Re: Jh-7 thread
I think China would define the JH-7 as a strike plane rather than a fighter-bomber. It'll be great for the JH-7A to be able to act as a fighter, but from what China has done, that is doubtful.
But do you know the strength of the wing? How else will you know that the 2nd station out is too weak to handle BVRAAMs?
PL-5B is tail-aspect, but all PL-5C/E and PL-8 are all-aspect, but the PL-5 cannot be used with HMS, but since right now JH-7A has no HMS, Having the PL-8 is like having the PL-5....
Since the JH-7A can launch long range ASMs, I too would think the JH-7A can launch BVRAAMs, but unless we see that happen in action, we can't say anything.
Also, PL-10 is not BVR. (Sounds like people haven't realise.)
I think China would define the JH-7 as a strike plane rather than a fighter-bomber. It'll be great for the JH-7A to be able to act as a fighter, but from what China has done, that is doubtful.
But do you know the strength of the wing? How else will you know that the 2nd station out is too weak to handle BVRAAMs?
PL-5B is tail-aspect, but all PL-5C/E and PL-8 are all-aspect, but the PL-5 cannot be used with HMS, but since right now JH-7A has no HMS, Having the PL-8 is like having the PL-5....
Since the JH-7A can launch long range ASMs, I too would think the JH-7A can launch BVRAAMs, but unless we see that happen in action, we can't say anything.
Also, PL-10 is not BVR. (Sounds like people haven't realise.)