Why would it be, it’s on par with the PL-15 and is launched from aircraft with considerably better low observables, electronic warfare, and other modern features.
My entire point is that America does not create analogues. The enemy either tries to match or subvert in some asymmetrical way, but we are always at the forefront. Nothing we have right now is a “response” to something that has bested us.
Since when is the aim120d-3 on par with the pl-15
Not sure if you are trying to be sarcastic …
But you say AIM-260 is “on par with PL-15”, a missile which has entered service way before AIM-260, which makes the AIM-260 an “analogue” / “response” to PL-15 by definition.
And many experts have hinted at that:
In most likelihood, its development started to counter the PLAAF’s advances in missile technology, such as the abovementioned PL-17 and other missiles like the PL-15. In fact, Air Force officials have publicly stated that the appearance of the PL-15 in 2016 was the one of the driving factors that kick-started the JATM program.
https://theaviationist.com/2025/02/23/navair-rendering-aim-260-jatm/
Air Force Developing AMRAAM Replacement to Counter China
June 20, 2019 | By Rachel S. CohenMaj. Douglas Rosenstock fires an AIM-120 AMRAAM from an F-35 Lightning II during a weapons test surge at Edwards AFB, Calif. Lockheed Martin photo by Darrin Russel via USAF.
DAYTON, Ohio—The Air Force is developing a new air-to-air missile, dubbed the AIM-260, that offers longer range than Raytheon’s Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile and would be used to counter the Chinese PL-15 weapon.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/Air-Force-Developing-AMRAAM-Replacement-to-Counter-China/
AIM-260 is a response to PL-15 (& Meteor)
And AIM-174B is a response to PL-15 & PL-17 & R-37M
Hypersonic air/surface to surface missiles
New gen ICBM
Poseidon
Sixth gen fighters
Long range air to air missiles (PL-15, PL-17, R-37M, Meteor)
But, yeah, sure, you are always at the forefront …
No no, he said the aim120 is on par not the aim260
LOL, that’s even worse
AIM-120D is certainly not on par with PL-15 as far as public data goes …
The AIM-260 would be a response to the PL-15 if it was designed and produced as a response to the PL-15’s existence, which it was not. The AIM-260 has been in development for quite some time and both missiles started testing around 2015. The technology for the AIM-260 dates back to the Obama administration, though funding was never really allotted for it as the AMRAAM still had several pre-planned product improvement nodes to hit and there was no need for a better missile.
That out of the way, “experts” hinted that Russia would steamroll Ukraine in less than 24 hours should the cold war have gone hot. Clearly that was never the case and all of these defense “experts” who make such claims are not so truthful. You could say that the existence of the PL-15 spurred funding for the AIM-260, but it is not a peer to the PL-15. It has a different role, different design, and better technology behind it.
The technology and capabilities of all these types differ, none of them are truly analogue to another for the most part. Planes will have missiles, guns, bombs, the method of employment differs and the technology that makes them work differs… but they will always have these “core” technologies. The PL-15 is not a copy of the AMRAAM, the JATM is not a copy of the PL-15, neither were designed with the intention of out-doing the other one. They were designed to meet a set of criteria that itself stands apart from the existence of the other.
Sixth gen fighters for example, these will differ greatly in many categories. One thing we know for certain is that they will place a higher emphasis on stealth than any previous fighter. This does not mean they are analogues. I suspect the warfare between them will be highly asymmetrical still.
The AIM-54 existed decades prior to anything else and they are just now achieving similar range, so yes, in this case we have been ahead of China for quite some time and still maintain quite a lead as far as reach goes. The actual use-case of the PL-17 vs an AIM-174 differs greatly but on paper we have better range.
I don’t see how it isn’t, both feature >140km range with two-way datalink and yet only one of them has really been seen in active service. The PL-15 is rarely seen live, all we ever see are big blue dummy rounds and claims of 200km range from dubious sources.
The PL-15 likely began development in around 2011 and was first seen in the form of a test missile carried by a J-11B the following year. From 2013 onwards it began to appear in the main weapons bay of the J-20 before that type was formally inducted. Operational service for the PL-15 is thought to have commenced in late 2016
https://www.twz.com/a-guide-to-chinas-increasingly-impressive-air-to-air-missile-inventory
Air Combat Command chief Gen Hawk Carlisle says …
In terms of air superiority weapons, Carlisle says the development of next-generation air-to-air missiles is also “an exceptionally high priority”.
Carlisle says outmatching the Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missile in particular is an “exceedingly high priority”.
“The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” he says.
17 September 2015
LOL
AIM-54 is certainly not in the same league as PL-15
Yes, at some point in history you were ahead in some areas; Good for you …
The Chinese invented the gun powder …
We are talking about PL-15 and AIM-260 and how the situation is right now; Not how it was decades ago …
The AIM-260 and AIM-174B are missiles with completely different purposes—the former is used for conventional BVR engagements, while the latter is designed for hunting large, long-range early warning aircraft
Which it was. If as u said testing started in 2016, we wouldn’t have the first hint of its existence in 2025, when the first confirmation of its existence was in the form of a pdf. The project in and of itself was started in 2017 according to some sources. The existence of JATM might have existed long before. But same could be said about F47 program, and does that mean it was a 2 decade old jet even if we haven’t even seen it? No. Same with JATM.
Meanwhile, you believes JATM exists from which source? USAF literally admitted it is a ‘future project’. Your so called dubious sources are from air shows, and that is the best we can get, nvm that is for PL15E.
So aim260 is in response to the Pl15 and aim174 is in response to the r-37m
AIM174 is response to both cause it is RIM174 basically. An existing temporary replacement.
As well as ships, surface targets, missiles, fighters, you name it. It’s large, and versatile.
It was not designed and produced as a response to the PL-15, it was designed to replace the AMRAAM and continue the logical evolutionary path of the design. There is no major improvement to be made for the AMRAAM design without major structural changes to maintain the form factor. The multiple pulse motor, advanced warhead and target detection system, even the seeker trace back to programs from as early as 2006. The PL-12 was just entering service when the JDRADM and T-3 projects were already well underway.
The AirForce has listed live fire exercises with the production missile, this isn’t news.
It is not temporary, it is a much better and fitting option. It is not a response to those missiles, the role of the F-18 is to defend the carrier fleet. It doesn’t need such ordnance for intercepting an R-37M or PL-15.
Instead, it permits the F-18 to hit targets while the carrier remains far from danger. Extending the reach of the Hornet has been crucial towards giving carrier groups safe striking capability towards near peers.
Source?
Literally the first result for “AIM-260” and “live fire”, is this laziness or am I expected to provide what should be common knowledge if you’re going to be entering a discussion on the missile?
And what year is that 2024. Nothing to back up the 2016 test claim. Also nothing official, not even a single picture.
I never claimed they live fired it in 2016, I’ve backed up everything I’ve said thus far.
As for dual pulse motors, US has used them since 2006 in testing
You’ll notice a lot of these technologies are rumored to be in use on the PL-15, which entered service a decade later.
There are many examples of the US developing technology and then not using it until it was necessary at a later date. Another example is the XM360 cannon mounted on the AbramsX… that gun was first fired in 2009.
To compare testing date of them this would be 5 years and also that is not JATM.
In fact that is nothing to do with it. China likely has also tested it before 2011 when PL15 was live fired.
That is correct, it is not JATM. It simply uses a lot of the same technologies. As an aside, many aerospace related technologies are borrowed from other projects and modified for use in newer ones.
Then again, PL15’s tech might also have been tested a few years ahead. It is like saying J10’s project originated in 1980s, but we will have no argument that it was a 2000s jet. Tech does not equate to the product.
The J-10 was not built and tested in the 80s and then held off from production until the 2000s