Chinese air to air missiles

plawolf said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

AndrewS said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Gloire_bb said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

AndrewS said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

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

bsdnf said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Ironhide said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

qwerty3173 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Not if it's a "slow" loitering aircraft like an AWACS or tanker that are known to fly in race-track patterns. Anyway, the Chinese are apparently developing a hypersonic AAM with a flight time of ~10 minutes to 1000km.

bsdnf said:

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

Click to expand...

Speaking of which, it appears that the USAF is examining the viability of having a flying-wing UCAV which could act as an "arsenal plane" by carrying "dozens of (long-range) AAMs". So, yes, there is indeed a possibility (if not a potential) here.


But of course, the ULRAAMs with maximum ranges in the 4-digits of kilometers wouldn't just require greater lengths than contemporary AAMs, but larger diameters as well. This also meant that whatever platform is carrying these ULRAAMs into contested airspaces in order to target enemy key nodes in the enemy's rear certainly would require supersized IWB(s).

Strictly theoretically-speaking, a centerline (if not main) IWB on a flying wing/cranked kite platform that is ~9-11 meters long should be able to do the job.

Either way, here's a couple fan-made illustration and stats based on a certain elliptical range envelope diagram from a couple months ago.

Do note that the following illustration and information are in no way or form meant to be indicative of any concurrent and future development projects in China, nor can the accuracy of the information on the LRAAMs already in active service today listed below be taken as it is. The following is only meant to offer some rough idea on the probable general developmental directions of future Chinese XLRAAMs (500-1000 kilometers) and ULRAAMs (>1000 kilometers).

Ironhide said:

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

Click to expand...

Well, still gotta be prepared for just-in-case scenarios. This could be where something like a WZ-X (VLO/ULO, mid-subsonic speeds, very high altitude, exceptional endurance) and an unmanned version of Darkstar-counterpart (hypersonic speeds, very high altitude, vast ranges) will be needed.

As we're an English language forum...