there is, but I’m not going to post it. I don’t want Jane’s getting angry at me for posting too many of their articles/pictures.

Probably a typo in the range; RIM-7 variants have a range from 40-45km. A range of 25km would be about right for an IR missile, but unheard of for a BVR missile.

Originally posted by Indian1973
one option is get rid of the APG66 for the RC400 which is anyway
going to be on FC-1. RC400 is better than the old APG66.

That way F16s can also use SD-10 later.

Might be too much work- also, I assume their budget is limited. This is probably the most cost-effective, and quite smart way. I wonder how the performance ratios are.

Originally posted by Indian1973
if PAF really goes ahead and buys this product, indicates the SD-10 is not ready for prime time show. the specs of SD-10 are far better than PL-11.

But wouldnt Raytheon need the details of the PL-11 to let the
APG66 radar guide this thing ?

The FD-60 will not be replacing the SD-10 and does not suggest the SD-10 is a failed program. Rather, for planes where integration of the SD-10 will be nigh impossible (F-16), the FD-60 will be used instead, albeit a poorer replacement. I assume that it shares similar features to the Sparrow for easier integration into the APG-66, that Raytheon won’t be needed. Are you kidding me? I highly doubt the PLAAF would allow Raytheon to get even anywhere close.