| System Name | HQ-20 |
| Manufacturer | China Aerospace Science & Technology Corp. |
| Country of Origin | China |
| Type / Role | Long-Range Surface-to-Air Missile System |
| In Service | Limited / Development Phase |
| Year Introduced | 2020s (Estimated) |
| Unit Cost | Estimated USD 1.5–2 Billion per Battery |
| Maximum Engagement Range | 250–300 km |
| Maximum Engagement Altitude | 30+ km |
| Target Types | Aircraft, Ballistic Missiles, UAVs, Stealth Targets |
| Interception Probability | Not Disclosed |
| Reaction Time | 8–12 seconds |
| Radar Detection Range | 300–450 km |
| Missile Type | HQ-20 Interceptor Missile |
| Missile Length | Estimated 6–7 m |
| Missile Weight | Estimated 1,200–1,500 kg |
| Warhead Type | High-Explosive Fragmentation |
| Warhead Weight | Estimated 150–200 kg |
| Speed | Mach 5+ (Estimated) |
| Radar Type | AESA Long-Range Radar |
| Radar Name | Undisclosed (Likely Type 415 or Derivative) |
| Detection Range | 300–450 km |
| Tracking Capacity | 100+ Targets |
| Guidance System | Active Radar Homing + Command Guidance |
| Fire Control System | Integrated Digital Battle Management |
| Launcher Type | Mobile / Truck-Mounted |
| No. of Missiles per Launcher | 4 |
| Reload Time | 30–45 minutes |
| Mobility Platform | 10x10 Heavy Military Truck |
| Crew Required | 3–5 personnel |
| C2 System | Integrated Air Defense Network |
| Connectivity | Secure Military Datalink |
| Network Capability | Yes |
| Operation Mode | Autonomous / Networked |
| Primary Operator | China |
| Combat Proven | No |
| Conflict History | None |
| Notable Feature | Long-range strategic interception capability |
The HQ-20 represents China’s next generation of long-range air and missile defense technology, developed to counter advanced threats including stealth aircraft, ballistic missiles, and high-altitude surveillance platforms. Positioned as a strategic counterpart to the U.S. THAAD and Russian S-500, the HQ-20 aims to extend China’s layered air defense network with improved interception range and multi-domain targeting.
Manufactured by the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), the HQ-20 is engineered to fill capability gaps between the HQ-9B and future hypersonic interceptors. Designed for operations within China’s Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy, the system enhances long-range precision engagement and boosts deterrence against fifth-generation aircraft and medium-range ballistic missiles.
The HQ-20 is believed to incorporate active radar homing, two-stage solid-fuel propulsion, and advanced datalink integration, enabling mid-course updates and improved terminal engagement accuracy. Estimates suggest a maximum engagement range of 250–300 km and interception altitudes surpassing 30 km. Its AESA-based radar suite provides wide-area surveillance, high-resolution target tracking, and resilience against jamming.
The system reportedly integrates with China’s dual-band early warning radars and space-based sensors, enabling precision tracking of stealth platforms and high-speed airborne threats. With a multi-launch truck-mounted configuration, the HQ-20 is optimized for rapid deployment and mobility across diverse terrain.
Though exact performance remains classified, defense analysts consider the HQ-20 a major step toward expanding China’s strategic air defense coverage and countering next-generation aerial threats.
The HQ-20 is not available for export and is currently exclusive to the Chinese military. As such, there is no official price for the United States, but defense analysts estimate that a complete battery—if hypothetically sold—could exceed USD 1.5–2 billion, depending on radar suites and missile loadout.
China’s closest equivalent to the U.S. MIM-104 Patriot system is the HQ-9 long-range surface-to-air missile (SAM). The HQ-9 provides comparable capabilities in targeting aircraft, cruise missiles, and some ballistic missile threats. Modern variants such as HQ-9B and HQ-9C offer improved range, radar performance, and enhanced anti-ballistic features.
While rankings vary by mission profile, many defense analysts consider the Russian S-500 Prometey and the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) among the strongest current systems.
S-500: Designed for intercepting ballistic missiles, hypersonic threats, and high-altitude targets.
THAAD: Provides advanced exo-atmospheric interception against ballistic missiles with proven combat performance.
No single system is universally “strongest,” as effectiveness depends on threat environment, radar network, and integration with national defense architectures.
China’s most advanced known air defense system is the HQ-20, a next-generation long-range SAM intended to counter stealth aircraft, ballistic missiles, and high-speed aerial threats. It is considered superior to the HQ-9 family in terms of engagement range, radar capability, and overall strategic value. For layered defense roles, the HQ-9B and HQ-22 remain widely deployed across the PLA.
Yes. China maintains a multi-layered missile defense network that includes long-range SAMs such as HQ-20 and HQ-9, mid-range systems like the HQ-16, and point-defense systems such as the HQ-17 and LD-2000. China is also developing early-warning radars, anti-ballistic interceptors, and space-based surveillance assets, indicating a growing strategic missile defense capability.
The information provided on TheDefenseWatch.com is for general informational purposes only. While we strive to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of our content regarding defense and aerospace products, technologies, and specifications, we cannot guarantee that all information is 100% accurate or up-to-date due to the evolving nature of military technology and classified data. TheDefenseWatch.com does not warrant the reliability, suitability, or availability of the information for any specific purpose. Users are advised to consult official sources, such as manufacturers, government publications, or defense agencies, for precise and verified data before making decisions based on our content. We are not affiliated with any defense manufacturers, governments, or military organizations mentioned. Opinions, reviews, and ratings reflect expert analysis but are subjective and should not be considered endorsements. TheDefenseWatch.com is not responsible for any errors, omissions, or consequences arising from the use of this website’s content. External links are provided for convenience and do not imply endorsement. TheDefenseWatch.com reserves the right to update or modify content without prior notice. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy & Cookies Policy.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More