CM-400AKG just looks like a smaller, conventional Kh-15 or similar simple aeroballistic rocket missiles.

According to reported sources, the CM-400AKG is somewhat more sophisticated than a “simple aeroballistic rocket missiles”, including mid-course updates and multiple seeker head options, including imaging IR.

http://www.asian-defence.net/2012/11/china-developed-cm-400akg-pakistans-hypersonic-carrier-killer-missile-for-jf-17.html/

It is a fire-and-forget precision-guided weapon that can be fitted with several seeker options, which are understood to include an active radar seeker and an imaging infrared seeker with target-recognition (TR) capabilities. PAF sources say the missile can be pre-programmed with digital imagery for highly precise attacks against fixed sites in TR mode, but it can also be retargeted in flight by using the radar seeker option.

The missile flight profile shown in the video clip with the MiG-31 suggests similar capabilities – the option of a lofted ballistic trajectory supplemented with mid-course guidance and perhaps target identification by imaging IR.

Eagle:

Why?
F-5E and F-18 is superior. Or F-20 and F-18, they share the same engine even. F-20 was more or less ready afaik. If my country is Switzerland, I’d seriously consider this combo.

For a single fighter choice, F/A-18 for multirole capability, but it’s a “jack of all trades and master of none” type solution. If I had to choose two aircraft options, in my view an upgraded F-5E Tiger II with Link 16, IFR, IRST, and a better radar would provide a purely A2A solution, but only when working alongside integrated AEWAC support. The A2G roles would be for the F-4E Pantom II, again essentially as a single role aircraft. However, both these platforms were mature and cost effective solutions in the 80s in my view, and they had gone through enough upgrade and development options to make them very effective at their specific roles.

I would have chosen an F-20/F-18 combo too, but the original challenge was to select aircraft that had entered service by 1989. I was always a fan of the underrated F-20 and it’s engine commonality with the F-18 would have provided a great hi-lo mix. Sadly wasn’t to be.

Then that begs the question, why didn’t the Chinese opt for TVC version of flankers all them years ago, like the Indians did?

Does anyone know what platform, targeting system and ordnance the Iraqis were using in those videos?

The last pic of it inverted, does that show 4 hardpoints under each wing?

Highly relaxed, according to the original design study. Perhaps as much as 10%.

Interesting, any further details, such as a source?

At what speeds are the doors operable for missile firing? Could it be that the heavy build of the doors mean they can be operated at high speeds? What speeds are the weapon bay doors operable on the F-22, T-50, and the F-35? Do we know for sure the doors are not meant to carry missiles?

Another general question regarding the J-20, do we know whether it’s a relaxed stability design? Where are the centre of lift and centre of gravity located relative to each other?

Here’s the full length version, seems to be a CATIC promotional video.