Chinese air to air missiles

[AndrewS]

If the PL16 is superior and cheaper in every way to the PL15, and you can expand production to make as many as you want easily, even in war time usage scenarios, why would you not just make an ARM version of that instead of keeping the PL15 line to make ARM versions of the PL15?

Indeed, if the goal is to have the best ARM, you really are better off with a clean sheet design rather than modifying an existing AAM.

With China’s technical capabilities, industrial might and the vast amounts of money China is prepared to invest in its military modernisation, the only logical explanation for making an ARM version of the PL15 instead of developing a brand new dedicated ARM is to preserve the manufacturing capability of the PL15. At least for a few years more.

Indeed, I would be amazed if the PLAAF doesn’t already have a dedicated clean sheet ARM already in service, given the mission set, threat environment, and systems they will potentially need to deal with.

I would also add that if you can reuse the PL-15 rocket body, it avoids cost and development time.

My guess is that this is the lowest cost approach.

EDIT

Stealth fighters are severely constained by internal weapons carriage volume, and the PL-15 form factor has already been optimised for this.

For comparison, I see that the F-35 can carry 4 AMRAAMs or half as many AARGMs (which occupy 2 hard points). In comparison, the J-20 or J-35 could swap PL-15 AAMs and ARMs on a 1-to-1 basis.

And my gut says that the 68kg warhead of the AARGM is a legacy from the HARM days when electronics and terminal targeting was much worse.

We can see many examples of SAM warheads getting smaller as well.

 

[Gloire_bb]

Stealth fighters are severely constained by internal weapons carriage volume, and the PL-15 form factor has already been optimised for this.

For comparison, I see that the F-35 can carry 4 AMRAAMs or half as many AARGMs (which occupy 2 hard points). In comparison, the J-20 or J-35 could swap PL-15 AAMs and ARMs on a 1-to-1 basis.

2 AARGMs and 2 AMRAAMs.
It isn't about PL-15 optimization, it's about how F-35 bays are arranged in a single engine aircraft, to give them additional depth, but somewhat shorter length.

 

[AndrewS]

2 AARGMs and 2 AMRAAMs.
It isn't about PL-15 optimization, it's about how F-35 bays are arranged in a single engine aircraft, to give them additional depth, but somewhat shorter length.

You're correct.

The F-35 is a bad example

The F-22 with its missile bays sized for AAMs would be a better example

 

[Gloire_bb]

You're correct.

The F-35 is a bad example

The F-22 with its missile bays sized for AAMs would be a better example

It's same there. F-22 doesn't have especially narrow bays, they just aren't deep.
And since US firmly takes egg over chicken(i.e. available munitions optimized for external carriage over bays), their main payloads aren't bay sized or optimized.

 

[bsdnf]

Some Reflections Triggered by the CJ-1000:

One day after the maiden flight of the J-36, Feiyu Club (飞羽社) suggested in a video that the J-36's IWB could not only carry LRAAM but also larger special munitions, such as an AAM with a 1,000-kilometer range, which utilizes space-based (e.g., satellites) and air-based platforms for relay guidance.

Given their good track record—for instance, last year they accurately point out that Type 100 is next-gen tank, explained based on open-source papers why the Type 100 was designed the way it was and what functions it would have (which now appears to be entirely correct), and some of their personnel have previously collaborated with Guancha team member—we can consider their perspective credible, or at least well-grounded in open-source research.

This claim seemed somewhat unbelievable at the time. However, in hindsight, since the somewhat ambiguous official statement after the parade that "CJ-1000 can strike key nodes of the air combat systems," along with recent news about the PLA actively preparing a prototype for a space-based early warning network, we may need to reexamine this concept: a super long range AAM (very likely HCM) that, through relay corrections from space-based or air-based platforms, as least can target slow-moving, high-value aerial assets like AWACS, as well as conduct air to surface strikes.

Damn, Northrop Grumman's B-21 could really be a 6-gen fighter

 

[Ironhide]

an AAM with a 1,000-kilometer range, which utilizes space-based (e.g., satellites) and air-based platforms for relay guidance.

Regarding the performance and effectiveness of such a platform.

RAND was asked by the USAF to look at a similar long range offensive counter-air scenarios.

An AAM with 1000 km engagement range, 50 km seeker acquisition range with an hour of flight time and track + IFTUs provided by space based assets.

They determined unless satelite gets taken out by adversary it remains the most reliable and accurate source for tracking and IFTU unlike GPS or INS or another aircraft.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[qwerty3173]

Regarding the performance and effectiveness of such a platform.

RAND was asked by the USAF to look at a similar long range offensive counter-air scenarios.

An AAM with 1000 km engagement range, 50 km seeker acquisition range with an hour of flight time and track + IFTUs provided by space based assets.

They determined unless satelite gets taken out by adversary it remains the most reliable and accurate source for tracking and IFTU unlike GPS or INS or another aircraft.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

View attachment 162096

Uh, what does "An hour of flight time" work here? Are they seriously considering a subsonic AAM? That won't work by the simple reason that the target plane will not be there a hour later, might already be back at base and in the hangar for all I know.