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?
i think it also gets 360* maws and also gets lws.
honestly with how the game is model upto this point the su35 will have a much better advantage. unless they add ecm , properly model radars. but i doubt they will cus most of them are completely classified.
J16 also gets maws although unsure if it’s rear aspect only like j11b or all aspect (j11b is rear aspect only irl but all aspect in game, copy paste of j11a mlu maws which is wrong)
The J-16 by itself only has rear facing MAWS
But the YINGS-III has MAWS and LWS built in, which gaijin would obviously not model but alas
1 Like
Surprised the pl-10e is so abysmal compared to normal pl-10, going from mica ir like range (50ish km) to 20km is insanity
I mean if there’s a source for that maybe they can add it?
Nothing apart from a exhibition showcase description
No LWS I missremebered
China’s published range figures for IR missiles remain notoriously ambiguous—unlike the clearly defined standards for MRAAM, the Short range’s stated ranges appear almost arbitrarily assigned. Presumably, the PL-10E retains the original rocket motor like its PL-15E counterpart, while likely implementing software-imposed performance constraints.
1 Like
Depends for PL-15E, since there are more than 1 models of that anyways.