So basically you’re making unfounded statements which you cannot defend. Again.

China hasn’t bought more because they’re developing their own HQ-9 with S-300 technology. That is a cheaper method than buying numerous examples of the very expensive S-300 family. Plus, not even Russia covered their entire country with the S-300 system as again, it was expensive. Most of them are around Moscow, and suprise suprise, most of them in China are near Bejing. China has other SAM systems around the country for added defense, but really, they have no need for an overwhelming SAM network anyway.

India isn’t buying it because they don’t need it. They’ll work with the Arrow system eventually for missile defense, to remove the Pakistani nuclear deterrent, and they have the Mirage 2000 and Su-30MKI which would easily eliminate any air threats they might have to deal with.

How can you say that India does not need it. They have been facing numerous BM(solid fuel) with Nuclear delivery. They need the most and they are not buying it. Domestic does not mean that it is cheaper. Russian stuff of the shelf purchase is more cheaper. How many billions is needed to built engine comparable to RD-93 if there is no infrastructure already compare to $2.5M purchase price. And i can safely bet that if R&D cost is put that J-10 is more expensive than Flanker.

Where’s the technical evidence to back up that statement?

Technical is not there but logical is there. India is not buying it and China bought in small quantity compared to area defended.

For decades, air and missile defense systems like the Patriot and the S-300P have been susceptible to advanced techniques designed to confuse or immobile their interceptor missiles and keep them from reaching their targets. One of the most common jamming devices is S- and C-band airborne noise. If used properly, this and other deception mechanisms lead to what is known as the “suppression of enemy air defenses” and allows attacking aircraft and missiles to proceed to their targets without challenge

it is known that ADS-37 does not have this deficiency.

ok…. so according to YAHOO25 the system should be called ADS-37 😀

and just giving it a fancy name won’t make it as capable as the S-300pmu-1… 😀

I didnot gave it name it is official name but i disclosed it. 😉 . Regarding its quality it is much better system than pure russian stuff. Range is estimated at 150KM.

4/5 bilj is a problem? You think they will get them today and pay them tomorrow? Your reason is not valid. If they were looking for same size Gripens then they can pay for this.

Read the quotation correctly. It states that those $2B are further than some other things. So there is no money for another fighter for next 5 years atleast.

it wont land in the hands of India, but the US could ask for a “close” look in Langley 😉

Pak China weopons are India specific and there is no evidence of any landing into western hands which will compromise its effectiveness against India.
J-10 due to cost alone is the reason not PAF buying it. It will cost $4 to $5B.
So no J-10 for atleast 5 years. On the other hand India should worry more about ADS-37. Which is comparable to S300PMU-1 with input from Patroit technology from Saudis.

Pakistan is expected to spend a further $1.5-2 billion on military modernisation over the next five years, with the bulk of this on Chinese equipment, such as Chengdu JF-17 fighter and K-8 trainer aircraft.

his IP is located in Beijing some where.

It takes years to operationalize S-300 type system effectively. China has spent a decade on it so they have found the operational value.

http://www.cast.ru/main/index.php?m=0&d=139&lang=1

Like Germany for the Soviet Union, Russia for China is a major but not one and only partner in its efforts to upgrade its Armed Forces. MTC with the West was quite productive throughout the 1980s and continues on a smaller scale even though in most spheres it was frozen after the 1989 developments in Tiananmen square. Partnership with Israel and also the acquisition of dual-use technologies in cooperation with major American and European companies play an extremely important role for advancing the Chinese defense industry. For instance, the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee led by Rep. Christopher Cox discovered that in May 1997 U.S. Loral Space & Communications that launches its satellites with Chinese launch vehicles transferred technical information to China permitting PLA to significantly raise the reliability of its DF-5 (CSS-4) ICBM and DF-4 (CSS-3) long-range ballistic missiles.

“Like the USSR in the 1930s China today is trying to combine technologies collected from different sources in one weapon. For instance, it is believed that the promising HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system design combines solutions applied by Russian S-300PMU (SA-10 Grumble) and U.S. Patriot surface-to-air missiles “