The Kashmir conflict 2025.

[Gloire_bb]

Not trying to be a killjoy, but someone needs to say this out loud.

The Chinese MIC, blessed by PAF competence and IAF misadventurism, has a lot to be proud about right now.

However, a single air battle doesn't make the J-10CE infallible or the Dassault Rafale unredeemable. There are going to be many, many sorties to come.

Sooner or later, might be the day after tomorrow or a decade from now, the PAF is going to lose a J-10 or two. Such is the nature and rhythm of warfare.

So let's not gloat too hard!

I don't think anyone is considering J-10C or JF-17 invulnerable.

The issue is whether SPECTRA, OPF and second M88 engine is worth 70-100 million, and wether french support package (which by default can't sustain indian air force in a war, there is just no such production capacity) is worth a similar or even higher price ratio.

Because at this rate, Pakistan can in fact lose planes and shoot missiles.

India invested everything into rafales, which it can't afford to lose and can't sustain.
And planes that India can lose and sustain are either delayed by a decade, or disregarded because of rafale costs.

 

[Blitzo]

I’m almost getting Jiawu vibes from this engagement.

I don't think it's quite that dramatic, materially.

This is mostly reputational from the perspective of the west.

 

[enroger]

PL15E is 4m long and weigh 200kg, if you watch the video, and compare the length, it was only 2m + and that guy moved it with a slight push.

Well, with the front end (payload, electronics) gone and all the solid fuel expended it ought to be pretty light

 

[Temstar]

Xi Yazhou's analysis on the air battle.

His key point is, as we discussed here in this thread: there's no material difference between PL-15 and PL-15E, any reduction in PL-15E's range would be due to software control.

Since range limit is software controlled, that limit could be easily removed and make PL-15E identical to PL-15, should the PRC leadership see it fit to authorize such a removal of limit. Therefore rumours of China rushing a batch of non-export variant PL-15 to Pakistan is an unimportant point. And likewise you shouldn't consider the "145km" limit as set in stone when you see PL-15E debris and attempt use their location to determine their launch position. Particularly if the party involved is in good relation with China and especially if they're one of the All Weather Strategic Partners.

 

[EverfrosT]

I am not sure if this article from the Telegraph has been posted yet (I couldn't find it in the last couple of pages), but I will leave here as a record to add to the way western media has been covering the aerial encounter.

To be honest the author put in a decent bit of effort into this article, with only some minor errors in reasoning.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Nice article, took me a while to realize who this Hu Jixin mentioned here is though.

 

[Lnk111229]

PL15E is 4m long and weigh 200kg, if you watch the video, and compare the length, it was only 2m + and that guy moved it with a slight push.

Well for few page we can already conclude it just a metal husk. All important component inside this husk is gone. So India can free to chopped it up put to resin cage and put on some Air Marshall's table. Little souvenir from China.

 

[bsdnf]

Xi Yazhou's analysis on the air battle.

His key point is, as we discussed here in this thread: there's no material difference between PL-15 and PL-15E, any reduction in PL-15E's range would be due to software control.

Since range limit is software controlled, that limit could be easily removed and make PL-15E identical to PL-15, should the PRC leadership see it fit to authorize such a removal of limit. Therefore rumours of China rushing a batch of non-export variant PL-15 to Pakistan is an unimportant point. And likewise you shouldn't consider the "145km" limit as set in stone when you see PL-15E debris and attempt use their location to determine their launch position. Particularly if the party involved is in good relation with China and especially if they're one of the All Weather Strategic Partners.

My understanding is that the range difference between PL-15 and PL-15E lies mainly due to the trajectory planning. PL-15E may use a more inefficient and primitive trajectory, such as flying straight to the target

 

[generalmeng]

Xi Yazhou's analysis on the air battle.

His key point is, as we discussed here in this thread: there's no material difference between PL-15 and PL-15E, any reduction in PL-15E's range would be due to software control.

Since range limit is software controlled, that limit could be easily removed and make PL-15E identical to PL-15, should the PRC leadership see it fit to authorize such a removal of limit. Therefore rumours of China rushing a batch of non-export variant PL-15 to Pakistan is an unimportant point. And likewise you shouldn't consider the "145km" limit as set in stone when you see PL-15E debris and attempt use their location to determine their launch position. Particularly if the party involved is in good relation with China and especially if they're one of the All Weather Strategic Partners.

I am confused, how would software limit the missile? because the missile is rocket soild fuel, in two stages. i am not sure how the software can limit the amount of rocket fuel to be burn. i am under the impression the rocket fuel burns very quickly over a few seconds, and the missile is using the remaining kinetic energy to go toward the bandit, until its close then the second booster burns.

My understanding is that the range difference between PL-15 and PL-15E lies mainly due to the trajectory planning. PL-15E may use a more inefficient and primitive trajectory, such as direct flight.

this reply would answer how the effective range is reduce.

 

[Temstar]

I am confused, how would software limit the missile? because the missile is rocket soild fuel, in two stages. i am not sure how the software can limit the amount of rocket fuel to be burn. i am under the impression the rocket fuel burns very quickly over a few seconds, and the missile is using the remaining kinetic energy to go toward the bandit, until its close then the second booster burns.



this reply would answer how the effective range is reduce.

Say for example, artificially reduce the timing gap between the first pulse burning out and ignition of the second pulse?

 

[generalmeng]

Say for example, artificially reduce the timing gap between the first pulse burning out and ignition of the second pulse?

then to remove the software limitation, PAK would need to individually reflash each missile's internal algorithm.