PAF SAM based Air Defense System - News, Discussion & Updates

One thing I don't understand is why the FD-2000 was purchased which was already a legacy system in 2020 especially when the Airforce acquired HQ-9B barely 2 years later.

I guess the logic was that PLAs HQ-9 missile inventory could be drawn upon if needed but was it worth considering the HQ-9B is so much better.
 
Toxic said:
One thing I don't understand is why the FD-2000 was purchased which was already a legacy system in 2020 especially when the Airforce acquired HQ-9B barely 2 years later.

I guess the logic was that PLAs HQ-9 missile inventory could be drawn upon if needed but was it worth considering the HQ-9B is so much better.
Click to expand...
It wasn't legacy back then (and arguably still isn't), HQ-9BE/FD-2000B started being advertised in 2021. PA also probably wasn't interested in greater than 125 km range.
 
Princeps said:
It wasn't legacy back then (and arguably still isn't), HQ-9BE/FD-2000B started being advertised in 2021. PA also probably wasn't interested in greater than 125 km range.
Click to expand...
It's equivalent of buying a PS4 in 2019 then the PS5 comes out a year later, also it makes zero sense for the Army to have HIMADs in the first place.

Sure it might not be a legacy system like the S-300 for example but it does feel a bit inadequate when compared to the B variant.
 
Toxic said:
It's equivalent of buying a PS4 in 2019 then the PS5 comes out a year later, also it makes zero sense for the Army to have HIMADs in the first place.

Sure it might not be a legacy system like the S-300 for example but it does feel a bit inadequate.
Click to expand...
Yeah honestly our AD procurement has been extremely weird. For a long time, the best thing PAF had was SPADA 2000, meanwhile PA was operating HQ-16s and HQ-9s.

Furthermore, both Spada 2000 and HQ-16A were already outdated and mediocre when they were bought. PAF selected Spada 2000 over SL-AMRAAM and IRIS-T SL in competition, both far superior. While PA could have gotten something like LY-70, or CAMM-ER was also available by then. I am sure they had their reasons and constraints but still. HQ-9Ps is actually one of our better purchases lol.
 
Last edited:
Princeps said:
Yeah honestly our AD procurement has been extremely weird. For a long time, the best thing PAF had was SPADA 2000, meanwhile PA was operating HQ-16s and HQ-9s.

Furthermore, both Spada 2000 and HQ-16A were already outdated and mediocre when they were bought. PAF selected Spada 2000 over SL-AMRAAM and IRIS-T SL in competition, both far superior. While PA could have gotten something like LY-70, or CAMM-ER was also available by then. I am sure they had their reasons and constraints but still. HQ-9Ps is actually one of our better purchases lol.
Click to expand...
The botching started with the PA.

There was an opportunity for them to adopt the Spada 2000 right after the PAF. MBDA had even offered a variant designed for the Army's needs. Aside from a difference in range (25 km vs 40 km), the Spada 2000-Plus was also a SARH-based SAM like LY-80, but smaller (Aspide 2000-based).

With a PA order, I reckon Pakistan would've had enough to justify ToT, especially as MBDA was phasing out the Aspide line in favour of the CAMM.

Basically, we could've been manufacturing the Aspide 2000 from the early 2010s and, from there, build on the tech base with improved variants (e.g., IIR, ARH), learn the solid rocket motor tech, and improve from there.

The even better scenario would've been adopting the South African Umkhonto IR/R/CLOS across the tri-services for their dual-pulse rocket motor technology. From there, we could have been developing our own equivalents to the Turkish Hisar-series or CAMM by now.
 
Toxic said:
It's equivalent of buying a PS4 in 2019 then the PS5 comes out a year later, also it makes zero sense for the Army to have HIMADs in the first place.

Sure it might not be a legacy system like the S-300 for example but it does feel a bit inadequate when compared to the B variant.
Click to expand...
It makes zero sense for Army to have a lot of other things as well............but hey they still do.

Air Defence with advanced systems like HQ16/9 and any others, must be completely PAF domain, because it seriously affects direct PAF operations. It is better that PAF has full integrated view of battle for both offense and defense.

There is no reason for Army to have AD batteries.

The only systems they should have are the CUAS systems for their mobile infantry/armor units.

Large monitoring and defense of airspace should be completely PAF domain.
 
rafale said:
It makes zero sense for Army to have a lot of other things as well............but hey they still do.

Air Defence with advanced systems like HQ16/9 and any others, must be completely PAF domain, because it seriously affects direct PAF operations. It is better that PAF has full integrated view of battle for both offense and defense.

There is no reason for Army to have AD batteries.

The only systems they should have are the CUAS systems for their mobile infantry/armor units.

Large monitoring and defense of airspace should be completely PAF domain.
Click to expand...
No it does make sense for the Army to have mobile Shorads so they can give AD cover to ground formations that are on the move but definitely not anything more then that, the FAAZ SL program is exactly for that purpose.
 
Toxic said:
No I don't think we do, I think you mistaking HQ-16EV with FE
Click to expand...

PAF has been showing the HQ-16FE in its videos since at least 2024 (although I am unable to find that video on their channel, it is either from late 2023 or 2024)

This one is from April of 2025
688948052_1709443737170834_534699775111737874_n.jpg

And this one is from this year I guess, so are we really sure that they have zero operational HQ-16FE batteries right now?
pafecosystem.jpg
 
studsmart said:
how many HQ9B do we have
Click to expand...
I don't know but I think maybe 2 batteries of HQ-9B and 2 HQ-9Ps


aurelianpilled said:
PAF has been showing the HQ-16FE in its videos since at least 2024 (although I am unable to find that video on their channel, it is either from late 2023 or 2024)

This one is from April of 2025
View attachment 197405

And this one is from this year I guess, so are we really sure that they have zero operational HQ-16FE batteries right now?
View attachment 197404
Click to expand...
The FEs were ordered before the conflict so this is likely just a over enthusiastic media guy that was showing a system that wasn't in service yet.
 
Last edited:
aurelianpilled said:
PAF has been showing the HQ-16FE in its videos since at least 2024 (although I am unable to find that video on their channel, it is either from late 2023 or 2024)

This one is from April of 2025
View attachment 197405

And this one is from this year I guess, so are we really sure that they have zero operational HQ-16FE batteries right now?
View attachment 197404
Click to expand...

No FEs yet bro.
But they will be joining soon.

Also the YLC-8E has been a remarkable addition to our ADGE. We are also purchasing more of these.
 
aurelianpilled said:
PAF has been showing the HQ-16FE in its videos since at least 2024 (although I am unable to find that video on their channel, it is either from late 2023 or 2024)

This one is from April of 2025
View attachment 197405

And this one is from this year I guess, so are we really sure that they have zero operational HQ-16FE batteries right now?
View attachment 197404
Click to expand...
Can anyone eplain how the FD2000 is fiferent from HQ9 or HQ16? also didnt the Airforce have the HQ9P?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top