J-10 might not needed as they don't add anything to PAF's capability

[volatile]

On the contrary it wtill remains the achilles heel of the Cuinese aviation industry. There have been problems with earlier version of Ws10s with serious breakdowns. You need to give things time before you can say that a certain technology has matured. The ws 10 is not quite there.
A

I totally agreed with you but AL series has proved its metal ,For Chinese or for any aerospace engines are achilles heel but argument here refers to J10 engine and its selection for PAF ,what it really amazes me that RD93 which is little less powerful then AL, PAF level of trust with RD series should also encourage them to use AL series for J10 (if this is the only matter of selection)

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-...gine-why-not-more-powerful-NPO-Saturn-engines

 

[araz]

What are you saying?? . I've told you before. Let the Pakistanis speak to me about Pakistan. When I give a da-yum about your country, you can debate with me. Thanks!




The J-10 A (specs you defined) aren't what Pakistan is interested in. Pakistan is interested in the C and D version (D is "classified" as of now, but it has stuff from the J-31, and will be stealth optimized).

The J-10B and then the C versions are built on rules of inter-operational ability, learned from the JFT. These are just software and avionics modifications that tell the KLJ radar to guide an AIM Sidewinder or Piranha to its destination, vs. the Magic-550 copy, the PL-7/8.

Also remember, both the JFT and the F-16 do about Mach 1.6-1.8 (with some weapons on). But for the SU-30's and the Mig-25's, and Mig-29's higher speed,thrust ratio on escort duties, won't be chased away by the F-16's or the JFT's. So you'll need an interceptor for it, high speed, delta winged, wired with 4-6 AAM's. That's the role the J-10C or D would play. The PAF was hoping for the SU-35's so they can be used in multirole ops but its still in talks. While the Chinese will provide the J-10B right away and the J-10C in about a year (J-10D is about 2 years away from mass production).

So consider the J-10's role in the PAF focused on supplementing the F-16's and act as escort and interceptor aircrafts. For strike, the PAF has multiple other options. Including converting the K-8's to light ground attack fighters armed with short range AAM's. More than likely, these will be attacking the Indian columns right at the border or inside the Pakistani borders, so the load-out and the range would work perfect. These can also serve as a point defense fighter too.

So your whole debate is based on a platform which does not exist, or parameters known about. There is no concrete evidence for a C version of J10 existing. It would be a waste of time since PLAAF is just beginning to incorporate J10B into its air regiments. This is another nosensical assumption.
Secondly your whole argument regarding a fast interceptor with mach 2 plus speed falls on its face because J10B has DSI incorporated which has brought its speed down not above.
The incorporation of fifth generation technology and semi stealth features is a piece of BULL!!! Let me tell you why!! As soon as you start hanging your crown jewels outside on hardpoints all of those semi stealthy features will go down the drain. It is not without reason that Stealth aircrafts are designed from the Git go. So you are incorporating a lot of changes for very little or no gain or a bloody waste of time and money.
As I have mentioned J10 cannot incorporate 6 BVRAAMs on account of restrictions on the belly hardpoints. There is now a DER available for use for SD10 and this can also be incorporated into JFT giving it 4 BVRs plus 2 WVR.
So this whole debate is a bit pointless.
A

I totally agreed with you but AL series has proved its metal ,For Chinese or for any aerospace engines are achilles heel but argument here refers to J10 engine and its selection for PAF ,what it really amazes me that RD93 which is little less powerful then AL, PAF level of trust with RD series should also encourage them to use AL series for J10 (if this is the only matter of selection)

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-...gine-why-not-more-powerful-NPO-Saturn-engines

The bit about AL 31 having proven its metal is what I have contested based on various reports from PAF pilots having seen massive flame outs ion J10s.The IAF has had problems in the past although @random radio will contest the issue. My sources in PAf report serious problems in the past with AL31 in IAF leading to grounding of the fleet. I think things may have improved as they usually do and AL41 is certainly better, but my point of contention is that it needs to be tested in forces outside of Russia before we can lable it as a good engine.
A

 

[volatile]

The bit about AL 31 having proven its metal is what I have contested based on various reports from PAF pilots having seen massive flame outs ion J10s.The IAF has had problems in the past although @random radio will contest the issue. My sources in PAf report serious problems in the past with AL31 in IAF leading to grounding of the fleet. I think things may have improved as they usually do and AL41 is certainly better, but my point of contention is that it needs to be tested in forces outside of Russia before we can lable it as a good engine.
A

Thumbs up thanks for sharing this information ,May i add one thing to it ,Kindly dont quote IAF example dont take me wrong or any thing neither i m in any superiority complex but IAF examples are some what outliers some one who manages to down brand new C-130`s what else i can comment i do agree accident occurs ,HAL has done a shitty job even in assembling SU series with major malfunctions and badly putting up things resulted in many accidents/crashes (dont want to derail the thread) ,It would be interested to hear from Chinese/Russians as minimum benchmark are these powers ,AL41 i dont know much about it and if PAF guys are happy with it its a good news ,we all should remmember RD93 smokey performance how its being tuned by any one of these (Russian/Chinese/Pakistani) to manageable manner ,but real question remains J10 was it not selected only because of its engine ?

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

May be JF 17 3rd block will give us the final answer, why PAF is not going for J 10.

Platforms gets better as it matures but there are design limitations, J10 have much higher potential, what PAF desperately needs is a reliable strike platform which jf17 isn't. but thats my view you can disagree, goodday

The bit about AL 31 having proven its metal is what I have contested based on various reports from PAF pilots having seen massive flame outs ion J10s.The IAF has had problems in the past although @random radio will contest the issue. My sources in PAf report serious problems in the past with AL31 in IAF leading to grounding of the fleet. I think things may have improved as they usually do and AL41 is certainly better, but my point of contention is that it needs to be tested in forces outside of Russia before we can lable it as a good engine.
A

Engine serviceability problem still persist that is why one of the most important thing in proposed mki upgrade is new engines.

 

[Lucky Breeze]

Platforms gets better as it matures but there are design limitations, J10 have much higher potential, what PAF desperately needs is a reliable strike platform which jf17 isn't. but thats my view you can disagree, goodday

J 10 has not any targeting pod. But 11 hard points make it an interceptor to cover JF 17 ( with Aselsan targeting pod) as a strike aircraft.

 

[araz]

Thumbs up thanks for sharing this information ,May i add one thing to it ,Kindly dont quote IAF example dont take me wrong or any thing neither i m in any superiority complex but IAF examples are some what outliers some one who manages to down brand new C-130`s what else i can comment i do agree accident occurs ,HAL has done a shitty job even in assembling SU series with major malfunctions and badly putting up things resulted in many accidents/crashes (dont want to derail the thread) ,It would be interested to hear from Chinese/Russians as minimum benchmark are these powers ,AL41 i dont know much about it and if PAF guys are happy with it its a good news ,we all should remmember RD93 smokey performance how its being tuned by any one of these (Russian/Chinese/Pakistani) to manageable manner ,but real question remains J10 was it not selected only because of its engine ?

That is unfair. Their problems with assembly have been known and they have resolved them. The main problem with the MKI has been its engine. One of the problems in 2006 was that the bearing was made from inferior material causing bits of metal to get mixed with the oil and cause engine damage. I gather the Saturn people proposed 9 changes to AL31 after 39 accidents of various natures in IAF. You cant blame engine problems on IAF. Lately the problems with AL31 have been seen by PAF pilots during exercises with PLAAF and their SUs which I have alluded to. So all in all there are problems with the engine.
A

 

[X-2.]

Jf 17 block 3 will be total diff from jf17 as It will be equipped with much powerful engine,better design,avoinics etc and it will be gen4++ for sure

 

[Viper0011.]

So your whole debate is based on a platform which does not exist, or parameters known about. There is no concrete evidence for a C version of J10 existing. It would be a waste of time since PLAAF is just beginning to incorporate J10B into its air regiments. This is another nosensical assumption.
Secondly your whole argument regarding a fast interceptor with mach 2 plus speed falls on its face because J10B has DSI incorporated which has brought its speed down not above.
The incorporation of fifth generation technology and semi stealth features is a piece of BULL!!! Let me tell you why!! As soon as you start hanging your crown jewels outside on hardpoints all of those semi stealthy features will go down the drain. It is not without reason that Stealth aircrafts are designed from the Git go. So you are incorporating a lot of changes for very little or no gain or a bloody waste of time and money.
As I have mentioned J10 cannot incorporate 6 BVRAAMs on account of restrictions on the belly hardpoints. There is now a DER available for use for SD10 and this can also be incorporated into JFT giving it 4 BVRs plus 2 WVR.
So this whole debate is a bit pointless.
A


The bit about AL 31 having proven its metal is what I have contested based on various reports from PAF pilots having seen massive flame outs ion J10s.The IAF has had problems in the past although @random radio will contest the issue. My sources in PAf report serious problems in the past with AL31 in IAF leading to grounding of the fleet. I think things may have improved as they usually do and AL41 is certainly better, but my point of contention is that it needs to be tested in forces outside of Russia before we can lable it as a good engine.
A

Alright man. A couple of things about me, I don't indulge in fan boy gossip. If I am writing something, I better know it right, and from the right resources.

You use a lot of "nonsensical", "non-existent" types of word in your post. People with these negative comments based on their own perception tend to be very close minded, my way or the highway people. Its useless to put facts in front of you as you'll firmly believe in what you know!!

From the post above, its very clear that I've hit some nerve. However, that wasn't my objective. But I will re-iterate and will agree to disagree with you. Here's my stance and God knows you'll remember me three years from today on this topic:

1) J-10C and D are not "non existent"..they are being worked on. Ask some of the senior Chinese members on here and I am more than sure someone will confirm it.

2) I can guarantee it, the day isn't far when you'll see the J-10C with 6-8 BVR-AAM's as an interceptor or CAP role. In fact there are pictures of the J-10A flying with 4 SD-10's on DERs. Which means, you can use the hard-points close to wingtips and mount more missiles. So it can already fly with 4 SD-10's and 2 PL-8/9 short range missiles so your argument has become invalid already. Again, some Chinese member can confirm this also.

3) And the rest assured, the J-10D or the J-10S will be stealth optimized. Not stealthy like the J-20 and J-31, but stealth optimized. Which would still make this plane close to being full stealth when flying low and inside Pakistan for interception. Some Chinese member can confirm this too

 

[volatile]

That is unfair. Their problems with assembly have been known and they have resolved them. The main problem with the MKI has been its engine. One of the problems in 2006 was that the bearing was made from inferior material causing bits of metal to get mixed with the oil and cause engine damage. I gather the Saturn people proposed 9 changes to AL31 after 39 accidents of various natures in IAF. You cant blame engine problems on IAF. Lately the problems with AL31 have been seen by PAF pilots during exercises with PLAAF and their SUs which I have alluded to. So all in all there are problems with the engine.
A

Ok ! but why Chinese never acknowledge this problem globally and filliing the AF with such engines or they are smart enough to figure out Preventive Maintenance scheduling to avoid such problems ,what i mean to say that too many of these engines are circulated all over the world in many examples any ways IAF may be unfair example but is this engine that much problematic seems difficult to digest ,I dont know about your background but i think you know much better inside stories than any one else .Any comments on RD93 smoke rectification ? was the DSI played an important role or some fuel mix as RD 93 is improving a lot in terms of smooke .Thanks in advance

Jf 17 block 3 will be total diff from jf17 as It will be equipped with much powerful engine,better design,avoinics etc and it will be gen4++ for sure

Engine : Not confirmed
design : No Comments
Avionics : Definately weather AESA (its still not confirmed)
4++ with Inflight refueling confirm ,2 seater confirm ,upgrade avionics and weaponry (If no AESA,IRST or HOBS) then not closed to 4++

 

[araz]

Ok ! but why Chinese never acknowledge this problem globally and filliing the AF with such engines or they are smart enough to figure out Preventive Maintenance scheduling to avoid such problems ,what i mean to say that too many of these engines are circulated all over the world in many examples any ways IAF may be unfair example but is this engine that much problematic seems difficult to digest ,I dont know about your background but i think you know much better inside stories than any one else .Any comments on RD93 smoke rectification ? was the DSI played an important role or some fuel mix as RD 93 is improving a lot in terms of smooke .Thanks in advance


Engine : Not confirmed
design : No Comments
Avionics : Definately weather AESA (its still not confirmed)
4++ with Inflight refueling confirm ,2 seater confirm ,upgrade avionics and weaponry (If no AESA,IRST or HOBS) then not closed to 4++

ASAK
Shall we say that the Chinese have been a bit economical with information regarding crashes and engine failures. There have been a few engine failures and J10 crashes(Source Sinodefence.today forum) as a result of this. We do not know for sure whether these engines were WS10 or AL31 as no information is available.
My background is totally nonmilitary and I gather information from visiting various fora and talking to and learning from a few kind friends. However you dont have to be an insider as a lot of information is available on the net and the rest is common snese.
A

 

[volatile]

ASAK
Shall we say that the Chinese have been a bit economical with information regarding crashes and engine failures. There have been a few engine failures and J10 crashes(Source Sinodefence.today forum) as a result of this. We do not know for sure whether these engines were WS10 or AL31 as no information is available.
My background is totally nonmilitary and I gather information from visiting various fora and talking to and learning from a few kind friends. However you dont have to be an insider as a lot of information is available on the net and the rest is common snese.
A

Any comments/info related to RD93 recent performance in terms of smoke ?

 

[araz]

Alright man. A couple of things about me, I don't indulge in fan boy gossip. If I am writing something, I better know it right, and from the right resources.

You use a lot of "nonsensical", "non-existent" types of word in your post. People with these negative comments based on their own perception tend to be very close minded, my way or the highway people. Its useless to put facts in front of you as you'll firmly believe in what you know!!

From the post above, its very clear that I've hit some nerve. However, that wasn't my objective. But I will re-iterate and will agree to disagree with you. Here's my stance and God knows you'll remember me three years from today on this topic:

1) J-10C and D are not "non existent"..they are being worked on. Ask some of the senior Chinese members on here and I am more than sure someone will confirm it.

2) I can guarantee it, the day isn't far when you'll see the J-10C with 6-8 BVR-AAM's as an interceptor or CAP role. In fact there are pictures of the J-10A flying with 4 SD-10's on DERs. Which means, you can use the hard-points close to wingtips and mount more missiles. So it can already fly with 4 SD-10's and 2 PL-8/9 short range missiles so your argument has become invalid already. Again, some Chinese member can confirm this also.

3) And the rest assured, the J-10D or the J-10S will be stealth optimized. Not stealthy like the J-20 and J-31, but stealth optimized. Which would still make this plane close to being full stealth when flying low and inside Pakistan for interception. Some Chinese member can confirm this too

Alright man. A couple of things about me, I don't indulge in fan boy gossip. If I am writing something, I better know it right, and from the right resources.

You use a lot of "nonsensical", "non-existent" types of word in your post. People with these negative comments based on their own perception tend to be very close minded, my way or the highway people. Its useless to put facts in front of you as you'll firmly believe in what you know!!

From the post above, its very clear that I've hit some nerve. However, that wasn't my objective. But I will re-iterate and will agree to disagree with you. Here's my stance and God knows you'll remember me three years from today on this topic:

1) J-10C and D are not "non existent"..they are being worked on. Ask some of the senior Chinese members on here and I am more than sure someone will confirm it.

2) I can guarantee it, the day isn't far when you'll see the J-10C with 6-8 BVR-AAM's as an interceptor or CAP role. In fact there are pictures of the J-10A flying with 4 SD-10's on DERs. Which means, you can use the hard-points close to wingtips and mount more missiles. So it can already fly with 4 SD-10's and 2 PL-8/9 short range missiles so your argument has become invalid already. Again, some Chinese member can confirm this also.

3) And the rest assured, the J-10D or the J-10S will be stealth optimized. Not stealthy like the J-20 and J-31, but stealth optimized. Which would still make this plane close to being full stealth when flying low and inside Pakistan for interception. Some Chinese member can confirm this too

The J-10 A (specs you defined) aren't what Pakistan is interested in. Pakistan is interested in the C and D version (D is "classified" as of now, but it has stuff from the J-31, and will be stealth optimized).

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/j-10-mig...-pafs-capability.429373/page-34#ixzz4H280ErAy

Also remember, both the JFT and the F-16 do about Mach 1.6-1.8 (with some weapons on). But for the SU-30's and the Mig-25's, and Mig-29's higher speed,thrust ratio on escort duties, won't be chased away by the F-16's or the JFT's. So you'll need an interceptor for it, high speed, delta winged, wired with 4-6 AAM's. That's the role the J-10C or D would play.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/j-10-mig...-pafs-capability.429373/page-34#ixzz4H28OgYWp

I have quoted you two of the statements that you made in the post that I responded to.
A. The J10 C theory has largely been destroyed as the plane allegedly reported to be J10C was actually a J10 B after all.
So to date there is no information about J10C,D,S or and Alphabet you care to choose for it. The rest is upto you to believe or not.
B. I think we will agree that J10 B has DSI . To my knowledge there is no plane with DSI which exists (Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong) and can cross mach 2. If you look at your second statement you had purported a need for J10 based on its capabilities as a interceptor with Speed +2 mach unless I have totally lost my grasp of the english language(considering that you dseem F16 and JFT at mach 1.6 /1.8to be unworthy of the role).
C. You have obviously forgotten the role of modern day BVRAAMs and WVR HOBS missiles which will make these high speed persuits a thing of the past.
D. Four vs 6 BVRs is a matter of how you plan the defence of your arena. We dont have too much of a distance between our FOBs and you barely have to go 2-300 miles before you are locking horns. Unlike the US where the planes travel long distances we dont so the point is mute as to whether you will ever carry more than 4 BVRs into an engagement. If you use a DER which will soon be ntroduced on the JFT you can easily carry 4+2 and 2 drop tanks if need be. So why do we need another plane to carry2 more BVRs. So again your point does not make sense to me .I am always keen to understand another posters point of view but I will not be brow beaten int oaccepting an argument which does not make sense.
E. I have read you a lot and read how you have made all these lofty claims about PAF getting this or that. I am mor e conservative in my approach. I have lived in Pakistan and can tell you i see no signs as yet of things improving and it needs a lot more work before they do. These changes will not bear fruit till 2030+ so I dont buy into your optimistic theories of what is possible.
F. You can guarantee anything you like but based on facts to hand to date these are un grounded and based on news coming out of PAF they are blatently false.So please feel free to rewmain in your world of false hope but keep me out of it.
Regards
A

Any comments/info related to RD93 recent performance in terms of smoke ?

The news was that the Chinese had done some work on it to reduce smoke. I personally think PAF has had input from the Russains and have retuned the engine to get the smoke issue under control. The other thing to note is that Smoke is seen in certain environments and conditions, so how you see it can vary depending on the time of the year. This is as much as I know.
A

 

[X-2.]

Ok ! but why Chinese never acknowledge this problem globally and filliing the AF with such engines or they are smart enough to figure out Preventive Maintenance scheduling to avoid such problems ,what i mean to say that too many of these engines are circulated all over the world in many examples any ways IAF may be unfair example but is this engine that much problematic seems difficult to digest ,I dont know about your background but i think you know much better inside stories than any one else .Any comments on RD93 smoke rectification ? was the DSI played an important role or some fuel mix as RD 93 is improving a lot in terms of smooke .Thanks in advance


Engine : Not confirmed
design : No Comments
Avionics : Definately weather AESA (its still not confirmed)
4++ with Inflight refueling confirm ,2 seater confirm ,upgrade avionics and weaponry (If no AESA,IRST or HOBS) then not closed to 4++

U will see iA confirmation after few months
Chief of paf didn't came back empty handed from rooss

 

[volatile]

Chief of paf didn't came back empty handed from rooss

LETS HOPE

 

[Viper0011.]

A. The J10 C theory has largely been destroyed as the plane allegedly reported to be J10C was actually a J10 B after all.
So to date there is no information about J10C,D,S or and Alphabet you care to choose for it. The rest is upto you to believe or not.

I never subscribed to any theory about the J-10C or B. Nor do I care about it. I told you what I know.....and usually, I write what I know and it doesn't give me shame. Not yet at the least. So I don't know which theory you are referring to. I just know there is a B and a C and will be a D version, which will come out. I'll ask you then on this very forum. And you can then tell me that I was correct . Also, your "till then" could be a lot different than my "till then"!!

If you look at your second statement you had purported a need for J10 based on its capabilities as a interceptor with Speed +2 mach unless I have totally lost my grasp of the english language(considering that you dseem F16 and JFT at mach 1.6 /1.8to be unworthy of the role).

You have obviously forgotten the role of modern day BVRAAMs and WVR HOBS missiles which will make these high speed persuits a thing of the past.

Its not about being worthy or not. Its about how much work will the JFT's and the F-16's already be doing. India is about to start building much more advance versions of the F-16's. And they'll go on wholesale, meaning there will be 200-300 built for India by India. So how much a 100 used, and very, very old F-16's be doing, along with a 4th gen JFT, still a generation or two below the much advanced jets India is fielding?

If you can't get your head around this little equation, I really don't know how to make you realize common sense!! Let's say, in any scenario, for every 100 fighters from the Pakistani side (in the air), Pakistan can fire estimated 120 BVR missiles (as 40 percent of your air force still can't use BVR's through the F-7 and Mirages), but for 100 Indian jets flying, there would be about 300+ BVR missiles fired on the Pakistan 100 jets. As each SU-30 can fire 4-6 BVR's, and the Mirage 2k India has (and fielded around Pakistan also) can fire 2-4 BVR missiles too. So you tell me who survives?

The "HOBS" you mentioned, means literally shiit in this scenario. Off bore sight has the word "sight" in it. Meaning it has to be visually available. In the scenario above (most likely will play out from the Indian airspace, without entering the Pakistani airspace), how do you use HOBS?

And advance BVRAAMS still need to enter the kill-zone. If an SU-30 is 50 KM out and it flies further away on Mach 2+, it can easily evade the missile as the 50 KM zone will more or less be there throughout the missile's journey. Majority of the missiles travel between 2.5 mach and less than 4 mach. So a SU-30 firing off its 4-5 BVRs, and turning away at 50 KM and then doing evasive maneuvers, can outclass the missile easily, as the missile never truly obtained a lock within its kill-zone!!

During the Operation Desert Storm, two Iraqi Mig-25's fired 5 missiles at an F-15 in a semi-distant encounter. And the F-15, out of weapons due to returning to the base in KSA, and running low on fuel, still outmaneuvered those missiles and returned with some shrapnel's on one wing due to HE blast of a missile that couldn't hit the jet, but exploded nearby due to maneuvering of the F-15!!

I hope you see my reference here, and can tie it to the paragraph directly above it.

If you use a DER which will soon be ntroduced on the JFT you can easily carry 4+2 and 2 drop tanks if need be. So why do we need another plane to carry2 more BVRs. So again your point does not make sense to me

You can put 4 DER's on the JFT and put 8 BVR's.....what's the use? You are going to get a JFT toasted in the scenario above, and waste 6 out of 8 missiles to ground. The JFT's radar can only guide two missiles at a time!!!!