What's new

National Air Defense Command (NADCOM) - Updates & Discussions.

In fact, the medium range SAM system may be good enough around Afghanistan as you are already thousands of feet above sea level. So on top of mountain say 12000 feet height, a batter that can hit at max altitude of 18000 feet, is really expanding its range from 18000 to 30000 feet (adding mountainous terrain's height in the picture).

But I do think Pakistan needs a long rage, high altitude SAM system placed in two tiers, preferably with TOT so it can produce in numbers.

A long range, high altitude SAM system in multiple tiers and numbers supported by 400 4th Gen/+ BVR jets and a few squadrons of some Stealthy platform guarantee enough protection for Pakistan.

Afghanistan doesn't have Airforce. In case they do get one, it's a long shot for them to take strike missions. Same with Iran.
400 BVR jets is not going to happen soon. With talks of J-31, it may never happen.
 
.
It is rather difficult to compare the systems on their performance levels but the ASPIDE 2000 missile may have come from the Sparrow yet it is much more sophisticated and has a very high probability of kill. The SPADA system can engage 4 different targets at once with 97% success rate even in high jamming environments.

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagallery/files/spada_2000_ds.pdf
Request Rejected
Aspide 2000 establishes another exceptional record

Versus this the LY-80 has a lower probability of kill but then is also cheaper. It is based off the Buk SAM system with improvements in electronics so it is going to be a good replacement for the older Crotale systems now obsolete.

The designed hit ratio does not mean is exactly that number but means no less than, while in real test, HQ-16A got hit ratio of 28 in 29, that is 96.5%.
http://news.ifeng.com/mil/2/detail_2011_12/17/11390804_2.shtml
Moreover, I should correct you is the 97% hit is not reached under a condition of engage 4 different targets at once, but all of the test combined from many different test, this raise a question: the hitting is through 1 missile on 1 target or 2 on 1 test?
Moreover, to fairly compare, we should know: what it the speed of target? what kind of maneuvering the target is doing? what is the distance from the launcher to the target? Since LY-80 has a much larger distance than Spada-2000, I think we can safely deduce that the target distance in the test is much larger than in Spada-2000 (2 fold from their range? ). If so, with a hit ratio of 96.5% compared to 97%, the accuracy of Spada-2000 is far behind LY-80
 
.
I think that is what we are discussing. Long range is need of the hour, to be automated and integrated with PAF's overall C4I.
A long range SAM would be the first deterrent to keep enemy high up and away where our fighters can engage them. In case they sneak through, there should be a credible last line of defense in forms of MR and SR SAMs.

I agree. I think the number that makes sense is about 400 4th gen (+ if possible) BVR jets (-16's and the JFT), a few squadrons of twin turbines (J-11 or 15?) and a few of J-31 in the future, supported by a three tier SAM system, medium range by the border as it'll be within close proximity of the Indian AF's reach, about 30-40 miles behind the Medium range SAM, should be the long range SAM system overlapping sectors. Then point defense fighters like the F-7's and SRSAM's as the last line of defense. I think this situation would result in almost giving out a security guarantee to Pakistan as anyone venturing in would lose about 75-80% of their fleet. I don't think anyone wants to risk so many air assets to take out a few things.
 
.
HQ-16ABC_LY80_Surface-to-Air_Missile_(3).jpg
HQ-16 / LY-80 SAM
 
.
Afghanistan doesn't have Airforce. In case they do get one, it's a long shot for them to take strike missions. Same with Iran. 400 BVR jets is not going to happen soon. With talks of J-31, it may never happen.

Afgahnistan is about to get a few squadrons of used - 16's......watch it in the next 12-18 months. There are other talks (supported by India) to get them three squadrons of SU's (half the money paid or loaned by India)......and the US will happily sell PAC1 or 2 to them. So don't discount Afghanistan as a future threat, specially when the IAF starts to operate out of one of their bases after the US leaves!!
400 jets isn't that difficult....150-200 JFT, 70 -16's (plus get about 40 more so to hit 100),60 J-11, etc supported by existing Mirages and F-7's (which are over 120 right now)? So you are around 400 currently.
With the economy going vertical, you'll have a few billion for the AF easily. I'd say use it.
 
.
I think PAF can help in that regard, take the jernail to a proper firing test. Let JF-17s and F-16s/Mirage drop those JDAMs/LS-6/MAR-1/Durandals etc from 50-100km out. They'll get the idea immediately (hopefully, if not high on JDs), that this is what you will face on the eastern front. Your AKs and Haiders and M109s would be useless pieces of metal.

Oerlikons can't hit what they can't see.

The Jernail's first reply would be: "But that far is out what you are here for".

Durnadals are dropped from 400m out.
 
.
I agree. I think the number that makes sense is about 400 4th gen (+ if possible) BVR jets (-16's and the JFT), a few squadrons of twin turbines (J-11 or 15?) and a few of J-31 in the future, supported by a three tier SAM system, medium range by the border as it'll be within close proximity of the Indian AF's reach, about 30-40 miles behind the Medium range SAM, should be the long range SAM system overlapping sectors. Then point defense fighters like the F-7's and SRSAM's as the last line of defense. I think this situation would result in almost giving out a security guarantee to Pakistan as anyone venturing in would lose about 75-80% of their fleet. I don't think anyone wants to risk so many air assets to take out a few things.

With J-31s on the horizon, forget Flankers or any other twin engines. If there is a technology that PAF would let go of it's 'single engine' philosophy, it would be Low RCS/Stealth.
F-16s can be had, but not so soon. Building a 300 jet BVR fleet will take at least another 5-8 years, if things speed. Big IF. Right now it is just chugging along.
 
. .
Afgahnistan is about to get a few squadrons of used - 16's......watch it in the next 12-18 months. There are other talks (supported by India) to get them three squadrons of SU's (half the money paid or loaned by India)......and the US will happily sell PAC1 or 2 to them. So don't discount Afghanistan as a future threat, specially when the IAF starts to operate out of one of their bases after the US leaves!!
400 jets isn't that difficult....150-200 JFT, 70 -16's (plus get about 40 more so to hit 100),60 J-11, etc supported by existing Mirages and F-7's (which are over 120 right now)? So you are around 400 currently.
With the economy going vertical, you'll have a few billion for the AF easily. I'd say use it.

In order to operate jets that advanced you need some and history some capacity. I am not saying that they cannot have it, all i am saying is, not right now. Yes, India is a big factor, but then get your act together. Even if they have Sukhois and unless IAF opens up a front, Pakistan will not have much problem to force a defeat on them. We have ample firepower to cover Afghanistan.
 
. . .
may be but wiki and some other pak defe forum also mention the mane .

Probably just some local improvements, rocket motor, electronics, weight etc. Not very high tech you know. Anyway, let's stick to LY80
 
. . .
If PAF is purchasing it then it is good news as this system can engage high altitude targets where Pakistan lags, but 40 km range is low even as per MR-SAMs, but as Pakistan don't have SAM above 25 km range till now, it will be good addition.

HQ-16A LY-80 ground to air defence missile system technical data sheet specifications pictures video - Army Recognition - Army Recognition
Yes our Air Defence area sucks we need three kind of similar systems but with far more range
 
.
Back
Top Bottom