gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
The PL-10 is supposed to be 'short range', so what does longer range than the AIM-9 really mean ?
There are reasons why we have 'long', 'medium', and 'short' ranges for missiles. These distances are not fixed, but they are guidelines and those guidelines were created by those who played this game long before China entered the arena.
When an air-air missile design is supposed to be short range, certain things occurs when the missile is away from the launch parent. In air-air combat, the term 'short range' implies maneuverability and that capability should be at the ready after that distance from the launch parent. Air-air missiles that are designed to be 'medium' and 'long' ranges have different behaviors before maneuverability. One of those behaviors is altitude gain, as in the missile gains altitude for a 'big picture' view and use gravity to increase speed. Missiles designed to be 'short range' is supposed to look for a target ASAP, so it should not be programmed for any altitude gain. That is wasted time.
That was just to give you guys an idea of what is involved at the conceptual level. In sum, what you want the missile to do AFTER it leave the rail determines its programmed behaviors.
In air combat, distances between fighters dictate which type of missiles to use. When fighters approaches each other, pilots have to take into consideration as to when they are far enough to use the 'medium range' missile or when they are too close that cannot use any missiles at all. On the other hand, when fighters are chasing each other, pilots have to take into consideration their separation distance, since one fighter is usually faster than his opponent due to differences in aircrafts and environment. That separation distance can increase or decrease and at different time rate, making which type of missiles to use difficult.
This is why American designers stays within the 40 km distance for 'short range' designs, for now. From our air combat experience, which is volumes more than your China, this distance is when fighters are less likely to be at Mach, more like high subsonic, so making the short range missile under Mach 3 is more than adequate. This reduces fuel load without suffering fuel consumption. The smaller size make the missile easier to maneuver when it needs to because it may need to maneuver immediately after it is that safe distance from the launch parent.
So just because the PL-10 is longer range, however dubious that advantage, and maybe capable of higher Mach, that does not mean the PL-10 is technologically superior. Anybody can make anything go longer and faster. American 1960s muscle cars can be made to run faster than modern day Ferraris but overall the Ferraris are technologically superior cars.
I do not expect any of you to accept what I said even though what I said is eminently common sense and from precious experience that your China do not have.
And my post 25 was exactly for that.
It be like saying the Russian aircraft that got shot down by an inferior made American missile. Or Saudi Arabia has shot down ballistic missiles by Patriot system from Yemen? We don't know what exactly happened that led to the missiles not able to hit the drone. And Israel has in the past shot down the enemy drones with Patriot and AIM before.
