ROCAF record

Totoro said:

Okay, i am confused now. First i say i read china has some 2000 r-27 to which vlad replies that china has 1000 adders which are r-73, and to which tphuang says 'youre right. china does have more than 1000 r-77'. So each of us is mentioning a different aam here! Ok, once for all, to the best of our (combined) knowledge:
china has how meny of each of following types of aam?
r-27 (if possible also break down to IR and extended range versions)
r-73
r-77
pl-12
pl-11
pl-8

I do think, however, it's silly to assume a non ending supply. Aams will be used up much faster than any production line could replace them. Also purchasing foreign made aams is not a quick process, at least not in quantities over several hundred. Therefore it is of paramount imporance to have enough aams to begin with, and to plan the war as if no more could be attained in the first month of the war.

Click to expand...

R-77 == adder

R-73 == Acher
Kanwa says that China has been buying 100+ R-77 each year for its flanker fleet.
The recent Kanwa article said that China just imported newer variants of R-27 again, I guess those ones are the ARH or IR versions.

PL-11 is in limited production, it's just Aspide missile basically. PL-12 is in mass production. I'm not sure how many China has. Crobato? any ideas?

Wow, i can't believe i screwed up there. I know these missiles, yet i mixed them up here...this is pretty embarassing. But thank you for correcting me.
Anyway, one would assume plaaf started ordering r77 when they got their first planes capable of firing them. With first su30s being delivered in 2000 that'd make 6 years of adder purchases, totalling 600 missiles. That is, of course, barely enough even for just the j11 that can carry them. And if even just a part of su30s are gonna be used in air supremacy role - that number is quite inadequate.

As for pl-12, i've seen articles comparing it to both aim120A and aim120B models... given that A was 80s tech and B came into service right after the gulf war... Chances would be the B comparison is closer to the truth, no? Which is then comparable with earliest C models since those have the same engine/guidance, only with different wings.

No idea on PL-12 numbers. But they should still be limited. On regiments, until J-11B is in mass serial production, it would only be the J-10, J-8F and J-8IIs upgraded to that standard that could use them. Ascertaining stocks on other Chinese missiles like PL-11 and PL-8 is nigh impossible. I do believe PL-11 is operational with J-8II regiments.

I am not sure if China has ordered the EA version of the R-27, which is the one that is active guided. Or the -P version, which is guides on to radars. Can't rule them out either, all in the envelope of possibility but currently lacks solid proof or report.

The R-27ER is not something to be underestimated though, even if it is SARH. It is longer ranged compared to the R-77 and their seekers still have double the acquisition range of the R-77's. The R-27T/ET versions are also missiles to reckon with; their seekers can acquire a target as far as 30km though you have to be at the rear to do that. At the front maybe between 10km to 15km at the best conditions. These missiles, however, are best used in any aspect of attack other than the front, for which the R-27R/ER is the best choice. These missiles can be something to reckon with in the between WVR and BVR regions.

One reason why SARH missiles are still being bought is because they are much cheaper than ARH missiles, and they are still quite deadly if you know how to use them. For that reason, one cannot discount that Sparrows on the F-16 Block 20s are still a major threat.

The designer of the PL-12 claims the PL-12 to be somewhere between the R-77 and AIM-120C. It sounds optimistic and boasting, but that is his opinion.

One thing to remember. It is always important to note that reliable missile kills do not take place at maximum range. You start getting a reliable kill ratio around two thirds and under. BVR missiles can still be used right to the verge of the dogfight, while improvements in IR AAM missiles have reached to the point they can engage in near BVR ranges.

The improvements are there on the R-73 and the PL-8. However, the AIM-9L/P used by the ROCAF has become significantly behind. Same goes to the Matra Magic II. Ironically, the indigenous TC-1 might be more developed, being a later design, than the other two, having for example, a 40 degrees off boresight compared to the AIM-9L/P around 25 to 30 degrees.

a recent R-27 article by Kanwa, makes no mention of R-27P or EA.


Actually, I believe the designer of SD-10 said that SD-10 is between R-77 and AIM-120C. And obviously, we can assume that PL-12 is better than SD-10. Anyhow, the turn rate and maximum speed and range number on PL-12 at least looks better than those of R-77.

I'd say, most likely it's true about the PL-12. I think China probably has better electronics on it than the Adder, but not as good as the Slammer. Then it probably has better manueverability and range than the Slammer, but not as good as the Adder. It seems that's usually the middle ground with China.

One reason why SARH missiles are still being bought is because they are much cheaper than ARH missiles, and they are still quite deadly if you know how to use them. For that reason, one cannot discount that Sparrows on the F-16 Block 20s are still a major threat.

Click to expand...

If an F-16 with a Sparrow confronts an Su-30 with an Adder, the Su-30 is favored greatly. Having a fire-and-forget missile means the fighter craft launching the missile has the ability to close in on the enemy fighter and there the Su-30 would have an overwhelming advantage with its great manueverability and off-boresight capability.

That does not necessarily make it a disadvantage for SARH either. Like I said, if you know how to use the missile, it can still be deadly.

A plane who fired a SARH missile does not necessarily have to keep its nose pointed on the target. It only needs to keep the target within the radar's field of view, which can range to 30 degress off bore, but some radars can manage even 60 degrees, or even 90 degrees like the Zhuk MSE. So long as the target is within your radar's view while the radar is at STT (Single Target Tracking) mode, the missile will stay true.

If you fire your ARH missile at long distances, it is important that you still have to keep your target in your radar FOV. That is because all ARH missiles are command guided in their inertial phase till they reach a range where the seeker's radar can acquire the aircraft. For the R-77, that's around 16km on a 5m2 RCS target. The smaller the target's RCS, the smaller the acquisition basket, and likewise, if the target RCS is bigger, the basket will be larger.

So in fact, you can keep flying toward the target in a tangent, doing all sorts of maneuvers but maintain the target at the radar's FOV at all times. During that time, you can fire off a second missile. Sometimes a target after trying to outmaneuver one missile, might not have enough energy to shake off the second one.

Regardless if you fire a SARH or ARH missile, it's always important to keep your target tracked at all times, and not to lose it from your radar FOV. if you lose him, it would take a while to rediscover him with your radar, and by then it may be too late since he may launch a counterattack of his own.

That does not necessarily make it a disadvantage for SARH either. Like I said, if you know how to use the missile, it can still be deadly

Click to expand...

.

No, that is definitely a disadvantage. The aircraft will have to keep guiding the missile even when it's close, an Su-30 wouldn't have to do that.

It only has to keep the target within radar FOV, which you have to do anyway in any fight, and it does not matter what missile you are using. While it remains to be a disadvantage, its not as big as it sounds like.

It only has to keep the target within radar FOV, which you have to do anyway in any fight, and it does not matter what missile you are using. While it remains to be a disadvantage, its not as big as it sounds like.

Click to expand...

No, with an ARHM once the radar-homing head of the missile activates the fighter can do whatever it wants. The missile can still hit. It's completely up to the pilot what to do, there's no requirement to keep the radar pointed at the enemy fighter. With an SARHM the radar has to be guiding the missile until it hits, meaning the fighter is severely limited in manueverability options compared to a fighter with an ARHM. In a fight like this, the difference would be more than enough to almost guarantee a kill.

Pointed and radar FOV are not the same thing. I can come at you at a transversal direction of 30 degrees, some radars can do 60 degrees, and still be able to guide a SARH missle. In a SARH terminal stage, you are not really guiding the missile---you are illuminating it like a flashlight. The missile is guiding on its own, attracted to that illumination. Even if you have to break off hard, the missile can still home because some other guy is still lighting the same target.

While it is an advantage to "forget" the target once the seeker is activated---so maybe you can evade the target's missile coming at you---usually it's not, because you still like to keep the target in your radar to make sure you can see that the missile gets him. Let's say, if you already "forgot" the target, but what if the missile didn't actually hit him? You would have already surrendered your primary advantage and he may jump on you in turn. You would have made the fatal mistake thinking he is dead when he's not. People need to --validate-- their 'kill'. In this case, ARH missiles are still used in a way not much different from a SARH missile.

By the way, how would you know if the ARH missile you fired had gone terminal or not? Remember, before the ARH seeker goes terminal, your radar still has guide the missile in its midphase flight until the target is within range of the seeker's acquisition envelope. The trouble is---when do you actually know this? Do you risk breaking off early and losing the connection of your radar supplying data to the missile? Or do you stay on course, making sure of this, and making sure of validating your kill?

The option and advantage of ARH missiles over SARH are there, yes, but it does not diminish the threat value SARH missiles have.