[DEV]PL-12 missile seeker problem

Based on authoritative Chinese information and interviews PL-12(SD-10)
The article of the deputy chief designer pointed out that the SD-10(Chinese official number: PLI 12) medium-range air-to-air missile has been the main combat equipment of the third generation aircraft in active service of the Chinese Air Force. thumbnail
It is a Russian 9B-1 103M active radar seeker introduced at the time of development.
In the 1990s, with the active radar-guided air-to-air missiles in developed countries, China also began to develop a new generation of masters
Moving radar guided air-to-air missile, 1997 China Air-to-air Missile Research Institute began to develop a new missile SD-10. Consider when
While the domestic technical base was still weak, the new missile was introduced with the Russian 9B-1 103M active radar seeker.
The 9B-1 103M is a new initiative developed by the Russian AGAT Institute to replace the R-77 first-generation 9B-1348 seeker
The radar seeker, which improves the signal processing power, the computer operation speed is provided to 50 million times/second, and the memory is improved to
64K, the detection distance has been increased from 16 kilometers to about 25 kilometers, and the mechanical gyroscope of the latter has been replaced by a fiber optic gyroscope
Rapid warm-up allows the missile to quickly complete the transition from ready state to launch state.

It follows that the active radar boot of the PL-12 missile should be changed to 25 km instead of 16 km

Thanks to the imported Russian R77-1 same seeker he used, there is a sign in the picture sent to me that this is true, he should get the same performance of 9B-1 103M instead of the wrong data now

PL-12 missile he should get omnidirectional locking capability instead of head-on attack locking, his data is completely wrong he should get the same seeker performance as the R77-1 9B-1 103M, because the PL-12 missile is the 9B-1 103M used, from the introduction of Russia

Data source: https://www.doc88.com/p-7428620567021.html 浅谈SD-10


国产最先进主动雷达空空导弹权威报告——访SD-10空空导弹副总设计师梁晓庚 - 道客巴巴 中国产最先进主动雷达空空导弹权威报告——SD-10空空导弹副总设计师梁晓庚

CATIC is known to be developing X-band and Ku-band active radar seekers, which may be intended for the PL-12. However the latest reports confirm that China has been co-operating closely with Russia’s AGAT Research Institute, based in Moscow, and that AGAT is the source of the PL-12’s essential active seeker. This joint development effort (perhaps with the name ‘Project 129’) has reportedly seen the supply of AGAT’s 9B-1348 active-radar seeker (developed for the Vympel R-77, AA-12 ‘Adder’) to China for integration with the Chinese-developed missile. Alternatively, technology from AGAT’s 9B-1103M seeker family may be offered to China. Russia is also the source for the missile’s inertial navigation system and datalink.
众所周知,中航工业正在开发X波段和Ku波段有源雷达导引头,可能用于PL-12。然而,最新的报道证实,中国一直在与位于莫斯科的俄罗斯"玛瑙"(AGAT)设计局密切合作,“玛瑙”(AGAT)设计局是PL-12必不可少的主动寻的器的来源。据报道,这项联合开发工作(可能名为“项目129”)向中国供应了"玛瑙"(AGAT)设计局的9B-1348主动雷达导引头(为Vympel R-77、AA-12“加法器”开发),以便与中国开发的导弹集成。或者,“玛瑙”(AGAT)设计局9B-1103M探索者系列的技术可能会提供给中国。俄罗斯也是该导弹惯性导航系统和数据链的来源。
来源 环球防务:中国PL-12空对空导弹_PL-12 air-to-air missile_GlobalMil-环球防务网

You have same issue


The evidence is that the Chinese military has indeed introduced this seeker and used it on the SD10(PL-12)


The SD-10 is the PL-12 missile, not the SD-10A This is just a reminder

SD-10’s Chinese designation is PL-12, it’s not two missiles, it’s the same missile, it’s just a reminder


Please look into J-11A radar. Gaijin now change radar so it can only guide 1 missile at a time. If you fire 2nd one, first one no longer guided. F-14 guide 6, J-11A guide only 1.


Doesnt just go ballistic. Should still guide itself. But will no longer get that Data-link help. Or at least thats how I interrupt that change.

But they do seem to have gotten a lot of things wrong with that. F3 and FA2 should be 4 (and by extension the Gripens) Would not be surprised if they got the J-11A wrong as well

1 Like

Tbh, I posted it to just see what his reaction would be. But the fact that its the only plane that will do only 1 radio correction seems to me that Gaijin has sources for it, rather than giving it the default 2 radio-correction channels. F-14 has 6. It seems they’ll wait for bug reports regarding the rest of the aircrafts. I also put in a report for RDY radar to have 4 rather than the default 2.

Yep, the fact its different at all from the Su-27SM means they either hate China or they have a source


They gave J-11A MAWS quickly after it was bug reported, so any notion that Gaijin hates China wouldn’t make sense. Just more likely as you said, they have a source. Perhaps we might see J-11B getting added in the patch after this, to rectify the issues.


Please investigate the issue of discrimination and prejudice against Chinese vehicles within your organization. The rise of domestically produced equipment in China after the new millennium is an undeniable fact. Please take this issue seriously for some developers.


Frankly the current ARHes in general dont really make any sense, all of the present missiles should be fully effective in all aspect engagements and the F-15, F-14, Tornado, and J-11A seem to be getting artificially limited in their TWS engagement channels for some reason that escapes me.

The J-11A is, for all intents and purposes a digitally superior SU-27SM, there is no reason it should have less guidance channels, while the F-14’s AWG-9 can guide missiles to 24 targets at once, being limited by it’s own onboard stores and not it’s guidance channels, the F-15’s AN/APG-63(V1) is renown for being able to guide all 8 or more AIM-120s at once, and the tornado’s AI.24 Foxhunter should be handling tws tracks for all 4 AIM-120s it should be carrying.

Feels like the SU-27SM and Mig-29SMT seem to be holding everyone else’s performance back as I have seen statements that their radars lack such support for multiple launches, same with the F-16s being limited to two target TWS engagemnts.


I really feel unworthy for Chinese players who work hard to send correction reports. Every time the game version is updated, the vehicle data of the Chinese technology tree is also the most incorrect, and gaijin’s review of the Chinese report is always the strictest. However, when facing the Russian technology tree, gaijin is always very tolerant, and he always likes to use double standards, just like all Western media


Do you really think gaijin doesn’t know all of this? They deliberately do it for the sake of ridiculous game balance


This is the biggest joke of the so-called “historical restoration” gaijin


Nah, they added MAWS but still closed down all the dev links to reports on J11A does not have MAWS, but only J11A MLU updated in the 2010s have received them. The key difference is however that J11A MLU has CAS capabilities and should be able to use guided bombs. I would not agree to the fact that China is balanced just from my experience in ground. The J11A is literally a copy and paste,

regarding that, they had MAWS in the trailer so it really is a consistency issue rather than a technical one.


It’s not true J11A is superior to Su27SM since they use similar systems, as J11A is just a fully domestic production version of the Su27SK, production block 38-39, which is what China purchased. We are trying to argue that with the MAWS issue, the J11A should actually be J11A MLU, which does get superior digital equipment.


It will be better if Gaijin really does as you said.
However, it’s hard for me to find another reason why PL12 is the only one doesn’t have all-aspect shoot down in ARH. Besides, similar things also happen in PL12’s other aspects. When it come together, all I can think about is Gaijin dislikes China.


The situation of Chinese tech tree is like:
bad experience with no outstanding vehicle almost → no players want to play it → Gaijin wont pay much attention at it → another loop
Who start it? Of course the guys who develop this game


Pl-12 is all-aspect in game

Do you have pic or something else?
It isn’t when i saw yesterday