In fact we don’t even know what is a PL-12A and what is not.
(Mainly cause the Pl-12A doesnt exist)
Actually, I’m not quite sure why a PL-12AE suddenly appeared when the PL-15E already has a successful export record, and it’s intended for UAV integration.
The PL-12A does exist and its data matches that of the PL-12AE, but apparently the PLAAF hasn’t procured many of them.
3 Likes
Well there are large differences at least in terms of appearance of earlier PL-12A models, which are more akin to standard PL-12, and latter PL-12AE. PL-12A still had those large windows for proxy fuse, whilst latter ones don’t much like the PL-15, which is a source of argument for motor improvement.
There is one piece of evidence of the Pl-12A´s existence that i know of, which would be a museums exhibitions piece (a seeker cone), other than that ive yet to see other proof of its existence
That’s impossible, because the PL-12A’s extended range was achieved precisely by shortening the proximity fuze section. Besides, the paper I posted was published in 2012, early enough to be relevant.
Given how China likes to keep its weaponry secret, it’s understandable. We only have hearsay about the capabilities or even the existence of the PL12A. Who knows, maybe it was the initial name of the improvement program, and now they just call it PL12 (late). But I’d be surprised if the PL12A didn’t exist, especially since it would help aircraft incapable of carrying the PL15, like the JH-7A, JL-10, and other attack aircraft. But that’s just speculation on my part
1 Like
Well, given the existence of oddly designated models like the ZTZ-99AE(==VT-4), the PL-12AE must have a domestic counterpart without the “E” suffix—otherwise, there would be no reason to add an “A” and they could have simply called it the PL-12E.
1 Like
btw could you provide the full document?
where tf did you get ZTZ-99AE being the VT-4 from also the HQ-16FE exists with there being no HQ-16F. To add to that the ZTZ specifically signifies PLAGF usage while VT signifies export.
What difference is there with the PL-12A if it has the same motor in game? Since i assume it still has the same copy paste seeker like all other fox-3s including the normal PL-12
15E(VT-5) and 99AE(VT-4).
Given the highly secretive nature of the PLA, certain equipment can only be confirmed to exist, not proven not to exist. You can never really know if something genuinely doesn’t exist or if it simply hasn’t been publicly disclosed yet.
This is the master’s thesis that was brought up during the discussion on the PL-8B. Its section on “achievements made so far,” describes the range improvement of the PL-12A and the propulsion characteristics of the PL-10.
1 Like
gaijin added the kd88a its the ir variant of the kd88
1 Like
anyway considering the VT-4(99AE) and ZTZ-99(A) are completely unrelated tanks whats there to say that the PL-12A and PL-12AE are related to eachother? they also could be comepletely unrelated like the above mentioned. Basically there is barely any proof of the Pl-12A existing.
GNSS and battery time I presume, so less of an upgrade than the Aim120D, which also gets no gimbal launch limits
It’s indeed unrelated, yet somehow they’ve linked them together—which is why I described it as odd naming. But this reflects a shift in China’s policies regarding weapon exports. Since then, we’ve seen a trend where export-oriented products are rebranded under the names of already operational domestic models to boost sales. If the PL-12A didn’t exist, then the designation PL-12AE would make no sense.
The VT4 is a completely different tank from the ZTZ. The VT4 is a completely different tank from the ZTZ. China chooses the export name for its equipment; yes, we’ve seen a certain habit in China of adding an “E” for “export,” but it’s not systematic, like the CM-802AKG, which is the export version of the KD-88. All this to say that China is quite secretive with its designations.
anyway back to the main topic: it is stupid of gajin to give us a missile that might not even exist to basically make it harder to bugreport its performace
Actually, it’s quite challenging to submit a performance-related bug report for the baseline PL-12, too.
