Chinese air to air missiles

[Deino]

Eh, that was what I think they implied in the podcast. Perhaps they do not yet want to show PL-16 publicly?

Unfortunately I cannot listen & understand what they say in that podcast.

 

[bsdnf]

They only mentioned the J-35 and not the J-15

 

[Blitzo]

So these are just carried for show?

View attachment 158971

What does "for show" mean in this context?

For example, J-15T is absolutely compatible with PL-15, and able to launch them and use them.

However what seems to be implied is that for carrierborne operations and deployments from a logistical point of view, usually the carriers would not be equipped with PL-15s, but instead with PL-12s and PL-16s rather than all three.


In other contexts, it is possible J-15Ts may still utilize PL-15s, for example if they are based from land or if they are in situations where they run out of PL-16s and want something more capable than PL-12

 

[bsdnf]

It is more likely that PL-15 and PL-16 will be paired in a high-low mix , J-15T only carries the PL-15, while the J-35 only carries the PL-16.

Rather than PL-12 and PL-16 in a cross-gen mix, that is inconsistent with our observation that the J-15T began to mount the PL-15.

 

[Deino]

What does "for show" mean in this context?

For example, J-15T is absolutely compatible with PL-15, and able to launch them and use them.

However what seems to be implied is that for carrierborne operations and deployments from a logistical point of view, usually the carriers would not be equipped with PL-15s, but instead with PL-12s and PL-16s rather than all three.


In other contexts, it is possible J-15Ts may still utilize PL-15s, for example if they are based from land or if they are in situations where they run out of PL-16s and want something more capable than PL-12

That's why I asked in case I did not misunderstand this post:

It is said PL-16 is already in active service with J-20s, it is possible(speculation) the next gen naval air force(J-15T/J-35) could skip PL-15 and go directly to PL-16 for compatibility and simplifying logistics instead of simultaneously supporting 3 different types of missile, PL-12/PL-15 and PL-16.

 

[Blitzo]

That's why I asked in case I did not misunderstand this post:

Yes, but in post #978 it was made pretty clear.

(And even without #978 imo it's a pretty logical deduction to come to)

 

[Deino]

Yes, but in post #978 it was made pretty clear.

(And even without #978 imo it's a pretty logical deduction to come to)

Sorry, must have missed #978!

 

[Atomicfrog]

It is more likely that PL-15 and PL-16 will be paired in a high-low mix , J-15T only carries the PL-15, while the J-35 only carries the PL-16.

Rather than PL-12 and PL-16 in a cross-gen mix, that is inconsistent with our observation that the J-15T began to mount the PL-15.

You need to use older stock before expiration date so with many Pl-12 in stock, we will see them flying a while then vanishing and be replaced by fresher newer missiles.

On the logistical side, having less missiles types that fit both is better in a carrier scenario. When mass produced the cost of a Pl-16 will not be a lot higher than a Pl-15. It could even replace both Pl-12 and Pl-15. Only way to do otherwise could be flight dynamicss at shorter range are better with Pl-15 or just to use missiles in storage before expiration.