What do you mean of old Soviet HMCS? Does that mean Su-35 can’t guide radar lock via HMD?
Extremely bold of you to just assume R-37M or PL-15/16/17 will even be added.
J-16 could be added next patch with PL-12 only.
I don’t think there’s any evidence that j-16 has an aesa mounted on a mechanical gimbal, it’s highly unlikely for it to get the su-35 radar because of that
Does the pl-10 get datalink? Also what’s max range of that thing, like 40 km? All sources I’ve seen of it stated it has a pretty abysmal max range of 20km, around 10 km less than the og r73
yes.
Verified data indicates the PL-10 features a 160mm diameter (vs. MICA-EM’s 165mm), weight of 105kg (vs. MICA-EM’s 112kg), and total impulse of 95 kN·s (vs. MICA-EM’s 98.5675 kN·s)—all substantiated by airshow exhibits and academic papers. Additionally, unverified sources suggest the PL-10 employs a high thrust-to-weight ratio, short-burn propulsion profile similar to the PL-5B, with motor burn time lasting 3.5 seconds. Synthesizing these parameters, the PL-10’s max range is close to that of the MICA series.
edit: My review of research papers confirms that the 3.5-second burn time has been substantiated.
2 Likes
Haven’t seen any official information on the PL-10 but the PL-10E has some bits
2 Likes
why would u compare pl15/17 to r77-1/r37m instead of r77m/r37m ? ill take 10-12 r77m over 8pl15.
Afaik theres no evidence it doesnt either. We dont even have a name for the radar afaik. Easiest (laziest) thing gaijin could do would be to just copy/paste the Su-35 radar and call it a day
Cuz the R-77M is just beginning to be seen, has like no info available, and we arent sure if they can e carried on the double racks.
Also, the 77M/37M is still likely losing to the PL-15/17 combo, even if the 77M closes the gap with the PL-15
I do not believe the R-77M possesses the range capability to match the PL-12AE, whether in terms of total impulse or aerodynamic drag, while the PL-15E has already achieved confirmed kills at distances of 160-190 km.
3 Likes
and what info do u know about the pl17 ? cus the last time i checked there is literally nothing on it ? r77m’s diameter is smaller than r77-1 (cus planar fins are shorter than grid fins) its physically smaller so its physically possible to fit in the double pylon . there is 0 info on pl17s range , no info on r77m’s range. all we know is that its 11% longer than the r77-1 and slightly longer than pl15.
what is the source for the range of the kill ? and do you work on the r77m to know about its performance ?
77m uses the same launchers as normal 77/771 (aku 170) but since it’s lengthier w than the og 77 who knows if it can still use the same double rack (double rack also uses aku 170)
Fair point. Was basing my opinion on Chinas superior missile and electronic development and production capabilities and track record, along with the fact that the PL-17 is a modern take on the old concept the R-37M was based on.
It can also be inferred that the PL-17 has an AESA seeker following the shootdown of an indian Rafale using a PL-15E which was found to have an AESA seeker, suggesting most, if not all modern high end Chinese AAM’s use them, while afaik, the R-37M does not.
At the end of the day though, these are just assumptions based on very limited info.
Internalized r37m for su-57 has aesa, not sure if other planes will also get it. ()
Normal 37m
Spoiler
1 Like
Hmmm, what do you guys think? Is it really EO pod?
https://x.com/Alfa_Particle/status/1963476325135454468?t=rNH5ji6oAwA4D67YhYy_yw&s=19
It probably won’t, Ronaldinho. TWR of J-11BG and J-16 is still so much better and we still don’t know if gaijin gonna or not implement double pylons for sino flonkas. Only surely better thing about 35 is gimbal and 77-1 over pl-12 until next gen fox3
maybe, but hard to know what’s its function. a2a or a2g?