Pakistan officially inducts HQ 9 Air Defence system

[iLION12345_1]

On lighter note with discounts and perhaps with some upgrades to make it effective. As it was stated in social media in recent past that HQ9 is much expensive system and is out of reach for Pakistan or China is reluctant to provide systems on discounted rates/long credit line basis.

I don’t know what makes people think these systems are too expensive for Pakistan. Apparently the money is present when we’re buying top of the line helicopters, tanks and artillery, were even asking China to make them better and more expensive. We’re doing the same while buying ships and submarines worth several billion dollars, but when it comes to SAMs we’re so broke that we have to buy used systems or buy an older model. It’s not like that.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Unlikely as France is one of the suppliers, they'll probably block it.

That said, the PAF could potentially acquire the CAMM-ER. It has the range (40+ km) to start building out the shorter-side of the PAF's HiMADS (i.e., the same role as the LY-80 in the Army) and complement the Spada-2000-Plus. If the PAF wants a long-range SAM, it could look at the HQ-9BE.

TBH I don't get France's stupidity...and Russians do it too. It is the arms supplier that holds the cards...not the importer. US doesn't let this crap fly...they sell to all sides and laugh all the way to the bank. Russia denying Pantsir to Pak...or France denying Aster 30 to Pak...
...in the big scheme of things...India would buy from them whatever they need for their defense. So when they deny stuff to Pak to please India...it's only these countries losing out on the money bcuz Pak gets something similar anyways from countries like China, Ukraine, Turkey, Italy, etc.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Unfortunately it is HQ-9 or HQ-9A not B，base on your pic 1.
HQ-9/9A:
View attachment 785440View attachment 785441

HQ-9BE:
View attachment 785442

HQ-9P:
View attachment 785443

The model is not of HQ-9P. Look at the actual system and compare it to the model, they look nothing alike.

 

[kursed]

The system to my eyes is clearly FD-2000B, with some Pak specific changes (Datalinks et al).

This vehicle is the firing TEL. Pay attention to the console on the side. And data receiving aerial stowed away.

Here you can see it standing with an empty magazine.

And this is the Uzbek FD-2000B. Check side console and the aerial.

HQ9A in comparison.

Also, the missiles shown in Pakistan’s case seem to be dummies. Not real missiles. IMO. PAAD is going to extra ordinary lengths to hide details on this.

 

[iLION12345_1]

The system to my eyes is clearly FD-2000B, with some Pak specific changes (Datalinks et al).
View attachment 785461View attachment 785460
This vehicle is the firing TEL. Pay attention to the console on the side

View attachment 785463
Here you can see it standing with an empty magazine.


View attachment 785464
And this is the Uzbek FD-2000B

FD-2000B isn’t an actual designation, it’s FD-2000, HQ-9B and HQ-9BE.

 

[kursed]

FD-2000B isn’t an actual designation, it’s FD-2000, HQ-9B and HQ-9BE.

Well, what Uzbek’s got isn’t exactly vanilla HQ-9/A or FD-2000 either. But their system looks closest to ours.

 

[lightoftruth]

Pakistan inducted this chinese S300 knockoff 4 years back.

 

[Beast]

Pakistan inducted this chinese S300 knockoff 4 years back.

Better than Indian Buk missile knock off...

Look at the shape of the missile. 1:1 replica but with inferior electronic and quality from India.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Pakistan inducted this chinese S300 knockoff 4 years back.

And india hasn’t inducted anything yet. Apart from what they used to shoot down their own helicopter. I bet they will keep the tradition alive, the first kill Indian S400 gets will be an Indian rafale. And probably the only one too.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Indian SAM network is very dense ,this is not even comparable.

This is just a poor attempt by PA to show something is being done against Indian induction of S-400,which is far superior system.

We are inducting S-400 next month. Good Luck !

Sure! Please induct as many as possible, that way when a war starts, at least half of the IAF will be handled by Indian AD.

Better than Indian Buk missile knock off...

View attachment 785469

View attachment 785471

Look at the shape of the missile. 1:1 replica but with inferior electronic and quality from India.

As long as it can shoot down their own planes, they will induct it. That’s all they are capable of bringing down anyways.

 

[Bilal.]

FD-2000B isn’t an actual designation, it’s FD-2000, HQ-9B and HQ-9BE.

Don’t know the specs of FD2000B though:

 

[iLION12345_1]

Don’t know the specs of FD2000B though:

View attachment 785477

I stand corrected have, not seen this poster before.

Don’t know the specs of FD2000B though:

View attachment 785477

FD-2000s max range is listed as 125KM. Given usual Chinese naming conventions, FD2000B should have a longer range. I assume FD-2000 is the export version of the HQ-9A while FD-2000B is export version of HQ-9B? But there is also HQ-9BE. Man these Chinese names are confusing.

 

[Bilal.]

I stand corrected have, not seen this poster before.

FD-2000s max range is listed as 125KM. Given usual Chinese naming conventions, FD2000B should have a longer range. I assume FD-2000 is the export version of the HQ-9A while FD-2000B is export version of HQ-9B? But there is also HQ-9BE. Man these Chinese names are confusing.

FD2000B might just be an older designation of HQ9BE. I think Chinese are moving towards standardized designation with “E” for export analogs of in service systems instead of giving completely different names, e.g., J-10CE, HQ17AE and HQ-9BE. I could be wrong though.

 

[iLION12345_1]

FD2000B might just be an older designation of HQ9BE. I think Chinese are moving towards standardized designation with “E” for export analogs of in service systems instead of giving completely different names, e.g., J-10CE, HQ17AE and HQ-9BE. I could be wrong though.

Hopefully that’s correct, makes sense too. In which case, it would be HQ-9BE that we purchased, and as kursed said the launchers look similar. And the timeline makes sense too, given it’s the newer system.

 

[vi-va]

What can the Chinese HQ9 system be compared to in Russian/American systems?

I suppose

HQ-9 SM-6

HQ-10 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile

HQ-19、HQ-26 SM-3

Type 1130 Gatling gun CIWS Phalanx CIWS

HQ-19、HQ-26 SM-3

Sea Power: China anti air, anti ship missiles VS US counterpart

HQ-9 SM-6 HQ-10 RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile HQ-19、HQ-26 SM-3 Type 1130 Gatling gun CIWS Phalanx CIWS HQ-19、HQ-26 SM-3 YJ-18 AGM-84 CY-3 RUR-5A CJ-10 Tomahawk cruise missile BGM-109 052D VLS MK-41 FM-3000N HT-1E VLS MK 25 ESSM 055 VLS no US counterpart

defence.pk