Chinese air to air missiles
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
So according to this article
By 2010’s, PL-15 and 17 were here and better already. This tech was transferred in 2022 that merely made these even better…
Blame the UAE? wtf have you been doing for 10 years man?
That's what happens when a low IQ propagandist is given two dossiers, one real, one fake, and told to blend them together into one story. They don't know where one starts and one ends.
Alleged/Claimed to be an excerpt from an academic paper, depicting simulation paths for a UCAV-launched hypersonic-capable ULRAAM against its target using Sanger ballistics.
The direct-line distance between the launch platform and its target is >600 kilometers, whereas the path taken by the ULRAAM is said to be >1000 kilometers.
Does anyone has full access to the academic paper?
Posted by @lyman2003 on Weibo.
The direct-line distance between the launch platform and its target is >600 kilometers, whereas the path taken by the ULRAAM is said to be >1000 kilometers.
Does anyone has full access to the academic paper?
Posted by @lyman2003 on Weibo.
Last edited:
SOYO from Weibo is hinting that China is currently fielding VLRAAM that is in the same category (if not a counterpart) to the AIM-174. I suppose he isn't referring to the PL-17, which is expected to have roughly similar strike ranges as the AIM-174, but with a longer yet slimmer body.
For reference: The AIM-174 can be rightfully described as an air-launched variant of the SM-6. It is ~4.7 meters in length, ~0.343 meters in diameter, and weighs ~860 kilograms. Which is pretty massive for an AAM.
For comparison - The PL-15 is ~4 meters in length, ~0.203 meters in diameter, and weighs only ~230 kilograms.
Hence, if the PLANAF (and perhaps the PLAAF too) does field counterparts to the AIM-174B right now, then they are certainly hiding it from the public - And probably for good reasons.
In the meantime - Perhaps it's time to think about the ideas/potentials for several type of large-diameter AAMs that:
1. Fit inside the IWBs of the J-20/A/S, J-35/A and J-XDS; and
2. Are as long as the PL-17 and can fit inside the IWBs of the J-36; and/or
3. Longer than even the PL-17?
For reference: The AIM-174 can be rightfully described as an air-launched variant of the SM-6. It is ~4.7 meters in length, ~0.343 meters in diameter, and weighs ~860 kilograms. Which is pretty massive for an AAM.
For comparison - The PL-15 is ~4 meters in length, ~0.203 meters in diameter, and weighs only ~230 kilograms.
Hence, if the PLANAF (and perhaps the PLAAF too) does field counterparts to the AIM-174B right now, then they are certainly hiding it from the public - And probably for good reasons.
In the meantime - Perhaps it's time to think about the ideas/potentials for several type of large-diameter AAMs that:
1. Fit inside the IWBs of the J-20/A/S, J-35/A and J-XDS; and
2. Are as long as the PL-17 and can fit inside the IWBs of the J-36; and/or
3. Longer than even the PL-17?
Last edited:
Why? It fits the description...
I don't think SOYO needs to go to such lengths in his post to describe/indicate the unknown missile as "PL-174" if said missile really is just the PL-17. Besides, the PL-17 isn't exactly shrouded in such deep levels of secrecy to warrant avoiding any direct mentions of the missile's name in the public discourse.
Also, ~4.7 meters in length vs ~6 meters in length is a lot of difference. This is apart from when comparing the diameters of the respective missiles (one is somewhere between ~250mm and ~300mm, the other is ~340mm). Again, a pretty glaring difference between the two missiles.
Last edited:
But both are same weight class more or less. AIM-174 is this way not because of some merit, but due to it being a crash response. Based o a SAM with heritage dating back into 1960s! Just to not be left completely behind.
This is literally the entire raison d'etre of this weapon, and while not without advantage (slightly larger seeker, more fuel) it will cost it a lot. Especially on hornets, which clearly struggles to haul damn thing around.
PL-17 is optimal weapon, designed on purpose for flanker. Note how it's relatively similar it is to an old abandoned KS-172.
It is just an optimal VLRAAM size/role/idea for flanker platform.
There's certainly no special class around. The only way China might be interested in shorter BVRAAM is to fit it into bays, but this is unrelated to AIM-174 in any conceivable way.
Well, no.
It appears that the PL-17 isn't that much thicker than the PL-15.
Let's give the diameter of the PL-17 some bump into 0.260 meters.
Doing some very simple calculations by assuming that the missiles are perfect uniform cylinders, the volumes of:
PL-15 = (0.203 / 2)^2 * pi * 4 = 0.129 m^3
PL-17 = (0.260 / 2)^2 * pi * 6 = 0.319 m^3
AIM-174 = (0.340 / 2)^2 * pi * 4.7 = 0.427 m^3
Calculating the density of the missiles based on known values:
PL-15 (~230 kilograms) = 230 / 0.129 = ~1783 kg/m^3
AIM-174 (~860 kilograms) = 860 / 0.427 = ~2014 kg/m^3
Hence, if the PL-17 has density that is:
- Same as PL-15 = 1783 * 0.319 = ~569 kg
- Midpoint between those of PL-15 and AIM-174 = ((1783 + 2014)/2) * 0.319 = ~606 kg
- Same as AIM-174 = 2014 * 0.319 = ~643 kg
Even with such gross approximations, the PL-17 is NOT in the same weight class as the AIM-174.
This is let alone some other more crucial factors, including how missiles of different diameters do have significantly different characteristics and performances, even if both missiles are of the same weight. This similarly applies for every object that flies through a medium.
Last edited:
Despite being far thinner than the AIM-174 (since the PL-17 is a clean sheet VLRAAM design as opposed to a repurposed SAM that is the AIM-174) the PL-17 still offers near AIM-174 range at about half the weight and drag.
Any ULRAAM that PLAAF deploy will be a clean sheet design and certainly not some repurposed SAM based development. If PL-17 is approx 70%-80% the range of AIM-174 at 60% the weight and volume, a "PL-174" will comfortably outrange the AIM-174. China appears to be using better energetics. I can't imagine the US having inferior optimisation software and body materials.
There's been whispers of scramjet powered ULRAAMs. We had strong hints of hypersonic, 1000km+ ranged SAMs but AAMs is a different machine.
The main difference is the Chinese will likely have ULO fighters and UADF carrying PL-17 and any longer ranged AAMs. While the US only currently has the F-18 carrying the AIM-174. Not even LO and not too different to the J-16 carrying PL-17 for now. In no time, J-36 will be launching PL-17 internally and any other missile that's more optimised for J-36.
Any ULRAAM that PLAAF deploy will be a clean sheet design and certainly not some repurposed SAM based development. If PL-17 is approx 70%-80% the range of AIM-174 at 60% the weight and volume, a "PL-174" will comfortably outrange the AIM-174. China appears to be using better energetics. I can't imagine the US having inferior optimisation software and body materials.
There's been whispers of scramjet powered ULRAAMs. We had strong hints of hypersonic, 1000km+ ranged SAMs but AAMs is a different machine.
The main difference is the Chinese will likely have ULO fighters and UADF carrying PL-17 and any longer ranged AAMs. While the US only currently has the F-18 carrying the AIM-174. Not even LO and not too different to the J-16 carrying PL-17 for now. In no time, J-36 will be launching PL-17 internally and any other missile that's more optimised for J-36.
Last edited: