What's new

PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

For J-10CE,the only target is RAFALE. So 4XPL-15 is enough.


when the enemy comes, they come in drove of 4 to 8 with strike package and same amount of planes for air cover.., A Cap is run by 2 aircrafts, J10C running CAP when the tension is high should be called, “strike mode” armed with 8 PL15 each and CAP of 2 containing 16 PL15.. i can assure you there will never by any spikes launched, even from inside the indian territory
 
For J-10CE,the only target is RAFALE. So 4XPL-15 is enough.

for me, the biggest target in a battlefield would not be a fighters but awacs and ew assets to cause disruption, you can't shoot if you can't see
 
It does of course but F-16 gives user the option to overload even more. People are assuming that the maximum load of F-16 (around 2T more than J-10) would perform similarly to J-10 at its allowed max load.

The difference here is the allowed max load of the 2 is different. I'm sure the J-10 can add another 2 tonnes but the performance would be more sluggish.

You are missing the important factor here. The difference is not that F-16 can carry more to the same performance let's call overall Performance level P1 (benchmark of high load performance) compared to J-10. It is that the F-16 allows user to load it more however Px < P1.

While J-10 simply enforces a minimum of P1 and does not allow user to simply load it further.

WS-10B and F110 have similar dry and wet thrust figures. Both fighters have similar drag and lift.

So why is F-16 capable of carrying more? The reason is in how much each side allows their fighter to have as max. With Chinese the allowed max is lower as the thinking may be along the lines of why should I max it out to the same extent as F-16 is allowed. It degrades performance and range far too much. Reduces energy for weapons released, cannot dodge missiles incoming as well, cannot fly as far or fast or turn or climb anywhere near what is required. So Chinese simply did not bother triple and double racking all the pylons.

F-16 allows this but most missions will not allow it to carry 6 BVR missiles, 2 WVR missiles, three tanks and pods etc. It's just a matter of what you want to do with it.

Some people still stuck at max payload. I suppose this is why those companies market their aircraft in beast mode.

It's the difference between going to combat like this.

View attachment 825404


and going like this.

View attachment 825405


Where both men have similar carrying capacity but both choose different limits.
Spare the chit chat.

There is a reason having air refueling capability, multirole capability, mission planning, route setting, payload delivery etc. PLAAF doesnt have F-16, yet it can carry out all missions whether or not putting J-10 in air. PAF is not dependent on one type of aircraft to fulfill its needs. So far Mirages, F-16, JFT and J-10 as a combination. In future it will be 3 types, yet it doesnt dictate that only one type of aircraft has to carry out all responsibilities related to the mission. A multirole aircraft is itself designed to swing roles.

So lets get out of the narrow view just to prove a trivial point since a random statement has been thrown out in the open which now requires a back up for prestige sake.

Even without original version of PL-15, the J10C plus PL-15E is a very capable duo.
Not sure if its theoretically suggested or if any practical tests have been carried out but if possible, an AAM with capability to take down supersonic CMs should be looked at and trialed by J-10.
Similarly, Army AD uses target drones for practice, maybe a different target drone is needed now.
 
Last edited:
Spare the chit chat.

There is a reason having air refueling capability, multirole capability, mission planning, route setting, payload delivery etc. PLAAF doesnt have F-16, yet it can carry out all missions whether or not putting J-10 in air. PAF is not dependent on one type of aircraft to fulfill its needs. So far Mirages, F-16, JFT and J-10 as a combination. In future it will be 3 types, yet it doesnt dictate that only one type of aircraft has to carry out all responsibilities related to the mission. A multirole aircraft is itself designed to swing roles.

So lets get out of the narrow view just to prove a trivial point since a random statement has been thrown out in the open which now requires a back up for prestige sake.


Not sure if its theoretically suggested or if any practical tests have been carried out but if possible, an AAM with capability to take down supersonic CMs should be looked at and trialed by J-10.
Similarly, Army AD uses target drones for practice, maybe a different target drone is needed now.

Not sure what you are saying.

Do you mean J-10 is more air superiority focused and F-16 is more multirole? I certainly think this is the case.

AAM taking down cruise missiles? Sure that's more another set of capabilities rather than a question of launching platform. It depends on the cruise missiles themselves. I'm sure many are simply too stealthy or fast to effectively detect, track, and shoot down.

Anyway J-10 is a budget fighter for PLAAF. I don't think it's all that as some members are making it out to be.

Like predicted before J-10CE revealed for PAF, one group will say it is complete junk and another will say it's the best thing since 5th generation.

I think instead of quite lofty goals of intercepting cruise missiles with 4.5 gen fighters and newer AAMs which are theoretically possible, the reality is no one really knows each others real capabilities and extents to really pursue some strategy of incorporating CM interception into fighter roles.
 
I was wondering if there could be another version of J10C with the dual engine? If it is a possibility? @Deino @beijingwalker @siegecrossbow
it is called J20. a twin engine delta wing with Cannards but with 5th generation features.

in the presence of all other twin engine flanker clones, a proposal to spending resources for a new delta wing jet with twin engines might be a hard sell.
 
There are plenty of them on this forum who failed to realise US have moved on and US don't have to put sanctions on us to deny weapons. Simply they are not entertaining the idea of selling new weapons to us without the Indian consent and the hostility in the congress against us is at the another level.
It just reinforces our commitment to do better and stop depending on others for our own defence and know who are our real friends. US sanctions turned out to be blessing in disguise for us and forced us in doing things which otherwise we could not have done in million years.
But there are still plenty of delusion who still cling onto hope of mending ties with US and get more F-16. They even prepare to give up sovereignty just for sake of some candies. I know some Pakistanis traitors even willing to give up Kashmir just to please Americans and get F-16 or Super Cobras.
 
FB_IMG_1647671982617.jpg
 
Tbh, I’m pretty pissed off that the Chinese sold us the export variant of the PL-15, even the US sells Israel it’s top of the line arsenal.
TBH, I am pretty pissed off at your sense of entitlement coupled with ignorance; also at your disingenuous attempt at creating a false equivalence between China & USA on one hand and Pakistan & Israel on another. Are you for real?
 
No point being their only ally than is there?

The fact that we have to counter S400’s without a Stealth jet, when our best of best Ally has one, is quite frankly outrageous.

The US sold F-15A/B exclusively to Israel in the last 70’s case in point.
What is outrageous is again you sense of entitlement, again. Why do you suppose the Chinese must provide Pakistan with their latest & greatest? Is there a particular reason or do you just consider it a birthright?
 
Nice they are flying it every day! Must love the new toy.

Are they doing any combat training yet or are they focused on aerobatics until after the parade?
Hi my friend
I think they might have done this training already within PlAAF while Chinese airforce doing training in their own territory with the other different fighters of PLAAF force
if PAF pilot were trained in China & training last let’s say 6/9 months ( by the way how long is the training) they must have participated with Chinese aces already
you are a very well informed member of the SDF too
I’m sure will try to dig out on SDF for our knowledge too
your input will be much appreciated
thank you
 
In multi role F-16 block 70 wins hands down, with longer range and greater weapons load. Air to air should be closer if it is using AIM-9X and AIM-120D, but the latter so far has only been exported to closest US Allies. F-16 has the advantage in sustained turn while the J-10C should have the advantage in instantaneous turn.

The low sale price to Pakistan is for Pakistan only. It is a bit like how the US provides military aid to Israel. If Argentina wants J-10C it will be quite a bit more expensive because China will also need to deal with political fallout with the UK.

Where did you get the payload and range figures for the F-16V and J-10C? I'm almost sure that the latter's specs haven't been leaked.
 
Where did you get the payload and range figures for the F-16V and J-10C? I'm almost sure that the latter's specs haven't been leaked.

It hasn’t. But based on limitations of deltas, especially one with a small span, it is most likely the case. J-10C doesn’t have wingtip pylons, and the inner pylons can only carry bombs unless you do some significant time consuming rewiring. Payload and range have been sacrificed for speed.
 

The J-10 is a good purchase by the PAF to hedge against any 4.5 generation fighter India builds or procures or upgrades.

The size of radar of the J-10 is probably as large or nearly as large as that on a potential IN Super Hornet (who’s APG-79 uses GaA T/R Modules https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14203228/radar-airborne-combat-aircraft) or a potential upgraded the Su-30MKI that will probably use a scaled down radar under development for the Su-57 (1557 T/R Modules). With renewed export interest, perhaps there will be further development of the J-10 to surpass the capabilities of these jets, because as one of the PLAAF’s main fighter types, it will need to find a way to be survivable against 5th generation fighters, and in that process it will come up with ways to dominate 4.5 generation fighters. The J-10 might become what the Russians had hoped the Su-75 would become. (Perhaps a future development with some aspects of the J-20’s wing and a switch to twin angled tails to lower RCS significantly?)

Future development of the JF-17 to at least match a similar RCS/IR/EW signature with the Rafale should be a goal, as the radar nose cone sizes seem to be similar and the JF-17 has the potential to hold its own against the Rafale with a more power engine, better TWR, and signature reductions through shaping.
 
Last edited:
But there are still plenty of delusion who still cling onto hope of mending ties with US and get more F-16. They even prepare to give up sovereignty just for sake of some candies. I know some Pakistanis traitors even willing to give up Kashmir just to please Americans and get F-16 or Super Cobras.

The US weapons saga is long over, it's time the very few people who still have hope come to their senses. As if a ban on helicopters, engines, refusal to sell even second hand F-16's is not enough....It's just trade. No more weapons ever from them, as poor India might get hurt.
 

Back
Top Bottom