…why are you in the Chinese Flanker thread if you are just simping for Russia and making outlandish claims? Pl-17 is just straight up better than the R-37M, reporting up to 500km of range, lofting itself high into the upper atmosphere to avoid detection, and uses an AESA seeker. As for PESA vs AESA debate: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA283773.pdf this is a bit old but has a good section stating the advantages over PESA radars. And there’s tons of other documents out there that took a deep dive into the subject matter and concluded AESA is better; there’s a reason modern military’s are using AESA and not PESA…
6 Likes
Why not 10k kilometers?
There is no access
The Chinese pl-15 is the R-77-1 level. The dimensions of the missiles are similar, both have a loft, you can’t jump higher, I advise you to study the rocket dynamics
Never mind you can in the VVS/VKS flanker.
What a joke. Even US intelligence reported PL-15 has range > 200km. Thats what triggered the US to develop the AIM-260
8 Likes
Okay, no need to pursue it anymore, it’s just a lie.
1 Like
We overinflate technologies of adversaries to generate funding. We conduct propaganda and establish fear in our own population to support the military industrial complex. It was a daily thing in the Cold War and it’s something we do today.
If you notice the US never downplays a principal enemies’ capability. Always exaggerates. There is no value in underestimating a foes ability.
7 Likes
You should go and see the FOX 3 missile thread.
PL-15 maximum range: >200km
R-77-1 maximum range: 110km
If we can’t agree with how missile performs it would be meaningless to continue discussing.
5 Likes
BTW the AIM-260 is supposed to have similar dimensions to existing AIM-120 but will have > 200km range. I guess it is fairy tale too.
5 Likes
It is worth to mention that Irbis is monopulse hybrid ESA radar because it has posibilities as both PESA and AESA radars. PESA 'cause N035 has those two TWT in tranmitter channel and two receiver units in receive channel ( high and low frequency receivers). Besides this it has phased array with about 1800 TR elements . AESA 'cause it has so called hybrid -heterodyne waveguide system in phased array. With that N035 can send many signals with different working frequencies simultaneously and with very high frequency agility just like all real AESA radars .
Irbis has the capability of digital heterodyning, therefore it has the capability not only of AESA, but also of DAR or a digital antenna array.
2 Likes
Chinese AESA not GaN. now no one country don’t have serial AESA on plane, based on GaN
1 Like
From the history of the “backwardness” of Russian/Soviet-made avionics for a number of “experts” for reference…
A method for obtaining gallium nitride…
During 2010, at the Institute of Microwave Semiconductor Electronics (ISHPE) Field-effect transistors with Ft = 77.3 GHz and Fmax = 177 GHz having a power gain of more than 11.5 dB at a frequency of 35 GHz were manufactured using AlGaN/AlN/GaN heterostructures of domestic production (Elma-Malachite CJSC). For the first time in Russia, the MIS of a three-stage power amplifier in the frequency range 27-37 GHz with a Cr > 20 dB and a maximum output power of 300 MW in pulse mode was developed and successfully implemented on the basis of transistors.
1 Like
Just random J-11 bonding.
3 Likes
omg das me :))
2 Likes
<3333
1 Like
There’s something I need to explain to you…If the engine has been given a name, it means that it has passed State tests and is in mass production…Information about the AL-51-F1 under this name appeared in August 2023…There is no discrepancy with the plans of the ODK (United Engine Building Corporation)…This is a priority program for the Su-57/Su-35S(M)/Su-75/Su-30SM2/S-70 Hunter/Su-34…She’s fine considering the SVO factor…
already
You cannot take physical dimensions as the mere standard for estimation. The efficiency of rocket engine and trajectory design would also matter a lot.
The designer of PL12/SD10, Liang Xiaogeng, mentioned in an interview that the maximum shoot range of SD10 and AIM120 are measured at 10km altitude and 1.2 Mach speed for both carrier and target aircrafts while the claimed 100km range for R77 is measured at 20km altitude and 1.5 Mach. When using the same test standard, the range of R77 would be =<70km, on par with or even worse than SD10/PL12.
In this regard, even the claimed 110km range of R77-1 is probably exaggerated as well.
And also note that even the export version of PL15, namely PL15E, is labled with a max. range of 145km by AVIC.
So yeah if someone still insists on this two having similar performance … Well, good luck.
4 Likes