PL-15 export version data officially released by China

[arjunk]

This was one of the reasons Russian missiles supposedly perform worse than their American counterparts in air but not on paper. Russians have a different testing criteria where they would launch from a higher altitude (iirc 40k feet), while Americans would launch from a lower altitude to find the range. I don't know what conditions the Chinese test them in. Nor is it clear whether 145km is the max range against fighters or large targets only.

145km is based on what parameters?
Is it nose on, is it at 10k ft or 25k ft?
Is it with launch aircraft doing 300knots at 5000ft or Mach 1.1 at 35000?

At best those are nominal performance values which are then cut down for public consumption. When units are sold there is a strict NDA (Non-disclosure agreement) signed that also involves intel agencies(or equal therof) from both countries after which actual performance parameters are disclosed and even then those aren’t fully released until a contract is signed.
The PL-15 was designed to outdo the AIM-120Ds published range - not what the AIM-120D can actually do because that is closely guarded Opsec as is the PL-15s actual max performance.

Those concentrating on the PL-15 should look at the other aspects of it -
Duplex link for constant updates along with Beidou positioning means that within the good WEZ of this system it will kill the target aircraft no matter what.

 

[MH.Yang]

Hows Does PL-10, a short range AAM have a range of 60 KM? Also where are these sources from? I doubt any of them are too accurate. That’s just now how BVR range works, “120 KM” and “60 KM” etc

The first picture is from the Chinese military magazine <ordnance science and technology>, and the second picture is from the military channel of sina.com.

The PL10 targets AIM9x and R73, and the range of the export version is 20km.

 

[arjunk]

In the POV of aerodynamic I doubt if missile can change trajectory easily. Not much degree of freedom and hence easy to miss.

Missile take advantage of low RCX and element of surprise. But this is good enough for long range BVR missile to take down tanker, AWAC and Bomber.

I am not sure if my hypothesis is correct. This is what I gather from doing work in radar. I have limited system level experience. The military guy will know better.

Missiles are manoeuvrable enough to do that. A missile launch from an enemy plane can also be detected. A "suicide drone" is basically a cruise missile that can be manually controlled (many SOWs already do this). They are best used for air to ground combat.

A missile will always be more manueoverable than a drone. An air to air "suicide drone" would just be a slower and heavier air to air missile (but it will be able to loiter and possibly have longer range). However, what many militaries are doing is arming these drones with their own weapons so they can fly into enemy airspace and launch otherwise short range weapons without endangering the pilot. But most of these applications are again air to ground, so I'm not sure if it's possible or feasible to give a suicide drone air to air missiles.

 

[Wikki019]

I don't know how much bluffing has been done on the range of PL 15 by chinese and pakistanis ranging from 250 to 350 km. Now China claims it to be 145 so it should be around 100 km at its best.

Try to test it, again like 27 feb

 

[iLION12345_1]

The first picture is from the Chinese military magazine <ordnance science and technology>, and the second picture is from the military channel of sina.com.

The PL10 targets AIM9x and R73, and the range of the export version is 20km.

IMO The PL-10 missile cannot go 60KM no matter what version, it’s too small. If there is any range increase in the local version, I doubt it’s more than 5-10KM, if any at all.

The other numbers seem too big of a jump too. How is China getting twice the range from the same missile with no apparent changes? Given how the source presents them, I would assume they are just making up the numbers. No country actually publishes missile ranges, and China is especially secretive of most of their missile tech. It’s also partly because they cannot be a single number but a vast array of numbers depending on the conditions.

 

[MH.Yang]

IMO The PL-10 missile cannot go 60KM no matter what version, it’s too small. If there is any range increase in the local version, I doubt it’s more than 5-10KM, if any at all.

The other numbers seem too big of a jump too. How is China getting twice the range from the same missile with no apparent changes? Given how the source presents them, I would assume they are just making up the numbers. No country actually publishes missile ranges, and China is especially secretive of most of their missile tech. It’s also partly because they cannot be a single number but a vast array of numbers depending on the conditions.

Yes, you have a point.
I thought about that. The gap between the two versions should not be so large.

 

[serenity]

IMO The PL-10 missile cannot go 60KM no matter what version, it’s too small. If there is any range increase in the local version, I doubt it’s more than 5-10KM, if any at all.

The other numbers seem too big of a jump too. How is China getting twice the range from the same missile with no apparent changes? Given how the source presents them, I would assume they are just making up the numbers. No country actually publishes missile ranges, and China is especially secretive of most of their missile tech. It’s also partly because they cannot be a single number but a vast array of numbers depending on the conditions.

PLAAF version of PL-10 range is quite secretive but they said it is extremely long for its size. Now that could just mean 30km rather than 20km and 30km is already more than typical short range missiles. However PL-10 is actually quite large and the aim was to have something which can push this range far as possible.

60km would mean it has some totally different fuel and engine system compared to 20km version. It is possible since PL-10's size is between AIM-9 and AIM-120 roughly and first generations of AIM-120 wasn't much better than 70km range. All of them basically have doubled. Although 60km is hard to believe I think if it really needed to be done, it could be since PL-15 is probably around double the fuel capacity than PL-10 and has at least 150km range for PLAAF own use versions using same measurement of range. So something like PL-10 having less than half 150km range at 60km is possible. PL-10 is actually quite huge for a short range missile but 60km is to be proven rather than assume is the case since it is so much longer than typical current generation of WVR missile.

 

[LeGenD]

Good move by China. This might attract some customers. Range is very good.

Aim120d is believed to be around 140km which PAF loved to have.

203++ KM range - demonstrated in a recent test involving a UAV.

American AIM-54 Phoenix produced an airborne kill at a range of (110 NM) 203 KM in a test in 1973; this could be achieved with an F-14 variant. This was world record until AIM-120D broke it in a test in 2021; this could be achieved with an F-15 variant.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1382425179394031626

F-15E/EX are equipped with some of the largest and most powerful sensor systems in the world (among all jet fighters).

This was intentional leak from USAF to send a message across to all those who are on the PL-15 hype train.

This is how Americans work. They intentionally undersell their own stuff to obtain funds for something new and better than ever before. Pentagon desired funding for the AIM-260 project for instance. American Think Tanks created much hype of the PL-15 to justify it. Now they are like: SURPRISE...

Maximum range of a missile is not a very telling metric in itself however. Technical complexity of the missile, launching platform, and the target itself - all are important considerations in the mix.

If you know a bit about missiles, Then the range is about what was always expected, it’s unlikely non-export version has a much longer range than this one either.

First of all, BVR range is a rather Useless and arbitrary figure because the range varies so vastly depending on the launch conditions.
The altitude, weather, aircraft speed, angle at which it is fired, aircraft capability, size of enemy aircraft, And so many more things come into play, the same missile that can go 200KM in ideal conditions might not even reach 100KM in bad conditions.

The “145” KM range they have estimated is likely under fair-good conditions, under ideal ones it would go a fair bit beyond that, in bad conditions it wouldn’t go 2/3rds that. It’s just how BVRs work.

That's why at the end of the day range is a rather poor factor to judge a missiles capability, in that regard we don’t know anything about any modern BVR missiles thats concrete, I’d expect a similar range from Meteor and AIM120D under the same conditions And I wouldn’t say one is better than the other until any of them get a combat record.

Now to be absolutely clear, 145+ KM is a massive range and with the other upgrades they’ve likely added to the missile It’s very likely Comparable with the best of the rest of the world (Meteor, AIM120D). Anyone who thought this thing could go over 200KM was sadly getting baited by fake numbers that someone had made up and then everyone started quoting. The missile is simply not big enough.

The only missiles currently getting ranges beyond 200KM are the ones that follow a parabolic path to achieve them, something they usually specifically do to target larger airplanes like AWACS and Tankers, PL-21/PLXX is known to be able to do this (and the Russian R37M with its quoted range of nearly 400KM). PL-15 , Meteor and AIM120D cannot do this.

Some good points in your post but please see above.

PL-15 is Chinese counterpart of AIM-260.

AIM-120D.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Good move by China. This might attract some customers. Range is very good.


203++ KM range - demonstrated in a recent test involving a UAV.

American AIM-54 Phoenix produced an airborne kill at a range of (110 NM) 203 KM in a test in 1973; this could be achieved with an F-14 variant. This was world record until AIM-120D broke it in a test in 2021; this could be achieved with an F-15 variant.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1382425179394031626

F-15E/EX are equipped with some of the largest and most powerful sensor systems in the world (among all jet fighters).

This was intentional leak from USAF to send a message across to all those who are on the PL-15 hype train.

This is how Americans work. They intentionally undersell their own stuff to obtain funds for something new and better than ever before. Pentagon desired funding for the AIM-260 project for instance. American Think Tanks created much hype of the PL-15 to justify it. Now they are like: SURPRISE...

Maximum range of a missile is not a very telling metric in itself however. Technical complexity of the missile, launching platform, and the target itself - all are important considerations in the mix.


Some good points in your post but please see above.


AIM-120D.

I have absolutely no doubt AIM120D and PL-15 can both reach this range, this test was done under ideal conditions with a known target (known position, altitude, airspeed, flight path etc) and a powerful launch platform. Anyone can set up a test like this. Notice how they didn’t publish a thing about launch details nor gave any proof. They didn’t even say the range at which the kill was achieved, It could have even been a shorter range and we’d never know. (I know the longest is 203 KM. But check the size of that missile…). I don’t doubt the AIM120D (or the PL-15) can reach such ranges, I just don’t think it’s a good indicator of anything.
it’s the same as China bragging about its missiles without much proof. I trust a statement from the US forces the same as I do from Chinese forces, both are trying to send messages.

It’s realistic range would be about the same as PL-15 (under the same conditions). Otherwise they wouldn’t be so hastily trying to develop a missile (AIM260) they they specifically say is to counter PL-15 and PL-21.

 

[LeGenD]

I have absolutely no doubt AIM120D and PL-15 can both reach this range, this test was done under ideal conditions with a known target (known position, altitude, airspeed, flight path etc) and a powerful launch platform. Anyone can set up a test like this. Notice how they didn’t publish a thing about launch details nor gave any proof. They didn’t even say the range at which the kill was achieved, It could have even been a shorter range and we’d never know. (I know the longest is 203 KM. But check the size of that missile…). I don’t doubt the AIM120D (or the PL-15) can reach such ranges, I just don’t think it’s a good indicator of anything.
it’s the same as China bragging about its missiles without much proof. I trust a statement from the US forces the same as I do from Chinese forces, both are trying to send messages.

It’s realistic range would be about the same as PL-15 (under the same conditions). Otherwise they wouldn’t be so hastily trying to develop a missile (AIM260) they they specifically say is to counter PL-15 and PL-21.

This was a live-fire test in which the AIM-120D missile was armed with actual warhead and the target* was detected, tracked, engaged and destroyed in real-time like it would be in actual combat. The fundamental objective was to see how the AIM-120D will perform in an extreme BVR engagement format but this was also an evaluation of the sensor systems involved** to see if these technologies are up to the task or not. This leak is intentional in my view.

*Target in this case was a BQM-167A UAV. This UAV can perform 9G maneuvers and can also be equipped with some types of countermeasures. It is a fairly complex target for operational validation of a missile.

BQM-167A Air Force Subscale Aerial Target

The BQM-167A is a high-performance, remotely-controlled subscale aerial target used to provide a threat-representative target drone to support the Air-to-Air Weapon System Evaluation Program and other

www.af.mil

**Launching platform in this case was an F-15C. The official statement hints a kill chain setup which suggests that additional assets might be involved in unknown capacity (network-centric approach?).

Details of this test are not disclosed to Public for obvious reasons but WE finally have more than a mere statement to acknowledge Pk potential of the AIM-120D at extreme range(s) in BVR combat situations.

AIM-260 is supposed to be a leap from AIM-120D on various counts; maximum range will be certainly increased but not the 'only' focus.

Boeing Unveils New Two-Stage Long-Range Air-To-Air Missile Concept

The new missile offering from Boeing uses two stages instead of one to increase range and lethality.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

AIM-120D.

PL-15 is a step above AIM-120D. PL-15 is same class as AIM-260.

 

[LeGenD]

PL-15 is a step above AIM-120D. PL-15 is same class as AIM-260.

This is based on like nothing really. It looks like you do not read older posts before you type a response.

For recap, the Chinese exclusive PL-15 is 'stated' to have 200 KM target engagement capacity but AIM-120D have 'demonstrated' as much in a recent live-fire intercept attempt. This debate is settled.

I believe that PL-15 will live up to its expectations in combat situations (very impressive A2A missile design) but AIM-120D leverages 'combat proven technologies' to begin with.

AIM-260 is "next generation." Understand this.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

AIM-260 is "next generation." Understand this.

There's nothing groundbreaking about AIM-260. It lacks ramjet Meteor has.

 

[LeGenD]

There's nothing groundbreaking about AIM-260. It lacks ramjet Meteor has.

This is "asinine."

 

[m52k85]

it just means the aircraft will have to defeat missiles by maneuver rather than turning and run away.

Thanks, very nicely laid out. Just dont agree with the above line given AAMs are designed to have an upper bound of 20g to 50gs worth of turning capability.