I believe we missed this recent report on the FTC-2000:

http://english.people.com.cn/200411/02/eng20041102_162509.html

Final design of advanced Chinese trainer aircraft “Shanying” due in a year

China is expected to complete the final design of its independently developed trainer aircraft “Shanying”, or Mountain Eagle, by the end of 2005 and end products will be delivered to domestic and international users in the following year.

The trainer aircraft would be used for training third-generation fighter plane pilots, said sources with China Aviation Industrial Group 1 (AVIC 1) Tuesday in Guiyang, capital of southwest China’s Guizhou Province.

Shanying is designed and developed by Guizhou Aviation Industry Group Company of AVIC 1, parent company of the manufacturer Shuangyang Aircraft Manufacturing Plant based in Guiyang.

Two prototypes of Shanying, which passed test flights in December 2003 and April 2004 respectively, are presently being modified and calibrated for a series of tests before the final design is approved before the end of next year, said Yang Dianyuan, deputy general engineer of the Guizhou Aviation Industry Group Company.

He noted that Shanying would meet domestic as well as international demands for a sophisticated training plane and could be turned into a fighter plane if necessary.

Founded in 1965, the Shuangyang plant, a major training plane manufacturer in China, has so far turned out more than 1,100 aircraft of varying types for the Chinese armed forces.

The nose looks terrible.

That is definitely a caucasian nose. Chinese people have smaller noses.

Hmmm, I didn’t take a closer look. I was directly taking the caption from a post. What does the Russian say?

But which protype? It definitely not 03.
As for BVR, i assume SD-10, and hence the Pakistani decision to go chinese radar for at least the first 50 aircraft.

Following the news FC-1 over the years, what is very clear is that the SD-10 is basically part and parcel of the same program and, in fact, was a core PAF requirement for the continuation of the Super 7 program.

The SD-10 appeared first on the FC-1 and, except for the J8II testfiring platforms, the SD-10 is almost exclusive to the FC-1 (at least publicly.) Even the pictures of the J-10 armed with MRAAMs are those of PL-11 and the same with the J8IIs.

So in many ways, the SD-10 for the FC-1 is a given. The problem is whether the radar that the PAF wants – and the PAF had always indicated it wanted a Western set – would be able to integrate the SD-10 in a reasonable time.

The first 50 JF-17s with Chinese radar would guarantee early entry of an ARH into the PAF arsenal. And it means the integretation of the SD-10 to a Western radar can proceed without leaving the PAF without any bvr capability.

Actually, three years ago, many Chinese aviation watchers didn’t think the FC-1 will ever fly because of these two PAF requirements of Western radar set and ARH. If politics had allowed a Western bvr along with a Western radar, the JF-17 would have been built a long time ago. But the embargos on both Pakistan and China meant you won’t get that pairing. If you want a western radar, you need time to integrate a Chinese (or, possibly, South African) MRAAM.

When the PAF decoupled the avionics/radar from the design around 2000-2001, the FC-1 project proceeded extremely quickly. The first 50 machines with the Chinese radar/bvr is simply an extension of this relaxation of the original requirements.

It seems the PAF still wants a Western radar but is flexible enough now that there needn’t be a Thales or Grifo in the very first batch.

Talking about AAMs, there was a recent post on wforum called “The Chinese Air-to-Air Missile Handbook”.

Must be an earlier writeup because there are no entries for SD-10, PL-11 and PL-12. For some reason, the PL-8 is skipped also.

I’ve no idea of the veracity of the information but there is a detailed history behind the ones that are mentioned along with a set of specs for each.

PL-1: there is a very long explanation and history of this first beam riding Chinese AAM based on the Soviet K-5M. There was lots of problems involved developing this simple AAM. Work began in the late 1950s and first missile was testfired in 1960.

PL-2: In September, 1958, China received a foreign AAM from a crash in Zhejiang. This foreign AAM was passed along to the USSR and formed the basis for the Soviet K-13 which is China became the PL-2. It was a short 3km dogfight AAM. (GD’s Note: the foreign missile is obviously the AIM-9, though not stated explicitly in the article. Also the account differs from the old Cold War story that a Sidewinder had buried itself into a PLAAF J-5 without exploding and was carried home.)

PL-3: this was an Chinese attempt at a long-range infra-red missile that began in 1962. It was a long and torturous development that took until 1981 when 50 production missiles were built. Production was then stopped in 1983. It was supposed to arm the J-8. It had a range of 11.5 km (which was pretty good for a SRAAM in the 1970s, unfortunately the PL-3 took until the 1980s to reach production.)

PL-4: this is the second independently designed missile after the PL-3. It was based in part on the US AIM-7D (GD’s note: presumable recovered from Vietnam.) Development was undertaken by the 612 institute which today is Louyang (maker of the SD-10.) Ambitious in 1966, this project was cancelled in 1985 because its specs were already obsolete by then. Range for the SARH version PL-4A is 18 km while the IR homing PL-4B is around 8 km.

PL-5: this began in parallel with the PL-4 by 612 (Louyang) in 1966 and was much more successful. It was testfired from a plane in 1972. It was upgraded again in 1981. Interestingly enough, it came in a SARH version PL-5A which had a shorter range at 10 km than the IR PL-5B at 16 km.

PL-6: Institute 612 began development of a highly maneuverable dogfight AAM in 1975. This was testfired in 1979. Project ended in 1983 when 612 switched to a newer advance project. PL-6 was IR and has a range of 11.5 km.

PL-7: project that began in 1982, it employs a “cruciform double canard” layout. It testfired successfully in 1986. IR, range was 14 km. (GD’s note: most Western pubs believe the PL-7 is reversed engineered Magic R550 for the PAF.)

PL-9: an IR project from Louyang that began in 1986. It was based on the layout of the PL-5B and development was quick with production of the PL-9 beginning in 1989. Range is 16 km.

PL-10: this is a SARH MRAAM based on the “Falcon 60” SAM (which also has the HQ-61 in its family.) It is also similar to the Aspide. Range is 60 km.

It’s a training missile actually. TV camera on the nose with IR seeker. This is used to register “kills”.

I don’t think so. That’s looks like the Python 3 seeker which the PL-8 is based on.

It’s also a training missile, which you can tell by the black stripes in the body.

That might explain the lack of canards.

Hard to say at that angle whether its an R-27 or PL-11 (not SD-10….fins are too big in the loaded missile)…..but the rear fin looks long…..so think its the R-27…but agin hard to say…….but I think what pic is trying to show is the automatd loading thnggy……

Normally I would be conservative. But the R-27 has cruciform canards ahead of the control fins that are not normally covered by the seekerhead protective cap. Also the cap is different unless they are using a different one in the picture above.

It could be trick of the angle and the cap is covering the canards. But look at the photo below of the R-27 with its protective cap. It doesn’t look like the missile above.