In the sense of training new pilots and maintaining pilot competencies. Not in combat roles.
JH-7/JH-7A/JH-7B Thread
- Thread starter MIGleader
- Start date
JH-7 is twin seat, you cannot equate them. Also there is dedicated trainers for training no need for those planes if there is all they can do.
Just to nitpick… the JH-7A cannot use the PL-12
What kind of BVR he can use ? I was thinking it was compatible with PL-12, read somewhere that it was, PL-11 ?
At Zhuhai, not all weapons at an aircraft's static display are actually integrated and operational with the given aircraft in PLA service.
PL-12 is not integrated with JH-7/A -- in fact the aircraft has does not have any BVR weapons integrated with it as part of operational service to the best of our knowledge
I'm not sure if you're kidding or not.
I assume you are, because I clearly wrote this in my previous post: "At Zhuhai, not all weapons at an aircraft's static display are actually integrated and operational with the given aircraft in PLA service."
For other users, if they are new, I want to reiterate that we've seen other aircraft do flight test and launch tests with a variety of other weapons before, like L-15 with TL-20 100kg SDB style weapon, H-6 with 500kg wing kit and engine FT-12 PGM, a variety of FT and LS PGMs across a variety of different platforms, and JH-7/As as well with a number of different PGMs (including another 1000kg PGM class, below) -- but that's all irrelevant for our purposes of establishing whether the PLA actually has procured a given PGM type in service.
Remember PGM testing =/= PLA procurement of said PGM in service
Flight testing and separation/launch testing is just part of the normal development of a new PGM by the various institutes.
It does not mean the PLA has bought them and it is in PLA service.
I started writing those before I got to your post.I'm not sure if you're kidding or not.
I assume you are, because I clearly wrote this in my previous post: "At Zhuhai, not all weapons at an aircraft's static display are actually integrated and operational with the given aircraft in PLA service."
For other users, if they are new, I want to reiterate that we've seen other aircraft do flight test and launch tests with a variety of other weapons before, like L-15 with TL-20 100kg SDB style weapon, H-6 with 500kg wing kit and engine FT-12 PGM, a variety of FT and LS PGMs across a variety of different platforms, and JH-7/As as well with a number of different PGMs (including another 1000kg PGM class, below) -- but that's all irrelevant for our purposes of establishing whether the PLA actually has procured a given PGM type in service.
Remember PGM testing =/= PLA procurement of said PGM in service
Flight testing and separation/launch testing is just part of the normal development of a new PGM by the various institutes.
It does not mean the PLA has bought them and it is in PLA service.
But to be fair. I need to point out that the JH7A in the video above has yellow/green primer paint, with the PGM in white paint.
But in the picture, both the JH7A and the PGM has the same color paint as active PLA JH7A. That to me is an indication that the grey active PLA color JH7A and 1-ton PGM is closer to integration than the yellow primer and white PGM paint combination.
Of course, your skepticism is definitely a stronger argument.
I could’ve sworn that I’ve seen a JH-7A carry PL-21 in flight though. Can’t seem to find the photo unfortunately. It is posted at this very forum.
Do we have a hashtag feature for finding past content easily?