I’m fairly sure Chinese have asked for guarantees for this exact scenario to not take place. They’ve shared their front line tech with Pak, in this instance.
J-10C isn't really defined as frontline fighter for PLAAF. Frontline fighter being the top fighters and force multiplier types which would certainly be J-20 and J-16 as frontline. J-10C are support fighters and number fillers. With air combat for air superiority, it is frontline fighters performing major mission of denying airspace and contesting it while taking out strategic assets and pushing ahead to take out launching platforms.
Rest assured that J-16 and J-20 technologies are ahead of J-10C in terms of electronics, sensors, and communication equipment that are fitted simply because these fighters hold those harder and more important mission profiles.
BUT in this case PLAAF uses almost the same (but not the same) J-10C with PAF now. And despite not being frontline, it is important enough for opsec to ban any types of exercises with any western nation unless China has some say in how the platform is used in those exercises. China exercising with Thailand with J-10B/C and Gripen C is more to benefit of China's side since it gets to evaluate Gipren C's performance (although in the hands of Thai airforce) and Thai airforce are far closer politically to China than to the US and won't be telling them much if anything about J-10's performance while China gets first hand direct experience flying with the Gripens. There are a lot of public information about Gripens exercising against F-16, F-22, F-15, Eurofighter Typhoon etc.
Su-30 is a flop as the Ukrainian war is demonstrating... Falling out of the skies like flies.
It depends how it is used. Russian airforce fighters have for decades become lagged in electronic warfare domain - EA, ECM, ECCM and so on. Even in sensors their first generation AESA for Mig-35 was not used. Their second generation is on Himalaya system for Su-57 and only in service in recent years but Su-57 produced in barely single digit numbers rate per year perhaps due to cost compared to Su-35 and overall capability improvement over Su-35 not being worth those extra price? No idea why they don't produce Su-57 in huge numbers. Russian reports indicate they would have been producing Su-57 in double digit numbers per year and before that suggested it is unnecessary. It could be production engineering side being more difficult and extremely costly. Manufacturing is in many ways the harder challenge compared to design believe it or not.
J-10C defeats JAS39C/D with a high score in Sino-Thai joint exercise: report
Posted on
September 18, 2019 by
buffalo
J-10C and JAS39 flying in formation
It’s been a mystery how J-10C fighters performed in last month’s
military exercise with Thailand’s JAS39C/D Gripen fighters as there’s no official information about the results, but some Chinese media channels have been reporting unconfirmed news about J-10C’s “complete victory”.
One Chinese news account reported yesterday that according to some Russian media, J-10C and JAS39C/D fighters appeared at the same time to celebrate the successful conclusion of the joint exercise, and J-10C has achieved brilliant results in this exercise. In the combat exercise, J-10C fighters defeated JAS39C/D fighters with a big score gap. And this is not surprising because the performance of J-10C is superior in terms of maneuverability and handling. However, the Western countries did not understand this, so they were very surprised when they learned of such a result.
In the simulation exercise, the super high maneuverability supported by J-10C’s canard wing layout makes JAS39C/D fighters at a loss. At the same time, J-10C’s radar and avionics systems are more advanced than JAS39C/D fighters. In middle-and long-distance battles, JAS39C/D fighters often did not find J-10C before they were locked and shot down by missiles. In the close combats, J-10C’s ultra-high manoeuvrability has an unparalleled advantage. The canard wing layout makes the fighter’s power very abundant, while JAS39C/D fighter has no power to fight back.
It’s quoted that a US F-16 retired pilot said on social media that he is very aware of the performance of the Gripens, so he’d take off his hat and pay tribute to J-10C for its advantages in the simulated air combats. The pilot also said that JAS39C/D fighters also have a pair of canards. Before the US military gained experience in combating canard wing fighters, they had conducted confrontation exercises with JAS39C/D.
The pilot said he faced great pressure when driving the F-16 against JAS39C/D fighters. JAS39C/D fighters are light fighters, and the radar and avionics systems were very advanced. Even if F-16’s air-to-air missiles could lock JAS39C/D fighters, the latter could get rid of them in time with super high mobility. Therefore, as J-10C achieved such a record in the actual combat against JAS39C/D fighter, this proves the superiority of J-10C performance.
According to the report, a spokesman for the White House said that the joint exercise between Thailand and China is unacceptable. This will only enhance the actual combat capability of the Chinese Air Force. The US has just signed an order for armored vehicles with Thailand, and the West should be Thailand’s choice. But from the current behavior of Thailand, it is obvious that the country has its own ideas. It is reported that in addition to the joint exercise with the Chinese Air Force, Thailand’s navy also participated in a joint military exercise between the United States and the ASEAN.
J-11A beat Gripen C in dogfighting by HUGE margins it was like 15 to 1 or something similar to that ratio. J-11A lost to Gripen C by huge margins in first exercises back in like 2015 or something. Indian and western reporting only focused on J-11A losing in BVR but of course it would lose since J-11A is from the 1980s level of eletronic and computing tech with 1990s missiles at best (in fact actually 1970s missiles level due to only having oldest R-77 and old R-27). Anyway this was like comparing F-16A with Gripen C in BVR. Of course Gripen C will beat F-16A in BVR.
It was very surprising that J-11A beat Gripen in dogfighting though. Showing PLAAF training in WVR for J-11A may have been emphasis and I bet PLAAF uses J-11A as missile platform that is simply networked. But it's missiles are too old to be long range and I guess they also use the whole platform as a sneak platform operating in mountainous areas only where the radar is switched off, feed data through awacs to approach targets slowing through mountain valleys and then networked to take 50km range shots with their very old BVR missiles and then sneak in for WVR and then dogfight.
J-10B destroyed Gripen C in both WVR and BVR. J-10C against Gripen C was again another breeze. Gripen C is also getting old. No surprise the much more modern J-10C had easy time in BVR. I doubt Chinese side would use too much electronic abilities against Gripen C. There is not much point since Gripen C lacks phased array and any good electronic abilities because Swedes may not sell Thailand their secret electronic stuff. No one sells the top secret electronic stuff to the point I even doubt China would sell Pakistan China's frontline electronic weapons. J-20's surely would be out of the question. J-16's and J-10's are similar tech level I guess but J-16's would probably have more space and available power.
its a hypothetical scenario. Russians let the Indians exercise with Americans using their SU 30 MKIs' J-10 is not the sole front line fighter with some out of the world technology that Americans want to find out. Chinese Flankers and J 20s are the real front line fighters that are far more sensitive and likely face the American or Taiwanese Jets first before or together with J-10.
again just an assumption. point is, there is a cost and benefit analysis., if benefit outweighs the cost then a country does what suits it.
Russians placed lots of conditions on how Indians can use their Su-30 and this is Su-30 with really not that much to give away. Their electronic techs - radar and comms that were limited are not that capable or sensitive but still it is opsec issue and opsec issue even for low tier stuff is still sensitive given the entire RuAF depends on Su-30 and even lesser fighters back in those days and to some degree still does.
Yes J-10 is not PLAAF frontline fighter or top level fighter BUT Americans do still want to find out anything they can.
America has bought and stolen lots of adversary technologies from low low level boring stuff like anti tank missiles to low tech (to be honest) air defence like Pantsir (they stole many in Libya and Syria wars) and bought many more on the blackmarket... all of this stuff isn't necessarily just to copy but first to study and find how it works, what it is strong in and weak in so that they are better able to defeat or counter them. The Americans got their hands on many Kh-31 and even developed their own version (you can call it copied or whatever) just so they can practice intercepting Kh-31. They even improved the Kh-31 but for the purpose of simulating more accurately for intercepting it, they kept most of it as it is.
J-10 may not be as sensitive for China but China has around 500 + J-10s and if the adversary learns a lot of details about it, it is definitely still a thing that is sensitive. This is not just about one particular missile or smaller weapon.
I don't understand the wholesale butthurt over a hypothetical scenario.
why have all the bleeding hearts decided that China has placed some sort of a ban on PAF to fly these jets with Western airforces?
its a two way stream remember, PAF (and in tern China) will also be gathering information about how these Jets fare against the other Western platforms. its not jsut Americans stealing the universal secrets of J-10s.
moving on, Chinese "fictional" reservations aside, it will be PAF's call whether to deploy these jets in such exercises or not because again .. such information (of a silver bullet) can trickle down to other "allies" of Americans that don't have very "cordial" terms with Pakistan.
NOW.. F-16 being a whore?
this Whore has kept the soviets at bay during first Afghan War and kept Indians sleepless since they were acquired and their fears were realized when these same F 16s who call whores shot down two IAF jets and the Modi's pride to the ground.
sell them out? we are talking J-10 NOT J-20.
what is so ground breaking and ahead of its time in this modest medium size single engine jet that Americans will be so keen to find out if they haven't done already though their conventional and electronic espionage ? does it carry some plasma shielding and directed energy weapons technology? does it use some phasing technology?
I agree mostly with what you've said.
But it should be understood that as less capable as J-10 is compared to J-16 and J-20 in not just performance but also how it is used (not frontline), this is still an opsec issue and hence still going to be kept away from Americans and exercises or only used in exercises with lots of conditions of what cannot be used and switched on.
Americans would still be keen to learn whatever just to gather precious intel. Just like China would also be keen to even get some NLAWs to study. It isn't to copy unless there are good ideas to use and copy but it is to learn about their level, what their thinking is in development, their manufacturing and industrial level, their cost associated and how much they spend on making it, the capabiltiy and weaknesses and strengths of this thing, and so on.
There are many many things to tell from even a small thing because you can combine it with other knowledge. I think many members in this forum miss stuff like this. Their thinking is too 1 dimensional - getting hands on an actual piece of weapon = to copy.
All these sides would love to even find out about each other's earliest 4th generation aircraft.
It is all technical stuff to assess technical level at a certain time and their industrial level and how much importance and resources the other devoted to this and how important the other seemingly places on this particular equipment.
So much to tell from something simple. If USA can get hands on a piece of 1960s Chinese thermonuclear weapon design, the Americans would love it! Does it mean they want to copy it? Of course not there is nothing for them to copy and actually adopt instead of modern own designs. Same with vice versa. Nothing to adopt anymore and copy but lots and lots to reveal perhaps even the entire configuration although it is said the American Teller Ulam configuration design is known quite widely and used by many nations. China using Yu Min configuration design is unique in the world and intelligence have long been after this design type if nothing more than to learn about it if not adopt and copy.
All things opsec are secretive and sensitive to some degree. J-10C is used as most modern J-10 version in PLAAF. This is not some modernized J-7 which if all revealed and they know about China's 1990s and early 2000s mods for J-7 which is highly limited platform to mod on for 2000s level technology, then fine whatever.
.
