PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

[abdulbarijan]

Block 2s don't have HMDs. They dont have an Aesa. Their fuel tanks are small and hardpoints limited. They have an average engine thrust. They dont have canards. Such an aircraft needs a powerful engine, like F16, if you are going to pitch it against SU30s, Mirages and Migs. They can only fire SD10s. They are not true 4th gens hence they shouldn't be included in the list.

Block 3s once they arrive will be true 4+ Gen. Since PL15s will make a lot of difference in their lethality. Otherwise JFs can't engage in a dogfight comfortably with any of the above.

Kindly go through the forum especially the JF-17 information pool thread before making sweeping statements like the ones highlighted above.

Just an example, the F-16 block 60 of the UAEF, a legitimate 4.5 generation aircraft doesn't have canards, therefore (going by the logic cited), even the block 60 isn't worth the 4th generation stamp?

Just to be clear on this, I believe many of the senior members as well as professionals on this forum would be very comfortable saying this today, that JFT when it was inducted in the PAF (block 1) was better than the F-16 block 15 in many aspects.

 

[Polestar 2]

I still dont believe in this acquisition until someone other than Shaikh Rasheed confirms it. I see it this way so far.

Why would Pakistan Air Force acquire an aircraft which it has rejected for 2 decades under 3 different Government administrations giving various excuses each it was offered.

Also, how does having 2 medium-weight combat platforms and 4 light-weight combat platforms at the same time makes any sense for an air force that operates around 400 combat aircraft?

I don't know if I want to be proven wrong or if I'll be happy with a disappointment of this acquisition not materialising.

J-10C is to replace F-16 which supply and spare cut off in future. Some say Turkey can continue help to maintain or service it which there is a limit especially engine which no way Turkey can replicate or keep overhaul to give it another life.

Basically in future, there will be only one medium weight fighter which makes the correct decision to buy J-10C. There are effective and yet still cheaper to maintenance compare to heavy weight fighter.

 

[Deltadart]

The day after 27 February Indian media asked the same question over and over again from their retired military personnel, why wasn't the Indian Air Force prepared for a Pakistani retaliation.

They had the answer all along, mostly fabricated by the same jingoistic indian media and the like minded scoundrels. According to that indian logic, arrogance, and contemptuous overconfidence: Pakistan was incapable of retaliating or didn't have the guts to do it, because of the vedic indian might.

Their thinking changed dramatically after the 2019 encounter, but with the arrival of mahan 20th generation Rafale, it has reverted back to the glory days of invincibility that was once provided by the MKIs.

It's only a matter of time before we start hearing the same old mantra of new Indian surgical strikes with rafales to teach us a lesson. Until the day their leadership is firmly convinced that we will hit them everytime they violate our airspace to drop bombs, they will continue with this reckless behavior. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

 

[iLION12345_1]

Kindly go through the forum especially the JF-17 information pool thread before making sweeping statements like the ones highlighted above.

Just an example, the F-16 block 60 of the UAEF, a legitimate 4.5 generation aircraft doesn't have canards, therefore (going by the logic cited), even the block 60 isn't worth the 4th generation stamp?

Just to be clear on this, I believe many of the senior members as well as professionals on this forum would be very comfortable saying this today, that JFT when it was inducted in the PAF (block 1) was better than the F-16 block 15 in many aspects.

I’ll make it simple; the guy you’re responding to has his own definition of aircraft generations that make no sense. To him Canards and G limits define generations and not actual technology and capability, it’s useless to argue with him.

 

[devil302]

What if sometime in near future, Shaikh Rasheed says that his statement was misinterpreted and they are coming for fly-past?

This is really whats gonna happen he said about flypast not about buying them

 

[The Terminator]

While we are at it can we get an F-35 fly-past as well?

And J20 and Su35 flypast too

 

[SIPRA]

And J20 and Su35 flypast too

Why not to have a complete "buffet" of fly past?

This is really whats gonna happen he said about flypast not about buying them

Well, he also mentioned "countering the Rafale". Obviously, you can't encounter, by merely fly past.

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

This is really whats gonna happen he said about flypast not about buying them

May be you people don't understand Urdu. He also clearly said it paf is getting them in response to Indian Rafale.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

Well, he also mentioned "countering the Rafale". Obviously, you can't encounter, by merely fly past.

It's totally imaginable.

 

[Danish Moazzam]

Is it you guessing, your 6th sense, a hunch that has brought you to that particular number?

With all due respect, but I think....correction, i'm certain that you're reaching.

If PAF does actually go for J10, it will be 100 or more, the number comes from the fact that after rejecting J-10 for 2 decades if finally PAF is accepting it that means that they are happy with it as a replacement for Mirage and a full compliment to F-16, down the road. So looking at that, the future PAF will operate JF-17, J-10 and Azm that will be a formidable conbination

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Very interesting excerpt from the reputed Defense News website (read entire excerpt):

Pakistan confirms Chinese ‘Firebird’ fighter acquisition

Pakistan has officially confirmed its long-speculated acquisition of the Chinese J-10C “Firebird” fighter, which will arrive in time to take part in the March 23 Pakistan Day parade.

www.defensenews.com

@Bilal Khan (Quwa)

It's an analysis by someone. Not everyone will come to the same conclusions when dealing with opaque information.

The way I look at the J-10CE is by China's weighing general industrial qualities against that of Europe.

I think China has a solid grounding in electronics, materials sciences, and even gas turbines. In some areas, like software, China's at the cutting edge. In others -- like gas turbines and materials -- it's among the world leaders, though not the leader. That said, the PLAAF banks on the J-10CE to handle sophisticated adversaries, e.g., F-16Vs, Su-30s, F-15s, and Rafales. Thus, the aircraft must have some type of solution for each of those threats.

With those facts in mind, the J-10CE is likely a credible threat against anything. Is it as good as the Rafale? No. However, not being as good doesn't necessarily mean you're not good enough to take it down. The MiG-21bis was not as good as the F-16, but the PAF still considered it a credible threat to the F-16. Moreover, sometimes the qualities of 'being better' aren't necessarily relevant to the scenario we're thinking about. So, the Rafale is a phenomenally better strike and maritime fighter.

That said, given China's strong industrial and very strong software bases, the J-10CE carries a lot of credibility in its own right. IMO, with Chinese equipment (especially mainline PLA stuff), there's no "China lens" anymore. If we're still valuing Russian equipment at a point, I'd automatically add a "+1" or even "+2" to mainline PLA stuff, which brings it to the same conversation as US and EU gear.

tbh my issue with Chinese gear hasn't been the quality, pace of improvement, performance, cost, etc. Rather, my issue is that it gives Pakistani military planners an easy (albeit at times necessary) exit from indigenous development. In of itself, this shouldn't be an issue, but defence is our go-to spending priority as a nation, so I'd prefer seeing that channel through our R&D, our capacity building, and our product growth than someone else's. I'd rather deal with people dismissing our stuff because "it's Pakistani" if it means we enter the same growth trajectory as China, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan.

@SQ8 @kursed @Chak Bamu

 

[Basel]

Flying fighters low and along with limited effective range of AWACS due to it being flying far away deep into the safe zone of Pakistani airspace creates a significant issue in situational awareness for the fighters conducting Ops at or beyond the enemy borders. Dedicated EW platforms also in constant threat from the S400s. That alone gives the IAF a tactical advantage against PAF fighters without firing a missile at them.

Could that be an effective A2/AD setup against PAF? And what would PAF do to turn conditions into it's favor? Utilize drones, fighters or surface to surface munitions (missiles, rockets) to effectively suppress or eliminate the long range SAM threat from India.

Pakistan should work with China to develop system that can engage not just airplane or drones but flying munitions like missiles, shells and rockets, like Israeli Iron Dome or Arrow-3.

 

[Zarvan]

Because they were not expecting Pakistan to retaliate, that is why. They thought they could dish it out and not get anything back in return - had it been a PPP or PML goverment in charge then they would have been right.

Imran Khan saw the risk in not responding and ordered a risky counterstrike. That was a damn risky gamble by him and one that paid off with the shooting down of the Su30MKI and the Mig21. That response killed India's strategy of hoping to turn Pakistan into another "Lebanon or Syria with strikes that are not questioned by anyone anymore" and it taught Pakistan a lesson to. Be ready as things are going to get hot, and you must be able to respond and that has to be clearly understood by India and everyone else. Deterrence was preserved through that action.

Pakistan would have responded whether it was PML N or PPP. Only thing different would have been is that Pakistani Forces would have striked on their own and then told PML N or PPP dumbos to claim victory and take responsibility. Just like Raheel Shareef started the operation in North Wazristan and Nawaz came to know about it through ISPR tweet.

 

[Rafi]

It's an analysis by someone. Not everyone will come to the same conclusions when dealing with opaque information.

The way I look at the J-10CE is by China's weighing general industrial qualities against that of Europe.

I think China has a solid grounding in electronics, materials sciences, and even gas turbines. In some areas, like software, China's at the cutting edge. In others -- like gas turbines and materials -- it's among the world leaders, though not the leader. That said, the PLAAF banks on the J-10CE to handle sophisticated adversaries, e.g., F-16Vs, Su-30s, F-15s, and Rafales. Thus, the aircraft must have some type of solution for each of those threats.

With those facts in mind, the J-10CE is likely a credible threat against anything. Is it as good as the Rafale? No. However, not being as good doesn't necessarily mean you're not good enough to take it down. The MiG-21bis was not as good as the F-16, but the PAF still considered it a credible threat to the F-16. Moreover, sometimes the qualities of 'being better' aren't necessarily relevant to the scenario we're thinking about. So, the Rafale is a phenomenally better strike and maritime fighter.

That said, given China's strong industrial and very strong software bases, the J-10CE carries a lot of credibility in its own right. IMO, with Chinese equipment (especially mainline PLA stuff), there's no "China lens" anymore. If we're still valuing Russian equipment at a point, I'd automatically add a "+1" or even "+2" to mainline PLA stuff, which brings it to the same conversation as US and EU gear.

tbh my issue with Chinese gear hasn't been the quality, pace of improvement, performance, cost, etc. Rather, my issue is that it gives Pakistani military planners an easy (albeit at times necessary) exit from indigenous development. In of itself, this shouldn't be an issue, but defence is our go-to spending priority as a nation, so I'd prefer seeing that channel through our R&D, our capacity building, and our product growth than someone else's. I'd rather deal with people dismissing our stuff because "it's Pakistani" if it means we enter the same growth trajectory as China, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan.

@SQ8 @kursed @Chak Bamu

PAF believe J10C is on par, and on some areas surpass Raphael, classified reasons nuff said

 

[Trailer23]

It's an analysis by someone. Not everyone will come to the same conclusions when dealing with opaque information.

The way I look at the J-10CE is by China's weighing general industrial qualities against that of Europe.

I think China has a solid grounding in electronics, materials sciences, and even gas turbines. In some areas, like software, China's at the cutting edge. In others -- like gas turbines and materials -- it's among the world leaders, though not the leader. That said, the PLAAF banks on the J-10CE to handle sophisticated adversaries, e.g., F-16Vs, Su-30s, F-15s, and Rafales. Thus, the aircraft must have some type of solution for each of those threats.

With those facts in mind, the J-10CE is likely a credible threat against anything. Is it as good as the Rafale? No. However, not being as good doesn't necessarily mean you're not good enough to take it down. The MiG-21bis was not as good as the F-16, but the PAF still considered it a credible threat to the F-16. Moreover, sometimes the qualities of 'being better' aren't necessarily relevant to the scenario we're thinking about. So, the Rafale is a phenomenally better strike and maritime fighter.

That said, given China's strong industrial and very strong software bases, the J-10CE carries a lot of credibility in its own right. IMO, with Chinese equipment (especially mainline PLA stuff), there's no "China lens" anymore. If we're still valuing Russian equipment at a point, I'd automatically add a "+1" or even "+2" to mainline PLA stuff, which brings it to the same conversation as US and EU gear.

tbh my issue with Chinese gear hasn't been the quality, pace of improvement, performance, cost, etc. Rather, my issue is that it gives Pakistani military planners an easy (albeit at times necessary) exit from indigenous development. In of itself, this shouldn't be an issue, but defence is our go-to spending priority as a nation, so I'd prefer seeing that channel through our R&D, our capacity building, and our product growth than someone else's. I'd rather deal with people dismissing our stuff because "it's Pakistani" if it means we enter the same growth trajectory as China, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan.