According to what I looking for, all of the Chinese air force currently includes (with radar series NRIET KLJ):

JH-7A use radar NRIET Type 243H aka KJL-1/2 (range 75 km for A2A)
J-10A/JF-17/FC-1 using KLJ-3 radar or KLJ-7 (range 100-105km for A2A)
J-8DF/11A using radar KLJ-4 (range 150km for A2A)
J-10B/11B/15/16 will use AESA radar KLJ-10 or Unnamed radar AESA (range ?)

J11 — Su27SK‘s analog FBW
J11B — the same
———
J11BS trainer — digital FBW, during the test flight, one of the prototypes was lost due to the flaw of the flight control developed by China R&D team..and there was another accident recorded on the Serial Production plane when the trainer entered the PLAAF service..
J16 — digital FBW
J11D — digital FBW
.
.
.
.

All versions J-11 are no different, they almost exclusively used by the Chinese weapons production. J-11A / B / D / BH has yet to be used AGM and anti-ship, the jamming pod BM / China KG300G not trust installed J-11 series version, which they still use Jamming pod of Russia as type L-005 ECM. Each version of the J-11A—J-11D they localize some electronic systems, or new weapons of their own production. Is there any information about the name of the new AESA radar of J-11D, J-16 and J-15 are used? operating parameters!

Aerodynamic, they completely copy the Su-27SK.

PS:
J-11B – PL-8/9/12
J-11D – PL-10/15

You must have some damn good sources. :rolleyes:

Some information for that PL-8 (and perhaps increase the scope PL-9) and PL-10 is capable of all-aspect, besides some other information that PL-10 is capable of IIR (红外 成像 制导) but I’m leaning towards, all three missiles capable all-aspect but not IIR seeker

http://baike.baidu.com/view/7410374.htm
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-AAM.html

China has no missiles Python 5 (China has bought and copied into Python 3 aka PL-8), which can be copied ability IIR or LOAL its mode

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 02-09-02 AT 01:57 AM (GMT)]-PL-1
PL-1 is copy of Soviet K-5, which entered Russian service in 1957. USSR provided this radar-guided missile to PLA between 1958-1959. Some trial versions of PL-1 were produced in 1960, the official production was not approved until 1964 because there were testing equipment problems.

The 6-km range PL-1 was only in production until 1967. Due to its poor performance, PL-1 was never used in combat, PLA later converted PL-1s into target drones CX-1.

-PL-2
The origin of Soviet Siderwinder could be trace back to the 1958 Taiwan Strait conflict, in which PLA acquired AIM-9 fired by Taiwanese F-86 and handed it over to Russian. Soviet Union began K-13’s developement in 1959, and entered initial service in 1961.

PL-2 is a direct copy of K-13, which PLA obtained the licence along with MiG-21F-13s. PL-2’s appearance is similar to the early versions of AIM-9, and it’s a tail-chase uncooled lead-sulfide (PbS) IR missile homing only on the engine exhaust. The work began in Feb. 1962, and production started in 1967.

PL-2A is the upgraded version offered for export, with a thermo-electrically cooled seeker, longer range, longer body length, and heavier weight. PL-2B is an unpgrade program (guidance, infared fuze, motor) started in 1976, its range was extended from 8km to 10km. PL-2B entered production in 1980, and all PL-2 lines stopped in 1986.

PL-2 is the first PLAAF AAM in widespread service. Platforms: J-5, J-6, J-7, and A-5.

-PL-3
Development of PL-3 started in May 1965, firing tests began in 1974, production authorized in 1980. PL-3 could be used by J-7 & J-8. Compare to PL-2, PL-3 has better warhead, improved fuse, and the ability to attack high speed bomber flying at high altitude due to better flight control (larger control surface). However, because the development cycle was too long, it was destined to be eliminated early.

PL-3’s main contribution is the valuable experiences the personnels learned during the design process, many of these people later formed the teams for future AAM projects.

-PL-4
Not much is known about PL-4 except it’s a mid-range radar guided missile never entered service. Some sources said this project was originally planned for the defunct J-9, which would have carried four PL-4 as standard armament.

-PL-5
Although PL-5 is still based on PL-2, it represents a significant leap in PLA AAM development. The project began in 1965-1966, the SAR version PL-5A was tested but never entered service.

The IR PL-5B entered production in September 1986 (possibly two years earlier according to some sources), it features a cooled PbS IR seeker and higher off-boresight capability than PL-2. The high-explosive fragmentation warhead is much more powerful than previous AAMs, and has IR or radio proximity fuze. Range is approximately 16 km. Platforms include J-7, J-8 and Q-5.

PL-5 has been updated continuously, the E model is the latest version achieved IOC in 1997. PL-5E’s double-delta fins is similiar to AIM-9L, and claims to sustain more than 40G maximum loading. Besides the active laser fuze, wider off-boresight targeting, and InSb seeker, the biggest difference is the all-aspect engagement capability.

-PL-6
PL-6 is an experimental missile with unique aerodynamic design, possibly SAR. Never entered service.

-PL-7
There are debates on PL-7’s origin. Some analysts believe PL-7 is a double-canard missile based on PL-5B, others say PL-7 is a copy of French Magic with possible indigenous seeker.

The initial study on the feasiblity of PL-7 project began in 1977, China Aerospace Industry Department officially ordered No. 331 to proceed with R&D in 1982, and achieved IOC in April 1987. The development time is notably shorter than other projects, and single agency handling the research also differs from previous projects with multiple management.

The 15km-range PL-7 has a nitrogen-cooled InSb seeker with radar proximity fuze, and better seeker coverage. It’s unclear whether PL-7 has all-aspect capability. The production and further development probably already stopped.

-PL-8
Both Israel and China denied any AAM transfer, but most analysts agree PL-8 is a copy of Python 3.

The Israeli Python 3 entered service in 1982 and was reportedly used by IDF/AF in the 1982 Israel-Lebanon conflict. It has an all-aspect seeker, active radar proximity & impact fuzes, high off-bresight capability, and can sustain 56G. Maximum range is estimated to be 15km.

PLA got Python 3 in the late 80s. PL-8 could be carried by J-7 and J-8.

-PL-9
Information on PL-9 and later AAM projects are quite scarce, and usually contains many speculations. Several sources say PL-9 is derived from the PL-2 line. Like PL-7, there are different opinions due to PL-9’s apparence (somewhat similar to Python 3).

The PL-9 SAM was first displayed at the 1989 Paris Air Show. The PL-9 SAM and AAM were both expected to enter service in the mid-90s, but their status are unknown. The latest PL-9C could be considered third generation Chinese AAM, and has a multi-element InSb seeker with a radar proximity fuze. It has longer range (approximately 20km) and better IRCCM compare to the basic version. Platforms includes J-8 and possbily J-10.

-PL-10
There are some confusion about PL-10, because the lack of information on different projects (specifically PL-11). Three events occurred in the late 80s-
(a) Agreement to buy Italy Aspide signed in June 1986.
(b) IOC of HQ-61 SAM in November 1988.
(c) R&D of a SAR AAM completed in 1989.
Naturally different analysts made different associations. Some said PL-10 was a short term measure aimed to use HQ-61 to develope a mid-range AAM, because no other solution was available at the time. Others claim PL-10 is a direct copy of Aspide.

One thing is clear: PL-10 never entered service due to its poor performance. It was originally intended to serve with J-8

-PL-11
No details are available about this mid-range AAM, first revealed in 1999. Several articles indicated PL-11 is the copy of Aspide, not PL-10. Other sources also mentioned possible installation of the Chinese indigenous active radar seeker AMR-1. Like PL-10, J-8 will be PL-11’s main platform.

-PL-12
AR missile, status not clear. Seeker is possibly AMR-1 or from R-77.

China Mobilizes Forces On Burmese Border

Response to fatal bombing by Burma
By Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer Posted March 17, 2015

China Burma Myanmar J-10

J-10A

east3y via lt.cdjby.net

This PLAAF J-10A, based in Yunnan Province, is running air patrols to deter and intercept any future intrusion by Tatmadaw aircraft.
China Burma Myanmar Bombing

At the Scene

Weibo

This March 13th strike near Lincang City, Yunnan Province killed four Chinese farmers, and injured several more. As shown from the large carter in the mid background, the culprit is a large airborne bomb (such as one carried by a Burmese jet, like the Q-5 or Mig-29).

On March 13, 2015, a bomb from a Burmese fighter jet dropped a few kilometers across the Sino-Burmese border, killing four Chinese workers in a sugar cane field. This isn’t the first time Burma (also known as Myanmar) has bombed Chinese territory during the current fighting in the Kokang region of the Kachin State. On March 8, another aerial bomb crashed into an empty house inside China (though fortunately nobody was killed or hurt in that earlier incident). The backdrop of the strikes is higher tensions between the two Asian countries, as the Burmese military, the Tatmadaw, is engaged in a widening conflict in the ethnically Chinese Kokang region, as well as wider unrest in the Kachin State at large. Ironically, some accounts state that the offending Tatmadaw aircraft were Chinese made Q-5 attack jets, though other accounts identify the aircraft as Russian made MiG 29. (China and Russia are Burma’s two biggest arms suppliers.) As of writing, Nayipidaw (Burma’s capital) has denied responsibility for the incident.
China SAM HQ-12

HQ-12

Weibo

The HQ-12 SAM, also known as the KS-1, is a medium range air defense system with a 50km range and a 20km service ceiling, making it ideal for shooting down offending fighter aircraft.

Such incursions, either intentional or accidental, have been common in countries bordering states in civil war; Turkey and Israel have shot down a few Syrian aircraft in the past few years. In response these incidents, China has mobilized a wide military deployment in Yunnan Province, which borders Kachin State. Given that the vast majority of China’s military modernization drive has been aimed at offshore control and long range air and naval weapons, the forces of the inland Chengdu Military Region, which is responsible for defending Yunnan province, are a mix of the highly modern weapons and legacy Cold War platforms. The PLAAF has a regiment of 4th-generation J-10A fighters in Yunnan to patrol the border, along with two regiments of J-7 fighters (which first flew in the 1970s). To stop future intrusions, the PLA has deployed medium-range surface to air missiles (SAMs), such as the 50km range HQ-12 and 18km range HQ-64 SAMs, and PG-99 35mm anti-aircraft cannon. Mi-171 helicopters and mechanized infantry have reportedly also been deployed to watch for border infiltration attempts.
China Burma Myanmar J-7

An Old Classic

Weibo

Due to the Chengdu Military Region’s (where Yunnan is) relative lack of military threats compared to coastal areas, many of Yunnan’s fighters are the second generation J-7 fighters (based off the 1960s Soviet MiG-21), which have short ranges and are limited to short ranged infrared guided missiles. However, they’re much easier to maintain, and are capable dogfighters for opposing any bomb laden jets heading into Chinese territory.

To stop future intrusions, the PLAAF would likely rely on the more capable J-10 fighters to act as a rapid response force to intercept foreign aircraft, while the J-7s conduct constant close air patrol along the border. The SAMs and other air defenses would likely be concentrated near population centers. If the Tatmadaw were to fly close to the Chinese border again, the Chinese may be quick to shoot back.

http://www.popsci.com/chinas-long-march-space-rocket-5-takes-another-big-step-forward