Military Review

Export of Chinese medium and long-range air defense systems and their competition with Russian anti-aircraft systems

96

In the XNUMXst century, the People's Republic of China, against the backdrop of impressive economic successes, has become one of the most militarily powerful countries. Simultaneously with the reform of the PLA and equipping the ground forces with new equipment and weapons, much attention is paid to the development of high-tech combat arms: the fleet, aviation, nuclear deterrent and air defense.


With large-scale financial injections into research and training, China has created its own design and engineering school, capable of independently solving the problems of creating high-strength materials, rocket fuels, radar equipment and control systems. Recently, China has adopted new air defense systems, many of which have significant export potential.

The first Chinese anti-aircraft missile system to be exported was HQ-2 (HongQi-2, Hongqi-2, Red Banner 2). The HQ-2 air defense system was created on the basis of the HQ-1 air defense system, which, in turn, was copied from the SA-75 Dvina air defense system. The main difference between the HQ-2 and the previous model was that the missile guidance station operated in the 6-centimeter frequency range (the HQ-1, like the CA-75, operated in the 10-centimeter range), which provided better noise immunity and higher guidance accuracy missiles.

The emergence of the HQ-2 air defense system was largely ensured by the successes of the Chinese intelligence, which managed to gain access to the Soviet S-75 Desna and C-75M Volga air defense systems delivered to Egypt. There is information that in exchange for Chinese weapon and a large amount in dollars, at least one SNR-75M guidance station and a batch of 13D and 20D anti-aircraft missiles were delivered to China.

Tests of the first version of the HQ-2 air defense system have been conducted since 1967 at the Jiuquan missile range. However, only after getting acquainted with the Soviet air defense systems and copying a number of technical solutions, the HQ-2 complex was able to demonstrate the characteristics that satisfied the Chinese military. The missile guidance station has undergone major changes. In addition to new electronic units with other vacuum tubes, more compact antennas appeared, which no longer required the use of cranes to roll up and deploy. In fact, Chinese specialists repeated the path traveled before by Soviet designers and used ready-made missiles from the HQ-1 complex, adapting new radio command equipment to them.

The HQ-2 air defense system was put into service and began to enter the troops in the first half of the 1970s. However, due to the "cultural revolution" and the resulting general drop in the technological level of production, the reliability of the first HQ-2 complexes was low. It was possible to achieve acceptable reliability and catch up with the S-75 Desna air defense system in terms of basic characteristics on the HQ-2A modification, which was put into service in 1978.

Export of Chinese medium and long-range air defense systems and their competition with Russian anti-aircraft systems

The Chinese clone of the Soviet "seventy-five" has long been the backbone of the PLA's air defense forces. Serial production of the HQ-2 air defense system continued until the late 1980s, and anti-aircraft missiles until the second half of the 1990s. In terms of its characteristics, the Chinese complex as a whole corresponded to the Soviet models with a 10-15-year delay.

Since there were no medium-range military complexes in the PRC, the PLA command demanded the creation of a highly mobile air defense system based on the HQ-2A. The main way to increase the mobility of the HQ-2V air defense system, which was put into service in 1986, was the introduction of the WXZ 204 self-propelled launcher, created on the basis of a light tank Type 63.


All other elements of the HQ-2V air defense system were towed. For this modification, a more anti-jamming guidance station and a missile with a launch range of up to 40 km and a minimum affected area of ​​7 km were developed.

Despite some improvement in characteristics, the HQ-2V air defense system cannot be considered a full-fledged military complex. First of all, this is due to the fact that it is impossible to move even on highways with a fully equipped rocket at high speed and for a considerable distance. As you know, anti-aircraft missiles with liquid-propellant rocket engines in a fueled state are quite delicate products that are categorically contraindicated in significant shock and vibration loads. Even minor mechanical influences can lead to loss of tightness of the tanks, which is fraught with the most sad consequences for the calculation. Therefore, placing a launcher of S-75 missiles on a tracked chassis does not make much sense. The presence of a self-propelled launcher, of course, somewhat reduces the deployment time, but the mobility of the complex as a whole does not dramatically increase.


The position of the SAM HQ-2J

As a result, having suffered with self-propelled tracked launchers, the Chinese abandoned the mass production of the HQ-2B air defense system in favor of the HQ-2J, on which all elements were towed. According to information presented at international arms exhibitions, the probability of being hit by one missile in the absence of organized interference for the HQ-2J air defense system is 92%. Thanks to the introduction of the CHP SJ-202В with an additional target channel in the working sector of the guidance radar, it became possible to simultaneously fire on two targets with up to four missiles guided at them.


In the PRC, more than 120 HQ-2 air defense systems of various modifications and about 5000 missiles were built. More than 30 divisions have been exported to the Chinese allies. Chinese clones of "seventy-five" were supplied to Albania, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan and Sudan. The Chinese-made HQ-2 air defense systems took part in hostilities during the Sino-Vietnamese conflict in 1979 and 1984, and were also actively used by Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Albania was the only NATO country where, until 2014, Chinese anti-aircraft systems with Soviet roots were in service.


Google Earth satellite image: HQ-2 air defense system position in the vicinity of Islamabad

Currently, the HQ-2J air defense systems are operated in the DPRK and Pakistan. Iran has launched the production of Sayyad-1 SAM systems for Chinese-made complexes.


Iranian SAM Sayyad-1 on TZM during the parade

The HQ-2 air defense system became the first Chinese medium-range air defense system to be exported. In the 1980s, this air defense system in the world arms market was to some extent a competitor to the widespread Soviet anti-aircraft system S-75. However, the deliveries of Chinese air defense systems were mainly carried out to countries that, for various reasons, could not receive Soviet weapons. This primarily concerns Albania and Pakistan. Iran and Sudan acquired the Chinese HQ-2 out of a desire to establish cooperation with the PRC, and North Korea received the HQ-2 air defense system free of charge within the framework of military assistance and operates them in parallel with the C-75.

Although the improvement of the HQ-2J air defense systems in service in the PRC continued in the 21st century, it became clear to specialists long ago that the complex, based on technical solutions half a century ago, has no particular prospects. The main disadvantage of the S-75 family of air defense systems and its Chinese clones is the use of liquid-propellant jet missiles, which use explosive and corrosive components, handling them requires special safety measures and protective equipment. Although the SJ-2В CHP has been introduced on some of the Chinese HQ-202J complexes, which makes it possible to simultaneously aim several missiles at two targets, in the anti-aircraft missile battalion on launchers there are still six ready-to-use missiles. That, given the relatively small launch range for a missile of this dimension, by modern standards, it is completely insufficient.

In this regard, in the late 1970s of the last century, China began the development of a medium-range anti-aircraft missile system with solid-propellant missiles, which was supposed to replace the outdated HQ-2. However, the creation of a solid-fuel anti-aircraft missile with the same range and altitude as that of the HQ-2 air defense system turned out to be a very difficult task. The first prototype, known as the KS-1, was presented to the general public in 1994. At the same time, in conjunction with solid-propellant radio command missiles, the SJ-202В missile guidance station was used, which was part of the modernized HQ-2J air defense system. However, the characteristics of this air defense system turned out to be lower than planned, and there were no orders for it from the Chinese military.


Guidance station and mobile launchers of air defense missile systems HQ-12

Only 30 years after the start of development, the Chinese anti-aircraft missile forces received the first HQ-12 (KS-1A) air defense systems. The main difference was a new multifunctional radar with AFAR N-200 with a detection range of up to 120 km and a missile with a semi-active radar seeker. The HQ-12 anti-aircraft missile division includes a missile detection and guidance radar, four mobile launchers, which have a total of 8 ready-to-use missiles and 6 transport-loading vehicles with 24 missiles.


Launcher SAM HQ-12

As part of the HQ-12 air defense system, an anti-aircraft missile weighing 900 kg is used, capable of hitting air targets at a range of 7-45 km. The height of the targets hit is 0,5-20 km. Maximum target speed - 750 m / s, overload - 5 g. The guidance station provides simultaneous shelling of three targets with six missiles. The improved modification of the KS-1C has a maximum firing range of up to 65 km, a defeat height of 25 km. This complex uses the SJ-212 multifunctional radar. Currently, the air defense forces of the PRC have at least 20 anti-aircraft batteries HQ-12.

Although the HQ-12 air defense system no longer fully meets modern requirements, Thailand (KS-1C) and Myanmar (KS-1A) became the buyers of this complex.


SAM GYD-1B

It is reported that with the assistance of Chinese specialists in Myanmar, licensed production of the KS-1M modification with the locally produced GYD-1B SAM has been established. As of 2019, the Myanmar armed forces had six KS-1A batteries and one KS-1M battery, according to reference data.


Thai launcher SAM KS-1C

Thailand uses the KS-1C air defense system to protect the Surat Thani airbase, located near the Gulf of Thailand. This airbase hosts the JAS-39C / D Gripen fighters and the Saab 340 AEW & C AWACS aircraft. Initially, the Chinese FD-2000 long-range air defense system was the subject of negotiations, but financial constraints forced Thailand to purchase a less expensive air defense system.

In early August 2020, it became known that Serbia had decided to purchase three batteries of the Chinese anti-aircraft complex FK-3, which is an export modification of the HQ-22 air defense system. In turn, the HQ-22 air defense system is an improved version of the HQ-12 with the SJ-231 radar and longer-range missiles.


Mobile launcher SAM NQ-22

According to Chinese advertising materials, the HQ-22 air defense system is capable of fighting aerodynamic targets at a distance of more than 120 km. The height of the defeat is 50-27000 m. The firing range of the export version of the FK-3 does not exceed 100 kilometers, the altitude parameters are similar to that of the HQ-22 system. The battery, in which there are three self-propelled launchers, is capable of simultaneously firing twelve missiles at six targets.

It is known that in 2018 Serbia probed the soil regarding the possible delivery of S-400 air defense systems, but this information has not yet been officially confirmed by either Belgrade or Moscow. Apparently, the main reason for Serbia's acquisition of the Chinese FK-3 air defense system was its relatively low cost and the desire to avoid the imposition of American sanctions for the purchase of Russian weapons.

In the early 1990s, China was a major importer of Russian air defense systems. In 1993, the PRC received four divisional sets of S-300PMU air defense systems. The S-300PMU anti-aircraft missile system is an export version of the S-300PS with towed launchers. In terms of firing range and the number of targets fired simultaneously, the S-300PMU air defense system was many times superior to the Chinese HQ-2J air defense system. An important factor was that the 5V55P solid-propellant missiles did not require maintenance for 10 years. Control firing at the "Site No. 72" firing range in the desert region of Gansu province in northwestern China made a great impression on the Chinese military leadership, after which it was decided to sign a new contract. In 1994, another Russian-Chinese agreement was signed for the purchase of 8 divisions of the improved S-300PMU-1 (export version of the S-300PM air defense system).


Firing practice S-300PMU-1 during an exercise at a training ground in Gansu province in August 2018

In 2003, China expressed its intention to purchase the improved S-300PMU-2 anti-aircraft systems (export version of the S-300PM2 air defense system). The first divisions were delivered to the customer in 2007. With the adoption of the S-300PMU-2, the PLA's air defense forces received limited capabilities to intercept operational-tactical ballistic missiles at ranges of up to 40 km.


Russian-made air defense system S-300PMU-2 at the test site in Gansu province

According to data published in open sources, the PRC delivered: 4 S-300PMU missiles, 8 S-300PMU-1 missiles and 12 S-300PMU-2 missiles. Moreover, each divisional kit included 6 launchers. In total, China has acquired 24 S-300PMU / PMU-1 / PMU-2 divisions with 144 launchers. Taking into account that the assigned resource of the S-300PMU is 25 years, the first "three hundred" delivered to the PRC should have already completed their life cycle. The production of missiles of the 5V55 (B-500) family ceased more than 15 years ago, and the guaranteed shelf life in a sealed TPK is 10 years. Taking into account the fact that China did not submit applications for refurbishment and extension of the service life of the S-300PMU air defense system, four divisions received in 1993 with a high degree of probability have already been removed from combat duty. However, taking into account the pragmatism of the Chinese, it can be assumed that the radar equipment supplied with the S-300PMU air defense system will be used together with other Russian or Chinese-made anti-aircraft systems. The 36D6 combat mode radar and the 5N66M low-altitude detector installed on a universal mobile tower, with timely routine maintenance, can be operated for about another 10 years.

In April 2015, it became known that China and Russia had signed a contract for the purchase of S-400 systems. At the beginning of 2020, information was published that Russia had fulfilled its obligations under the contract for the supply of two regimental sets (4 zrdn) of S-400 air defense systems to the PRC. Apparently, we are talking about self-propelled launchers, radar equipment, mobile command posts, power and auxiliary equipment. In July 2020, the Sohu publication reported that Russia had partially delivered the ordered anti-aircraft missiles. Formally, this was due to the difficulties caused by the outbreak of coronavirus infection.

A number of media outlets wrote in the past that the Russian S-400 air defense systems should replace the S-300PMU, which have served their time. This is partly true, but it should be understood that at the time of the delivery of the first modification of the "75" to China, the PLA had nothing better than the Chinese version of the C-400 air defense system. More than a quarter of a century has passed since then, and the PRC has long created its own very effective medium and long-range anti-aircraft missile systems. It is quite obvious that the purchase of four S-XNUMX divisions (which is very little by Chinese standards) is mainly related to the desire to get acquainted in detail with modern Russian air defense systems.

Almost immediately after the S-300PMU appeared at the disposal of the PLA air defense forces, work began in the PRC to create its own air defense system of the same class. However, one should not think that long-range anti-aircraft missile systems with solid-propellant missiles were an absolutely unknown topic for Chinese specialists. By the end of the 80s, there were developments in China for effective formulations of solid rocket fuel, and cooperation with Western firms made it possible to promote electronics. Chinese intelligence made a significant contribution. In the West, it is generally accepted that when creating the HQ-9 air defense system, a lot was borrowed from the MIM-104 Patriot long-range air defense system. So, American experts write about the similarity of the multifunctional Chinese radar HT-233 with the AN / MPQ-53, which is part of the Patriot air defense system. At the same time, there is no doubt that a number of technical solutions were spotted by the designers of the China Academy of Defense Technology in the Soviet S-300P system. The first modification of the HQ-9 air defense system used command-guided missiles with radar sighting through the missile. Correction commands are transmitted to the missile board via a two-way radio channel by a radar for illumination and guidance. The same scheme was applied to the 300V5R missiles delivered to the PRC together with the S-55PMU.


Multifunctional radar HT-233 and SPU anti-aircraft missile system HQ-9

The Chinese leadership spared no resources to create its own long-range anti-aircraft system, and in 1997, the first pre-production model was presented to the general public. Officially, the characteristics of the HQ-9 air defense system were not announced. Apparently, initially, the HQ-9 was inferior in its characteristics to the S-300PMU-1 / PMU-2 air defense systems purchased in Russia.


Model SAM FD-2000

In the early 2000s, during aerospace shows and weapons exhibitions, the characteristics of the export version of the FD-2000, which uses an anti-aircraft missile weighing 1300 kg, with a warhead weight of 180 kg, were announced. Firing range: 6-120 km (for the HQ-9A modification - up to 200 km). Altitude reach: 500-25000 m. The maximum missile speed is 4,2 M. According to the developer, the system is capable of intercepting ballistic missiles at a range of up to 25 km. The deployment time from the march is about 6 minutes, the reaction time is 12-15 seconds.

Currently, the improvement of the HQ-9 air defense system is actively continuing. In addition to the modernized HQ-9A anti-aircraft system, which was put into service in 2001 and is being serially built, it is known about the tests of the HQ-9B with extended anti-missile properties, which allows intercepting ballistic missiles with a firing range of up to 500 km. This anti-aircraft system, tested in 2006, uses infrared-guided missiles at the end of the trajectory. The HQ-9C model uses extended-range missiles with an active radar seeker. Also, a missile was introduced into the ammunition, aiming at a source of radar radiation, which is designed to combat AWACS and electronic warfare aircraft. Chinese representatives said that thanks to the use of high-speed processors, the data processing speed and the issuance of guidance commands on modern modifications compared to the first model HQ-9 increased several times. According to information published by the official Chinese media, during the range firing, the Chinese HQ-9C / B air defense systems demonstrated capabilities that are not inferior to the Russian S-300PMU-2 anti-aircraft missile system.

According to information published in the United States, obtained by means of radio and satellite reconnaissance, in 2020, the PLA air defense forces have at least 20 HQ-9 air defense battalions. In this case, no breakdown by modification is provided. Western experts believe that the anti-aircraft systems built over the past 10-12 years are currently in operation. The PRC claims that thanks to the progress achieved in the creation of new materials and alloys, the development of compact high-speed electronics and solid rocket fuel with high energy characteristics, Chinese specialists have managed to create and launch into serial production an anti-aircraft missile system that meets the highest standards. Of course, if the latest modifications of the HQ-9 air defense system were superior to the S-400 in their characteristics, then the contract for the purchase of the Russian system would never have been concluded. At the same time, it should be recognized that very substantial investments in research and training, while actively copying advanced foreign developments, have made it possible to create a number of modern Chinese anti-aircraft missile systems.

In addition to saturating the PLA anti-aircraft missile units with modern equipment and weapons, Chinese air defense systems are actively moving to the foreign market. The FD-2000 system was actively talked about in 2013, when this export model of the HQ-9 air defense system unexpectedly became the winner in a tender announced by Turkey. All manufacturers of long-range air defense systems took part in the T-LORAMIDS competition (Turkish Long Range Air And Missile Defense System, "Turkey's long-range air and missile defense system"). Applications were submitted by the European consortium Eurosam with SAMP / T air defense systems (with the Aster 30 Block 1 missile defense system), the alliance of American companies Lockheed Martin and Raytheon (a combination of PAC-2 GMT and PAC-3), Rosoboronexport with the S-300VM air defense system Antey-2500 »And the China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation (CPMIEC) with the FD-2000 system.

Apparently, a very attractive price became the guarantee of victory for the Chinese FD-2000 air defense system (export version of HQ-9). At the time of summing up the results of the tender, the cost of 12 divisions was $ 3,44 billion. At the same time, the United States offered Turkey 12 Patriot anti-aircraft batteries for $ 7,8 billion. However, in 2015, the results of the tender were actually canceled, and the competition was restarted. The Turkish side did not give an official explanation on this matter. A number of sources say that, in addition to pressure from the United States, the reason for the rejection of the deal was the reluctance of the PRC to grant a license for the production of key elements of the system and anti-aircraft missiles. Apparently, Turkey hoped, with the help of China, to enter the elite club of manufacturers of modern air defense and missile defense systems.

However, this setback did not discourage Chinese importers. It is known that the buyers of the export modifications of the HQ-9 air defense system were Morocco (4 mark), Uzbekistan (1 mark) and Algeria (4 mark). In the past, Venezuela and Turkmenistan have been actively interested in Chinese long-range systems. But after Caracas received a loan of two divisions of the S-300VM Antey-2500 air defense system, negotiations with Beijing on this topic were terminated. The situation with Turkmenistan is not clear. A number of sources claim that this country has acquired two divisions, which are intended to replace the outdated S-200VM long-range air defense systems. But there is no official confirmation of the delivery of the HQ-9 air defense system to Ashgabat.

During the IDEAS 2014 arms exhibition, Pakistani representatives announced the purchase by Islamabad of three LY-80 air defense systems and eight IBIS-150 radars worth $ 265,77 million. In 2015, information on the purchase of three more LY-80 batteries was announced. Armament experts believe that new mobile anti-aircraft systems should replace the outdated Chinese-made HQ-2J air defense systems in Pakistan and strengthen the capabilities of Pakistani air defense in a possible confrontation with India.


The LY-80 anti-aircraft missile system is an export version of the Chinese HQ-16A air defense system. In March 2017, Pakistani representatives announced that all delivered LY-80 air defense systems are ready to be on alert. In January 2019, during the two-week military exercises "Al-Bayza", a training and control launch of the LY-80 missile was carried out.


The piquancy of the situation lies in the fact that when creating the HQ-16 air defense system, Russian developments were used on anti-aircraft complexes of the Buk family. China first recognized the existence of the HQ-16 in 2011. The serial modification, in which the identified shortcomings were eliminated following the results of military tests, received the designation HQ-16A.


Mobile launcher SAM HQ-16A and the layout of the SAM

The anti-aircraft missile used in the HQ-16A externally has a lot in common with the 9M38M1 missile defense system, and it also uses a semi-active radar guidance system, but at the same time, a vertical missile launch is implemented in the Chinese air defense system. All elements of the HQ-16A are located on a wheeled chassis, and this complex, by all indications, refers to the object air defense system and is adapted to carry long combat duty in a stationary position.

According to information published in open sources, the HQ-16 air defense system originally had a firing range of up to 40 km. A rocket weighing 615 kg and a length of 5,2 m after launch accelerates to 1200 m / s. Serial SAM HQ-16A can intercept an air target flying at an altitude of 15 m to 18 km. The probability of hitting one SAM for cruise missiles flying at an altitude of 50 meters at a speed of 300 m / s is 0,6, for a MiG-21 type target at the same speed and height of 3-7 km - 0,85. In the improved version of the HQ-16B, the maximum launch range against subsonic targets flying in the altitude range of 7-12 km has been increased to 70 km. The HQ-16A air defense system battery includes a missile illumination and guidance station and 4 self-propelled launchers. Each launcher has 6 ready-to-use anti-aircraft missiles. Thus, the total ammunition load of the anti-aircraft battalion is 72 missiles. The operations of the anti-aircraft batteries are controlled from the divisional command post, where information is received from the IBIS-150 three-dimensional all-round radar.


Air target detection station IBIS-150

Mobile radar with HEADLIGHTS IBIS-150 is capable of seeing a fighter-type target at a range of 140 km and an altitude of up to 20 km. The radar IBIS-150 can detect up to 144 and track up to 48 targets simultaneously. The guidance station of the HQ-16A air defense missile system is capable of tracking targets at a range of up to 80 km, simultaneously tracking 6 targets and firing at 4 of them, aiming two missiles at each. In total, the division has three fire batteries. Foreign observers note that conceptually the HQ-16 air defense system resembles the Russian S-350 medium-range complex or the South Korean KM-SAM.

In 2016, the HQ-16V air defense system with an increased firing range was presented. Also in the Chinese media published information that for use as part of the HQ-16 air defense system, a missile defense system with an increased body diameter has been developed. Due to this, the accelerating characteristics of the rocket were increased, and the maximum range of destruction of aerodynamic targets was brought to 120 km. According to the US Department of Defense, at least 2020 divisions of the HQ-5A / B air defense missile system can be deployed in the PRC as of 16. Currently, the Chinese military, without taking into account the outdated HQ-2J air defense systems, has about 120 medium and long-range anti-aircraft systems, which is not much less than the number of systems of a similar purpose available in Russia.

From all of the above, it follows that the Chinese industry is able to provide the PLA with the entire line of medium and long-range anti-aircraft missile systems. In addition, recently, China has begun to actively compete with Russia on the global arms market in the segment of anti-aircraft systems. For our country, the situation is aggravated by the fact that the buyers of Chinese air defense systems for the most part in the past were focused on Soviet-style weapons, and, as a rule, for one reason or another, they were deprived of the opportunity to acquire modern anti-aircraft missile systems manufactured in the USA or NATO countries.
Author:
96 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sergey_G_M
    Sergey_G_M 19 September 2020 05: 56
    +5
    China is already quite technologically and industrially developed, but still complex products are mainly based on borrowing other people's developments.
    Damn, it's time to start releasing something of your own (Chinese) unique and interesting.
    1. Aleksandr1971
      Aleksandr1971 19 September 2020 06: 11
      +1
      I will assume that the next step of the Chinese military-industrial complex in the field of air defense and missile defense is the creation of systems that can confidently destroy existing and future aircraft with stealth technology, as well as the formation of a solid anti-missile shield over industrial coastal areas. It will be Chinese and unique.
    2. dzvero
      dzvero 19 September 2020 06: 28
      +1
      to start producing something of your own (Chinese) unique and interesting.

      Thinking is not right (and this is not racism). They are great performers. Like - first read the manual, and then start the device. Creative people don't read the manual at all smile If something goes wrong, they will immediately have a technical solution smile A fairy tale is a lie, but there is a hint in it: the Chinese do not like to go off the beaten paths, and the unique and interesting lives there ...
      1. KKND
        KKND 19 September 2020 07: 14
        +2
        Quote: dzvero
        Thinking is not right (and this is not racism).

        Quote: dzvero
        They are great performers.

        Quote: dzvero
        the Chinese do not like to go off the trodden paths, and the unique and interesting lives there ...

        All according to the classics of race theories. The 19th century British would approve. And other thinkers, these, in fact, not confirmed by science, adored theories.
        But you came up with a cool "excuse". In style: War is peace. Laughed a little.
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 19 September 2020 16: 23
          -1
          What has race theory to do with it? I observed it myself in the laboratory. A Chinese man can easily beat anyone at work and this is no joke. But if the problem is one that requires non-standard thinking (and not knowledge or work experience), then that's it. Forehead against the wall, eyes closed, stress, not turning into panic at all ... In my opinion, this is not a racial feature, but a socio-cultural one. Overcome - few people will be able to compete with them; will not be able to - their lot is the coloring of photocopies. The main thing is that they understand it and take action.
    3. Bongo
      19 September 2020 07: 26
      16
      Quote: Sergey_G_M
      China is already quite technologically and industrially developed, but still complex products are mainly based on borrowing other people's developments.
      Damn, it's time to start releasing something of your own (Chinese) unique and interesting.

      There is nothing wrong with borrowing; this was also practiced in the USSR. This allows you to shorten development time and save money.
      As for "your", then you probably did not carefully read this publication. The HQ-12/22 air defense missile system is a Chinese development that has no direct analogues abroad. No. Even if this complex does not shine with outstanding technologies, it is relatively inexpensive and is quite a worthy replacement for the outdated HQ-2.
      One way or another, the PRC has already created its own scientific and engineering school and there are technologies for the independent creation of anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems of any class.
      Even 10 years ago, Chinese developers and industry complied with the requirement of the PRC leadership to use only components and software produced in China when creating new types of weapons. Can we boast of this? No.
      1. ancient
        ancient 22 September 2020 17: 17
        +4
        Quote: Bongo
        There is nothing wrong with borrowing; this was also practiced in the USSR.

        Seryozha, it's time for you to get a job at the "Zhugarinka" ... listeners and cadets will be very good satisfied with your presentation of the material, for further improvement in the field of Tactics and Armament of a potential enemy drinks
        In our time, you would be torn off with hands and feet in the "Foreign Military Review" laughing drinks soldier
        1. Bongo
          23 September 2020 12: 26
          +5
          Thanks for the kind words! drinks But you know, I write solely for the soul, well, I also joke about the "uryalka". wink
          1. ancient
            ancient 23 September 2020 12: 29
            +5
            Quote: Bongo
            I write exclusively for the soul, well, I also joke about the "uryalka".

            good drinks soldier
          2. KKND
            KKND 23 September 2020 15: 24
            +2
            Quote: Bongo
            Well, I'm also joking about the "uryalka".

            No, well, over the "uryakalka" it's not a sin to joke, only it's very dangerous recourse
            And how "peas against the wall" sad
    4. Doccor18
      Doccor18 19 September 2020 10: 45
      +4
      It is sad to realize, but Russia has received the strongest competitor in the field of air defense systems. Moreover, our country itself has helped a lot to raise this competitor. Without Russian technologies, the Chinese would have been "marking time" for a long time. Anglo-Saxons would not broadcast theirs so widely ..
      And now the Chinese air defense systems, somewhat inferior to the Russian and European ones, will win due to the unique price of the product and its service, and the speed of delivery. And in this they are beyond competition.
      And the fact that the "eastern" air defense systems almost fall short of the "western" ones, and the buyers are not so sophisticated and rich ... So ... a technological giant is growing in the east, which in the future will still spoil the life of Rosoboronexport ... And especially surprising that Russia is still feeding the ideas of its neighbor's military-industrial complex by selling modern air defense systems, fighters and aircraft engines, helicopters, and so on. Moreover, deliveries are not carried out in such large batches as in the 90s ...
      1. Lexus
        Lexus 19 September 2020 18: 47
        +6
        hi And this filth is happening with "pomp" and under exclusively "plausible pretexts."
      2. muham
        muham 19 September 2020 21: 31
        +4
        Quote: Doccor18
        It is sad to realize, but Russia has received the strongest competitor in the field of air defense systems. Moreover, our country itself has helped a lot to raise this competitor. Without Russian technologies, the Chinese would have been "marking time" for a long time.
        For what they fought, and how Mikhan mulled persecuted, they say, sell them 57, and most importantly, he got a plus sign. And that's how to get out.
    5. snake
      snake 19 September 2020 11: 49
      +3
      Quote: Sergey_G_M
      Damn, it's time to start releasing something of your own (Chinese) unique and interesting.

      Already. The Chinese are called.
    6. mvg
      mvg 22 September 2020 07: 33
      +1
      on borrowing other people's developments

      Tell that to Chinese electronics manufacturers, and ICBMs. And also space rockets of various classes. By the way, the PRC is leading, by a margin, in space launches. Lunar program, space station, anti-satellite weapons ... a lot of things they have or are developing.
      1. zyablik.olga
        zyablik.olga 22 September 2020 08: 04
        +4
        Quote: mvg
        on borrowing other people's developments

        Tell that to Chinese electronics manufacturers, and ICBMs. And also space rockets of various classes. By the way, the PRC is leading, by a margin, in space launches. Lunar program, space station, anti-satellite weapons ... a lot of things they have or are developing.

        The phase of creating aviation, rocket and space technology by borrowing from the PRC has long passed. But the "patriots" are not aware of this, they are still repeating the learned mantra of twenty years ago: "a copy is always worse than the original." wassat
        1. mvg
          mvg 22 September 2020 08: 35
          +1
          copy is always worse than the original

          Good morning. Not everyone is ready to admit that there are technologies in the PRC that are not available in the Russian Federation. Although, it would seem that the "import substitution" program should have shown this. For some reason it seems to me that China will not get into such a situation. And it's not even a gigantic trade turnover with the hegemon and the EU, but also in the presence on the territory of the PRC, practically everything that is in the world. Probably the most prepared country in case of the Third World War.
        2. ancient
          ancient 22 September 2020 17: 19
          +5
          Quote: zyablik.olga
          But the "patriots" are not aware of this, they still repeat the learned mantra of twenty years ago: "a copy is always worse than the original."

          good drinks laughing
  2. KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 07: 04
    +3
    Also, a missile was introduced into the ammunition, aiming at a source of radar radiation, which is designed to combat AWACS and electronic warfare aircraft.

    Sergei, here I would be extremely careful. Missiles aimed at moving There is no radar station. There are stationary ones. Why this task has not been solved by humanity, I do not know. It is possible to direct to interference both stationary and moving.
    Otherwise, it would be possible to direct missiles on airplanes to the included radars of enemy aircraft.
    For our country, the situation is aggravated by the fact that the buyers of Chinese air defense systems for the most part in the past were focused on Soviet-style weapons, and, as a rule, for one reason or another, they were deprived of the opportunity to acquire modern anti-aircraft missile systems manufactured in the USA or NATO countries.

    Well, here I would not really "steamed", because if the Chinese sell their air defense systems for a penny, we generally pay for the written off loan (for free) wassat
    Then, among the western air defense systems, there is a large, and even medium-range, there is not much choice, and everything is expensive and not too impressive.
    But seriously, we "fed" the Dragon well, and now we are also giving away the EWS technologies. The question arises: what will happen when we run out of "food" for the Dragon?
    I remember that older people told me that the Chinese beef stew, with which China in the 90s paid for the Su-27, in the course of a partial barter deal, was all made of fat, it was impossible to eat.
    Then they also violated the contract for a license to assemble their J-11s. We put our electronics there.
    In general, "for all the money" they sold the Su-27 with a license.
    And now the state propaganda tells us that the Chinese are our friends and they don't need our territory at all, tk. they all live on the coast where it is warm and good. It's funny that Damansky Island was far from the coast.
    Still, China is still far from competing with us in the arms markets.
    1. Bongo
      19 September 2020 07: 28
      10
      Quote: KKND
      Sergei, here I would be extremely careful. There are no missiles targeting moving radars. There are stationary ones. Why this task has not been solved by humanity, I do not know. It is possible to direct to interference both stationary and moving.
      Otherwise, it would be possible to direct missiles on airplanes to the included radars of enemy aircraft.

      Hello! We bet on a bottle of cognac that such UR and SAM have long existed?
      Quote: KKND
      I remember that older people told me that the Chinese beef stew, with which China in the 90s paid for the Su-27, in the course of a partial barter deal, was all made of fat, it was impossible to eat.

      They also paid for consumer goods, the floor of KnAAZ in Chinese "adidas" and "pumas" went.
      The stew was normal, I ate it. wink
      1. KKND
        KKND 19 September 2020 07: 34
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        Hello! We bet on a bottle of cognac that such UR and SAM have long existed?

        It's dangerous to argue with you, I always "blow". And my data is taken from the Digital Combat Simulator, where the planes of the late 80s are mainly represented. But the manual for him says that this is impossible for 2004. I would have read your data before parting with a bottle of cognac.
        1. Bongo
          19 September 2020 07: 37
          +5
          Quote: KKND
          It's dangerous to argue with you, I always "blow". And my data is taken from Digital Combat Simulator

          Don't get hung up on sources ... wink
          Quote: KKND
          I would familiarize myself with your data before parting with a bottle of cognac.

          Damn, I could have tried ... lol Moreover, I have a 15 year old cognac from Koktebel, I can throw off a photo. Can you take a chance?
          1. KKND
            KKND 19 September 2020 07: 42
            +2
            Quote: Bongo
            Can you take a chance?

            I will risk.
            Give proof.
            1. Bongo
              19 September 2020 07: 49
              +4
              Quote: KKND
              Quote: Bongo
              Can you take a chance?

              I will risk.
              Give proof.

              Take an interest in the nomenclature of the UR R-27, how the S-200 air defense system functions when firing at the active jammers and the method of using the X-31 missile defense system at sea targets.
              1. KKND
                KKND 19 September 2020 07: 54
                +1
                Quote: Bongo
                Take an interest in the nomenclature of the UR R-27

                It is in the DCS P-27 that you can start up (it is generally old), and in the variants with a semi-active homing head (there is no active radar at all) there is only the option of jamming. The radar itself does not have the same as the R-77 and the AIM-120C.
                Quote: Bongo
                how the S-200 air defense system functions when firing at active jammers

                The dispute over a bottle of brandy, let me remind you, is about launching by aircraft radar, not by interference.
                There are anti-ship (X-31A) and anti-radar (X-31P) missile options.
                there, as it were, the heads are different.
                1. Bongo
                  19 September 2020 08: 01
                  +5
                  Quote: KKND
                  It is in the DCS P-27 that you can start up (it is generally old), and in the variants with a semi-active homing head (there is no active radar at all) there is only the option of jamming. The radar itself does not have the same as the R-77 and the AIM-120C.

                  R-27P - missile with a passive radar homing head 9B1032, for destruction radio emitting air targets ensuring the defeat of aircraft, putting active jamming and operating radar. Well, the plane is moving, or I misunderstood you:
                  Quote: KKND
                  There are no missiles targeting moving radars.

                  The Kh-31P may well operate on naval radars. There are no obstacles to this.
                  1. KKND
                    KKND 19 September 2020 08: 14
                    -1
                    Quote: Bongo
                    R-27P is a missile with a 9B1032 passive radar homing head, for the destruction of radio-emitting air targets, ensuring the defeat of aircraft that put active interference and operating radar.

                    Sergei here you are wrong, she is only guided by interference but not at the radar itself.
                    Here is a video, there it is just simulated, though not very clear for a beginner.

                    There is simply no such mode of operation with the R-27 as on the Su-27 or on the MiG-29. To aim at interference, first of all, the pilot himself must turn on his radar and select this mode there. If you turn off the radar, then through the SPO you will never launch a missile at the radar of an enemy aircraft that we have that the Americans have.
                    And Harm can be launched without a radar, but HARM is only on stationary ones, do you feel the difference?
                    1. KKND
                      KKND 19 September 2020 08: 23
                      +1
                      I did not explain very clearly here, in short, in order to launch a rocket at the interference of the aircraft, you need to turn on the radar. But there is no launch on the radar of the aircraft at all, turn on the radar, SPO, OLS. The radar of the enemy aircraft, as well as the operating mode, is displayed on the PDF and that's it. It is almost impossible to start using open source software. And on the radar of the air defense missile system through the SPO is possible, but the radar of the air defense missile system is stationary.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
                      1. KKND
                        KKND 19 September 2020 08: 39
                        0
                        Again, are we talking about interference or radar? The interference is created by a jammer with a separate antenna; this device has nothing to do with the radar of the aircraft.
                        The dispute, about a bottle of cognac, about moving radars in general and aircraft radars as very fast objects in particular. I have proofs with videos from the most serious of public simulators, in which real pilots fly and lead. Yes, there are inaccuracies and sometimes serious ones, nevertheless, the impossibility of launching aircraft on the radar is the basics. Do you still need proofs from the video? Upload videos of real pilots playing this simulator? Find a manual?
                        No problem. I'll do it.
                        And now I'm waiting for your proof. Manuals, RLE, video. While there are only photos of some more serious simulators. But there, too, it may not be possible to launch missiles at aircraft radars.
                        We can simply contact the developers of this simulator to resolve the dispute. By the way, they are Russian guys. They left Tsaga in the 90s and made the most serious computer simulator, well, of course, this is a game of everything, nevertheless there is their forum and there people are not familiar with aviation by hearsay, their Russian pilots advised them.
                        Then let them act as arbiters.
                        Or do you have any other suggestions?
                      2. zyablik.olga
                        zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 09: 27
                        +5
                        Seryozha went fishing. Will be back tomorrow.
                        Quote: KKND
                        By the way, they are Russian guys. They left Tsaga in the 90s and made the most serious computer simulator, well, of course, this is a game of everything, nevertheless there is their forum and there people are not familiar with aviation by hearsay, their Russian pilots advised them.

                        Don't you think that some things have changed since the 90s? The MiG-29s of early modifications were mostly decommissioned, and the Su-27P with a significant airframe resource was brought to the level of the Su-27SM. The capabilities of the avionics of combat fighters that can use the R-27 have increased significantly.
                        Here is what they write about the R-27P in the magazine "NOZS":
                        R-27P / R-27EP - R-27 missile with 9B-1102 passive radar seeker. Designed to destroy aircraft AWACS and other radio-emitting air targets at any time of the day, in simple and difficult weather conditions, in the front hemisphere, including against the background of various underlying surfaces, ensuring the defeat of aircraft that place active interference with radar to cover their aircraft.
                      3. zyablik.olga
                        zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 09: 32
                        +3
                        You can also read here:
                        http://nevskii-bastion.ru/r-27/
                      4. KKND
                        KKND 19 September 2020 10: 08
                        +2
                        You got me, together with Sergei, to confuse the targets of jamming and radar. The Wiki says it differently. You can add a bunch of links.
                        We need to find serious sources.
                      5. zyablik.olga
                        zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 10: 43
                        +5
                        Quote: KKND
                        You got me, together with Sergei, to confuse the targets of jamming and radar.

                        I gave you a "+" for your persistence! tongue
                        It was originally about the SAM, or do you disagree? What does it have to do with aircraft missiles?
                        The article originally says what it says:
                        Also, a rocket was introduced into the ammunition, aiming at a source of radar radiation, which is designed to combat AWACS aircraft and EW.

                        Even the old S-200 air defense system could be guided on electronic warfare in passive mode. Do you think the Chinese are unable to adapt to Missiles broadband passive homing head. I got into the "jungle", it turns out that the Americans also created something similar for the "Standard" rocket, but it did not go into production.
                        Quote: KKND
                        We need to find serious sources.

                        I wrote to the "ancient" in a personal message. I hope this is a serious enough source?
                      6. KKND
                        KKND 19 September 2020 10: 48
                        0
                        Quote: zyablik.olga
                        It was originally about the SAM, or do you disagree? What does it have to do with aircraft missiles?

                        I agree, we were talking about the air defense system from the very beginning, and so I say that it is still impossible to point the AWACS on the radar. Of course, if the AWACS plane turns on the electronic warfare, then aim at the electronic warfare. But it was originally about the radar of the aircraft. And it was Sergey who started talking about the R-27, not me. And the principles are similar everywhere.
                        Let's provide evidence about the air defense system and radar of the aircraft.
                      7. zyablik.olga
                        zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 10: 53
                        +3
                        Quote: KKND
                        I agree, we were talking about the air defense system from the very beginning, and so I say that it is still impossible to point the AWACS on the radar.

                        Why would, what obstacles exist for this?
                        Quote: KKND
                        But it was originally about the radar of the aircraft.

                        This is what it was originally about:
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Take an interest in the SD nomenclature P-27how the air defense system functions C-200 when shooting at the directors of active jamming and the method of using PRR X-31 for sea targets

                        Can't the anti-radar Kh-31P shoot at moving ships either?
                        Quote: KKND
                        And the principles are similar everywhere.

                        Ага. yes Only algorithms can be different. smile
                      8. KKND
                        KKND 19 September 2020 11: 00
                        0
                        Quote: zyablik.olga
                        It was originally about the SAM, or do you disagree? What does it have to do with aircraft missiles?

                        Quote: zyablik.olga
                        This is what it was originally about:
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Take an interest in the nomenclature of the UR R-27, how the S-200 air defense system functions when firing at active jammers and the method of using the X-31 missile defense system against sea targets

                        You are using a dirty trick called entanglement.
                        Where is the ancient one, have you decided to tire me? wassat
                      9. zyablik.olga
                        zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 11: 05
                        +5
                        Quote: KKND
                        You are using a dirty trick called entanglement.

                        Come on, I just turned to the original source - to what it all started with. request Please don't be nervous. stop Seryozha, as far as I know, treats you positively. And I'm not your enemy. smile
                        Quote: KKND
                        Where is the ancient one, have you decided to tire me?
                        Are you in a hurry somewhere? Whole life ahead. Ancient, if you appear on VO, will answer without fail.
                      10. KKND
                        KKND 19 September 2020 11: 10
                        -1
                        In short, drive the evidence like an air defense system on Radar station aircraft works, according to AWACS
                        Quote: Bongo
                        Hello! We bet on a bottle of cognac that such UR and SAM have long existed?

                        This is how it all started. Let me remind you that the burden of proof lies with the claimant (I am a denier if anything).
                      11. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 21 September 2020 17: 13
                        0
                        Let me remind you that the burden of proof lies with the claimant (I am denying if anything) ... ... denying the norms ... but here's the fact ... October 2001 ... the downed TU-154 flight SBI1812 missile of the S-200 Ukrainian military ..... at this ill-fated time, the Ukrainian military is conducting exercises at the air defense, all the pot-bellied generals are present, headed by dad Kuzmuk. and then oops ..... the target continued its flight and on the radar of the survey, another aircraft object that was located much further than the target stopped moving ... this is all from the words of my friend who at that time was at the survey station .... the trick is what. ... in view of the presence of high shoulder straps in the air defense exercises, a command was given to automatically defeat the target. but then the SBI1812 board intervened with its radio altimeter, which attracted a missile from the S-200, ... in principle, the RCS for Tu and the targets were the same. but the target had a barometric altimeter and a radio altimeter on the Tu ske, the automatics of course chose the fatter target ..... so think about what would happen to AWACS in such a case ...
                        now about air-to-air .... read at your leisure about the P-40, or rather about its version with a passive head for aiming at the source of the radar signal ...
                        well read
                        I think from the betrayed cognac something will fall to me !!!!
                      12. KKND
                        KKND 21 September 2020 18: 13
                        +1
                        The million dollar question. Name the height of the Tu-154 during the "capture".
                      13. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 21 September 2020 18: 22
                        +1
                        The height of the Tu-154 during the "capture" name ..... was 9500 at Tushka, at the target a little lower, approximately in the echelon area of ​​8 km, because it changed imitating a maneuver, the target was closer than Tushka, but the rocket ignored it, the counter is still in the fact that there was another shot. but already managed to transfer the guidance station to manual mode and the rocket self-destructed, the target, flying the Kerch Strait, flopped into the Sea of ​​Azov. and they searched for the carcass in the area of ​​the Chushka spit on the Russian side
                      14. KKND
                        KKND 21 September 2020 18: 37
                        0
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        . was 9500 at Tushka, at the target a little lower, approximately in the area of ​​the echelon 8 km

                        Forced to break off you harshly. Your whole story is very similar to "fake" as there is a serious inconsistency. Namely, the RV-154 radio altimeter is installed on the Tu-5, and it measures from 0 to 1500 meters (suddenly, radio altimeters have strict height limits, these are no more flexible barometric devices fellow ). Why turn it on at 9500? Waste device resource? fool
                        Here's a link, study if anything. Http://forefronts.narod.ru/rle-134.pdf
                        Although I already from the message with a bunch of points realized that they want to "chop".
                        You worked in the Ministry of Emergencies, where do you go with your "overvalued" opinion?
                      15. KKND
                        KKND 21 September 2020 18: 49
                        0
                        Forgive the wrong manual, but oddly enough, the Tu-154 has the same radio altimeter as the Tu-134, here is the proof: http: //russos.ru/img/avia/pt154b-rle.pdf
                      16. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 21 September 2020 18: 49
                        +1
                        You worked in the Ministry of Emergencies, where do you climb with your "overvalued" opinion? ......... but I don't go anywhere, for which I bought and sold it ..... such a trick .... part and all air defense after this incident with Opuk dispersed anyone where. and so they skented with the man who was at this incident, he got to our unit, but a lot of people came to us during the disbandment, and tankers and railroad workers, even marines ... why lie to me ... we are 4 people then they threw on Tuzla for a week, so that if you catch the carcasses of Cheese ... and so Tuzla ... almost home. five times there was at ChSakh ... so no one pricks anyone .... this is life .... so inject on brandy. do not push
                      17. KKND
                        KKND 21 September 2020 19: 00
                        +2
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        so inject on brandy. do not push

                        Sergei and I have already agreed on everything in PM. I will not divulge, for that and "PM". I'll have to ask him.
                        And about how they shot down, any "excuse" can come up with, just not to bear responsibility. Believe these "nonsense" do not respect yourself.
                        Here is another link to the Tu-154M there is the same RV-5 radio altimeter.
                        https://www.avsim.su/f/aviadokumentaciya-15/tu-154m-rukovodstvo-po-lyotnoy-ekspluatacii-kniga-1-7958.html
                      18. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 21 September 2020 19: 28
                        +2
                        And about how they shot down, any "excuse" can come up with, just not to bear responsibility. ....... well, what is the excuse, people were dispersed on free bread, and the Kuchma tode himself blurted out .... "well, it’s gone. Tse is not a parshi and not a rest at the sweets" .... but the trick is ... why the rocket was redirected to a non-priority target ????? that's the whole point
                      19. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 15: 33
                        +2
                        Here is another link to the Tu-154M there is the same RV-5 radio altimeter ........ The measurement limits of the instruments may be different. For example, altimeters VD-10, VD-17 measure heights up to 10 thousand meters and are installed mainly on airplanes whose maximum flight altitude is not very high. And such as, for example, VD-20 (stands on the TU-134, TU-154), (the Aviation website is understandable to everyone), read and enjoy ... therefore, this topic for reflection in the question that I asked you, I will type on the shift that b eyes opened "WHY THE ROCKET OF THE S-200 COMPLEX CAPTURED A TARGET WITH THE SAME EPR, ALTHOUGH THE PURPOSE WAS CLOSER AND THE CARCASE FURTHER AND HIGHER .... let’s wriggle out.
                      20. KKND
                        KKND 23 September 2020 15: 45
                        +2
                        Sorry that I spoke to you so harshly.
                        The limits can be very different for different radio altimeters, up to 20000 meters and "higher", but this one is only up to 1500 meters.
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        WHY THE ROCKET OF THE S-200 COMPLEX CAPTURED A TARGET WITH THE SAME EPR, ALTHOUGH THE PURPOSE WAS CLOSER AND THE CARCASE FURTHER AND HIGHER ...

                        The question is incorrect, because the missiles of the S-200 complex have a semi-active radar seeker and capture only the target at which the operator of the guidance station points with a narrow beam. It seems that the operator simply highlighted the wrong beam with a beam, since the determination of the target air defense system, especially without the transponder, is possible, but extremely difficult, especially with the same RCS. There are several methods, but they are not very reliable and I am not sure that they are present on the C-200.
                        As a consolation, I can say that now the ancient "burns" my ass, you can read it, perhaps it will console you.
                        Sorry again for the harshness. hi
                      21. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 16: 00
                        +1
                        It looks like the operator just highlighted the wrong whole beam, ..... and the operator did nothing at all, everything was on the machine. they ran in and fuss like in an anthill only when messages began to fly from the observation station to the position that (the rocket went wrong). that's when the fuss started, but it was too late .. that's the question why she (the rocket on the machine) chose not a target, but a carcass ...
                        \ As a consolation, I can say that now the ancient "scorches" my priest, you can read it, maybe it will console you ........ but what does it console you will not console ... we do not offend each other, we rummage in archives and debug. Well, not all astronauts, but they should know about space. well, in any case, who is registered on the VO ...... let me know ... and who is this ancient. and where are you "fighting" now?
                      22. KKND
                        KKND 23 September 2020 16: 04
                        +2
                        We are fighting right in this topic, and the ancient-old Soviet real pilot retired. Sergei called him to understand the topic, and he wrote that it is really possible to shoot the R-27P at aircraft radar and in general it is possible to shoot at fast moving radar.
                      23. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 16: 17
                        +3
                        and the old-old Soviet real pilot is retired ... it will be interesting to read ... although I will report to you that real specialists in any field may not know the specifics of other equipment ... well, for example, my friend commander the T-72 tank did not know that the UR TUK Cobra in the T-64 is located between the legs in the fighting compartment, because neither in the MZ carousel nor in the racks can you shove it ... and the commander of the T-64 company found out that the AZ T-72B was on a slope more than 15 degrees does not work at all, you have to manually charge it. and often the buns reject (what remains from the burned-out liner) also often does not work and you have to throw it out through the hatch manually ... but we have a lot of interesting things in any service
                      24. KKND
                        KKND 23 September 2020 16: 21
                        +2
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        although I will report to you that real specialists in any field may not know the specifics of other equipment ...

                        Quite often this happens, a lot depends on the person, but I "roll around" with him, in my opinion the CIA knows less about our planes than he knows. wassat
                      25. Crimean partisan 1974
                        Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 16: 25
                        +2
                        I'll read it and dock ... I now have time ... I'll go to my brother-soldier in a chipok ...
            2. KKND
              KKND 23 September 2020 16: 43
              0
              Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
              VD-20 (stands on TU-134, TU-154).

              Yes, the VD-20 is on the Tu-154, but you also Google a little inattentively. This is a barometric altimeter, their altitude limits are always very high.
            3. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 17: 20
              0
              ........ in the norm ... the trocha chip has raised the morale ..... Yes, the VD-20 is on the Tu-154, but you also googled a little inattentively ... evil tongues in tekhmurzilki say that it is civil the modernized ones put the PB-10, but I don't need to google it. since such a booze has gone then climb into the attic as they say ..... now what about this tragedy. ..... it can be assumed that the radio altimeter was turned on on the downed carcass, and why. ... because he lost his course, the carcass shouldn't have been there at all. it is quite possible to assume that the pilots wanted to lower the level but did not have time ... it is not possible to cover with anything else ...
              By the way, about being knocked off the course ..... my first-born flew to Khabarovsk through Moscow for training, I tracked the flight by air radar ... I see he took a course to Mariupol from Simferopol, and somewhere in the middle of the Azov he began to wind downward. I already had the motor pounding like after a run, but then it leveled off on Taman, I slept .... so in this tragedy, the same thing could happen at the expense of entering the correct course. which is essentially obvious ...
            4. KKND
              KKND 23 September 2020 18: 43
              +2
              Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
              evil tongues in tehmurzilki they say that they put RV-10 on modernized civilians

              This is not a military radio altimeter, it is hardly "screwed" into the standards of civil aviation, but I am too lazy to google standards for a citizen of the USSR.
              Well, you can assume anything you want about the course. The S-200 in real life is a very long-range system (long-range S-400) for 300 km can easily fly away on civilians.
              And even if you turn on the radio altimeter, it is unlikely that it works on the letters of the guidance station, and it also coincided that 19 letters from EMNIP SNR 1 coincided with the frequency of the radio altimeter?. stop
              No need to come up with such complex versions. Maybe he got off course, went into the exercise zone and confused him with a target. All.
            5. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 24 September 2020 11: 40
              0
              I entered the exercise area and confused it with a target. All ...... no, not all ... eyewitnesses are the last instance of truth. but the truth is ... from the words of my colleague who was in the "review"
              - the shooting was planned in automatic mode (there were reasons for that). what was done - fact
              -after the launch from the "survey", a notification came that the rocket deviated from the target and goes to another object-fact
              - it takes time to switch to manual mode. Considering that the carcass was 70 km from the position, when the signal from the survey was about deviation from the target, it had already passed half the way, that is, everything about everything was about 30 seconds, which included in these 30 seconds - to understand that something went wrong. and when they understood. then transfer to manual mode and then only either redirect or undermine ... of course they did not have time - this is a fact
              such complex versions. ... and how can they not be if the investigation of such tragedies has not established why this happened. but it follows that this would not happen in the future .... the Ukrainian side "investigated" in a very peculiar way, the division was immediately removed from position and sent to the storage base in Sovetsky, where it was disbanded ... nevertheless, the curious have many questions WHY and dry statement of facts
            6. Bongo
              24 September 2020 13: 02
              +1
              Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
              I entered the exercise area and confused it with a target. All ...... no, not all ... eyewitnesses are the last instance of truth. but the truth is ... from the words of my colleague who was in the "review"
              - the shooting was planned in automatic mode (there were reasons for that). what was done - fact
              -after the launch from the "survey", a notification came that the rocket deviated from the target and goes to another object-fact
              - it takes time to switch to manual mode. Considering that the carcass was 70 km from the position, when the signal from the survey was about deviation from the target, it had already passed half the way, that is, everything about everything was about 30 seconds, which included in these 30 seconds - to understand that something went wrong. and when they understood. then transfer to manual mode and then only either redirect or undermine ... of course they did not have time - this is a fact
              such complex versions. ... and how can they not be if the investigation of such tragedies has not established why this happened. but it follows that this would not happen in the future .... the Ukrainian side "investigated" in a very peculiar way, the division was immediately removed from position and sent to the storage base in Sovetsky, where it was disbanded ... nevertheless, the curious have many questions WHY and dry statement of facts

              Volodya, where were you when we could chat live? request
              I know a little about S-200, and I could enlighten you in something. Transferring "to manual" mode would not give anything, the breakdown of tracking is achieved only by turning off the ROC or by forced deflection of the beam to the side.
              As for the tragic accident with the Tu-154, I can assume that the main reason for what happened was the extremely low qualifications of the Ukrainian crews, which was superimposed on the nervousness caused by the presence of generals in the K-2 cockpit. I also heard a version that the Tu-154 could "shine" on the ROC of another division, but this is unlikely, since the letter frequencies for different units should not coincide.
            7. Crimean partisan 1974
              Crimean partisan 1974 25 September 2020 09: 00
              +1
              that the main reason for what happened was the extremely low qualifications of the Ukrainian calculations, which was superimposed on the nervousness caused by the presence of generals in the K-2 cockpit. ....... quite rightly noted. This is what a colleague, a former air defense officer and participant in the tragedy, told me (by the way, when you were on a visit last time, I took you to the fire, it’s a pity that I didn’t introduce you to him, but it was not before that), and that the shooting was carried out exclusively in automatic mode .. .and one more thing, I was digging in my tehmurzilki and found about the automatic guidance of missiles of the S-200 complex .... and then I remembered your old article on the S-200 air defense missile defense system (abbreviated to an abbreviation), where Russian in white ... " The advantages of the S-200 over the aforementioned systems could be especially evident when the active jammers were fired upon, which served as an almost ideal target for the S-200 homing missiles. "...... this is what caught me in a dialogue with my opponent ... why is the rocket on the machine gun chose the wrong goal. and with the same ESR .... it is interesting to know this from professionals .......
              and so for humor ...... along the way I joined the ranks as you threw the phrase about air defense "I'm one of those who don't fly myself and don't give to others" ... because I was late for the flight and then didn't give the Prior
  3. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 22 September 2020 08: 10
    +2
    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
    but they already managed to transfer the guidance station to manual mode and the rocket self-destructed, the target flying over the Kerch Strait flopped into the Azov Sea.

    Volodya, I specifically consulted with Sergei. There are manual and automatic capture modes. On SPC S-200, tracking is disrupted by disabling the "high" illumination on the radar. After the missile stops seeing the target, the autopilot raises it to the maximum height and detonates.
  4. KKND
    KKND 21 September 2020 18: 21
    0
    Moreover, name a specific modification of the R-40 with a passive head. Because the passive head (without reflection of the target of the radiation of the MiG-25 radar) or the interference of the target does not exist in nature.
    P.S. tie there in the Crimea "thump", you can really get stupid if you are too zealous.
  5. Crimean partisan 1974
    Crimean partisan 1974 21 September 2020 19: 20
    0
    Moreover, a specific modification of the P-40 ... ... along the P-40R, it's too late to climb into the attic,
    but about the thump, and even in the district no one was dull, for example, for the first time I changed the oil filter on the prior and the sensor. and ofigel, why did the designer quite often put the dismantled parts into the jo ....... you can't figure it out without a bubble
  6. KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 10: 43
    -1
    In short, I did a little investigation where this nonsense about AWACS came from. Here is the (developer site): http: //vympelmkb.com/products/prod01/
    the link has already been removed but it is being referenced: http: //militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-103.html
    The author of this site only takes information from open sources, so he wrote where he got it.
    Instead, on the same official website of the developer, there is already a new link with real data: https: //www.ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/rakety_r-27p1-_r-27ep1.html
    as you can see, not a word about AWACS and radar. And about the interference, interference.
    As usual, someone messed up something, maybe the girl filled out the site, and the sensational infa spread across the Runet.
    The impossibility of using passive seeker against moving radars is not associated with the magical presence of old technologies, but most likely with the fundamental absence of mathematical algorithms for such guidance. And the new "magic" and not new magic avionics is unlikely to help. But here I don't understand anything, of course.
  7. KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 11: 34
    0
    Here I was in vain to drive our missile developers, the nonsense about AWACS from A.V. Karpenko is going on.
    Source: http://nevskii-bastion.ru/r-27/ MTC "NEVSKY BASTION" AVKarpenko
    The source must be said to be very authoritative, wherever the developers of the flight simulator are, it is enough to look at the main page of the site to understand the degree of "authority".
  8. ancient
    ancient 22 September 2020 19: 09
    +5
    Quote: KKND
    The impossibility of using passive seeker against moving radars is not associated with the magical presence of old technologies, but most likely with the fundamental lack of mathematical algorithms for such guidance.

    Here you are absolutely wrong, since the whole principle of operation of passive seeker provides selection of a radar target in a spatial strobe of ± 5 ° at the carrier frequency and by the repetition period, auto-tracking of the target selected by the pilot (operator), in the range of angles: at the rate of ± 30 °, pitch - from + 10 ° to - 47 °.
    In the auto-tracking mode, the seeker sends signals to the missile control system proportional to the bearing angle and the angular velocity of the target's line of sight, i.e. missile continuously tracks target position wink
  9. KKND
    KKND 23 September 2020 13: 00
    0
    Excuse me, but how is the method of aiming passive seeker on moving radar exactly called? And what is its principle of operation? And what other device does gating produce in this case? GOS missiles?
  10. ancient
    ancient 23 September 2020 14: 08
    +5
    Quote: KKND
    and how is the method of aiming passive seeker on moving radar exactly called?

    Proportional Approach Method or otherwise Proportional Navigation Method. wink
    Quote: KKND
    And what other device does gating produce in this case? GOS missiles?

    A direction finding device made according to a superheterodyne scheme (with a search heterodyne) has a high sensitivity, noise immunity and allows guidance to radars that use the carrier frequency tuning from pulse to pulse. The control system also includes a prolongator that preserves the "memory" of the target position when it is turned off or in a "flickering" stealth mode for up to 15 seconds. hi
  11. KKND
    KKND 23 September 2020 14: 53
    0
    I understand that you are a serious specialist, but I cannot logically imagine why on our Su-27s of the late 80s, on the MiG-29C on the F-14B, on the F-15C on the F-16C on the F-18C on the F- 18E, on a bunch of other simpler planes are there no missiles guided in some way on the radar of the planes? There are no modes. Yes, in DCS from where I looked at these aircraft, there is no R-27P or R-27EP, there are older modifications with IR and passive radar seeker. There are a bunch of relatively modern missiles of the 120C type, but they work for interference and not for the radar itself.
    If the creation of the R-27P is possible, why did the Americans not create a similar missile? In explosives electronics, they were one step ahead of us.
    Yes, it is possible to target HARM-type missiles on ships' radars. But not planes.
    You understand that it would be super convenient for the pilot.
    And another million dollar question, which has been tormenting me for a long time: why is there no equipment for passive radio triangulation (even group triangulation) on airplanes (at least the size of a fighter), or, I don’t know, any method of cunning time direction finding for determining the range of radio-emitting objects not? This is also a critical infa for working with enemy air defenses or even conducting air combat.
    Why is there no information about the air defense systems of aircraft operating on the radar? Rather, it is, but from very dubious sources and again about the supposedly newest developments. request
  12. ancient
    ancient 23 September 2020 15: 43
    +6
    Quote: KKND
    why on our Su-27 of the late 80s, on the MiG-29C on the F-14B, on the F-15C on the F-16C on the F-18C on the F-18E, on a bunch of other simpler aircraft there are no missiles guided in some way on the radar aircraft?

    What I told you about refers to air-to-ground missiles (Kh-31P, Kh-58U (USHKE), Kh-27PS, Kh-25MP (MPUiMR), which have reconnaissance, guidance and control containers).
    Quote: KKND
    I looked at these aircraft, there is no R-27P or R-27EP, there are older modifications with IR and passive radar seeker.

    Absolutely, you will not find "Methods" for the use of R-27P and 27PE missiles in any of these types of radio transmission lines.
    Why ... I will not cover this issue bully
    But the GSI tests were successful.
    Quote: KKND
    Yes, it is possible to target the HARM-type PRR on the radar of ships.


    Quote: KKND
    If the creation of the R-27P is possible, why did the Americans not create a similar missile?

    Probably they decided that there would be plenty of "interference" for guidance (after all, it is obvious that if an enemy aircraft detects a threat, then jamming starts in the Yankes, for example, in the machine gun). (Although we were still in the "school", at the dawn of Soviet power they were taught at the Department of Tactics - that the main unmasking feature is the production of active and passive interference wink )
    I can’t answer the rest of the questions ... this is for the developers .. why do not they cover their topics in more detail soldier
  13. KKND
    KKND 23 September 2020 16: 18
    +1
    Quote: ancient
    Absolutely, you will not find "Methods" for the use of R-27P and 27PE missiles in any of these types of radio transmission lines.
    Why ... I will not cover this issue
    But the GSI tests were successful.

    Che then my thoughts began to appear that I was "a little" obos ..... in this dispute ..... belay
    And if it's not secret, does the R-27P work only against AWACS and similar "wide-beam" stations, or can it even target narrow beams of fighter radars?
    Quote: ancient
    Probably they decided that there would be plenty of "interference" for guidance (after all, it is obvious that if an enemy aircraft detects a threat, then jamming starts in the Yankes, for example, in the machine gun). (Although we were still in "school", at the dawn of Soviet power, they were taught at the Department of Tactics - that the main unmasking feature is the production of active and passive interference by the protinus)

    Well, earlier it was easier for the Americans with the Su-27 and MiG-29A, they had to turn on the radar in the capture mode, then the Americans also understood that they had to put a hindrance. They already had an F-15C with TWS mode, they didn't have to soar from our interference.
    But now we have for a long time everything with the modes and radar has recovered. And the jamming stations on the Su-27 inspire in size
  14. ancient
    ancient 23 September 2020 18: 11
    +4
    Quote: KKND
    And if it's not secret, does the R-27P work only against AWACS and similar "wide-beam" stations, or can it even target narrow beams of fighter radars?

    No comments
    Quote: KKND
    Well, earlier it was easier for the Americans with the Su-27 and MiG-29A, they needed to turn on the radar in the capture mode, then the Americans also understood that the obstacle should be set

    Absolutely true, but even earlier ... at the stage of target detection and regardless of the choice of any of the 4 modes of operation of the RLPK-29E wink
  15. KKND
    KKND 23 September 2020 18: 47
    +3
    Quote: ancient
    Absolutely true, but even earlier ... at the stage of target detection and regardless of the choice of any of the 4 modes of operation of the RLPK-29E

    Does it make sense to include the interference at the detection stage? To just glow like that?
  16. ancient
    ancient 23 September 2020 20: 52
    +3
    Quote: KKND
    Does it make sense to include the interference at the detection stage?

    And at the stage of aiming and capturing at the ASC it will be too late ... "to drink Borjomi", especially on .. "slow-moving vehicles" with an operational Ny of about 3 g crying
  17. Crimean partisan 1974
    Crimean partisan 1974 23 September 2020 15: 50
    +3
    The impossibility of using passive seeker against moving radars is not connected with the magical presence of old technologies, but most likely with the fundamental absence of mathematical algorithms for such guidance ........ it is a pity that the developers of the IC seeker for MANPADS do not know them (these algorithms) for 60 years ... Radio waves, like Infrared, have one thing in common - these are electromagnetic waves only with different spectra, there are no problems with this and cannot be
  18. KKND
    KKND 23 September 2020 15: 57
    +3
    Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
    .. it is a pity that the developers of the IR seeker for MANPADS (these algorithms) do not know them for 60 years. Radio waves, like Infrared, have one thing in common - these are electromagnetic waves only with different spectra, there are no problems with this and cannot be

    Yes, here you are right, all explosive aircraft missiles, with IR, with active, with passive, radar seeker all have a common guidance method: the method of direct proportional navigation. Nevertheless, there is some oddity with the moving radars of aircraft, we are trying to figure it out, so far little is clear, very little is known. And about the lack of algorithms, I only put forward a hypothesis, I do not understand anything in the mathematical algorithms of navigation, I signed it below.
  19. KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 09: 52
    0
    Quote: zyablik.olga
    Seryozha went fishing. Will be back tomorrow.

    I will wait.
    Quote: zyablik.olga
    The capabilities of the avionics of combat fighters that can use the R-27 have increased significantly.
    Here is what they write about the R-27P in the magazine "NOZS":

    R-27 old rocket should have been replaced long ago by R-77. I think (not sure, but logically) it has long been discontinued due to a critical flaw in real air combat. Namely, the absence of an active radar seeker. But there is no such mode on the P-77 and even on the Amraam, and there is no such mode on the Aim-54C. Not at all anywhere.
    And in all kinds of magazines it is usually journalists who write, not the guys from TsAGI. And to squeeze an article is not even to "code" a complex model.
    I said, it's useless to measure who wrote what. You can ask a question on the simulator developer forum - this is my suggestion. Offer other more serious forums, I say not to offer paralay right away, they left not far from the topvar.
    You know, something tells me that real pilots flying in DCS would have noticed such a "jamb" as the absence of such a super-convenient operating mode would have noticed. Because its radar to include it is very fraught in air combat.
  20. Hexenmeister
    Hexenmeister 19 September 2020 10: 43
    +3
    You were told that we are talking about the R-27P rocket, just because someone hasn’t heard about it doesn’t mean that it is not there. And yet, look at the modern videos with Sukhoi, and you will see the R-27E there.
  21. KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 10: 52
    0
    https://www.ktrv.ru/production/voennaya_produktsiya/rakety_klassa_-vozdukh-vozdukh/rakety_r-27p1-_r-27ep1.html
    Here's a link for you, listener, you're ours.
    Advice: do not go where you do not need to go.
  22. Hexenmeister
    Hexenmeister 19 September 2020 13: 45
    +4
    Advisor, read your own links carefully! The "radio-emitting air targets" are directly indicated, so a missile with such a head can visit any air target (moving!), Emitting something in the operating range of the seeker.
  23. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 19 September 2020 10: 55
    +3
    Quote: KKND
    R-27 old rocket should have been replaced long ago by R-77.

    It should, only due to the fact that the production of the R-77 was transferred to Ukraine, after the well-known events, the supply of these missiles was disrupted. Until now, our main medium-range aviation missile is the R-27.
  • ancient
    ancient 22 September 2020 18: 31
    +4
    Quote: Bongo
    The Kh-31P may well operate on naval radars. There are no obstacles to this.

    Absolutely true for sea and land ... in short, for any radiation sources, but only with the presence of an overhead or built-in control equipment that provides target designation of the missile seeker - containers "Phantasmagoria" and "Ethnography" "Progress" and "Sych" wink
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 20 September 2020 12: 56
    +1
    Quote: Bongo
    The ear was normal, I ate it.

    Well, half of the meat, half of the fat. Although now we have a cheap stew of what is
  • Bongo
    19 September 2020 07: 31
    +3
    Quote: KKND
    Still, China is still far from competing with us in the arms markets.

    In what ways they cannot compete with us?
    1. KKND
      KKND 19 September 2020 07: 37
      +2
      Well, we still have good connections, and our customers love us for our "good" loans. Then I would still argue that in the air defense system we are technologically ahead of the Chinese, dumping at the price still loses in the market to "quality" as a rule.
      1. Bongo
        19 September 2020 07: 47
        +5
        Quote: KKND
        Well, we still have good connections, and our customers love us for our "good" loans.

        Loans don't solve everything, some countries are buying Chinese weapons in an effort to forge ties with a growing China. As for the "technological level", the Chinese developers and manufacturers are stepping on our heels. Now the PRC has a whole range of its own anti-aircraft systems. In addition, as I wrote above, in the PRC, high-tech military products are completely manufactured from their parts and components. Do you know how we are doing with this?
        Speaking about "quality", it is difficult for me to judge how solidly the Chinese air defense systems are made, but from a source that is absolutely trustworthy, I can say that the build quality of the J-11 in Shenyang is higher than our fighters in Komsomolsk.
        1. Lexus
          Lexus 19 September 2020 18: 49
          +3
          hi Sergey, thank you! Great article. The only pity is that there is no reason for joy.
  • ancient
    ancient 22 September 2020 17: 53
    +6
    Quote: KKND
    There are no missiles targeting moving radars.

    Come on..... belay belay belay and where did the R-27P and R-27EP and their "export versions" go?
    And on the ground radar ... belay Where have the X-58, X-58U and the new "brainchild" - X-58USHKE suddenly gone?
    Quote: KKND
    older people told me that the Chinese beef stew, which China paid for the Su-90 in the 27s,

    Then I tell you again ... it ... this Chinese pork stew was ... in my memory ALWAYS (early 60s) and ... somewhere in the 90s. Very tasty, especially with fried potatoes good

    Beef was extremely rare, and it tasted like ... cotton wool with soy wassat
    For Su-shki they usually took "down jackets" bully
  • KKND
    KKND 19 September 2020 07: 49
    +1
    Quote: Bongo
    Do you know how we are doing with this?

    The main problem there is not even the element base, but the fact that all machines are imported.
    1. Bongo
      19 September 2020 07: 54
      +3
      Quote: KKND
      The main problem there is not even the element base, but the fact that all machines are imported.

      This is not even worth talking about. Okay, means of production, we have many components, in particular the element base of imported production.
      1. KKND
        KKND 19 September 2020 07: 58
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        Okay, means of production, we have many components, in particular the element base of imported production.

        Yet in industry, the means of production are much more important than finished products, oddly enough. The Americans partially brought production to China, but they produce and push their machines. They even managed to get involved in defense plants in their “fat years.” Father works.
        1. Bongo
          19 September 2020 08: 05
          +7
          Quote: KKND
          Yet in industry, the means of production are much more important than finished goods, oddly enough.

          The problem is that our defense industry is highly dependent on the supply of foreign-made components. We do not produce a number of electronic components at all.
          1. Vladimir61
            Vladimir61 19 September 2020 13: 00
            +4
            I read the article and all the comments with interest. Liked. But, there was a keen interest - who became the owner of the 15-year-old Koktebel cognac?
            1. Bongo
              21 September 2020 14: 27
              +4
              Quote: Vladimir61
              I read the article and all the comments with interest. Liked. But, there was a keen interest - who became the owner of the 15-year-old Koktebel cognac?

              Alas, everyone remained unconvinced. Unfortunately, there is no real evidence in the public domain. request It turned out to be a "combat draw" ...
  • TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 19 September 2020 12: 49
    -5
    So far, China can compete with Russia, only in one parameter - cost. So it's a weapon for the poor. There is no substitute for the school of rocket science and instrumentation. Stolen secrets are good, up to a certain level.
  • Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 25 September 2020 14: 17
    -3

    China has created its own design and engineering school, capable of independently solving the problems of creating high-strength materials, rocket fuels, radar equipment and control systems.

    And then in the article the author himself breaks this point of view.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 27 September 2020 14: 04
      0
      Quote: Sckepsis
      And then in the article the author himself breaks this point of view.

      Only in your imagination. No.