Chinese air to air missiles

[Blitzo]

That missile does not look like it'll be useful for a stealthy fighter at all, and like A Mace said, I'm not convinced it's even Chinese. It looks nothing like any of the proposed new gen AAMs we know of.

The booster makes it look something more like something you'd see on a two stage SAM rather than a two stage air to air missile. This thing will probably only be useful onboard large, not stealthy A2A planes like flankers.

 

[Hyperwarp]

what on earth is a PL-13?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Quickie]

That missile does not look like it'll be useful for a stealthy fighter at all, and like A Mace said, I'm not convinced it's even Chinese. It looks nothing like any of the proposed new gen AAMs we know of.

The booster makes it look something more like something you'd see on a two stage SAM rather than a two stage air to air missile. This thing will probably only be useful onboard large, not stealthy A2A planes like flankers.

Looks to me, an AAM riding on a (2 staged?) SAM. The entire setup would be too big for even a flanker.

This may well be a operational system meant to extend the range of the AAM rather than just a test setup.

 

[AssassinsMace]

If it's not Chinese, I'm sure that pic is out there to cross reference what it really is. The PL-10 mockup seen on the J-20 doesn't look like what it use to... if it's still the PL-10. So it can be something not seen yet.

 

[thunderchief]

That missile does not look like it'll be useful for a stealthy fighter at all, and like A Mace said, I'm not convinced it's even Chinese. It looks nothing like any of the proposed new gen AAMs we know of.

The booster makes it look something more like something you'd see on a two stage SAM rather than a two stage air to air missile. This thing will probably only be useful onboard large, not stealthy A2A planes like flankers.

Conventional wisdom says that large , long range AAMs do not belong on fighters (planes for air superiority ) . Instead , they are usually deployed on interceptors to engage fast flying high altitude targets ( bombers , recon aircraft ) or low flying cruise missiles .

In recent times dedicated interceptors (like MiG-31) are almost extinct . Instead , modern 4.5 and 5. gen fighters could be configured to act as interceptors . In that role , they would sacrifice some stealth and instead would use powerful radars and long-ranged missiles to detect and engage enemy at distance .

Bear in mind that in most types of recent conflicts you wouldn't need such AAMs . They would pay off only when you have very sophisticated opponent (like USA ) , so they are in fact limited-use niche weapons .

 

[i.e.]

Conventional wisdom says that large , long range AAMs do not belong on fighters (planes for air superiority ) . Instead , they are usually deployed on interceptors to engage fast flying high altitude targets ( bombers , recon aircraft ) or low flying cruise missiles .

In recent times dedicated interceptors (like MiG-31) are almost extinct . Instead , modern 4.5 and 5. gen fighters could be configured to act as interceptors . In that role , they would sacrifice some stealth and instead would use powerful radars and long-ranged missiles to detect and engage enemy at distance .

Bear in mind that in most types of recent conflicts you wouldn't need such AAMs . They would pay off only when you have very sophisticated opponent (like USA ) , so they are in fact limited-use niche weapons .

Imagine a B1B Lancer,
- upgraded with a Big AESA in front and a full suit of ECM and ECCMs. Jammers and IR-EODAS (space and electrical power is no problem)
- its belly filled with rotary launchers full of long range AAMs in sizes of AIM-120D and latest LRAAMs with active radar-IR composite seekers. down to AIM-9X for close range work.
- its 4 F101 engines are swapped out for 4xF119s. pushing the B1B to have a supercruise capability.

yeah Boeing was pushing for this idea long time ago for long range air dominance in pacific. a super interceptor.
that does not need vulnerable inflight refuelers.

also.

don't forget cruise missiles... Mig31 is mostly built to deal with them rather than bombers.!

 

[thunderchief]

- upgraded with a Big AESA in front and a full suit of ECM and ECCMs. Jammers and IR-EODAS (space and electrical power is no problem)
- its belly filled with rotary launchers full of long range AAMs in sizes of AIM-120D and latest LRAAMs with active radar-IR composite seekers. down to AIM-9X for close range work.
- its 4 F101 engines are swapped out for 4xF119s. pushing the B1B to have a supercruise capability.

yeah Boeing was pushing for this idea long time ago for long range air dominance in pacific. a super interceptor.
that does not need vulnerable inflight refuelers.

Interesting concept but totally unpractical . Largest interceptors actually built were Tu-128 and Yak-28P . I don't think they would be of much use in actual war .

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

don't forget cruise missiles... Mig31 is mostly built to deal with them rather than bombers.!

Well , I tend to disagree on that . Cruise missiles we are talking about are BGM-109 Tomahawks . Unless armed with nuclear warheads , I don't think they would be such a priority target for Soviet PVO to dedicate an expensive and valuable aircraft to shoot them down with equally expensive missiles like R-33 . But , this is just my opinion

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The craft IE just described was called the B1R or as I like to think of it "The BoneR". The structure of the plane would have also been changed swapping swing wings for fixed angle wings external load and a new tail.

 

[plawolf]

Such a supersized interceptor would only work if your opponent does not have BVR, or else it is going to struggle to dodge incoming missiles. The Mig25 and 31 got away with terrible agility by being very fast and can usually outrun any missiles shot at them at BVR and sometimes even WVR ranges. A modified B1 would not have that even with F119s.

So it cannot outturn or outrun incoming missiles and would be reliant pretty much completely on soft kill measures to survive. Just not very practical.

I'm guess this idea was conceived when the PLAAF was still relying on J7s and J8s with only PL8s and limited PL11s, and it might have been effective against that kind of opponent, but the idea was dropped pretty quickly when it was evident that the PLAAF was well on its way to getting ARHAAMs and upgrading its fighter fleet to have BVR across the board on all its main frontline fighters.

 

[hardware]

during the 1982 falkland/malvinas conflict, I saw picture of Nimrod ASW carry sidewinder AAM. for self defense.surely not against fighter aircraft.