What's new

Pakistan Sets Eyes on China’s New J-35 Fighter Jet

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
The sub contractor which is making WS19 is already making it as there was some leaked info about tax filing of 5 WS19 engines.
Highly doubt that leak is reliable or of any value ... actually I don't think that was even a leak and instead was public disclosure information
 

The Raven

FULL MEMBER
Mar 31, 2020
414
3
899
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
The Chinese it seems lately are more inclined to sell rather than build/assemble in Pakistan. This would not be what PAF wants. The Turks are at the right moment in their developmental cycle for us to go with them in return for work share agreement which one MAY NOT get from China. This is the only addition to your very good post I would like to make.
A
Araz, I would partially agree with you here. The Chinese have been more than willing to transfer tech for license manufacture in Pakistan, e.g. Al Khalid, K-8, etc, and if Pakistan is willing to pay for development costs, I think they'd be more than happy to help us in designing a bespoke fifth gen fighter. However, as I alluded to in my post, I don't think they'd be willing to subsidise another fighter programme, in a similar manner as they did with the JF-17, but this time for a fifth gen design, primarily designed for the PAF and with little potential use in the PLAF. In that regard, a PAF version of the FC-31/J-35 would remain the only realistic option. The Turks and the TFX, which although can't be ruled out, would be highly risky, not only because of lack of historical precedent by Turkey in fighter development (and not to diminish the Turk's excellent technological and industrial base), but also because of the current geopolitical uncertainty facing Turkey and its reliance on third party technology, on which the TFX heavily relies, e.g. BAE and other third parties for design and critical technologies.
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
751
3
873
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
This is not true. The Z-10 contrary to what many people say is not actually underpowered. Its engine is rated at 1100 kW ... do you actually think it is in the same class of attack helicopters as the Apache or the Mi-28? The original Z-10's engines were at around 900 kW, making them somewhat underpowered but not "crippled".


The US will need to gain air superiority within the first Island Chain in any war with China (whether it be over Taiwan or the SCS). The J-20 leads the forefront of those efforts ... they are the single largest threat to the USAF in the Pacific besides the SAM systems.

And is what i said wrong? Cutting payload capacity in half is not crippling?

"PAAC conducted extensive trials with the T129 and the Z-10. At the end, the T129 prevailed over the Z-10 principally due to the weak performance of the latter’s WZ-9 turboshaft engine, which reportedly prevented the Z-10 from carrying its maximum weapons payload during military operations. "

"Z-10 can carry 16 HJ-10 missiles with maximum takeoff weight, but the payload is very heavy for the Z-10 and engines and potentially risky for flying, so 8 missiles with other weapons serve as the maximum useful payload"
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
And is what i said wrong? Cutting payload capacity in half is not crippling?

"PAAC conducted extensive trials with the T129 and the Z-10. At the end, the T129 prevailed over the Z-10 principally due to the weak performance of the latter’s WZ-9 turboshaft engine, which reportedly prevented the Z-10 from carrying its maximum weapons payload during military operations. "

"Z-10 can carry 16 HJ-10 missiles with maximum takeoff weight, but the payload is very heavy for the Z-10 and engines and potentially risky for flying, so 8 missiles with other weapons serve as the maximum useful payload"
Where is the evidence that the Z-10's payload was cut in half?
 

Akh1112

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2019
751
3
873
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
I just showed you quotes... Here, since you'd like to be spoonfed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAIC_Z-10

https://thediplomat.com/2020/02/pakistan-reconsiders-chinese-z-10-attack-helicopters/

https://thediplomat.com/2020/02/china-unveils-latest-z-10-attack-helicopter-variant/

Also, if these aren't good enough for you, please find me a photo of 16 HJ-10's being carried. Thanks.
All unreliable sources ... and no, I can't find any photos because there is nowhere stated that the Z-10 was officially supposed to carry 16 HJ-10s. IMO, this may be fanboy dreams rather than reality.
 

zhxy

FULL MEMBER
Mar 15, 2020
848
-5
1,288
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Viet Nam
Turkish people have a mind of their own. So far they are not happy with any one be it USA, Russia, China even Pakistan faced their wrath when there was a military co. So I don't think we should collaborate with turkey on such a big project. They might have gave us some input but in exchange we might buy their other stuff specially for navy. But Turkey will not become a part of this J35 and abandon their TFX project.
The Turks and the TFX, which although can't be ruled out, would be highly risky, not only because of lack of historical precedent by Turkey in fighter development (and not to diminish the Turk's excellent technological and industrial base), but also because of the current geopolitical uncertainty facing Turkey and its reliance on third party technology, on which the TFX heavily relies, e.g. BAE and other third parties for design and critical technologies.


Turkey does not have much experience in large projects. But should not underestimate their capacity.
If the economy is growing steadily, Pakistan should join the TF-X program. Turkey and Pakistan are brothers, they do not reject Pakistan.
 

danger007

ELITE MEMBER
May 30, 2011
10,016
-27
8,289
Country
India
Location
India
The sub contractor which is making WS19 is already making it as there was some leaked info about tax filing of 5 WS19 engines.

Tax filing leak?? Isn't that offence to leak sensitive info.... are you just making tall claims as if you have knowledge..
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
Tax filing leak?? Isn't that offence to leak sensitive info.... are you just making tall claims as if you have knowledge..
It was not a leak. Western media just assumed it was a leak since they found it on Twitter first. In reality, it was a public company disclosure. And you are right, there was no sensitive info since this was all public information, so imho unreliable.
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
8,138
67
13,183
All unreliable sources ... and no, I can't find any photos because there is nowhere stated that the Z-10 was officially supposed to carry 16 HJ-10s. IMO, this may be fanboy dreams rather than reality.
Irrespective if the Z10 had fulfilled PAA needs PA would have ordered them straight away after a generous offer from the Chinese to loan 3-4 machines for a year to try extensively. The fact that PAA returned them and asked for improvements meant it did not fulfill the criteria set for it to succeed. The Chinese have now brought an improved version(Z10 ME??) for evaluation. Lets see how this one does.
A

We have to remember that the J-35 is meant for the PLAN. So, a lot of the key changes can't have anything to do with the PAF because the PAF doesn't have aircraft carriers. Stuff like a specific landing gear, stopping salt erosion, etc don't apply to 80%+ of the PAF's fighter fleet. It's unlikely we'd recommend or foot the bill for those.

I don't think we could've offered much input to the Chinese either. The FC-31 was probably fine the way it was, but because the PLA hadn't adopted it, the PAF wasn't sure of its viability. It's one thing to co-fund the JF-17, but to just complete a FGFA is a whole other ballgame, financially speaking.

But now that the PLAN is moving ahead with the J-35, I think the FC-31 has enough 'lift' from China for the PAF to seriously consider it.
Initial vibes coming out of the Chinese and PAF circles was that the Chinese wanted a partner to foot the bill for F31 development. PAF somewhat chastened by the JFT fiasco where the Chinese allegedly reneged on their commitment to buy 150 units refused to foot the bill but instead wanted the Chinese to complete the project and then try the plane. The RD93 were underpowered for this monster and the brick like maneouvering of the first prototype did not help. The Chinese weakness of a mature powerful engine remains a big impediment.
A
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
Irrespective if the Z10 had fulfilled PAAneeds PA would have ordered them straight away after a generous offer from the Chinese to loan 3-4 machines for a year to try extensively . The fact that PAA returned them and asked for improvements meant it did not fulfill the criteria set for it to succeed. The Chinese have now brought an improved version(Z10 ME??) for evaluation. Lets see how this one does.
A
Z-10ME is definitely an improved variant that is for sure ... just because Pakistan didn't order the Z-10 doesn't mean there was anything fundamentally wrong with it. Pakistan didn't order the VT-4 either but Thailand did and they are very satisfied with the performance and have ordered more. It is all about the needs of the military. Clearly the Z-10 was not as well suited for the needs of the Pakistani operational climate versus the T-129
 

araz

PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
Jun 14, 2006
8,138
67
13,183
Z-10ME is definitely an improved variant that is for sure ... just because Pakistan didn't order the Z-10 doesn't mean there was anything fundamentally wrong with it. Pakistan didn't order the VT-4 either but Thailand did and they are very satisfied with the performance and have ordered more. It is all about the needs of the military. Clearly the Z-10 was not as well suited for the needs of the Pakistani operational climate versus the T-129
I think the fact that an "improved version" was sent means that the original did not satisfy the needs of the client. This is a failure in any book. Whether it satisfies someone else's needs remains irrelevant to the discussion.
VT4s apparently are another item that is currently being inducted following improvements. Again the original did not satsfy the requirements so an improved version was retrialled and now inducted.
A
 

Figaro

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 17, 2017
5,798
8
10,769
Country
United States
Location
United States
I think the fact that an "improved version" was sent means that the original did not satisfy the needs of the client. This is a failure in any book. Whether it satisfies someone else's needs remains irrelevant to the discussion.
VT4s apparently are another item that is currently being inducted following improvements. Again the original did not satsfy the requirements so an improved version was retrialled and now inducted.
A
AVIC did not make the Z-10ME exclusively for Pakistan ... it was meant as a general upgrade for the Z-10.
 

khanasifm

SENIOR MEMBER
Apr 16, 2008
6,159
6
4,669
The original article on f-35 has no mention of paf I think. This was added by sometime after the fact ??

option??
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom