Libyan Galeb had landed when Rafale destroyed it.

No A2A that I’m aware of in Latin American – last one was Cenepa War in 1995. Could’ve been some shoot downs of civilian drug runners that I’m not aware off.

Also not aware on any African kills but could be same as Latin America.

Have updated for MiG-29 shootdown of UAV and Ethiopan Su-27 kills.

Poor MiG-29 stands as the only fighter to be shotdown in the 2000s.

In that case geopolitics may have very well played a large part in this deal, at least more than it says on surface

I suspect geo-politics did play a big role.

HQ-9 fits for Turkey – useable against all potential threats – Russia, Greece (US aligned and equipped) and Israel (US aligned and equipped).

I wouldn’t say that — because we don’t hear about all the instances US cyber-intelligence manage to hack into chinese systems either.

My point was from a political perspective. It looks bad if you sue someone because they managed to get your defence secrets and then turn it into a marketable program. The media loves this kind of stuff especially if it makes government look incompetent.

However it would be embarrassing if US put up a fuss after the chinese won a competition, because it would almost be like crying foul because your product lost in a fair* competition.

(*Fair meaning the cost, capability, and terms each vendor produced without bribery or coercion etc. Also, let’s not exaggerate the degree to which espionage may have benefitted various defence products — it’s not just a matter of ctrl c, ctrl v, you really need to know your s**t to pull anything useful from one product into your own, and it would require time as well, so even if China say creates a carbon copy of F-35 in 2020, that doesn’t say anything about US counter intelligence vigilance in 2020, but rather in the 2000s or maybe early 2010s.)

Totally agree.

Whatever the case, counter intelligence seems crtical to maintaining an edge.

Since the 1960s the Chinese have proven to be masters of reverse engineering. If they can turn that into developing technological leadership, then it could pose problems.

Mind you technological leadership means nothing without actual tactical and human resource leadership. As I always say, fancy toys are useless if you don’t know how to use them properly.

I think part of it was also price, and possibly favourable co production and tech exchange terms (as well as others? I wonder if backend economic incentives may have played a part?)

Anyway this sale does possibly indicate a turkey that is more willing to go out it alone beyond NATO — how integrated politically is turkey to NATO these days?

But this deal may still sour yet, I won’t light any cigars until the first FD-2000s in turkish colours enter service.

Turkey is definitely shifting East wards. They’re rebranding themselves as a Muslim country and not a secular country. I guess that’s what happens when EU won’t let you into their decripit little playground.

The other issue is Cyprus and its potential oil-gas reserves which the American aligned Israel is working at getting, regardless of Turkey’s wishes.

It’ll be interesting in future as more chinese products compete with western and russian peers, if they try to make a case for IP infringement.

It would be embarassing for Americans as it would show their counter-intelligence services to be useless and incapable of stopping Chinese spying efforts.

Turkey has selected HQ-9 over Patriot PAC-3 after thorough evaluation. HQ-9 is one of the most advanced and capable air defense missiles in the world, and operates with HT-233 phased array air defense radar. Taiwan better watch out.

At least the US and co will be able to have a look to see what makes HQ-9s tick.

It’s an interesting choice though.

Are Turkish HQ-9s different to Chinese ones? Selling one of your main AD systems to a country in a strong alliance with your main enemy seems like a risky proposition unless it’s a downgraded system.

And even if downgraded, you’re still giving a lot away in terms of intel.