Well that is kind of silly, you don’t look at a chart and take the lowest figures immediately do you? Anyways error on my end, it was by general media and not just Chinese media but you should always take the mean figure instead of the lowest or highest which would be 400km.
Also, uk kinda just imaginates, what it can be. Nothing else.
They(uk) even writing about IR seeker, thats not on PL-17.
Yes you are completely right, Chinese reports on Chinese missiles are inaccurate, Western reports on Chinese missiles are inaccurate and Wikipedia (obviously) is inaccurate.
Chinese manuals are also inaccurate and the USA can’t also be trusted because I said so!
You are completely correct, China is inferior in all aspects and the PL-15, PL-17 and PL-12 are a joke of a missile, Western engineering is the best and don’t get me started with Russia! Russia can’t even produce the T-14 so surely their tech is also in the mud, right?
2 Likes
Is the PL-15 similar to the KS-172/K-100? Looks similar
How is it overkill when better missiles have existed for years?
1 Like
I mean technically the PL-17 isn’t actually meant for small aircraft like fighters and are meant for AWACS and tankers just like the KS-172 so they’d be both filling in the same role and therefor inherit similar features.
Ah, I just looked up pictures and they do look alot more different than I thought they were.
Better, well
Few sources states that PL-15 near to 120C-7/smth like that
260 project by itself started before Pl-17 was shown/etc.
It’s widely agreed upon that the PL-15 has greater range than all AIM-120 variant but with inferior intelligence and the PL-17 and AIM-260 aren’t that similar to be fair and fill in different roles.
1 Like
PL-17, PL-15, Meteor, R-37M, R-77M (which has been video tested, nothing can be said about even a picture of the AIM-260), etc…
1 Like
And any stats to indicate it?
Honestly, yeah, the ICE is better than both the 29SMT and the Su-27. Once it has its Aim120, it completely dominate the long range engagement against the soviet.
I’d be willing to trust you if I had drunk myself half to death beforehand. F-4F can barely make use of its supposed “advantage” when its airframe massively limits the range of the AMRAAM.
R-77-1 would at least level the playing field a bit, and not let the US side completely crush the opposition.
I’ve one question for you, how? R-77-1 is still limited by the illogical and fully sub-optimal grid fin design. No matter what you do, it won’t match up to the AMRAAM simply because of that… and because 90% of engagement still take place at lower altitudes, where people still make full use of multipath.
The Phantom has the long range advantage with the Aim120.
It hasn’t. Maybe in some imaginary world where it can somehow, someway, manage to pick up enough speed & altitude to make the “long range advantage” actually matter in practice. In reality however, you’ll be lucky to fire off at someone beyond 30km’s and have the missile wobble its way towards them. I agree with the sentiment, Tornado is garbage, but so is the ICE… then again, if wt’s heatmap is to be trusted, apparently Germany with their F-4F is eating everybody else for breakfast, US & Russia included - 72% WR btw.
2 Likes
By china and russia? Might be
So why not add the R-77-1 and give a tiny bit more hope to RU players if it wouldnt be that big of a deal or impact to SPAMRAAM meta?
Pl-17 was not public, at start of Aim-260 project.
But actually theres Aim-174, that can be similar by range.
Pl-15 some sources states it smth near to C-7
Meteor - yes, but thats allied.
37M - phoenix on steroids, kinda bruh
77M - nothing to say, but not in use at all
I completely agree that alot of stuff is hard to find, but you have to agree that the US has been a tad behind in missile technologies (Fox-3).
Any missile that popular = meta?
Pretty much
Well
Then R-73 is still meta
With 27ET.
Any missile thats extremely good and used by a majority of the playerbase is meta. When the AIM-54A was added=meta. When the R-27ER was added=Meta