Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Pakistan Strategic Forces' started by MZUBAIR, Nov 19, 2010.
this might help you
Thanks for the responce. yes, I remember that now - it was a report mention some exercise a, I believe with J-10s, launching missiles with range over 100km (or was it 110km?).
There is just one version of SD-10A, and it has a range of 70 kms. They are not developing several versions, just for different customers.
About the ranges, its 70 kms, and it has not been upgraded. Let the missile be mass produced. Its a new missile and it won't be upgraded so quickly. Other versions of the missile with more range are in development. But they are not SD-10A missiles.
So the specs of this missile are frozen.
Let me try to explain how missile ranges are calculated. The missile is tested in favorable conditions, which are:
- no cross winds
- altitude of launch somewhere around 14-18 kms
- launch velocity of Mach 1.5+
- straight trajectory
Under these circumstances the range is 70 kms. Under normal conditions, the range won't be greater than 50 kms. And if you've studied something about missiles, you'll see that missile ranges drop drastically with lower altitudes.
Range at ground level would be less than 15 kms for SD10A.
Let me show you what you are saying. You are saying that the missile would first gain altitude, and then travel horizontally towards the target. But that is not possible because in vertical flight, the target would move out of missile's seeker range, and the missile would lose its track.
Even if missile is fired from the ground, and it moves straight towards the target, the distance traveled would be 74 kms. (21 km altitude + 70 kms distance). This can be calculated by simple pythagoras theorem.
So what you are trying to say is not correct.
70 kms is the maximum range, under favorable conditions. The figures for AIM120, and R77 are also calculated in such conditions, which is why no missile is fired from 100 kms.
I am not trying to say SD-10A is a bad missile, I am just clearing somethings that should be clear to all on a defense forum. I hope you'll take my post in the right spirit.
You just answered yourself.
AIM-120 is a lighter missile, and travels at a lower speed, so it needs to spend less energy to travel its distance. Hence a lower kinetic energy.
Remember, Kinetic energy gained by missile = energy spent by propulsion system to propel the missile forward.
In case of SD-10A, the missile is heavier, and travels at a higher speed, so that means it is spending a lot more energy when compared to AIM-120, and since its carrying just as much fuel, it would run out of fuel earlier.
You can also take example of Brahmos, which is a supersonic missile, but has a short range, and other missiles like Tomahawk, which are subsonic but have much longer ranges.
You can convert any AAM into a SAM, but the range of the missile would be reduced by at least 40% due to drag at lower altitudes.
Thanks for joining the discussion. I think I understand you explation. You are saying the AIM-120 has a longer power time than the SD-10? While the SD-10 reaches the top speed, it then relies on glide more than the AIM-120.
Yes. You can say that. I'd love to get into more detail, like how drag increases at such speeds, and how it affects the performance of the missile, how much fuel is consumed, and what are the efficiencies at different speeds, but I guess it takes a LOT of time, and I gotta write a LOT for it. I wish I could do a video on it. May be someday I will.
Taking the past experience, i would say, yeah am wrong and you are completely correct.
On the other hand i wonder, where has it been mentioned that SD-10A design has been frozen, as we had recently started to hear about the SD-10B from some good and reliable sources who got this designation/info from PAF contingent directly at Zhuhai, that a newer and better version of SD-10 is gonna be inducted, either you are wrong or the PAF contingent is lying. Again, i wonder, why would the Chinese have to give the SD-10A designation if the specifications were frozen, why not keep SD-10 simple, why add A.
Why have the Chinese A & B versions of the PL-8 or the B, C & E / EII designated versions of PL-5 or the simple PL-9 & then C designated versions.
Below is Jane's latest article about SD-10 missile and they did not said its frozen or something like that, rather says that SD-10A is the current production model and main theme is that the capabilities of the missile as for known may be less then what actually they may be, so even in this one month back article, doubts are being shown about what the possible specifications of the missile would be. In simple words, we don't even know the real specifications of this missile and you have frozen the missile specifications and stopped the future advanced versions right now.
China discloses new SD-10 combat capabilities
Even the Chinese in defence exhibitions write Range >70Km , meaning the range is not exactly 70KM, it can be greater. Chinese, don't stop at one thing, they keep on improving till there is space of improvement and SD-10 has plenty of space left in it to be improved. The range of 100KM is being quoted at many places and the source is being said to be some official PLA magazine, hope some Chinese member can throw some light on it.
So, in the end we don't know what the real specifications of the SD-10A are, has the specifications been frozen or not and the newer version of the missile coming or not would be solved in few months time, but i can assure you that PAF is not getting the SD-10A with just 70KM range, its more.
But i would agree that the range from land of such systems is less, SD-10A launched from land would be having a range of 25KM or so, thanks for correcting that.
To add more Taimi Bhai, the basic version of SD10 with a range of 70km was tested in 2007 on a Mirage. It was outright rejected not based on the range but due to its inferior seeker and the missile was easily jammed. PAF's engineers that are based in Chengdu had previously tested the AMRAAM and other European Options, they brought their experience and knowledge and worked along side with our Chinese partners and further improved the missile.
Result: SD10A and than later S10B which is going to be the standard BVRAAM on JF17 for the time being. The Chinese never freeze a design, they run simultaneous projects because they have the necessary financial and technical resources required to. Look at their Aviation Projects; they are running simultaneous projects for J10, JF17 and J20. Engine is one aspect where they lack and that is why they running multiple projects such as WS 13, WS 10 and WS 15. Its quite evident to me that in future China and United States will be the primary producers of military technology, Europe and Russia simply cannot compete on equal footing anymore.
Alright, so you yourself said that the new missile is development is named the SD-10B, now that is what I had said.
The SD-10A's range will remain 70 kms. Although newer versions of it will be in development, they won't be named SD-10A, they would be SD-10B, then C, then D, and so on.
That means the specs of the missile are frozen, any missile that moves into mass production has their specs frozen. The newer missile with higher range would be called SD-10B, but the range of SD-10A will always remain 70 kms. And these missiles would co-exist. SD-10B would be a newer product.
It happens in every country, every business, the product keeps evolving, it doesn't mean that the specs are not frozen. The newer specs result in a newer product. For eg F-16s. When PAF bought them, they were F-16A, the development continued, and C/D, E/F variants came out, but they were new products, the specs of the aircraft in PAF's inventory remained the same. They didn't change. I hope you got my point.
Do remember the South African link in this development. They have a hand in this too.
Default SD-10 vs AIM-120 (Latest versions)
hahaha nice joke
if we talking abot latest versions we talk abot aim-120 d
I do understand (not the maths of it but I can visualise the physics) that the more speed, the more wind resistance, drag, turbulance, etc. It fact when I asked the question the first time, I was expecting that the answer will come more along the lines of increased drag/turbulance.
I also understand the effects of altitude and speed of the launch platform.
I will try to find the PLA article that mentions the over 100km range.
OK, the PLA news article mentioning the >100km is quoted here: ??????-10??????????100??_??_??? . While I don't see where it actiually says PL-12 or SD-10, I am assuming that is the only MRAAM for the J-10s unlike their Flankers which use Russian missiles.
SD-10= 70 km