Talk:PL-15

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Chinese

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Asian military history task force
	Chinese military history task force

Military Watch Magazine - source credibility

Hi, I removed the citation for this missile being available for the JF-17 because "Military Watch Magazine" is an amateur blog with a lot of wild unsubstantiated claims. Ghost1736 (talk) 05:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

clarification of text needed

What is this supposed to mean: "Compared to ramjet-powered Meteor, which advantages in sustained flight profile with a fly-out speed between Mach 3 and 3.5, the dual-pulsed solid propellant rocket motor of PL-15 potentially offers higher burn-out speed excess of Mach 5, then gradually loses its velocity at the terminal phase."

If it intends to say, "the Meteor has advantages in sustained flight..." please omit the comma after Meteor.

Also, the phrase "which advantages" is awkward perhaps "with advantages" would be better. 75.72.161.233 (talk) 18:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I too think the current wording is next to gibberish and it's impossible to know with any certainty what the author is trying to say. Reading through the citations for this missile, most of it is circular citation of the work of one man - Douglas Barrie at the IISS.

The fly-out speed of the Meteor is likely between Mach 3–3.5, whereas at burn out the PL-15 is likely travelling in excess of Mach 5.

With all the "likely" wording it's clear that most of the "facts" cited on this page are in fact just speculation, including the missile's use of an AESA radar in the seeker.

If anyone is interested in knowing anything useful on the PL-15 I'd recommend they read the citations, keeping in mind that even they are mostly speculation. This page says little except the Chinese have a new missile and it's gooder.

I'd edit the page but in my experience some tool who knows just enough to be dangerous would just come along and revert it back into garbage, so I'm not going to waste my time (nor donate to this pathetic example of Gresham's Law applied to reference material called Wikipedia) --Solidpoint (talk) 02:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of AIM-260 JATM

In the "History" section for the PL-15 missile, it shows late 2022 as a possible deployment date for the US AIM-260 JATM, whereas the wiki page for the AIM-260 JATM has it in late 2023.

I'm not sure if either date is correct, at this point, and couldn't suggest a source to find out. Just wanted to bring this up and maybe some editor will see it and take a look. Patlan82 (talk) 23:19, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]