The views expressed in this post are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Open Nuclear Network or any other agency, institution or partner.
Summary
- Chiang Kung is an anti-ballistic missile (ABM) with a reported maximum interception altitude of around 70 km (below the exo-atmospheric boundary of ~100 km), complementing Taiwan’s lower defence layer (approximately 30 km interception altitude[1]), which consists of Patriot PAC-3/PAC-3 MSE and Tien Kung-3.
- Local media reports suggest that initial procurement of Chiang Kung systems is likely to be included in the 2026 defence budget. The future deployment of the Chiang Kung would allow Taiwan to field a layered ballistic missile defence with expanded upper endo-atmospheric coverage and enhanced radar redundancy, enhancing overall defence posture.
- The missile followed a relatively simple, low-cost design philosophy to strike a balance between performance, development complexity and production cost.
Chiang Kung ABM: an overview
Naming, size and layout
Taiwan’s National Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology (NCSIST) initiated the development of an enhanced Tien Kung-3 anti-ballistic missile (also referred to as the Chiang Kung, meaning Strong Bow) in 2014, soon after the completion of the Tien Kung-3’s development. The enhanced Tien Kung-3 reportedly passed initial combat evaluations in February 2023. Although a control list of military items released by the Ministry of National Defense in July 2024 referred to the enhanced Tien Kung-3 as the Tien Kung-4, the missile was called the Chiang Kung at its first public debut at the Taipei Aerospace and Defense Technology Exhibition (TADTE). According to the 2024 control list, the Chiang Kung is significantly larger than the Tien Kung-3 (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The Chiang Kung missile is significantly larger than its predecessor, the Tien Kung-3. Images: MNA, PTS
The Chiang Kung consists of a large booster and a kill vehicle (second stage) powered by a sustainer rocket motor. The exact dimensions of the Chiang Kung missile are unknown. Using the disclosed length of the Chiang Kung missile canister (Figure 1) and the diameter of the Tien Kung-3 as two rough references,[2] estimated dimensions of the Chiang Kung missile are given in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Approximate dimensions and layout of the Chiang Kung missile. Image: UDN
The overall layout of the Chiang Kung appears similar to that of Israel’s Arrow-2 interceptor. However, unlike Israel’s Arrow-2, which reportedly uses both infrared and active radar seekers for terminal guidance,[3] Chiang Kung solely relies on an active radar seeker in terminal engagement. This difference might explain the relatively rounded shape of Chiang Kung’s radome, which possibly leaves room for a relatively large seeker antenna and a higher degree of freedom of movement (Figure 3).
Figure 3. A comparison between the Chiang Kung and the Arrow-2 interceptors. Inset: debris of an Arrow-2 kill vehicle showing one of its infrared sensors. Images: NCSIST, Missilery, OSMP
Increase in guidance precision
Visual inspection of the exhibited missile revealed no external antennas or optical windows for a proximity fuse,[4], indicating that the Chiang Kung must keep its target within its seeker’s field of view until the last moment. This is different from the Tien Kung-3, which has a dedicated radar proximity fuse (Figure 4) to allow detonation when missile and target cross each other (Figure 5).[5]
Figure 4. Radar proximity fuse antennas on Tien Kung-3 missile. Image: MDC
Figure 5. Proximity fuse allows warhead detonation when the missile’s seeker loses contact with the target at the final moment of engagement (Left). Without a proximity fuse, Chiang Kung must keep its target within its seeker’s field of view to trigger warhead detonation at close range (Right). Images: Tech Digest, NCSIST
This difference indicates an increase in guidance precision and manoeuvrability, enabled by Chiang Kung’s combined-attitude control system (aerodynamic control surfaces plus thrust vector control nozzles). Reportedly, this system not only ensures the missile’s manoeuvrability in a very thin atmosphere at high altitude, but also enables engagement against manoeuvring ballistic missiles.[6]
Despite this increase in guidance precision, the Chiang Kung apparently relies on shrapnel generated by a directional warhead to destroy its target, and is not designed as a hit-to-kill interceptor with a large warhead as a fail-safe.[7] [8] Nevertheless, with seeker-aligned directional fragmentation, the Chiang Kung is possibly more effective than the Tien Kung-3 in the destruction of ballistic targets (Figure 6).
Figure 6: A frame-by-frame sequence showing a Chiang Kung interceptor (yellow) engages an incoming target (red).[9]Images: NCSIST
Chiang Kung radar
The Chiang Kung radar is Taiwan’s first domestically developed active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and could reportedly better predict the interception point against ballistic missiles than previous models (Figure 7). According to information collected from the TADTE, the radar can be rotated to adjust its azimuth during setup, but is possibly not supposed to rotate during engagement.
Figure 7: Left: Three generations of long-range SAM engagement radars (Chang Bai, Tien Kung and Chiang Kung) seen at NCSIST Jiupeng base. Right: Chiang Kung radar displayed at TADTE in September 2025. Images: Taiwan ADIZ, MNA
NCSIST’s promotion video shows that (1) the tactical command vehicle of the Chiang Kung system appears quite similar to that of the Tien Kung-3, and (2) one command vehicle could process radar data from both the Chiang Kung engagement radar and the Tien Kung-3 engagement radar. These two points suggest that the Chiang Kung system can be integrated into existing Tien Kung-3 batteries. In this possible arrangement, the Chiang Kung would provide missile defence facing the main direction of threats at a higher altitude and longer range, while Tien Kung-3 missiles would provide a lower-altitude, 360-degree coverage.
Design philosophy: a comparison
Information revealed at the TADTE point to a technical evolution from the Tien Kung-3 to the Chiang Kung: The latter adopted new elements where necessary to reach higher altitude and to meet manoeuvrability requirements, while keeping the Tien Kung-3’s old elements (active radar seeker and directional warhead). This evolution not only reduces resources for research and development, but also minimises complexity and eases production.
In comparison, interceptors designed as hit-to-kill vehicles (such as the Patriot PAC-3) largely eliminated the need for a warhead, significantly reducing their weight and size. These interceptors could also theoretically ensure total destruction in the event of a direct hit. However, such compact hit-to-kill interceptors normally would require a dedicated reaction control module (Figure 8) to meet the endgame agility necessary for a direct impact, increasing complexity and potentially driving up production cost.
Figure 8: Mock-ups of HHQ-9C shipborne interceptors displayed during a September 2025 parade in Beijing, People’s Republic of China. A dedicated reaction control section consisting of multiple mini solid rocket thrusters (painted in red), along with the missile’s small size, point to the possibility that the HHQ-9C might be primarily a hit-to-kill interceptor. With a two-stage design, the HHQ-9C likely has an interception altitude higher than that of the US Patriot PAC-3. Image: CCTV
Should Taiwan further develop an exo-atmospheric (roughly 100 km and above) interceptor, the NCSIST might not be able to continue Chiang Kung’s current design philosophy, because (1) the booster required to bring a kill vehicle armed with a heavy warhead into the exo-atmosphere may be too large, and (2) infrared signatures emitted from targets are more discernible in the exo-atmosphere (space), making an infrared seeker more suitable for terminal guidance. These two considerations suggest that the NCSIST might change to an infrared hit-to-kill vehicle for its future exo-atmospheric interceptor (Figure 9).[10]
Figure 9. Reaction control modules, with divert nozzles and side thrusters respectively, showcased by NCSIST in 2017. Neither module appears in production variants, reportedly to reduce complexity and production cost. Image: acewings.com
[1] Patriot PAC-3 MSE maximum interception altitude is deducted from the schematic diagram of PAC-3’s engagement envelopes. It is often reported that the maximum interception altitude of the Tien Kung-3 stands at 45 km. However, considering that the Tien Kung-3 missile solely relies on aerodynamic control surfaces, it remains to be seen if it could effectively manoeuvre in a very thin atmosphere at high altitude. Quoting an unnamed source, the Liberty Times claimed that the Tien Kung-3’s “effective interception altitude” is actually around 24 to 26 km.
[2] As the Chiang Kung missile was developed on the basis of the Tien Kung-3, the first reference used is the 40 cm diameter of the forebody of the Tien Kung-3 , on the assumption that the forebody of Chiang Kung’s kill vehicle (the only part that, in appearance, resembles the Tien Kung-3) has the same diameter. The diameter of the Tien Kung-2/3 missile can be deducted from an article on Taiwan’s sounding rockets, See: 科學發展月刊 [Science Development Monthly], No. 542, February 2018, p. 7, Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan. The second reference used is the reported length of the Chiang Kung missile canister, mentioned in the control list of military items released by the Ministry of National Defense in July 2024 (Also see Figure 1).
[3] While official information on the Arrow-2 is vague, some sources claim that the Arrow-2 uses both the active radar seeker and infrared seeker for terminal guidance and warhead fusing.
[4] This can be confirmed because the missile displayed at the TADTE was not a mock-up, but a real one without warhead and solid propellant.
[5] TK-3 seeker also serves as a proximity fuse, which suggests that in ideal scenarios, Tien Kung-3’s directional warhead can be triggered by the active radar seeker. In case the seeker loses contact with the target at the final moment (as seen in Figure 5), the warhead will be triggered by the proximity fuse.
[6] In December 2023, a Legislative Yuan award was given to the director of NCSIST’s system development center for his role in the mass production of the Tien Kung-3 and the development of the Chiang Kung. During the awards ceremony, then Premier of the Executive Yuan Chen Chien-jen and then President Tsai Ing-wen stated that the enhanced Tien Kung-3 (Chiang Kung) adopted, for the first time, a combined-attitude control system, to ensure the missile’s manoeuvrability in a very thin atmosphere at high altitude, enabling the missile to effectively counter manoeuvring ballistic missiles.
[7] At the TADTE, the NCSIST personnel described the Chiang Kung’s second stage as a kill vehicle (截殺載具) instead of kinetic kill vehicle (動能殺傷載具). When asked specifically if the Chiang Kung was designed as a hit-to-kill interceptor, NCSIST personnel only replied that the shrapnel from the directional warhead can be directed toward the incoming target.
[8] The Arrow-2 could not be a reliable reference in this regard, as the official information on the Arrow-2 is vague, while outside sources have contradicting claims. Considering the large size of the missile, the author tends to think that the Arrow-2 was not designed as a hit-to-kill interceptor.
[9] The still burning sustainer rocket motor left a smoke trail behind, while the target, already burnout after boost phase, no longer has a smoke trail. This is similar to Arrow-2’s interception footage.
[10] There are reports suggesting that the NCSIST is working on a Chiang Kung-2 interceptor with an interception altitude of around 100 km. However, there is no authoritative information regarding the Chiang Kung-2 programme.
