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
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.
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.
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?
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.
And same for JATM. J10’s flight model existed well earlier than the 2000s, the project started in 1984, when the CAIG, might still be 132 back then applied and was rewarded the development of 3rd gen. They obtained F16 radar and most of the tech, and the process was less focused on after the 1990s saw tensions peak. But again, this is a 20 year process so we go by the date of in service and not when the tech existed.
China did not have dual pulse motors in production and tested prior to the development of the PL-15, you are ignoring the point. The PL-15 is not a counter to anything, the JATM is not a counter to the PL-15. None of these were designed as a direct response to an existing weapon.
The J-10 did not exist in the early 80’s and the protracted development time does not mean they had a fully capable weapon that could have been in production much sooner.
Without an air to air missile with sufficient range, they had no advantage over their peers in air superiority. They needed something new. We have stealth aircraft and superior electronic warfare capabilities, they needed an answer to that. The result, as is the case when there is a real world “meta” to these things, is similar but different hardware.
The J-20 and J-35 as well as the PL-15 and PL-17 are all simply their solution to a slightly different problem. It’s absurdity, the idea that there is some debate about whether or not these must be a response to the others equivalence.
My name is a Russian fighter jet, I’ve advocated for the peer to peer capability of Chinese fighter jets in these threads for years, I know bias when I see it. There is no nationalism in what I’ve been sharing.
