PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

[Big_bud]

It does have some benefits; however those are nullified very significantly once HMDS/High offbore aams are deployed.

Nope, I dont think so. In close combat more manurable aircraft would always win. Unless the underdog get a purely lucky shot or you are assuming that the enemy aircraft has TVC but can't fire a high off bore missile. You have to Jam the weapon engagement zone of the enemy aircraft. If you go for a 1 circle or 2 circle dog fight, a TVC equipped plane would always be pointing nose at you with ease. A TVC equipped plane would even give a Rafale or RFT a run for its money in WVR. The Indian SU30 is great for WVR. However its said that it has issues with radar and how certain upgrades have been done on it.

 

[The Eagle]

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.

Well, honestly I will only question/argue/debate acquisition of a platform if I knew it inside out, being aware of it's pros and cons, experienced the flying or at-least I have credible data and experienced it's advantages or disadvantages. Other than that, it's just like US/Western Vs Unknown Chinese platform. It's just like. The mindset and inability to understand Chinese advancement in many fields.

 

[Raider 21]

The Saudis and the Americans paid for the Pakistani F-16s. When Pakistan paid for then, PAF received soya beans instead.

Who's going to pay for J-10s?

The soya beans were via FMS as well. Not to mention the spare parts that kept coming covertly in the 90s.

As for the J-10s, it could be another loan to the Chinese

 

[The Eagle]

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

Turn you don't just counter Rafale by a mere flypast. I agree that he wasn't detailed about even and participants but he was very clear about the remarks on countering Rafale. However, what I am saying that what if he says that he was just mistaken with all details.

 

[Zapper]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1478349496409022466

 

[GiantPanda]

Thanks for the simulation and the very detailed analysis. This was a treat to read!

This post got me thinking of the rumored engagements between the PLAAF J-10C and Thai Saab Gripens. Does anyone know how well the J-10c performed? It should give an indication of the capability of the J-10C. @Deino @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

The J-10Cs destroyed the Gripens.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

... Some leaks very sensitive news and still walks away with it. Military Brats, Brigadier's Nephew, General's Relative, Officials brother in law, cousin and even someone with not close relation.

Where's the discipline? Why do serving personnel need to share info with their relatives? What do they get out of it?

 

[The Eagle]

The Saudis and the Americans paid for the Pakistani F-16s. When Pakistan paid for then, PAF received soya beans instead.

Who's going to pay for J-10s?

British Queen

 

[kursed]

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.
@SQ8 @kursed @Chak Bamu

I have to say that when judging PLAAF and PLAN system qualities, we need to keep in mind that their primary enemy lies in SCS. Their entire system capability is being built to take on an active deterrence role against some of the top-tier naval and aerial powers in the SCS. If we still think that Chinese radars, EW and ESM is not up to the mark, then we'd be seriously underestimating them. They are not gearing up to take on the likes of India..

I do still believe that in terms of material sciences they might be a few years behind Europe but fast catching up, but in terms of EW/ESM, Seeker, and rocket propulsion tech, they are pretty much world leaders. This is also why you see a lot of Chinese emphasis upon missiles, seeker, radar, EW, and avionics - because where they lack in engine propulsion tech, they'd make up for it elsewhere. Chinese also believe in very very fast reiterations, so if anyone is judging them by singular failures, does not really realize how fast they figure problems out and sort them out in the real world.

 

[The Eagle]

Where's the discipline? Why do serving personnel need to share info with their relatives? What do they get out of it?

Chacha, Mama and Taya problem. Discipline? Koi nahi. Aish kar.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1478349496409022466

This guy is just attracting RSS trolls and nothing else. He might get net-lynched.

However, interest was reported many a times before. But, those SU-35 with PLAAF might be handed over in sweet deal after upgradation/hard and software of choice etc etc. I don't see that happening and they aren't coming.

 

[syed_yusuf]

I am very surprised to know that j10c carries 4500 kg on internal fuel. No other single engine fighter carry that much internal fuel as far as I know

 

[kursed]

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.

J10C is not J10A. J10C with WS10 is not J10C with AL-31F.

 

[alikazmi007]

BBC is jumping into the fray:

جÛ-10 Ø³Û Ùائٹر جÛÙ¹: ÚÛÙÛ Ø³Ø§Ø®ØªÛ Ø¬Ø¯Ûد Ø·ÛØ§Ø±Û Ú©Ù ØµÙاØÛتÙÚº Ú©Û ØاÙÙ ÛÛÚº اÙر Ú©Ûا ÙاÙØ¹Û Ù¾Ø§Ú©Ø³ØªØ§Ù Ø§ÙÚ¾ÛÚº خرÛدÙÛ Ú©Ø§ Ø®ÙاÛØ´ÙÙد ÛÛØ - BBC News اردÙ

پاکستا٠Ûا ÚÛÙ ÙÛ Ø¬Û-10 Ø·ÛارÙÚº Ú©Û ÙرÙخت Ú©Û ØªØµØ¯ÛÙ ÙÛÛÚº Ú©Û ÛÛ ØªØ§Û٠اگر ÛÛ Ø¬Ø¯Ûد ÙÚاکا Ø·ÛØ§Ø±Û Ù¾Ø§Ú©Ø³ØªØ§Ù Ú©Û Ø¯ÙØ§Ø¹Û ÙÙرس کا ØØµÛ Ø¨ÙØªÛ ÛÛÚº ت٠ÙÙÚ© Ú©Û Ø³ÙÙØ¯Ø±Û Ø¯ÙØ§Ø¹Û ØµÙاØÛت ÙضبÙØ· ÛÙØ³Ú©ØªÛ ÛÛÛ

www.bbc.com

 

[Goenitz]

I do still believe that in terms of material sciences they might be a few years behind Europe but fast catching up, but in terms of EW/ESM, Seeker, and rocket propulsion tech, they are pretty much world leaders. This is also why you see a lot of Chinese emphasis upon missiles, seeker, radar, EW, and avionics - because where they lack in engine propulsion tech, they'd make up for it elsewhere. Chinese also believe in very very fast reiterations, so if anyone is judging them by singular failures, does not really realize how fast they figure problems out and sort them out in the real world.

In universities here, you can find many Chinese ethnic faculty in IT and control system programmes. At one time,staffordshire control system faculty was overwhelmingly chinese, (in 2015-16) I guess. Mine and my sister advisors were both chinese.

 

[Ali_Baba]

BBC is jumping into the fray:

جÛ-10 Ø³Û Ùائٹر جÛÙ¹: ÚÛÙÛ Ø³Ø§Ø®ØªÛ Ø¬Ø¯Ûد Ø·ÛØ§Ø±Û Ú©Ù ØµÙاØÛتÙÚº Ú©Û ØاÙÙ ÛÛÚº اÙر Ú©Ûا ÙاÙØ¹Û Ù¾Ø§Ú©Ø³ØªØ§Ù Ø§ÙÚ¾ÛÚº خرÛدÙÛ Ú©Ø§ Ø®ÙاÛØ´ÙÙد ÛÛØ - BBC News اردÙ

پاکستا٠Ûا ÚÛÙ ÙÛ Ø¬Û-10 Ø·ÛارÙÚº Ú©Û ÙرÙخت Ú©Û ØªØµØ¯ÛÙ ÙÛÛÚº Ú©Û ÛÛ ØªØ§Û٠اگر ÛÛ Ø¬Ø¯Ûد ÙÚاکا Ø·ÛØ§Ø±Û Ù¾Ø§Ú©Ø³ØªØ§Ù Ú©Û Ø¯ÙØ§Ø¹Û ÙÙرس کا ØØµÛ Ø¨ÙØªÛ ÛÛÚº ت٠ÙÙÚ© Ú©Û Ø³ÙÙØ¯Ø±Û Ø¯ÙØ§Ø¹Û ØµÙاØÛت ÙضبÙØ· ÛÙØ³Ú©ØªÛ ÛÛÛ

www.bbc.com

I did a google translate - the theme seems to be that there is no contract signed for these yet - and somehow they are good for/suited for maritime operations.

Am fairly sure the native speakers will do a much better job of translation!