Thread 64181156

>Chinese missile defense

No wonder their HQ-9 completely failed in Pakistan to defend Vs Indian missiles

>Youtube OP image
So this is a chinese falseflag thread then.

YT slop aside the Chink being sneaked in is sending my sides

Peak Implessive

>>64181156 (OP)
>HQ-9 completely failed in Pakistan to defend Vs Indian missiles
I'm starting to think literally nothing was destroyed in that conflict, just Indian, Paki, and Chinese shills lying about shit.

>>64181166
We have pictures of entire paki airbases being destroyed

>>64181173
Pics please?

>>64181176
Check X. There's a reason why Pakistan surrendered so easily

>>64181180
>Check X
So zero Paki airbases were destroyed then, got it.

>>64181184
>Wanting to be spoonfed

Fuck off newfag

Now that I actually look into it, don't the Changs have anything more than HQ-9s and CWIS for their missile defense? A Burke has 25mm chain/20mm Phalanx CWIS, SeaRAM CWIS, ESSMs, SM-3s, and SM-6s which can double as offensive ASCMs. What the fuck are the Changs gonna do when they have to intercept a combined strike?

>>64181191
>provides no backing to his arguments
>gets called out for it
>buttmad

>>64181192
Their best AD is the H-9C, which is a improved copy of the S-300PMU2.

>>64181156 (OP)
I don't think chink naval air defenses can defend against the Brahmos or JASSM.

>>64181208
>Initial tests were reportedly conducted around 2018–2020, with full operational capability (FOC) anticipated by 2026–2028.

Jesus Christ so they will be operational just in time to meet Block IB SM-6s and C-3 LRASMs. Shouldn't they be doing something more to stop being a glass cannon?

>>64181192
They have a RAM/SeaRAM analogue which is better than just gun CIWS, but like you said this pales in comparison to the Burke's air defense loadout, or other Western surface combatants for that matter.
If I had to guess it's a Soviet-like strategy to focus on offense to get as many surface attack missiles into the air before their own ships are inevitably sunk. This would also explain the nearly nonexistent compartmentalization of munitions/fuel and poor facilities for damage control.

>>64181156 (OP)
Too many hypersonics types to choose from to fill in those VLS is a big problem

>>64181191
>can't post an image he claims exists on an imageboard
good morning!

>>64181200
Not OP, but it is easy to find images:
https://www.newsweek.com/satellite-images-damage-pakistan-air-base-nur-khan-india-strike-2070833

>>64181245
>doing something more
That was what the trannie wave was for. Recruitment was way down, DEIs were tanking companies, intelligent employees driven out and replaced by morons, politicians bribed and so on and so on.

>>64181397
This is so tiresome...

>>64181397
Why would you post something using images that aren't even slightly convincing

>>64181191
>t. 2016 """""""""oldfag"""""""""
You're a stupid nigger

>>64181565
>some trucks destroyed
Why are jeets so pathetic?

>>64181704
Those are the SAM systems, not ordinary trucks

>>64181767
Are you still trying to push that the image is not (blatantly) shooped?