It would be enough if it weren’t for the fact that photos alone are not going to cut it. These can easily be manipulated and lead to errors. Therefore, either we get more info for the future or this is not enough.
not for this I think. shot by a acknowledged photographer, and original post can be find.
3 Likes
We had pictures taken at airshows of stationary weapons being considered ok until they weren’t. No need to go into details, but I just hope to see the pylon with an ARH mounted on it.
5 Likes
hard to see. nowadays photographers are avoiding taking photos of planes with loadouts, or they just censor the loadouts, avoiding classified loadouts leak, especially this kind of normal daily training photo. the famous photo of J-16 with PL-17 is a accident and caused this.
1 Like
Perhaps the only way would be to interview someone high-ranking in China XD
1 Like
Yes, and that’s why I only said “if possible.” Finding direct photographic evidence of ARH missiles mounted on those stations is becoming increasingly unlikely. Nowadays, the PLAAF seems more inclined to showcase fleet scale rather than specific weapon loadouts.
So if we want more photographic evidence, we might have to wait until some future conflict breaks out someday XD. Of course, I was only joking. No one truly wants to see more conflicts break out in reality. After all, conflict always means the loss of lives and many other negative consequences. I sincerely apologize if I caused any offense.
I’m very glad to see so much interest in this topic, and I sincerely appreciate everyone’s discussion and support. In any case, I will continue searching for more evidence by examining additional images from publicly available sources. Wish me luck.
1 Like
These are of course not sufficient, because the issue section requires at least two independent sources to cross-verify each other. (Although the issue section seems to be somewhat out of control nowadays, especially regarding Chinese vehicles and their weapon systems.)
herefore, I also hope that if anyone finds more evidence that could support the 10+2 air-to-air missile loadout capability for the J-16 and other new-generation Chinese Flankers, based strictly on publicly available and non-classified sources, you could share and supplement it here. I really do not want to see any leaks again…
1 Like
no way we get chinese leaks lol
2 Likes
J-16s equipped with different engines (Please ignore the J-16 with the serial number 66666—it is the photographer’s joke photoshop).
Both are powered by the WS-10B. The former should be the newer WS-10B3 (also designated WS-10D), while the latter is an earlier variant of the WS-10B (used in early-batch J-16s and later improved J-11B/BS models).
ws10b3
The WS-10B3 is characterized by noticeably longer convergent flaps (with a more pronounced angle between them), vertical stripe patterns in the central area of each flap, and a smaller area of darker-colored heat-dissipating skin.
2 Likes
The unknown twin rack under the J-16’s air intake。If it truly is a missile composite pylon, that would be very interesting.
2 Likes