There are reportedly several anti-stealth radar systems in existance.
The VERA/VERA-E system, I believe that this is from the Czech Republic (I cant be sure from memory though). A few years back there were rumours that the chinese had attempted to obtain the system but the US had stepped in and brought it on the condition that it was not sold to another nation.
In the Ukraine there is reportedly a system called Kolchuga (spelling probably wrong) which is able to detect stealth aircraft. It is apparently similar to the VERA system.
Russia is said to have 2 radar systems capable of tracking stealth aircraft.
What degree of stealth technology these systems are capable of tracking is unknown but one must assume that they were initially intended with the F-117 and B-2 in mind.
There is a very interesting thread about this at ACIG.
It has been claimed that F-117s have been tracked using mobile phone technology including the one shot down over Yugoslavia, I have my doubts about this and the claim made by some that china has developed its own stealth tracking radar.

You have been told repeatedly that the S-400 system exists and evidence has been presented to prove as such. Noerpers rantings are boring and pathetic and he refuses to aknowledge much of what has been put in front of him.

So you think a medium range missile desighned with a range of 120kms hit a target at 327km? Yet this range does not prove any long range capabilitys in your opinion?
Do you not use common sense.
All the evidence was presented for you in the last thread so I will not present it again.

:rolleyes: becouse western weapon systems never get delayed :rolleyes:

we can just about make out the rear, the booster assembly looks incredibly similar to that of Babur.

I do not dislike the Gibbs and Cox desighn and I certainly do not harbour anti-american sentiment, I just realy feel that the F100 would be the better option for australia, less risk being the main reason (four units already being built for spain) whilst the Gibbs and Cox desighn is an evoltuion of the Burke, it is still effectively a different vessel. And the F100 still has Aegis. My argument is rather flimsy so I wont protest too much.
I think the G and B desighn would be a good option for Taiwan if they realy want an Aegis DDG.
Does anybody have any realy good info or pictures of the G and B desighn?

The picture I was reffering to, is the picture in the link posted by harry. Reposted below,

http://www.sinodefence.com/missile/tactical/lacm_gallery1.asp

The wings can be seen and are almost identical to that of the Babur, or though I will concede that we cannot see the tail or the inlet. The reason I believe that this weapon is not the sole product of pakistan is that pakistan has yet to demonstrate any form of technological level required to produce such a weapon, name me one indigenous high tech pakistani weapon, missile preferably that has not originally been brought from another country.
In future I would prefer it if you did not patronise me or criticise me for no paticular reason. I have not rejected everything you have said, and I am open to argument, but based on previous events I see virtually no way that pakistan could have developed this missile itself.

The Takwars arnt bad ships, good capability if a bit dated in some aspects, I think it would be a good decision on the part of the IN, like vikraal said, boost the numbers.