Is the meteor missile better than the PL15? Does the meteor have longer range
than the PL15?
Having longer range does not guarantee a kill at extended range.
Outside the 'radar coverage envelope' of a combat aircraft, PL-15 would need continuous feed from the Chinese Beidou Network
to stay on course and reach the designated target
but Electronic Warfare can interfere with satellite feed. PL-15 might need to take cues from an AEW&C system to manage otherwise. This is assuming that an AEW&C system is operating nearby. This would come down to Chinese Netcentric warfare capabilities. The outcome is also contingent upon the capabilities of the adversary - what kind of countermeasures it is able to field, number of assets deployed, formations, tactics - all of this.
METEOR is reportedly among
the most advanced long-range A2A missile designed thus far (the very best of European engineering effort in a while). It can take cues from multiple systems to stay on course, and its RAMjet propulsion allow it to achieve extraordinary speeds mid-flight but the missile is programmed to preserve its fuel
until it
close-in on the designated target, and its
No Escape Zone is 'massive' - the target cannot escape. Netcentric warfare capabilities of the employer is an important consideration nevertheless.
Therefore, straightforward theoretical black-and-white comparisons are not very telling.
---
American hardware
lived up to its HYPE in BVR engagement capacity on 27-02-19 when employed by PAF to counter SU-30 MKI of IAF operating near LOC (around 100 KM mark) in spite of Indian Electronic Warfare efforts in view; Indian pilots had no choice but to scramble to safety (cowards that they are). And these missiles are older AIM-120C5 variant.
The current AIM-120D is much more capable. And the next-generation AIM-260 would push the envelope to far greater extent. Speak of resilience to numerous Electronic Warfare systems among other considerations.