What's new

PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

If PL-15E doesn't have dual pulse motor , then it's more rubbish than i thought.
Dual pulse doesn't only increase range, it also helps in sustaining kinetic energy while maneuvers and terminal phase.
The missile uses the second motor as close to the target as possible.
That means the missile has a motor burning, when it needs thrust the most, at the last moments when it's twisting and turning to catch the target.
Sir if you think there are 2 physical motors in dual pulse motor missile. You have absolutely no idea what dual pulse motor is.

It's basically a technique to avoid expensive and complex stage separation mechanism which will have to be there in case of 2 physical motors. Instead, dual pulse motor rockets uses 2 kinds of propellants. One is fast burning producing higher thrust and is placed near the nozzle of rocket while other is relatively slow burning helping in sustaining the speed of rocket while ensuring longer range, and is placed farther from nozzle. There is a PSD in between the two but no physical separation takes place like in septation stage rockets we see in space or Ballistic missiles applications. A dual pulse motor is a single motor with 2 pulses.

PSD = Pulse Separation Device. It's an internal mechanism for ensuring that two propellants don't get mixed.

1-s2.0-S2214914721001409-gr1.jpg


Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Intrigued with your explanation. There are many variables which make it confusing.

If Chinese were making a data link, then a 5th gen would be in the making too side by side as another project. Technology is researched and implemented by keeping future technology/additions/expansion/upgrades in mind. A software update is much more easier than a hardware update, its cost effective too. The aircraft design team will be pissed off if the software team designs a module which needs a hardware change later on. Antennas, themselves can be configured by softwares for compatibility as well as operating over a large range of frequencies keeping future in mind apart from data link's own software configuration.

1. What would be the requirement of a large throughput data link for a 5th gen only ? that it needs to send massive data compared to DLs(data links) carried by other aircrafts of older gen ?
Is this a special or recon version of aircraft which needs high-res SAR sensors for mapping or collecting information from sensors for continuous transmission which requires dedicated bandwidth ?

2. Why can't 4gen or 4.5 gen aircraft do the same ?
e.g. EA-18G operates with F-35, both are different generation. One is EW and other is fighter. In other cases F-15s and F-22 could be operating together. Would that require addition of hardware like antennas on F-15s or EA-18s.

3. Wasn't it plausible to keep the same version of data link in all aircraft for inter-operability ?


Yeah, they have already sent along Brahmos.


Why not delegate and shift the A2G responsibility to UCAVs, slowly and gradually ?
For all those datalink related issues you might consult F-35's level 4 update. Which drastically improves it's datalink capabilities and also includes costly hardware upgrades. Their details are more public than the Chinese equipment. And PAF have removed some unnecessary components to make it more cost effective for them. Yes when 5th gen fighters would come almost a decade later, these brand new fighters would be going through their 1st overhaul so can be refitted with datalink of that age.

The latest upgrades in F-35 can let them communicate with multiple assets at a time with directed communication beams which are harder to intercept and jam. And they can literally receive and relay HD video feeds to/from different sources and it can't be done in current tech of 2mbps link16. So 5th gen fighters have situational awareness, data fusion and data transfer rates a lot more higher than any 4th gen fighter could even handle it. This requires processors with multiple times more processing power and related equipment.

And it's like buying an expensive spacesuit but there isn't any rocket available to you to actually go into the space🙄🤣🤣😂😂. That's the whole purpose of modular system. You can upgrade as and when required and luckily PAC is skilled enough to install some communication modules in a jet, they wouldn't have to go to Canada to do that. 😜
 
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.
Just wait for the opposition to come in power :usflag:
 
simple ToT (time on target) is limited so you need to send max rounds down range in the limited time the piper is on target and so rate of fire is prioritised.

Hi,

Thanks for your post. GSH 23 is no match for the m61

GSH 23 is on a mounted platform and mounted platforms are not very accurate.
 
Hi,

Thanks for your post. GSH 23 is no match for the m61

GSH 23 is on a mounted platform and mounted platforms are not very accurate.



Any gun based on the Gast principle isn't really useful in air to air combat. Probably obvious from its placement on both the JF-17 and Tejas. I guess it is principally meant to strafe ground targets.

The M61 linkless feed system is reliable irrespective of own ship orientation (immune to G's) and it does not spit out spent casing and damage the aircraft when the canon is fired.
 
Though every squadron has a checkered colour assigned to it but painting it on aircrafts is only a trend in Mirage squadrons.

One exception are Arrows I think.


As per my understanding, 25 is something like serial number. The column before is of number of aircrafts ordered but clearly the figures aren't mentioned.
Could it be an indication the J-10s have a strike role (or taking over to some extent in that regard) as the new Deltas in the fleet?
 
My personal opinion. Is it possible to modify all pylons on J10C to carry missiles of choice? Can you make a one time only modification on the central fusalge pylon and the two inner wing pylon so that there is no need to make the cumbersome penal removal whenever you want to change from fuel tank to AAM?

Tp me it looks like lack of inner space within the fuselage and the wing to accommodare hard wiring. Correct me if I am wrong.

However, solution is always achieved by the desire of needs. Yes, I believe you can made the neccesity modification if that is your need. Hard wiring is like your old landline phone in the office, solution is like a latest 5G smartphone that requuires no wiring.

Is it not possible to design a device for short range 5G command transmission from cockpit to a modified pylon to effect a missile launch? No wiring connecting missile pylon to the wing or the fuselage is required. I believe this is doable if you think beyond the box.
 
very interesting tweet regarding our J-10C:
(Look at CH4 numbers as well)

So no Z10Es attack helicopters as claimed by some unverified sources.

I think Army is not much interested in attack helicopters anymore that is why they are inducting more attack drones instead. Perhaps change in doctrine. Also drones can provide us more waiting time for T129 alternate engine options.
 

Back
Top Bottom