I assume it's been only in IWBs of the J20 and J35/A then? Since there isn't even a single photograph of the PL16.
We see what they let us see.
I assume it's been only in IWBs of the J20 and J35/A then? Since there isn't even a single photograph of the PL16.
Why is dual rail pylon indirect evidence that PL-15 is used for anti-radiation?I don't really expect to see the J-20 publicly displaying the PL-16 with its IWB open at the Zhuhai Airshow; that's not typical of the PLA.
More likely, we'll see a small ramdom fighter model carrying a strange missile, like the YJ-15. Or a J-16D using dual-rail pylon to carry multiple PL-15s, as indirect evidence that the PL-15 has been modified into an anti-radiation missile.
I'm assuming that he means that if a J-16D is seen carrying such a setup, its meant to be/imply its the ARM variant, given it wouldn't really make any sense for a J-16D to be carrying 4 regular PL-15 BVRAAMs as if its a fighter doing some air superiority mission. But I would assume maybe if they did though, it would be seen with the name for the ARM version, which I believe is LD-8A, so the evidence of it being dual-racked isn't as relevant as just seeing the designation for the ARM variant itself.Why is dual rail pylon indirect evidence that PL-15 is used for anti-radiation?
Key advantage of PL-16 is that it is compact enough to be stored within weapon bay in high numbers. What’s the point of showing it as a flex and reveal China’s design philosophy on latest AAM? Keep in mind that before 2023 there was zero, zero image or video of PL-15 being fired live despite the fact that it has been in service for the better part of part of seven years. I expect the same level of secrecy around PL-16 unless they want to make a statement.
Yeah because they had to test it on J-11B and it can’t be avoided. If the J-20 were the test vehicle we wouldn’t know anything about the basic form until PL-15 is ready for export.In the case of PL-15 though, we did get images of it in testing fairly early on and its official reveal didn't take that much longer either.
If there is something in the form factor of PL-16 which is important to conceal then fair enough, but a fly by with mockups is not out of the question given the stage that the program is at by now.
Whether they'll choose to do so is another matter.
Yeah because they had to test it on J-11B and it can’t be avoided. If the J-20 were the test vehicle we wouldn’t know anything about the basic form until PL-15 is ready for export.
I think the planform for PL-16 actually matters a lot. How many control surfaces does it have, for instance? Does it have minimal set of fins to reduce drag but compensate using thrust vectoring or does it have additional pair of fins but collapsed like they do on new model PL-15E? It could show adversaries the design philosophy as well as which tradeoffs were made to boost certain performance parameters.