为什么有人说，即使美国最新的AIM-260导弹在2026-2027年服役，也可能刚服役就面临落后于中国霹雳-21空空导弹一代的风险？

Jesuan Wu
No matter whether you live in the US or China, physics is the same.
If the US designs the AIM-260 to be operable from the small weapon bays of F-22 and F-35, it will likely not compete against China’s next gen missile.
Why?
Because under the same level of technologies, a missile’s tracking capability is limited by the size of its seeker, its range limited by the amount of fuel it can carry.
Both are related with the missile’s size.
无论你住在美国还是中国，物理规律都是一样的。
如果美国把 AIM-260 设计成能装进 F-22 和 F-35 那样的小型武器舱来使用，那它很可能无法与中国的下一代导弹竞争。
为什么？
因为在相同技术水平下，导弹的跟踪能力受限于制导头（寻的器）的尺寸，射程受限于它能携带燃料的量。
这两者都与导弹的体积有关。


Already in China’s current generation of missiles, as shown in this picture, the PL-12 and PL-15 are bigger than the AIM-120, making them longer range. There is also the huge PL-17, as shown in the picture, which can’t even fit in the weapon bays of J-20 and J-35.
That’s why China had to develope new platforms like the J-36 and J-50. The former with a huge weapon bay as big as American stealth bombers and can definitely house the PL-17 or similar-sized next gen missile internally, the smaller J-50 also has a small groove in between its weapon bays, which may serve as the place to house one PL-17 if needs be a la Korean KF-21 style, but wouldn’t compromise as much on stealth because the PL-17 doesn’t have fins to start with.
The size of the PL-17 is a good indicator of where the next gen Chinese missile is headed. So it should out-class anything that F-22 and F-35 can house in their weapon bays. Unless the US makes a huge breakthrough and leapfrogs China a couple of generations in missile propellent tech that is.
在中国现役这一代导弹中（如图所示），PL-12 和 PL-15 都比 AIM-120 更大，因此射程更远。图中还有体积巨大的 PL-17，甚至无法装入 J-20 和 J-35 的武器舱。
这就是为什么中国必须发展像 J-36、J-50 这样的新平台——前者有一个与美制隐身轰炸机相当的大武器舱，完全可以将 PL-17 或相似尺寸的下一代导弹内置；较小的 J-50 在其武器舱之间也有一个小槽，类似韩国 KF-21 的做法，必要时可放置一枚 PL-17，但不会像外挂那样严重影响隐身性（而且 PL-17 本身也没有尾翼）。
PL-17 的体积很好地反映了中国下一代导弹的发展方向。因此，它应该能超越 F-22 和 F-35 武器舱所能容纳的任何导弹。除非美国在导弹推进剂技术上实现巨大突破，跃进几代，否则难以改变这一点。

Andrew Miller
If we want some thing to scare China, the aim 174 already exists. The amount of Chinese shilling and cope positing on the day “sm-6 strapped to an f-18” was revealed is very telling.
如果我们想让中国害怕，AIM-174 已经存在。当天“SM-6 绑在 F-18 上”的消息被披露时，中国那边大量的吹嘘和表演性发帖非常耐人寻味。

Steve
What is telling is how hard these Chinese bots are making these claims to a civilian audience when those with access to the classified assessments on these weapons already know them to be hype and BS.
The people within the DOD and supplier companies who know the truth are likely smart enough not to post what they know in these threads and probably laugh out loud at the Chinese claims to have near ICBM range on missiles fired from aircraft that are probably as stealthy as a flying library building.
There is enough BS in the original post here to fertilize half of Mongolia, and others like it become cartoonish and laughable when we realize those making the claims are from a military industrial base that has to steal Russian and US designs because they can’t create original ideas and bring them to the air bases and carriers of the future.
Producing low-end electronic goods and t-shirts is what they have proven proficient at, and the legions of cheaply-made ships would be so much wreckage on the bottom of the South China sea in a real conflict.
有意思的是，这些中国“机器人账号”竟然在面向普通民众极力宣称这些主张，而那些能接触到这些武器机密评估的人早就知道那不过是炒作和胡扯。
国防部及供应商公司内了解真相的人，大概聪明到不会在这些线程里发布他们所知道的内容，反而会对中国方面宣称从飞机发射的导弹接近洲际弹道导弹射程这种说法笑出声来——这些飞机的隐身性恐怕像一座会飞的图书馆大楼一样显眼。
原帖里有足够多的胡扯，足以“养肥”半个蒙古。当我们意识到那些夸夸其谈的人来自一个不得不偷用俄美设计、无法创造原创并将其装备到未来空军基地和航母的军工体系时，这类说法就变得像漫画一样可笑。
他们擅长的只是生产低端电子产品和 T 恤，而大量廉价造船在真正冲突中只会成为南海底部的一堆残骸。

Ngee K Low
F18 is not stealth, J20 and J35 can carry PL15 which has same range as AIM 174. And PL15 has proven itself in combat, F18 and AIM174 as a combination was only deployed recently. PL17 and PL21 have longer range than AIM174. China is ahead in missiles is a fact. US cant even deploy hypersonic missiles. Tomahawks are from decades ago.
F-18 并非隐身机，J-20 和 J-35 可以携带 PL-15，它的射程与 AIM-174 相当。PL-15 已在实战中证明过自己，而 F-18 + AIM-174 这样的组合只是最近才部署。PL-17 和 PL-21 的射程都比 AIM-174 更远。中国在导弹方面领先这一事实无可否认。美国甚至还不能部署高超音速导弹，战斧巡航导弹也属于几十年前的东西。

Brent Meeker
Where the U.S. has leap-frogged the PRC is in the numbers competition. While they went from PL-12 to PL-15 to PL-1 we boldly advanced from the AIM-7 and AIM-9 to the AIM-54 to AIM-120 to AIM-260. Fortunately, Cantor has assured us we won’t run out of numbers (though we may run out of room to paint them on the missile).
美国在“编号竞争”上超过中国了。中国从 PL-12 到 PL-15 再到 PL-1，而我们则从 AIM-7、AIM-9 发展到 AIM-54、AIM-120 再到 AIM-260。幸好 Cantor（注：指负责编号的人或机构）保证我们不会缺号码（尽管可能没地方再在导弹上写编号了）。

凛冬将至
What is being discussed here is the PL-21, a long-range air-to-air missile that can be internally carried in the J-20's weapons bay. The PL-21 was originally purpose-built to pair with the J-20. In contrast, the PL-17 would compromise the aircraft's stealth capabilities, which is not conducive to the J-20 penetrating enemy air defense networks to engage the enemy's high-value targets such as early warning aircraft, tankers, and electronic warfare aircraft.
这里讨论的是 PL-21，一种可在 J-20 武器舱内携带的远程空对空导弹。PL-21 最初就是为配套 J-20 而专门研制的。相较之下，PL-17 会损害飞机的隐身能力，不利于 J-20 突破敌方防空网络去打击预警机、加油机和电子战飞机等高价值目标。

Baldcoach
Correct! You saved me a post. Super range AAMs that have to be externally mounted on stealth craft defeat the purpose. Give me shorter ranges internals so my enemy doesn’t see me until they are inside my range and my missiles are in the air.
正确！你替我省了一条评论。必须外挂在隐身飞机上的超远程空空导弹本身就违背了隐身飞机的用途。给我能内置的较短射程导弹，这样敌人在进入我的有效射程并且我的导弹已经发射之前看不见我。

凛冬将至
The J-20 will remain the main fighter jet of the Chinese Air Force for at least the next decade. The PL-15, which entered service a decade ago, cannot effectively suppress the AIM-260 in terms of range (200-300 km). Meanwhile, the length of the PL-17 is clearly unsuitable for the J-20’s internal weapons bay and can only be externally mounted on the J-20 or J-16. Therefore, the Chinese Air Force needs a new air-to-air missile. It must be able to fit into the J-20’s internal weapons bay, and on the premise of maintaining the J-20’s stealth status, it should extend the air combat range to at least 300-400 km, or even 350-500 km. This is the only option! Otherwise, this would definitely be a strategic decision-making error for the Chinese Air Force.
J-20 在未来至少十年仍将是中国空军的主力战机。十年前入役的 PL-15 在射程上无法有效压制 AIM-260（约200–300公里）。同时，PL-17 的长度显然不适合装入 J-20 的内置武器舱，只能外挂在 J-20 或 J-16 上。因此，中国空军需要一种新型的空对空导弹。它必须能装入 J-20 的内置武器舱，并在保持 J-20 隐身状态的前提下，将空战射程扩展到至少 300–400 公里，甚至 350–500 公里。这是唯一的选择！否则对中国空军而言将是一个重大的战略性决策错误。

Jesuan Wu
The PL-21 was originally thought to go into the weapon bay of the J-20. It’s possible they changed the design to fit changing needs, otherwise it’s a missile too many years in the making.
PL-21 最初被认为会装入 J-20 的武器舱。也可能是为了适应变化的需求而改了设计，否则这就是一个耗时过久的导弹项目。

Graeme Andrew
How does the Metor rate in this discussion?
在这场讨论中，Meteor（“流星”导弹）表现如何？

Jesuan Wu
Don’t know because Meterors didn’t score any hits in this year’s India-Pakistan air war. All we have are 200km kills on Rafaels made by PL-15E, which is supposedly inferior to the PL-15.
不知道，因为在今年印巴空战中并没有听说 Meteor 有任何击中记录。我们所知道的是 PL-15E 在对阵风的作战中有 200 公里击杀记录（而 PL-15E 据说还不如 PL-15）。

Spitfire-109
The Meteor is still not integrated into the internal weapons bay of stealth fighters, so the PL-15 still holds the advantage in this regard (yes, I know there are pictures of F-35 carrying Meteor in IWB, but it hasn't been pictured firing them nor being inducted in service…yet).
Meteor by itself is certainly a capable missile, and is probably the best the West have to offer until AIM-260 comes online. On paper it is more manoeuvrable than the PL-15 during the terminal phase and the ramjet allows for acceleration. PL-15 have a higher maximum speed of Mach 5 vs the Meteor’s Mach 3 and a good dual pulse system that allows it to have a longer range and effective speed control.
The Meteor uses an older MSA radar seeker compared to the AESA radars carried on PL-15, which makes it more susceptible to jamming by electronic warfare systems seen on dedicated jammer aircraft like the J-16D or aircraft suite like the SPECTRA.
Meteor 仍未与隐身战机的内置武器舱整合，所以在这方面 PL-15 仍占优势（是的，我知道有 F-35 在内置武器舱携带 Meteor 的照片，但还没有看到它们发射 Meteor 的照片或正式服役的证据……至少尚未）。
单从能力看，Meteor 确实是一枚可观的导弹，可能是西方在 AIM-260 上线之前能提供的最好选择。在末段机动性方面，理论上它比 PL-15 更机动；其冲压冲压/冲压发动机（ramjet）也允许在末段加速。PL-15 的最高速度更高（约5马赫 vs Meteor 约3马赫），且具有良好的双脉冲推进系统，使其具有更长的射程和更有效的速度控制。
Meteor 使用的是较老的 MSA雷达导引头，而 PL-15 搭载的是有源相控阵雷达，这使得 Meteor 更容易被像 J-16D 这类专用干扰机或像 SPECTRA（阵风战机防护与火力控制规避系统） 这类电子战套件实施的电子干扰所影响。

Robin Wilson
I wonder if a B2, B21, B1B, and B52 are being outfitted to carry the AIM-174B? Will the Buffalo pilots start getting air-to-air kills and become aces in the next war? I can see a team effort where a B-52 has 20–30 of the AIM-174B loaded up, and an F-35 is giving him datalix to target from closer to the front, but the Buf is just slinging those things like a Pez dispenser…
我想知道 B-2、B-21、B-1B 和 B-52 是否会被改装去携带 AIM-174B？难道“水牛”（B-52）机组会在下一场战争里拿下空战击杀、成为王牌？我能想象一种团队协作：B-52 装载 20–30 枚 AIM-174B，F-35 在前线更近处通过数据链为其指示目标，而 B-52 就像糖果机一样发射这些导弹……

Jesuan Wu
Bombers fly slower and that greatly affects the effective range of the missiles launched.
Ideally you would want the missile carrier to be flying as fast as possible when the missile launches. Converting the SR-71 to a missile truck would be a better idea than converting a B-2.
轰炸机飞得慢，这会大大影响所发射导弹的有效射程。
理想情况下，希望发射导弹的平台在发射时速度越快越好。把 SR-71 改成导弹运输机比改装 B-2 更靠谱。

Richard Lafford
The longer range missiles are a major problem for only the non-stealthy opponents. If the missile has very little data to track on it’s basically flying blind - if you launch at all. Then look at the radar signature of the fighters in the picture. Who will see who first is the important point.
超远程导弹主要会对非隐身对手造成重大问题。如果导弹获得的战场数据很少，基本就是盲飞——即便你发射了。看看图片中那些战机的雷达特征，谁先发现谁才是关键。

Jesuan Wu
That is also correlated to the missile’s size. A bigger missile would be able to carry a bigger seeker, as well as more fuel or battery to power the higher energy consumption of the stronger seeker.
这也与导弹体积有关。更大的导弹能装更大的制导头，同时携带更多燃料或电池，以为功耗更高的更强制导头供能。

Dale Tittensor
This argument is a moot point. The F-22/F-35 doesn’t need to carry the missile. The F-35 will be OVER the Chinese target when the F-18 fires the missile from a safe distance. The F-35 will guide the missile to the target, who will be completely unaware of the missile or the F-35 spotter.
这个争论有点无谓。F-22/F-35 不一定需要自己携带导弹。F-35 会在目标正上方，而 F-18 在安全距离外发射导弹。F-35 会引导导弹到目标，目标完全不会意识到有导弹或有 F-35 在侦查。

Jason Trostorff
Range of the Chinese missile is important, provided the aircraft can actually FIND an F22 to shoot at. If a Raptor can get within range to lock you up and fire on you without it being detected itself, then the range of your missile is irrelevant.
中国导弹的射程重要，但前提是飞机能真正找到可供攻击的 F-22。如果猛禽能在不被发现的情况下靠近到足以锁定并开火，那么你导弹的射程就毫无意义。

Jesuan Wu
China has the most advanced radars worldwide. If people didn’t know before, they must know now, after the Chinese rare earths getting the US so worked up. Gallium is 97% produced in China, and the main element used in the newest AESA radar chips. The US air fleet is fully dependent on Chinese gallium, not yet fully GaN, with even the E-3 AWACS running on legacy pulse doppler radars, while Chinese air fleet is already all AESA and moving a generation ahead with Ga2O3 AESA radars.
Plus, Chinese fighter design philosophy emphasizes BVR more than the current Western designs, that’s why the cheap-ass Chinese J-10 could defeat the much more expensive and "sophisticated" French Rafael in the India-Pakistani air war of this year.
Chinese radar sizes reflect this emphasis:
中国拥有世界上最先进的雷达。如果以前有人不知道的话，随着中国稀土让美国如此紧张，现在应该清楚了。镓（Gallium）有 97% 在中国生产，是最新有源相控阵雷达芯片的主要元素。美军空中编队在很大程度上依赖中国的镓（尚未完全转向 GaN），甚至 E-3 警戒机仍在使用传统脉冲多普勒雷达，而中国空军已经普遍采用 AESA，并正用 Ga₂O₃ 的 AESA 雷达向下一代迈进。
另外，中国战机的设计哲学比西方更强调超视距（BVR）作战，这就是为什么廉价的中国 J-10 在今年的印巴空战中能击败更昂贵、更“复杂”的法国阵风。
中国雷达的尺寸也反映了这种侧重点：



And don’t forget the electronics in the J-20 is 20 years newer than in the F-22. You’re writing online so I’m sure you know what that means.
It’s in China’s interest that the process of China surpassing the US goes as smoothly and as quietly as possible, so it would be good that Americans can stay informed and don’t bet on wars with very unlikely assumptions like "F-22 getting close and locking on to target first".
别忘了，J-20 上的电子设备比 F-22 新大约 20 年。你在网上写文章，应该明白这意味着什么。
中国希望自己超过美国的进程尽可能平稳、安静地进行，所以让美国人保持知情、不要基于诸如“F-22 先接近并锁定目标”这种不太可能的假设去押注战争，会更有利于局势的稳定。


HaroldP
A key question is what does this range mean tactically.
This will largely depend on the relative ranges at which the competing aircraft can detect each other with enough resolution for a firing solution.
And the range at which each of these aircraft can detect a missile headed their way and evade.
None of which is know right now by the civilian Quora cohort.
一个关键问题是，这个“射程”在战术上到底意味着什么。
这在很大程度上取决于彼此对抗的飞机能够以足够分辨率探测到对方以形成开火解算的相对距离。
以及每种飞机能在多远距离探测到朝它飞来的导弹并进行规避。
这些情况现在在民间的 Quora 群体里都无法得知确切答案。

Hugh Scott
China is the next world superpower if it is already not. America has space technology and can match China however, China may not really take much cognisance of restrictions by the globalist zero Carbon imbeciles, this has enabled China to build the largest industrial and military infrastructure with cheap labour and world trade. I don’t think the American public realise, however America will never be invaded by a land army as Americans all have weapons to defend their country, Britain on the other hand will have bows and arrows or pea shooters, we cannot even defend our beaches. If someone throws a stone in a pond Britain could possibly rule the ripples we certainly don’t rule the waves.
中国已是或将成为下一个世界超级大国。美国在航天技术上有优势并能与中国抗衡，然而中国可能并不太在意全球主义者那些“零碳”限制，这使得中国能够凭借廉价劳动力和世界贸易建立起最大的工业与军事基础设施。我认为美国公众并未意识到这一点，不过美国永远不会被陆军入侵，因为美国人普遍拥有武器来保卫国家；相较之下，英国可能只能用弓箭或小型武器来防守，我们甚至无法守住海滩。如果有人在池塘里扔石头，英国或许能控制涟漪，但绝对无法掌控波涛。

凛冬将至
— The AIM-260 is designed to counter the already in-service PL-15 (with a range of approximately 200-250 km), and its maximum range target is likely around 300 km. However, the "starting range (estimated range of 300-400 km)" of China’s new-generation PL-21 directly exceeds the "upper limit target" of the AIM-260, and the PL-21 takes ultra-long-range suppression as its starting point.
— The AIM-260 is restricted in platform integration and lacks "design margin" for rapid upgrades. It must strictly comply with the internal weapons bay dimensions of the F-35 or F-22, which limits the missile’s length and diameter. To "fit into" the weapons bay, the AIM-260 may have to make compromises in certain performance aspects. Such early design compromises may lead to insufficient space margin in its propulsion system and fuel capacity for rapid and significant range-increasing upgrades. In contrast, the PL-21 is seamlessly compatible with the J-20, and the J-20’s internal weapons bay is longer than that of the F-35! Obviously, the PL-21 has more room for upgrades than the AIM-260.
— AIM-260 的设计目的是对抗已服役的 PL-15（射程约 200–250 公里），其目标最大射程可能在约 300 公里左右。但中国新一代 PL-21 的“起始射程（估计 300–400 公里）”直接超过了 AIM-260 的“上限目标”，而 PL-21 本身就是以超远程压制为出发点设计的。
— AIM-260 在平台适配上受限，缺乏用于快速升级的“设计余量”。它必须严格满足 F-35 或 F-22 内置武器舱的尺寸限制，这限制了导弹的长度和直径。为了“装入”武器舱，AIM-260 可能不得不在某些性能方面做出妥协。这类早期设计上的妥协可能导致其推进系统和燃料容量在未来进行快速且显著的增程升级时空间不足。相比之下，PL-21 与 J-20 的兼容性更好，而 J-20 的内置武器舱比 F-35 的更长！显然，PL-21 在升级空间上优于 AIM-260。