-2000, a Chinese anti-radiation surface-to-air missile system designed to counter electronic jamming aircraft, AWACS aircraft, and other air radiation wave targets. Developed and manufactured by the China National Precision Machinery Import and Export Corporation (CPMIEC) during the late 1990s, the FT-2000 is also believed to be capable of destroying tactical ballistic missiles, similar to the U.S. Patriot and the Russian S-300P systems on which it is based.(2) At present, two versions exist, the mobile FT-2000 and the fixed-based FT-2000A.(3)


The FT-2000 is the direct result of a concerted effort by China to eliminate an inherent vulnerability in medium- and long-range surface-to-air missiles: jamming. For decades, air and missile defense systems like the Patriot and the S-300P have been susceptible to advanced techniques designed to confuse or immobile their interceptor missiles and keep them from reaching their targets. One of the most common jamming devices is S- and C-band airborne noise. If used properly, this and other deception mechanisms lead to what is known as the “suppression of enemy air defenses” and allows attacking aircraft and missiles to proceed to their targets without challenge.(4)



The FT-2000 was designed to neutralize and counter these airborne jamming devices. It contains a passive radar target seeker programmed to detect the specific electromagnetic signals emanating from its target. Essentially, the FT-2000 uses its target’s own jamming frequencies against it. In addition, the FT-2000 has a passive homing system that does not transmit electromagnetic waves, thus minimizing the chances that its enemies will detect it in time.(5) The system is equipped with modified HQ-9 interceptor missiles, each of which is 6.8 meters long, 0.47 meters in diameter, and has a launch weight of 1,300 kilograms. The HQ-9 missiles give the FT-2000 a range of 12 to 100 kilometers and an operating altitude of 3 to 20 kilometers. The mobile system is transported and launched on an 8 X 8 cross-country launcher with four canisters that resemble those used by the S-300P.(6)



In addition to the mobile FT-2000, China has developed a fixed-based variant, the FT-2000A. According to a recent Chinese sales brochure, the FT-2000A uses a highly-modified HQ-2 missile that has been equipped with passive radio frequency homing seekers. Each HQ-2 is armed with a 60-kilogram fragmentation warhead and has a range of 60 kilometers and a maximum altitude of 18 kilometers. Reports indicate that each FT-2000A battery consists of 12 missile launchers, each containing one missile, and a central control station. The central control station has one master passive sensor and three auxiliary passive sensors. The four sensors are capable of triangulating on electromagnetic signals in the 2- and 6-GHz frequency range, which covers most AWACS aircraft and other air radiation wave targets, thus earning it the nickname “AWACS killer.”(7)



In addition to its role as an anti-radiation missile system, the FT-2000 also has advanced capability against tactical ballistic missiles, although this point is seldom mentioned. As Richard D. Fisher, Jr. has pointed out, Chinese officials at the 1998 Zhuhai Air Show—shortly after plans for the FT-2000 had been unveiled—stated that the FT-2000 was being developed into an active-guided missile that eventually would have the ability to shoot down short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.(8) Since the FT-2000 is based on comprehensive systems such as the U.S. Patriot and the S-300P, it is no surprise that it too has anti-missile capabilities.



In October 2003, it was reported that China had closed a deal with its neighbor, Pakistan, to supply the latter with an unspecified number of FT-2000 missiles to counter India’s early warning capabilities. The China-Pakistan deal followed India’s own arrangement with Israel and Russia to install three Israeli Phalcon AWACS on Ilyushin Il-76 freighter aircraft, thus giving it an airborne early warning system.(9) According to various news sources, shortly after India announced its acquisition of the Phalcon radars, Air Chief Marshal Kaleem Saadat, the head of Pakistan’s air force, visited China and conveyed Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s wish to purchase an unspecified number of FT-2000s.(10)



The recent China-Pakistan arrangement may just be an attempt to maintain the delicate balance of power between India and Pakistan, both of which possess nuclear weapons. Yet according to an article published in Malaysia in January 2003, the People’s Liberation Army is eager to export the FT-2000 around the globe.(11) It is entirely possible that “AWACS killer” air and missile defense systems like the FT-2000 will soon proliferate throughout Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, a development that would introduce a multitude of strategic problems for the U.S. and its allies.

Footnotes

U.S. Department of Defense, “FY04 Report to Congress on PRC Military Power Pursuant to the FY2000 National Defense Authorization Act,” May 2004.
Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “China Increases Its Missile Forces While Opposing U.S. Missile Defense”, The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, No. 1268, 7 April 1999; Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “NMD DOA? China’s Missile Defense Ruse,” The Asian Wall Street Journal, 27 July 2000; Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “PLA Air Force Equipment Trends,” in The People’s Liberation Army and China in Transition, ed. Stephen J. Flanagan and Michael E. Marti, 139-176 (Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Press, 2003).
“China Reportedly Develops Own Missile Defence System,” Hong Kong Sing Tao Jih Pao, 2 November 1999, A13; Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “NMD DOA? China’s Missile Defense Ruse,” The Asian Wall Street Journal, 27 July 2000; Bulbul Singh, “Pakistan Seeks FT 2000 Missiles to Counter Indian Warning System,” Aerospace Daily, 28 October 2003.
SinoDefense.com.
GlobalSecurity.org; David A. Fulghum and Robert Wall, “Russia’s Top Designers Claim Antistealth Skills,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, 8 October 2001; Robert Wall, “China Seen Building Conventional Might Pentagon; China Experts Detail Extensive Chinese Plan to Strengthen its Military to Confront Taiwan and the U.S.,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, 3 July 2000; Bulbul Singh, “Pakistan Seeks FT 2000 Missiles to Counter Indian Warning System,” Aerospace Daily, 28 October 2003.
U.S. Department of Defense, “Annual Report on the Military Power of the People’s Republic of China,” January 2000; SinoDefense.com.
Robert Wall, “China Seen Building Conventional Might Pentagon; China Experts Detail Extensive Chinese Plan to Strengthen its Military to Confront Taiwan and the U.S.”; Robert Wall, “Chinese Advance in Electronic Attack,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, 28 October 2002; GlobalSecurity.org; SinoDefense.com; U.S. Department of Defense, “Annual Report on the Military Power of the People’s Republic of China,” January 2000.
Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “PLA Air Force Equipment Trends.”
Bulbul Singh, “Pakistan Seeks FT 2000 Missiles to Counter Indian Warning System,” Aerospace Daily, 28 October 2003.
Anik K. Joseph, “First China-Pak Joint Naval Exercise Begin,” The Press Trust of India Limited, 21 October 2003.
Prasun K. Sengupta, “China’s KS-1A and FT-2000A Air Defence Systems Unveiled,” Tempur, January 1, 2003, p. 60, in Richard D. Fisher, Jr., “The Impact of Foreign Weapons and Technology on the Modernization of China’s People’s Liberation Army,” submitted to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, January 2004.

Jane’s
 
.
Pakistan, alarmed at India's purchase of Phalcon AWACS aircraft from Israel, is now considering purchasing China's FT-2000 ARM (anti-radiation missile) system. An ARM is a missile that homes in on a radar signal, or any other electronic broadcast that the missiles guidance system is programmed to go after. The FT-2000 is a unique system, which has just entered service in the last year or so. All other ARMs are carried on aircraft, and are used to destroy enemy air defense radars on the ground. The FT-2000 is the only ARM that is fired from the ground, to take out attacking enemy aircraft that are using radar to spot air and ground targets. The Chinese developed the FT-1000 (apparently using the missile, and other components, of the Russian S-100/SAM-10) to give them some protection against high tech U.S. aircraft and their long range, radar guided missiles, as well as American bombers that used radar for finding targets. Using the FT-2000 against an AWACS aircraft is a long shot, literally. The 1.3 ton FT-2000 missile has a max range of 100 kilometers, but both Phalcon and the U.S. AWACS have a range of 400 kilometers or more. And if India knows that Pakistan has the FT-2000, then they will make sure that their Phalcon aircraft stay at least a hundred kilometers from Pakistan
 
.
Hold up just one moment.

HQ9 and FT2000 are the same system effectively the difference being that the missile for FT2000 is basically an AWACs killer due to its tracking equipment.

Furthermore the program for the system is effectively dead because of the latest version of Patriot and S300 ie PAC 3 and S400 Triumf.
 
.
Hold up just one moment.

HQ9 and FT2000 are the same system effectively the difference being that the missile for FT2000 is basically an AWACs killer due to its tracking equipment.

Furthermore the program for the system is effectively dead because of the latest version of Patriot and S300 ie PAC 3 and S400 Triumf.

Not entirely true.
Unfortunatly FT-2000 is the only choice on the table cause US anit selling us PAC-3 "even after negotiating" and Europeans are not giving with ToT.
i would say FT-2000 is a 4th gen Long range SAM while S-300 PMU-3 and PAC-3 are 4.5 gen "latest technology" and the most advance long range system!
FT-2000 is basically based on PAC-2 through "Israeli tech transfer" and S-300 PMU-2 " they are the version before PMU-3 "S-400" but with a anti-radiation guidance system..
 
.
The fuel tanks in the wings of the Sabre were self-sealing.......and were thus bullet-proof in a manner.......that must be the external fuel tank that was hit by the bullet.....which can be jettisoned if it catches fire.........

However the self-sealing wing fuel tanks of the Sabre must have been very encouraging for the pilots to go into combat without the fear of fuel catching fire upon being hit....

Fuel tank doesn't just catch fire specially JP4 it explodes, The constant movement builds up gases in it. And talk about bullet proof just caculate the speed of a bullet hitting a plane at speeds between 300 and 600 it turns into a massive weight. In all my service I have never seen a fuel tank catching fire when it is hit.
 
.
"The official said a former PAF chief had sent a summary to President Musharraf for the purchase of a high-altitude air defence system from a European country without transfer of technology, but the president rejected it."
Pakistan is only interested in long range SAM with transfer of technology and that none of European companies are willing to give.
FT-2000 is the best choice because it comes with transfer of technology and much of technology is that of S-300 and PAC-2.

Not entirely correct. The system I mentioned was medium level SAM system not high level as mentioned by you. Spada is medium level SAM and order has been confirmed both by PAF and manufacturer of Spada system. Infact it is referred to as Super Spada by PAF. I am not sure what improvement this new system has over original Spada 2000.
As far as FT-2000 is concerned nothing solid has yet emerged. So high level SAM system has not yet been finalized by PAF or I am atleast not aware of it. PAF perhaps is waiting an giving some time to be sure that the system has matured and worth purchasing.
 
.
Not entirely true.
Unfortunatly FT-2000 is the only choice on the table cause US anit selling us PAC-3 "even after negotiating" and Europeans are not giving with ToT.
i would say FT-2000 is a 4th gen Long range SAM while S-300 PMU-3 and PAC-3 are 4.5 gen "latest technology" and the most advance long range system!
FT-2000 is basically based on PAC-2 through "Israeli tech transfer" and S-300 PMU-2 " they are the version before PMU-3 "S-400" but with a anti-radiation guidance system..

Actually at the last IDEASconference the US offered both SLAMRAAM and Patriot systems to Pakistan the issue was one of cost.

Have a read of the article on HQ9/FT2000 on SinoDefence.com - Leading online source of information on China's military power for more clarification and difference between the two.

The latest and best version of S300 is the S400 Triumf though I can't offer a source on it other than the s300 article from wikipedia.

The main problem with HQ9 is that by the time it matured it lagged behind these other missiles and as a result of the chinese not mastering rocket fuel technology it is a very large missile and cold launched
 
.
Not entirely correct. The system I mentioned was medium level SAM system not high level as mentioned by you. Spada is medium level SAM and order has been confirmed both by PAF and manufacturer of Spada system. Infact it is referred to as Super Spada by PAF. I am not sure what improvement this new system has over original Spada 2000.
As far as FT-2000 is concerned nothing solid has yet emerged. So high level SAM system has not yet been finalized by PAF or I am atleast not aware of it. PAF perhaps is waiting an giving some time to be sure that the system has matured and worth purchasing.

:what:
SPADA is a short-medium range high probable kill SAM with a tracking range of 60 KM and 20 km intercept range. and we have placed an order of 10 batteries with out ToT.
I have clearly mentioned that for long range SAM pakistan is only interested if it comes with ToT, and that no western company is willing to supply their latest technology.

Actually at the last IDEASconference the US offered both SLAMRAAM and Patriot systems to Pakistan the issue was one of cost.

US has only offered us older version PAC-2 while offered latest PAC-3 to india.
ca190f7f3b1649987589a3ae8bc4114a.jpg


The latest and best version of S300 is the S400 Triumf though I can't offer a source on it other than the s300 article from wikipedia.

The main problem with HQ9 is that by the time it matured it lagged behind these other missiles and as a result of the chinese not mastering rocket fuel technology it is a very large missile and cold launched

S-300 PMU-3 and S-400 are same thing.
FT-2000 is not a old tech as you intend to think of it, but its a very decent system against anti radiation air borne threats and ballistic missiles.
 
.
:what:
SPADA is a short-range high probable kill SAM with a tracking range of 60 KM and 20 km intercept range. and we have placed an order of 10 batteries with out ToT.
I have clearly mentioned that for long range SAM pakistan is only interested if it comes with ToT, and that no western company is willing to supply their latest technology.



US has only offered us older version PAC-2 while offered latest PAC-3 to india.
ca190f7f3b1649987589a3ae8bc4114a.jpg




S-300 PMU-3 and S-400 are same thing.
FT-2000 is not a old tech as you intend to think of it, but its a very decent system against anti radiation air borne threats and ballistic missiles.



In the air defence jargon, SHORT RANGE is used for ranges upto 10 km. If SPADA's engagement range is more than 10, then its Medium Range system.
SHORAD is short range air defence system and VSHORAD is very Short range ADS...I have forgotten the exact VSHORAD ranges but they are mostly the Shoulder launched systems in ranges of 2-3 kms.
 
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom