Link below.I compiled a partial list of issues with Chinese weapons in service with several countries last year. Now observe how poorly Chinese air defense, ECM, drones & other equipmt performed in Pakistan.
Some folks got butthurt then & will probably do so again
Dr Saab, please post in the correct thread. I have moved your post to this thread.drnayar wrote: ↑21 May 2025 18:14 China has unveiled the HQ-9BE, an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed for global markets. Showcased at IDEX 2025, it features a 250 km range, Mach 4 speed, and superior anti-jamming capabilities. With multi-target engagement and seamless defense integration, the HQ-9BE strengthens China's presence in the air defense industry.
Unveiled by China.drnayar wrote: ↑21 May 2025 18:14 China has unveiled the HQ-9BE, an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed for global markets. Showcased at IDEX 2025, it features a 250 km range, Mach 4 speed, and superior anti-jamming capabilities. With multi-target engagement and seamless defense integration, the HQ-9BE strengthens China's presence in the air defense industry.
https://www.moneycontrol.com/world/jinp ... 05374.htmlgakakkad wrote: ↑30 Jun 2025 08:00 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... a-military
Multiple jernails (>30) fired. Wonder what's up . This is third such purge I know off in the last couple of years including the famous one in which water was used instead of raakit fuel .
prashantsharma wrote: ↑29 May 2025 22:44 Check out youtube channel ‘Lei’s Real Talk’ video called Power Shift in China : What Zhang Youxia’s rise reveals.
She says he was involved in guiding Pak during Op Sindoor.
Not sure about how reliable her intel and analysis has been in the past.
There are Some other interesting predictions / rumours in the video.
Just a month...lol. In our cheen threads, this has been going on for over a decade.prashantsharma wrote: ↑01 Jul 2025 14:23 This channel had been talking about a major power struggle for a month plus.
The Chinese "S-400 competitor" turned out to be weak
Pakistan is dissatisfied with the performance of the HQ-9B complex, which was advertised in China as "more advanced than the Russian Triumph."
Local conflicts, such as the Indo-Pakistani war, are often particularly interesting because of these duels, where systems that were competing in peacetime find themselves on the front lines against each other. The Chinese anti-aircraft missile system, like the S-400, is based on the Soviet S-300PM system.
The first models were presented in the early 1990s, and since then, several modifications have been developed, each more advanced than the last. The latest model, with the letter "B" and an integrated AESA radar and digital combat control system, was introduced by the Chinese in 2021. It was positioned as a "more advanced competitor to the S-400," although the Chinese were the first to acquire the "Triumfs" and are now using them in the most critical areas. But what can not be said for the sake of marketing.
Many countries were quite satisfied with this relatively inexpensive alternative, and it has recently become one of the most exported high-tech products from China's military-industrial complex.
Pakistan acquired the HQ-9B in 2021. Its combat debut took place during the brief conflict in May. However, it was a bit of a misfire. The system managed to intercept some of the French SCALP-EG cruise missiles launched by the Rafales, but it was completely ineffective against the Russian-Indian BrahMos missiles, which caused significant damage to Pakistan's rear airfields.
Shortly after the end of the conflict, Islamabad requested more advanced HQ-19 systems from Beijing, and tried not to even discuss the operation of the HQ-9B. However, it is now revealed that behind this conspiracy of silence lay a deep disappointment with one of China's top air defense systems.
Pakistanis on military forums complained that the complex is highly susceptible to electronic warfare systems, and its missiles require constant target illumination, which in turn quickly attracts enemy anti-radar missiles.
At least one full battery protecting the key Nur Khan airbase was destroyed by Indian Rudram-1 anti-radar missiles. The Pakistani military also complained that the HQ-9B could only shoot down subsonic cruise missiles, even though the advertisement promised that all missiles, including hypersonic and quasi-ballistic missiles, would be shot down.
This example once again proves that the original is always better than a copy, especially when the developer of that copy uses the original Russian Triumph for their own urgent needs, as does the PRC in the Taiwan Strait area.
https://dzen.ru/b/aGaheWrcjGIpP8Mz
According to Lt. Gen P R Shankar (retd), India has no official document or stmt that says Tibet is part of China. During 2003 ABV and chinese agreed to do trade by enabling two locations one in Tibet side close to India and the other is in India close to Tibet border. That is it. So commerce was enabled btwn China and India using a ground based system.
The whole world will turn against India. What is the casus belli that India can simply attack Chinese positions in Tibet?bala wrote: ↑08 Jul 2025 08:15 // Personally I feel that India should use post Sindoor to take away 100-200+ km of Tibet and solve all of India's immediate issues with China. If possible take out Lhasa. India can suppress HQ-9B or whatever after SEAD/DEAD, the PLA are sitting ducks. A rainshower of brahmos (which they cannot intercept) on their key assets and Tibet falls to India.
Very sharp observation. That means there are no american nukes or anything that Americans have control over at NKB.
Good question. When the deputy chief of IA Lt. Gen Rahul Singh said that China was giving full support (live feed of Indian positions) to Pak in Sindoor for the Pahalgam murder, do you need any more reasons than that? India can instigate the Tibetans to revolt and then to support the cause take out PLA positions. BTW PLA is not in a position to fight, they have told Emperor many times. Tibet was forcibly taken by the Chinese in the 1950s, a territory never theirs in their own ancient maps.
Are we 100% sure about this?
Manish ji, the agreement signed between China and India in 2003 by ABV does not carry any legal binding on either country. It is not an international Treaty. If China persistently fails to appreciate India’s sensibilities in the POK and other border areas, India is free to raise Tibet issue any time.Manish_P wrote: ↑09 Jul 2025 06:59 Are we 100% sure about this?
We should not be caught out unless we are sure
After ABV there was congress sarkar with agreements and MOUs signed... Some which are not yet revealed to the public.
In any case GoI needs to publicly declare that we support freedom of Tibet. Rest follows from there...
True. This (appointment of successor) is a hot topic and an opportunity, Bala sir.
