It is well known to use PL-12.
4 Likes
But would It be worth asking for them?
J-8F could use them, but IDK if sending this thing up in BR would be worth it
I am trying to get the TWS, not the PL-12. TWS is useful in GRB.
Basically, I want to prove that JH-7A can fire PL-12 so that we can get TWS.
4 Likes
If/when it gets it’s actual complete ground loadout it will end up at a higher BR anyways. If it gets Pl-12 and Pl-5EII’s it will still be competitive at a higher BR bracket. The flight model is good enough that it won’t just be like the Tornado. And in air battles it can already see the 12.3 vacuum, so might as well give it better tools to survive if it’s gonna be sucked up there anyways. Although I say we wait until we get closer to the AMRAAM update and see what changes Gaijin makes to the plane before asking for the Pl-12.
And besides, there’s some bugs on the JH-7A that are more important right now we need to fixed
- HUD doesn’t circle and track radar locked target (super big issue for Sim users, we use that to get a visual)
- missing TWS mode
- missing HMS
- missing TG-250’s and other ordnance
5 Likes
Sadly the mod seems to have rejected this photo as evidence because they think it is the anti-radiation missile LD-10
TWS Confirmed in sources
“the radar could track four targets at a time”
JL-10A radar
Also this site, they seem reputable and have cooperations with Chinese aviation companies
@gultraman the mod has no way of determining for sure it was the LD-10, only concluded that it’s likely since the other munitions laid out were ground ordnance. But the LD-10 has the same mounts as the Pl-12 and the JL-10A has been acknowledged that it can guide them. Furthermore, the missile on display was hinting at that it can carry either, as the Chinese like to hint what their capabilities are rather than tell us. In the same demo we can see the same style missile next to a JF-17. The JF-17 is known to carry Pl-12’s and the Chinese were saying that the LD-10 would be effective on the JF-17 and is the primary user for the missile.
I hope JH-7A can be obtained in the next update 4x KH29TE and 6x TS250
3 Likes
Of course such conclusion is reasonable, but I am afraid the mod will not consider this as solid enough proof.
Maybe we can use the photo of JH-7A mounting PL-17 to prove JH-7A can carry a previous generation radar missile PL-12
A lot of people seem confused that a big strike aircraft turns so well but I don’t think it’s very surprising. Jaguar uses a similar aerodynamic layout and turns well in similar ways, and the size and payload of the JH-7 means that when unloaded the wing loading is probably at a very nicely low level
4 Likes
Pantsir only will explode own chair, with his broken TRK radar and irst
JF-17,F-7BG/BGI,FTC-2000G and other export fighters
Not for JF-17.
You know Pakistan isnt the only user of it.Nigerian JF-17s have PL-9C(Claimed by unofficial sources)
JF-17 can definitely use PL-9. I think most people are saying it doesn’t simply because they can’t in DCS, most soruces back up the idea that the PL-9 can be mounted on the JF-17
2 Likes
not diggin the 5C’s rn tbh, god awful flare resistance kills it for me. was hoping it would end up being an all aspect 5B but that doesnt seem to be the case unfortunately
4 Likes
yeah, its unfortunately even less reliable than pl5b thanks to its aim9b flare resistance and MASSIVE fov. I genuinely dont understand why they gave this vehicle pl8 but then a downgraded pl5 that doesn’t match pl8 seeker performance. Its like making f16s wingtip pylons only able to carry aim9j while the inner ones can carry aim9m. Cant think of another jet in wt with such a mismatched missile load. How gaijin thought pl5c was the way to go and not pl5e is beyond me. I really don’t understand what they were going for here… Never been so disappointed with a vehicle. Be we saw this coming after the q5L disaster didnt we
2 Likes
PL-5C and E are the same missile E is just an export designation, only difference is maybe E has a different warhead fuse
then possibly eii, since we dont have any solid documents stating the performance of these seekers id say just give it a seeker at least matching pl8 and aim9L. What we have currently is something more like an r60 seeker which is terribly unreliable. Shows how bad chinese missile documentation really is. Everywhere ive looked states pl5b and c to be about the same, then pl5e being the all aspect one and pl5eii being a further improvement to the seeker with irccm
I think they are going to be increasing the BR of this plane anyways. In a downtier, even stock you are one of the best aircraft if not the best. And with additional ground ordnance possibly on the way, I don’t see them keeping it at this BR. The issue is like you said, the missiles aren’t competitive enough to fight in the 12.3 vacuum. The Pl-5EII is our best bet, it would be just like if an R-73 and Aim-9M were combined. And it needs it’s HMS too. Then we could expect this plane to be 11.7 or possible even 12.0.
1 Like
You are better off in a z19 than trying to space bomb with the jh7a. Because when you fly top tier, the contested airspace will be chalk full of f16s etc which will just aim9m you without warning. Also hard to deal with pantsirs when you dont have agms. No standoff weapons to speak of. Not having hmd is also something i caught myself missing greatly. j8f is actually a great anti air vehicle in ground rb because of its hmd.
2 Likes