I don’t see the point of making it only available to select few aircraft.
After all, PLAAF and PLANAF have modernized older aircraft such as J-10A, J-11B etc. to have the ability to fire PL-10 and PL-15. There is no technical bottleneck.
1 Like
I don’t either, I suspect it’s already in service and nobody has picked it out from regular PL-12s yet
This is the likely scenario.
There were already rumors of PL-12A years ago.
PL-15 ended up catching more attention though, which is to be expected.
1 Like
Pulling this from the J-11B Block 2 suggestion, some general statistics of the J-11B.
MTOW of 28000kg.
Second image documents the use of composite materials in areas such as the main wing, vertical stabilizer, horizontal stabilizer which accounts to 555 kilograms or 9% of the empty weight of the airframe. In addition, replacement of N001 radar, power supply, and cooling have also saved some weight.
In total, it is in the region of being 700-800kg lighter empty than Su-27SK.
Light-green areas are where the composites are located.
2 Likes
The missiles hit the ground right infront of you, chaff makes them go behind you a bit. Chaff is the reason multipathing isn’t working for you
And have only 48CM :(I hope Chinese engineers have made hanging CM of the Tornado GR4 type. Because 48 sounds very very small. Especially considering what kind of missiles he will have to fight. There won’t be enough 150 there
Is PL-10 better than python 5 or iris T or 9x? Asraam?
No it is not, if u notch both should work, but the issue is chaff is still crucial. This is more so if u are engaging any one really at top tier, especially when u don’t have any ARH missiles.
I don’t know how u calculated that, but if the missile locks onto chaff, it does that and can’t hit u. Multi path really is about 1. making missile miscalculate ur path and hit the deck, two use clutter to make it loose u all together. They do not interfere with each other at all.
In theory yes, because it has more pixels of IR, and also potential for more types of guidance and IRCCM than IRIST or 9X. It is also the longest of them all so I suspect more range as well.
I have a suspicion that we are unlikely to see such modern types of weapons in the game, or they will not look much like themselves. It’s all too complicated to implement, and when implemented, they will simply be practically invincible. Well, how can you get away from a rocket that launches behind your back, gives an overload of 60G, flies 20 kilometers, has a super cool homing head that is almost impossible to deceive. Something on the level of fiction
Battle rating 14.7 or 15.0 minimum to rank IX, maybe
Dependent of arms hugely, cause with the current meta I would want F15Es and Typhoons go 15.0 anyway, and that it depends on how everything else goes cause PL15s will have quite honestly insane range, and for current map pool, literally would be spawn to spawn and Meteor would be the only competitor.
1 Like
sadly there is no such thing. most of the hanging CM pods are cold war left over, not useful for modern missiles, so you seldom see such things in modern fighters. and Chinese planes are almost all 21th century things, more CM is not considered.
Also WT don’t have ECM jamming now… so the only way against ARH is chaff and multi path
1 Like
It is a curious design decision for J-15T to only have 48 CM count like Su-33. I know J-15 is derived of a Soviet Su-33 prototype (T-10K-3), which presumably also only carried 48 CM like Su-33, but I must wonder why the CM amount was not revised during J-15 development. Maybe there is satisfactory ECM/IRCM suite to counter modern missiles guidance? I cannot find anything on internet forums discussing J-15 countermeasure systems.
Noone even knows how the nato ones are against each other. Logically you can disqualify 9X as long as its not really close range fight due to lack of range.
J15 like J11B has integrated ECM equipment, instead of the two pods off the wing tip.
1 Like
T-10К-7 not T-10K-3
1 Like
What is the difference between prototype T-10K-3 and T-10K-7?
The difference is huge, ranging from cabin equipment to the power frame of the aircraft. The T-10K-3 was built to evaluate flight characteristics. T-10K-7 for state tests