And your point is? That they are using Kinzhal? It certainly isn’t too big for that position. 4 cells or 8 cells could fit in there.

Currently the smallest ship with Shtil is INS Talwar, at approx 4000t full load displ. That incorporates 22 Shtil missiles below deck and the footprint of the launcher isn’t that much smaller than the VLS. So 54A could still have that amount of Shtil missiles. As for the Russian frigate, you,nor me, know anything about that ship, it could be any displacement ranging from 4000 to 8000t and it could have any number of missiles. The tonnage really doesn’t matter for this system. As mentioned before, we will have to wait and see, we can’t exclude any of the options (except for Rif-M 😉 )

can you think of another ship with 4500 tonne full displacement (which is my personal estimation for 054A), that has a hangar, an entire compliment of different type of radars, illuminators, AShM and decoys. On top of that, still has the capability to hold 32 cell VLS with each cell weighing over 1 tonne? Remember, all 054 had in the same position was a 8 cell launcher + 24 HH-7 missiles. You are going from 24 x 85 kg + weight of launcher to 32 tonne.

I remember reading on Chinese forum that PL-11 actually has better turn rate than SD-10 (> 40 g) and PL-12 has even better turn rate than PL-11. The unknown factor for PL-12 is the quality of its seeker.

tphuang, I don’t think they are actually obliged to tell you every order they make or every export (the Russians in this case) do. How hard can it be to adapt a module like this from 2×6 to 2×8 or 2×4 and so on? It’s basically a very easy system and they can probably adapt it to each required configuration to fit a ship.
Orekh, why would they keep the Orekh shape if they have developed their own stuff? It’s not like the Orekh shape is the ultimate stealth shape or has any other super advantage really…

PKF seems to catch every single export from Russia to China. RIF-M export to China was pretty well known. We know how many 051C there will be. I wonder how come we haven’t heard anything about VLS shtil systems actually exporting to China. We have no idea how many 054As there will be in total. I’m not sure how hard it would be to adapt a module to 2×8 and 2×4, but there is no evidence that they have done it.
As for Orekh, that’s probably the most likely thing on 054A that is Russian. As for why would they keep the Orekh shape, they have done it with Top Plate and Band Stand already.

Have you asked CAC? Whom did you ask? Quote the person who said that Pakistan is not a co-developer. Give us his name. Don’t say what CAC would say unless CAC had actually said it.
The fact is the FC-1/JF-17 is officially a joint project.
Again, this is different from the Su-30MKK or MKI projects. India does not own 50% of the Su-30/Su-27 design. Pakistan does own 50% of the FC-1’s.

Nope, I haven’t asked CAC, but I have read posts from people that had dinner with CAC honchos and attended CAC banquets. They talk about JF-17 as a private project of CAC that got a lot of funding from Pakistan. You can go find this on war-sky forum, dig up some threads on JF-17. There are official wording and private opinions.

As for WS-13, I think you can actually find out quite a bit about it, if you go read up AVIC1 website and try to decrypt though their articles. Most predictions would put its IOC at around 2009-2010.

Four Hulls is news to me, we only have photographic evidence for 2 but I would not find four surprising given the current pace of PLAN shipbuilding. From my own suppositions the 054A weapons and systems fit will be largely if not entirely china produced but that the systems used will have strong Russian influence and lineage. For instance HQ-16 is said to be a result of co-development of a stil variant between China and Russia.

As for 071, there was a Hull spotted not so long ago that was said to be the 071 but it appears to have dropped of the radar lately so it may have just been a civilian ship.

The new test ship is intriguing, I would expetc to see somewhere in the future a development of the 054A with a radar derived from the technology used on the 052C , or maybe there is something new and unexpected in the pipe-line, its anybodys guess.

actually, the photos of 071 have come out quite often. They have a thread on it on CDF.

I think maybe you should read the post again. My point was to indicate the different possible interpretations of ‘designed by an AF’. Isn’t the SU30MKI a version of a existing type — the JF-17 was designed and produced from scratch to PAF requirements — see any difference?? As for being a ‘co-developer’ thats what CATIC says — take it up with them

Ask CAC, they would not tell you that Pakistan is a co-developer. If JF-17 was really produced to PAF requirement, why is it that Pakistani side was so surprised to see some of the stuff placed in prototype 4?

Really? So China can’t make more than the 200 licensed production J-11s? Even if the J-11 can be fully indigenized.

well, I think it would have to be a different design, they would have to have changes in airframe imo, but then, I never read the original agreement. But either way, we know that China is going to do more than 200 whether the Russians like it or not.

As for Pakistan, I will have to see Pakistan make a change to JF-17 on its own before being convinced that it has certain capability that I previously did not give it credit for. Because up to now, CAC has done all of the work.

Does J-10 underfuslage pylon has the ability to carry AAMs like Mirage 2000v/9?
Mirage 2000 can carry MICA or Air to ground loads on these pylons total # 4.
It is seen usually carrying 250 kg bombs or MICA BVR which is smaller than AIM120 or R77 and weighs only 110 kg but has a max range of 60 km which is better than AIM120 A 50 km (B/C has better range) or R77 50 km for manuvering fighter targets and 80 km for high alt. non manvering bombers (according to pdf i downloaded from russian sites).

do you really think Mica has better range than R-77 and AIM120? Think about it.