Q-5 was the dedicated test bed for all PGMs for quiet some time
PLA Air Force news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Probably said exercises involve certain province and is operationally sensitive.
I am aware of that weapon, and it is indeed 100kg weight class, and it is the weapon that optionsss is referring to in this thread:
PLA Air Force news, pics and videos
This would be ideal for exports. J-10 with targeting pods and radar system should be sufficient for delivering A2G weaponry. You are thinking A2A for exports? That would work, too. I was actually thinking A2G. With this kind of adaptors, J10 would be more capable in A2G missions. Even with two...
www.sinodefenceforum.com
However that is the only picture we have of it, and it definitely is not 250kg class.
The 100kg bomb is the one at the top of this brochure.
Well, you can't convince @Bltizo with the words of the like of Shilao, just like you can't convince @asif iqbal without an actual video of heavy vehicle loaded on type 726 coming in/out of a 071/076. For them, seeing is believing.
Sadly, for the PLA and military affiliated people in China, anyone who demand a "see-it-to-believe-it" is potentially a foreign spy trying to gain intelligence.
You can't appease both side.
What is beyond dispute is that PRC has the technical and industrial capability to make pretty much any kind of air to ground munition it wishes.
I would rather you didn't speak for me thanks.
Regarding what Shilao stated -- I can very much absolutely believe that the PLA have conducted training with a broader range of PGMs and more sophisticated PGMs than we have seen.
That is absolutely within the realm of believability for me, and is something that we can have all expected, myself included.
However, there is a major difference between "the PLA has some PGM strike capabilities we haven't been shown" versus "the PLAAF has equivalents to every type of non-powered PGM the USAF has" -- and it certainly does not mean the PLAAF has PGMs of the various weight classes and configurations I've been describing as a high priority (250kg and 100kg PGMs, with multi-ejector racks).
Let me be clear -- if Shilao said tomorrow "PLA in service JH-7As carry six 250kg PGMs on a single pylon using a MER" then I would absolutely be happy to use that as a sufficient evidence for the PLA having that capability in service.
I think words from more credible individuals like him, are absolutely adequate as a substitute of imagery thresholds.
But telling us that the PLA has some more capable and sophisticated A2G capabilities that we haven't seen, is not particularly useful.
What you are saying certainly make sense.
However, like I said before, Shilao is ONLY credible because he is not a fully independent actor/person. The price he has to pay for knowing more about the real PLA, is that he is also subject to security restrictions and is held accountable for what he says. This is also why someone as logical and attentive to detail as you would "believe" what he says. Because what he says could be considered a credible source with a level of confidence deemed sufficient by you. However, from the POV of the PLA and Chinese authorities, Shilao's words are also credible and thus have the risk of leaking important technical details of the PLA's abilities. Therefore, just like @asif iqbal won't get his pictures, you won't get Shilao's words.
Your original words: "But telling us that the PLA has some more capable and sophisticated A2G capabilities that we haven't seen, is not particularly useful." should be enough to explain my point. The PLA will NOT give the general public information that some like you can determine to be "useful", because if you can determine it to be "useful", than a professional spy would at least dig even more sensitive information from those.
So, my original words was also first prefaced with:
"I can very much absolutely believe that the PLA have conducted training with a broader range of PGMs and more sophisticated PGMs than we have seen.
That is absolutely within the realm of believability for me, and is something that we can have all expected, myself included."
... and:
"However, there is a major difference between "the PLA has some PGM strike capabilities we haven't been shown" versus "the PLAAF has equivalents to every type of non-powered PGM the USAF has" -- and it certainly does not mean the PLAAF has PGMs of the various weight classes and configurations I've been describing as a high priority (250kg and 100kg PGMs, with multi-ejector racks)."
If you want to say "we cannot even get any words from Shilao/others about detailed information like XYZ type of weapon etc" -- sure, that's fine, and understandable. There is always some information across all domains of PLA watching that for some reason or another, will be omitted.
But by extension, then we collectively as PLA watchers must also acknowledge that we have no evidence as to the extent of the PLA's precision strike capabilities in terms of categories of weapons acquired, and in service status.
All we can conclude is "PLA has A2G capabilities which they haven't revealed to us".
We do not have the basis to try to claim the PLA has a reached a certain threshold of A2G capability in terms of munitions type or proliferation status or operational maturity.
Yes to all what you are saying. And this is NOT inconsistent to what my original post was:
Although, I see what the conflict is:
"the words of the like of Shilao" is understood by you to mean "any words of the like of Shilao".
Okey, I guess I was vague here. What I meant was "those words by the like of Shilao", specifically referring to what he said in the video.