Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!

Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up Log in

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dalvinder Singh Grewal" data-source="post: 226633" data-attributes="member: 22683">Multiple reports confirmed the failure of Pakistan’s Chinese-made HQ-9 air defence system to intercept Indian aircraft or missiles during the conflict. Indian forces effectively jammed and bypassed air defence units deployed around strategic sites. Operation Sindoor not only marked a decisive military and strategic win for India but also laid bare critical weaknesses in Pakistan’s military, particularly its heavy dependence on Chinese defence equipment. With nearly 82% of Pakistan’s defence imports sourced from China, the operation served as a real-world trial for Beijing’s weaponry—one that exposed major flaws when pitted against a combination of Indian and Western systems.Indian forces successfully struck and neutralized key Pakistani military and terror-related infrastructure, often bypassing or overwhelming Chinese-origin air defence platforms like the HQ-9. The Chinese-made system failed to intercept multiple Indian missile strikes, including those carried out with the BrahMos missile.Reports also point to underperformance or outright failure of other Chinese systems during the operation—from PL-15 air-to-air missiles and J-10C fighter jets to naval frigates—leaving Pakistan’s defences compromised and unable to mount an effective response to India’s offensive.These combat failures have implications far beyond the subcontinent. The inability of Chinese weapons to perform under battlefield conditions has further damaged China’s already-fragile standing as a global arms exporter. Defence analysts argue that the outcome of Operation Sindoor confirms longstanding concerns about the quality and reliability of Chinese military equipment. The results are likely to worsen China’s declining arms exports, which have been dropping in recent years due to similar performance and quality issues.This credibility gap creates a strategic opportunity for other defence manufacturers—including India—to promote their own battle-tested and reliable systems in the global market.Multiple reports confirmed the failure of Pakistan’s Chinese-made HQ-9 air defence system to intercept Indian aircraft or missiles during the conflict. Indian forces effectively jammed and bypassed air defence units deployed around strategic sites. The underperformance of HQ-9 and other Chinese systems has raised significant doubts about their detection and interception capabilities, particularly against modern Indian and Western platforms.Chinese nationals reportedly voiced criticism on social media, attributing the HQ-9's failure to "inadequate training and operational inefficiencies on the Pakistani side."The PL-15, a Chinese beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile often compared to the American AIM-120D, also failed to meet expectations. Some reportedly missed their targets entirely or malfunctioned mid-flight. Indian officials even displayed fragments of a PL-15 missile recovered in Hoshiarpur, which landed without hitting anything—undermining Chinese claims about the missile’s effectiveness.While pro-Chinese media claimed successful hits by PL-15 missiles, these reports were "largely considered propaganda" and lacked independent verification.Marketed as a “carrier killer,” the Chinese-made CM-400AKG was easily detected by India’s Netra and AWACS platforms. Despite its high speed, the missile’s lack of stealth and limited terminal manoeuvrability made it highly vulnerable to jamming and spoofing.Pakistan deployed J-10C and JF-17 Block III fighter jets—both Chinese platforms equipped with PL-15 missiles—during the operation. However, they failed to significantly disrupt Indian airstrikes. Claims that these jets shot down multiple Indian aircraft, including Rafales, remain "unsubstantiated and unverified by independent sources." Notably, Pakistan has provided no physical evidence such as debris of downed Indian jets to support these claims.Many military analysts described the performance of these fighters as lack-lustre when faced with Indian aircraft, which included a mix of Western and Russian-origin platforms.</blockquote>

Verification