China Admits HQ-9B/HQ-16 Air Defence Systems Not Capable to Intercept India's BrahMos Missiles, Fueling Acute Pakistani Frustration

China Admits HQ-9B/HQ-16 Air Defence Systems Not Capable to Intercept India's BrahMos Missiles, Fueling Acute Pakistani Frustration


Reports surfacing on Chinese social media platforms suggest significant discontent within Pakistan regarding the performance of its Chinese-supplied HQ-9B and HQ-16 air defence systems.

This frustration has reportedly intensified following an admission by Chinese manufacturers that these systems are not designed to intercept advanced supersonic missiles like India's BrahMos, particularly after their perceived failure during a recent military engagement.

The concerns prominently arose after "Operation Sindoor," a reported India-Pakistan skirmish between May 7 and May 10, 2025. During this period, India is said to have launched precision strikes against terrorist locations and Pakistani military installations. These actions were in retaliation for a terrorist incident in Pahalgam that resulted in 26 civilian deaths.

Indian forces were described as using a variety of advanced weaponry, notably the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile. The BrahMos, a collaborative development between India and Russia, is known for its high speed (approaching Mach 3, or three times the speed of sound), low-altitude flight capabilities, and sustained destructive power through its final attack phase, presenting a significant challenge to air defence capabilities.

Pakistan's air defence infrastructure, which heavily relies on Chinese systems such as the long-range HQ-9B and the medium-range HQ-16, reportedly failed to detect or counter the incoming Indian missiles. This exposed critical vulnerabilities in Pakistan's defence shield.

Reports indicated that Indian strikes, which also involved French-made SCALP cruise missiles and Harop loitering munitions, successfully neutralized key Pakistani airbases and a Chinese-supplied YLC-8E anti-stealth radar system located in Chunian, Punjab. The inability of the HQ-9B and HQ-16 systems to counter these assaults has led to widespread criticism.

According to information circulating on Chinese online forums, Pakistani military officials have formally conveyed their dissatisfaction to the Chinese defence manufacturers. They highlighted the underperformance of the HQ-9B and HQ-16 systems in actual combat conditions.

The HQ-9B, marketed by China as a competitor to the American Patriot missile system with an engagement range of 250-300 kilometres, and the HQ-16, designed to intercept targets at low to medium altitudes up to 40 kilometres, were considered vital elements of Pakistan’s Comprehensive Layered Integrated Air Defence (CLIAD).

However, during the "Operation Sindoor," these systems were allegedly bypassed, subjected to electronic jamming, or destroyed by Indian forces employing sophisticated electronic warfare tactics and precision-guided weapons.

In response to these complaints, Chinese manufacturers reportedly clarified that the HQ-9B and HQ-16 air defence systems were not engineered to neutralize high-speed, low-flying missiles like the BrahMos, which maintains its Mach 3 velocity throughout its terminal phase.

Unlike some cruise missiles that may reduce speed or maneuverability in their final approach, the BrahMos's ramjet engine and relatively flat flight path make it exceptionally difficult to intercept.

This explanation, however, has reportedly not alleviated Pakistan's concerns, with some officials feeling that previous Chinese assertions about the systems' capabilities were misleading.

Reactions on Chinese social media have been varied. Some commentators defended the Chinese systems, suggesting that operational errors and insufficient training on the Pakistani side were to blame, rather than inherent flaws in the military hardware.

Conversely, others expressed dismay, pointing out that the systems' failures have negatively impacted China's reputation as a dependable arms supplier. This is particularly significant as Pakistan sources approximately 82% of its defence imports from China, making it a crucial market for Beijing's defence industry.

The HQ-9B is a long-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) system intended to engage aircraft, cruise missiles, and tactical ballistic missiles. It is publicly stated to have a range of up to 300 kilometres and the capacity to engage multiple targets at once.

The HQ-16 (also known by its export designation LY-80) is a medium-range SAM, primarily designed to counter low-altitude threats such as cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles, with a stated range of 40 kilometres.

Both systems are integrated into Pakistan's air defence network and are supported by various radar systems, including the IBIS-150 and YLC-8E. They were promoted as capable of providing a robust shield against advanced aerial threats, including aircraft like India's Rafale jets and missiles such as the BrahMos.

However, the unique characteristics of the BrahMos missile – its high velocity, low-altitude trajectory, and manoeuvrability – appear to have proven too challenging for these Chinese systems. The missile's speed and flight path make it difficult for radar systems to achieve timely detection and tracking necessary for interception.

Furthermore, it is suggested that India's employment of Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) tactics, which could include radar jamming and the use of loitering munitions like the Israeli-origin Harop, likely incapacitated key elements of Pakistan's air defence network, thereby rendering the HQ-9B and HQ-16 ineffective.

An incident in March 2022, where an unarmed BrahMos missile inadvertently flew into Pakistani territory for 124 kilometres without being intercepted, had previously raised questions about the effectiveness of Pakistan's air defences. While Pakistani authorities claimed to have tracked the missile, no interception was attempted, highlighting potential gaps in their capabilities.

Analysts have also pointed out that the truck-mounted design of the HQ-16 and its dependence on separate guidance radar vehicles might restrict its mobility and operational effectiveness in challenging terrains, such as Pakistan's mountainous border regions.

The reported underperformance of the HQ-9B and HQ-16 systems carries broader implications for Pakistan's national defence strategy and China's position in the international arms market.

Pakistan has acquired nearly $20 billion worth of Chinese armaments, including J-10C and JF-17 fighter jets, PL-15 air-to-air missiles, and Wing Loong-II armed drones. The perceived failures during "Operation Sindoor" could represent a considerable setback for Beijing's ambitions as a major defence exporter.

Additional reports alleging that other Chinese systems, such as the PL-15 missile, failed to engage targets effectively and the YLC-8E radar was destroyed, have further deepened concerns about the reliability of Chinese military technology.

In light of these events, Pakistan is reportedly considering diversifying its sources for air defence systems. There is indicated interest in Turkish systems like the SİPER 1 and SİPER 2, which are claimed to offer enhanced radar and guidance capabilities, as well as greater resilience against electronic countermeasures. Such a move would signal growing dissatisfaction with Chinese-supplied systems.

For China, the public criticism on social media and the direct complaints from Pakistan present a challenge to its image as a credible alternative to Western and Russian arms suppliers.

The HQ-9B's comparison to the US Patriot system, which has seen documented operational successes in conflicts such as in Ukraine, is now being critically examined.

The perceived shortcomings of Chinese systems in Pakistan may also influence China's own air defence posture, as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) deploys similar technologies, including reportedly close to 300 HQ-9 variants, for its own national defence.
 
Pakistan aka Terroristan aka Toiletistan got fooled again and again by Junk weapons of china. Now JF17 got blasted, J10C got blasted, HQ9 series could not defend. So Master China made billions of dollars by selling these junk copies of weapons to fool Pakistan. 🙂
 
Chinese arms industry has taken a direct hit in all this mayhem as it's cant do a thing and costly western radar plus missile systems are out of budget of Pakistan so its total collapse,left or right , for manufacturer and user due to solid tech oriented doctrine here,that's us . Pakistan is good for fighting Taliban airforce now ,not us .
 
Last edited:
To intercept a missile, first it needs to be detected. The question is whether the so-called Chinese advanced radars detected BrahMos or not? The answer is NO, because its low altitude and terrain-hugging missile with Mach 3 speed cannot be detected, and the response time will be too less to defence. By the time radar detects and activates missile battery to respond, BrahMos would destroy it. Ha ha ha ha. China made Pakistan fools by giving outdated machines and used that money to build advanced weapons at home.
 
India missed a golden opportunity to strike Pakistan so hard that they could not recover. My simple question: Will Pakistan agree to a ceasefire if the situation were opposite? Never. This humanity, tolerance, mankind, and all other bullshit are only for Indians. This was an incomplete mission for gaining some votes in the election. 'Kom se kom Karachi to uda ke ate..wo bhi nehi kia'. Do Israel, US agree to a ceasefire if all this had happened to them? The US did not spare Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria after 9/11. This defensive approach of ours is responsible for the deaths of innocent Indians.
 
To intercept a missile, first it needs to be detected. The question is whether the so-called Chinese advanced radars detected BrahMos or not? The answer is NO, because its low altitude and terrain-hugging missile with Mach 3 speed cannot be detected, and the response time will be too less to defence. By the time radar detects and activates missile battery to respond, BrahMos would destroy it. Ha ha ha ha. China made Pakistan fools by giving outdated machines and used that money to build advanced weapons at home.
Only during the terminal phase. At the boost phase, the BrahMos requires high elevation. China might supply its large phased array radar (LPAR) tech to Pakistan as India buys OTR from Russia, which can track BrahMos from its boost and midcourse range. But if India can find a way to keep the booster altitude of BrahMos low, then it can beat the LPAR.
 
India missed a golden opportunity to strike Pakistan so hard that they could not recover. My simple question: Will Pakistan agree to a ceasefire if the situation were opposite? Never. This humanity, tolerance, mankind, and all other bullshit are only for Indians. This was an incomplete mission for gaining some votes in the election. 'Kom se kom Karachi to uda ke ate..wo bhi nehi kia'. Do Israel, US agree to a ceasefire if all this had happened to them? The US did not spare Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria after 9/11. This defensive approach of ours is responsible for the deaths of innocent Indians.
Yeah, at least their Karachi Port should have been obliterated. Their air power got crippled; else, they wouldn't be running to Trump for a ceasefire. But one problem with continuing war would have been Pakistan using MRBM and ICBM. Our BMD hasn't been inducted in several cities or completed its phase 2 and 3 to take those out. Once the full BMD is inducted in large numbers along with other systems, the war won't end until Balochistan and Sindh become separate nations.
 
Only Barak 8 can stop BrahMos because it was specially made to defend against P-800 Oniks, from which BrahMos is derived.
 
First time I support China. These systems are not designed for BrahMos because it's too fast to intercept. Not for Harop and other drones; they are too slow to intercept. Not for SCALP and other precision-guided bombs, because the requirement was not for these dumb bombs and missiles. And obviously not for missiles, because we are still testing the method to stop missiles. For the rest of the work, systems are uniquely designed, and if any problem persists, please call China customer care.
 
China is desperate to manage it's image in the area of arms exports market. This is the price we need to extract when they involve in other people's affairs.
 
Hehe. So India can intercept their Mach 3 Fatah but the Chinese can't intercept Mach 3 Brahmos. Fantastic.
 
But one problem with continuing war would have been Pakistan using MRBM and ICBM. Our BMD hasn't been inducted in several cities or completed its phase 2 and 3 to take those out.
Pakistanis keep thinking like they can act without consequences. There will be severe consequences. India does matching retaliation. The price they paid for failed Fatah launch is 85% of their air bases and 2 nuclear storage sites. Mind you it was an intercepted launch with no real damage to India. Imagine launching these ICBM against Indian cities. Pakistan will be completely wiped out of the map in minutes.

Pakistan has poor delivery systems. Their CEP for Fatah is about 150m. Pinaka, our cheapest rocket, has a CEP of 60m. Their systems are from the 90s. Their ability to land a hit - highly questionable. They can launch one missile, sure. But once they do, it's game over for them.
 
First time I support China. These systems are not designed for BrahMos because it's too fast to intercept. Not for Harop and other drones; they are too slow to intercept. Not for SCALP and other precision-guided bombs, because the requirement was not for these dumb bombs and missiles. And obviously not for missiles, because we are still testing the method to stop missiles. For the rest of the work, systems are uniquely designed, and if any problem persists, please call China customer care.
Funny thing, we intercepted their Mach 3 Fatah. They can't intercept our Mach 3 Brahmos. 🤡
 
China is desperate to manage it's image in the area of arms exports market. This is the price we need to extract when they involve in other people's affairs.
The Chinese are very good at marketing, and we are bad at it. The Chinese will keep creating false images. They have debt-trapped many countries. They will use that leverage and sell their shit systems and create the image. We need to have solid counter-strategies.
 
So PAF never care to read the product specification or even test the product and is now complaining.
 
Funny thing, we intercepted their Mach 3 Fatah. They can't intercept our Mach 3 Brahmos. 🤡
Both are different situations and can't be compared with each other. Our soldiers were awake on duty. They intercepted the missile and tweeted nothing. Pakistanis tweeted and went for a deep sleep.
 
India missed a golden opportunity to strike Pakistan so hard that they could not recover. My simple question: Will Pakistan agree to a ceasefire if the situation were opposite? Never. This humanity, tolerance, mankind, and all other bullshit are only for Indians. This was an incomplete mission for gaining some votes in the election. 'Kom se kom Karachi to uda ke ate..wo bhi nehi kia'. Do Israel, US agree to a ceasefire if all this had happened to them? The US did not spare Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria after 9/11. This defensive approach of ours is responsible for the deaths of innocent Indians.
I have different opinions. Maybe Pakistani defence was so weak that we felt something was fishy, and we took continuous decisions, and they used this time begging with the US and China.
 
Chinese air defence systems couldn’t counter SAAW and Rampage also, not just BrahMos. We need to soon get a minimum of 5 batteries of S-500 that will take out hypersonic missiles. Now Chinese are going to supply Pakistan with all kinds of hypersonic missiles like D-17 and others.
 
The Chinese are very good at marketing, and we are bad at it. The Chinese will keep creating false images. They have debt-trapped many countries. They will use that leverage and sell their shit systems and create the image. We need to have solid counter-strategies.
No marketing can match war performance.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
5,266
Messages
52,623
Members
3,432
Latest member
abm
Back
Top