PAF New Batch J-10 C Spotted

[KaiserX]

Russia lost a few Su-30 in Ukraine but not quite as many as some think. The numbers last time I checked was under 10 lost. Ukraine war for Russia is like Vietnam war for USA or Korea for USA rather than using Afghanistan or Iraq as examples. The capability gap between Russia and Ukraine is closer than USA and Vietnam 50 years ago. That of course was a different era but the US lost over 3000 manned aircraft and over 5000 helicopters.

I think the portrayal of the war is a bit too affected by propagandas. I think Russians use their stuff very roughly and with a very risk tolerant attitude but reality is maybe this is even a wrong impression and in comparison to other major large scale all out wars (which Russia is the one not pushing all its weight) then their aircraft losses aren't actually all that substantial. If the US were to go to war with North Korea for example, they would lose many modern fighter aircraft. One can bet everything on that. Lose at least similar levels to how many Russia is losing. Of course this requires China to be supporting the North Koreans with weapons like USA supports Ukraine for example.

To recently at least, Ukraine still moves around S-300 SAMs and others. They are not all destroyed by Russia especially in the eastern half.



MKI they have over 200 of which means well over 100 that are serviceable. This is capable of bringing basically 1000 medium range missiles into fights or a fight. This alone is some force. Of course MKI is by even 2010, outdated as this was the era (for everyone not USA) of 4.5 gen fighters already starting to be manufactured. MKI is NOT a 4.5 gen fighter.

PLAAF considers J-11B to be fairly useful. Of course it is using even more old tech than what is on MKI but for PLA as a whole, J-11B in modernity and technology is after J-20, J-35, J-16, J-10C, J-10B, Su-35, J-11D (or J-11BG), and even Su-30MK2 (modernity but maybe not in capability).

PLAAF still has J-8 and J-7 in service. Thousands of these fighters are not a force to be ignored. hundreds of Su-30MKI is a greater force than the entire Australian Airforce for example, ignoring F-35 in Australian service of course.



This I would not bet. J-10C vs Su-35 or Su-30MKI, J-10C ...okay yes 5 bitcoins no worries. PAF will eat up IAF in the next conflict? we should remember how much of a numbers difference there is and if it was a case where PAF has dozens of 5th generation fighters to balance it out, then 5 bitcoins bet okay.

India has roughly 600? 4th generation to 4.5 generation fighters (assuming 36 Rafales all delivered) while Pakistan has 300? 4th and 4.5 generation fighters.

No matter training and command superiority, that's 100% more. The technology base and equipment capability level are roughly similar, maybe even with slight advantage to India in fighters and missiles while Pakistan at the moment would have slight advantage in networking, communications, and electronic warfare.

Idk where you get your figures of 600 4th generation jets in IAF inventory. 270 SU30s+60 mig29s+50 mirage 2000+ 36 Rafale= 410-430 fighter jets. PAF has roughly, 140 JF17s+80 F16s+36 J10s= 260-270 4th generation jets. You refused to even answer my point of force posturing. India will never allocated 100% of its forces to the Pakistani border due to threats from China. Even Russia today cannot allocated 100% of its forces in Ukraine due to the threat from NATO. At best India can only allocated 60-70%. Furthermore the majority of Indias population lives far away from Pakistans border. States like Maharastra, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi, MP, etc are atleast 500-600 miles away from Pakistans border. Majority of Pakistans population is within 100 miles of the Indian border. Even a child will tell you that Pakistan will mobilize far far quicker and have numerical superiority during most of the conflict.

You went on a tantrum that Russias loses are not what they seem due to western propaganda. That point is def noted but in the day and age of satellite imagery+drone footages+OSINT sources then there are far more than enough neautral sources to throw fire on biased reporting. China+Russia itself has a huge network of satellite+drones. Why have they been unable to build a counter narrative compared to the ukrainians???

The fact with all its resources CHINA HAS REFUSED TO BAIL ITS ALLY RUSSIA OUT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE. Only thing China has been able to do is buy a lot more cheap oil. China has been unable to provide any military support, any real political support, and even its economic support is self serving... Why is this??? Had Russia been winning and had the upper hand China would have been far more supportive. Your own CCP and Govt see's the writing on the wall.. The russians have been far from successful and at most times ruthlessly incompetent.

You can visit neautral sources such as ORYX who themselves are taking the time to count/validate each and every single russian/ukrainian losses- https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

Russians are taking a pounding. There is a reason the chinese were smart enough decades ago to stop procuring russian equipment. There is a reason that 99% of components built in J11 (chinese copycat of SU30) is Chinese rather than russian.a

Lastly you cannot compare the Vietnam war with the Ukrainian war. Russia and Ukraine are neighbors. The US fought in Vietnam successfully being thousands of miles away. The US had split the country along north/south. Even then US forces showed a high degree of competence. Do you want to compare that to Chinas invasion of Vietnam where the Vietnamese defeated China in a matter of months???

The fact is neither China nor Russia have a great history of winning wars. Russia lost every war in the last 150 years other than WW2 were it won due to mass waves and still lost 15+ million troops. Chinas only semblance of victory was against India in 1962... even the korean war at best china could only achieve a stalemate that to sacraficing millions of troops in mass waves. Today neither Russia nor China have the competitive advantage of being able to sacrafice millions due to large population declines.

The Russians have been unable to even hold the little land they have conquered and any sane intelligence assessment will tell you that the situation for the Russians will become pittiful within the next few months. The Ukranians currently have hundreds of thousands of fighters being trained that will enter their forces within the next few months. Without either mass mobilization or tactical nukes THE RUSSIANS ARE TOAST. Ill give them 2-3 more months max.

 

[serenity]

Idk where you get your figures of 600 4th generation jets in IAF inventory. 270 SU30s+60 mig29s+50 mirage 2000+ 36 Rafale= 410-430 fighter jets. PAF has roughly, 140 JF17s+80 F16s+36 J10s= 260-270 4th generation jets. You refused to even answer my point of force posturing. India will never allocated 100% of its forces to the Pakistani border due to threats from China. Even Russia today cannot allocated 100% of its forces in Ukraine due to the threat from NATO. At best India can only allocated 60-70%. Furthermore the majority of Indias population lives far away from Pakistans border. States like Maharastra, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi, MP, etc are atleast 500-600 miles away from Pakistans border. Majority of Pakistans population is within 100 miles of the Indian border. Even a child will tell you that Pakistan will mobilize far far quicker and have numerical superiority during most of the conflict.

You went on a tantrum that Russias loses are not what they seem due to western propaganda. That point is def noted but in the day and age of satellite imagery+drone footages+OSINT sources then there are far more than enough neautral sources to throw fire on biased reporting. China+Russia itself has a huge network of satellite+drones. Why have they been unable to build a counter narrative compared to the ukrainians???

The fact with all its resources CHINA HAS REFUSED TO BAIL ITS ALLY RUSSIA OUT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE. Only thing China has been able to do is buy a lot more cheap oil. China has been unable to provide any military support, any real political support, and even its economic support is self serving... Why is this??? Had Russia been winning and had the upper hand China would have been far more supportive. Your own CCP and Govt see's the writing on the wall.. The russians have been far from successful and at most times ruthlessly incompetent.

You can visit neautral sources such as ORYX who themselves are taking the time to count/validate each and every single russian/ukrainian losses- https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

Russians are taking a pounding. There is a reason the chinese were smart enough decades ago to stop procuring russian equipment. There is a reason that 99% of components built in J11 (chinese copycat of SU30) is Chinese rather than russian.a

Lastly you cannot compare the Vietnam war with the Ukrainian war. Russia and Ukraine are neighbors. The US fought in Vietnam successfully being thousands of miles away. The US had split the country along north/south. Even then US forces showed a high degree of competence. Do you want to compare that to Chinas invasion of Vietnam where the Vietnamese defeated China in a matter of months???

The fact is neither China nor Russia have a great history of winning wars. Russia lost every war in the last 150 years other than WW2 were it won due to mass waves and still lost 15+ million troops. Chinas only semblance of victory was against India in 1962... even the korean war at best china could only achieve a stalemate that to sacraficing millions of troops in mass waves. Today neither Russia nor China have the competitive advantage of being able to sacrafice millions due to large population declines.

The Russians have been unable to even hold the little land they have conquered and any sane intelligence assessment will tell you that the situation for the Russians will become pittiful within the next few months. The Ukranians currently have hundreds of thousands of fighters being trained that will enter their forces within the next few months. Without either mass mobilization or tactical nukes THE RUSSIANS ARE TOAST. Ill give them 2-3 more months max.

So much of this is wrong. Vietnam "defeated" China in the same way Afghanistan "defeated" the USA.

As for neighbor war and power projection, I used the example because US power projection is far and so far ahead of Russia's in fact this is US specialty. Power projection and regime change type wars or occupation and invasion wars against nations the power and size of Iraq as a maximum and even then require allies and regional bases to all go into play. Iraq could not strike a single US regional base. Can the US do this on Iran? No. Because Iran can overwhelm air defences of regional US bases and developing capabilities to even threaten US carriers that are within a certain range.

The Vietnam comparison is still valid because the force brought to the space is roughly equivalent. Russia is not bringing thousands of aircraft to the war in Ukraine. US brought 10s of thousands of aircarft to Vietnam war. The only difference in commentary we can make on this is US power projection is so far superior to Russia and all others. But if we consider that Russia has brought 100 units of strength to this war, we can say that US has brought 200 units of strength to Vietnam, neighbor or power projection falls under a different category. It is still a valid comparison in losses because of the scale of the war, the rest is just how well their logistics are.

Russia would not have received Chinese open support in military terms even if it were winning, especially if it were winning. Why do you assume China ought to bail Russia out? In whatever status of their conflict, China wouldn't get involved unless Russia itself is being invaded by NATO. Only then could I imagine China militarily getting involved and even that is a question.

So you basically created this assumption for your own goals of China must help Russia and if it doesn't offer support you define, then you reach your own conclusions based on this.

Look I see you clearly have a certain world view. I think probably more appropriate to leave this as it is. There is no way we would be able to discuss anything constructively. No more than you could with an Indian person who maintains a certain world view and set of beliefs.

Let's just agree to disagree on fundamentals, on interpretations, on others.

But on topic, you are probably correct in IAF and PAF numbers. I mentioned in my post I wasn't sure about specific numbers by asking the question. I was still very accurate on the conclusion. IAF is about 100% larger than PAF in 4th and 4.5 gen fighters. That's why I would not bet on PAF defeating IAF in war.

IAF cannot devote everything to Pakistan I agree. So let's half their inventory for simplicity. This would make it far closer to a 1:1. Any wonder why India does not take Pakistan lightly at all. Himalayas separate India and China. But yes they wouldn't use all air assets against Pakistan just in case China chooses to get involved. BUT honestly, if all out conventional war between Pakistan and India happen, I don't think China would get involved unless Pakistan's survival is at stake. And even if involved, it would be minimal just to maintain that Pakistan can defeat any Indian invasion. That's it. Real war and real politics isn't all in all the time whenever things start going off. It is restrained and restrained and restrained even if it happens.

It's really just that simple.

On the topic of J-10C vs Rafale.

Rafale and J-10C are roughly equal in terms of modernity and when they came out, the types of technology used e.g. AESA and most modern missiles they can both fire.

BUT Rafale is France's number 1 best tip of the spear fighter. J-10C for PLAAF comes after J-20S, J-20, J-35, J-16. J-10C is also China's budget mass volume fighter. Rafale is Frances no expenses spared fighter much in the same way J-20 is for China.

Therefore I think China would put lesser stuff on J-10C than they have because it is aimed to be quick and cheaper to make while France aims to put onboard Rafale all the best they have.

Having J-10C even in two dozen limited numbers is still a additional force multiplier for PAF. JF-17 is the backbone force with block 3 receiving some limited 4.5 gen technology - AESA albeit a smaller and power limited one due to engine and platform size.

24x J-10C however isn't a direct counter to 36x latest and most updated Rafale. Unless PAF are just that much better trained, more skilled, and better commanded. We should never make those assumptions that would allow us to believe PAF would spank IAF in next conflict. That was the point of this discussion. If it were a case where PAF has 24 5th generation fighters, then okay sure maybe we can say 24 5th generation fighters would force multiply PAF so much it allows them to counter IAF Rafales and the huge size gap.

 

[Signalian]

On the topic of J-10C vs Rafale.

Rafale and J-10C are roughly equal in terms of modernity and when they came out, the types of technology used e.g. AESA and most modern missiles they can both fire.

BUT Rafale is France's number 1 best tip of the spear fighter. J-10C for PLAAF comes after J-20S, J-20, J-35, J-16. J-10C is also China's budget mass volume fighter. Rafale is Frances no expenses spared fighter much in the same way J-20 is for China.

Therefore I think China would put lesser stuff on J-10C than they have because it is aimed to be quick and cheaper to make while France aims to put onboard Rafale all the best they have.

Having J-10C even in two dozen limited numbers is still a additional force multiplier for PAF. JF-17 is the backbone force with block 3 receiving some limited 4.5 gen technology - AESA albeit a smaller and power limited one due to engine and platform size.

Now when you are mentioning China and France, you must keep Pakistan in mind and how Pakistan upgrades simple weapon systems to modern standards. Lesser stuff on J-10, we will see.

1. Evolution of JF-17 into Block-II with advanced weapons and in future Block-III while China's top tier became J-20.
2. T-59 into Al-Zarrar while China's top tank was Type-99 and Type-59 being retired.
3. ROSE upgrades of Mirages while India was conceiving 126 x MRCA tender. True that there is no comparison between Mirage-5 Vs Rafale, however PAF had brought it as closer to Mirage-2k as it could in strike role.

Pakistan took all the above to their maximum capability of lethality, serviceability, life, survivability, electronics, and weaponry in every sense.
So what will Pakistan do with J-10 ?

 

[serenity]

Now when you are mentioning China and France, you must keep Pakistan in mind and how Pakistan upgrades simple weapon systems to modern standards. Lesser stuff on J-10, we will see.

1. Evolution of JF-17 into Block-II with advanced weapons and in future Block-III while China's top tier became J-20.
2. T-59 into Al-Zarrar while China's top tank was Type-99 and Type-59 being retired.
3. ROSE upgrades of Mirages while India was conceiving 126 x MRCA tender. True that there is no comparison between Mirage-5 Vs Rafale, however PAF had brought it as closer to Mirage-2k as it could in strike role.

Pakistan took all the above to their maximum capability of lethality, serviceability, life, survivability, electronics, and weaponry in every sense.
So what will Pakistan do with J-10 ?

Yes I got your point here but we should consider that a lot of these examples are modifying from much lower base to begin with in an effort to keep up to date. As for fighter aircraft, it is simply too difficult to do important modifications, even replacing radar is no easy task and not simply changing a thermal sight on a tank.

I think whatever form J-10CE is for PAF is basically what it is, cannot be changed that much. It is a good modern fighter for sure. But 24 units of a budget modern 4.5 gen fighter simply isn't enough to say it will be able to counter the effects of 36 modern - no expense spared 4.5 gen fighter. Or to say that because of it, PAF could at least hold its own against IAF in future conflict. It keeps PAF up to date with IAF acquisitions in many ways but Pakistan's major deterrence against India is in its ability to deal massive damage to India if it were to invade for whatever reason, keeping the conversation in conventional conflict.

As for small scale skirmishes like 2019, Pakistan can hold its own in a better way compared to all out war because small scale skirmishes sort of prevent India from using its main and only strength against Pakistan - relative size. For these concerns, J-10CE bring a lot more capability to the table relative to the scale of acquisition. Develop tactics and know the aircraft well I guess. This way it maximizes its effectiveness. Something PAF seems to understand since ages ago due to being in the position smaller in the smaller vs larger typical dynamic. PAF and Pakistan is going to be typically less complacent. Also existential threat is non-existent from India since Pakistan has nuclear MAD with India and I don't think China would like to see Pakistan be taken over by India so existential conflict is much more removed in possibility while India and Pakistan engage in either small scale tit for tats and political maneuvering that sometimes involve military.

 

[Signalian]

But 24 units of a budget modern 4.5 gen fighter simply isn't enough to say it will be able to counter the effects of 36 modern - no expense spared 4.5 gen fighter. Or to say that because of it, PAF could at least hold its own against IAF in future conflict.

In terms of ?

While Rafale is the best for France as well as India, the J-10 is the best for Pakistan so why will PAF stop from getting the best tech(weapons, electronics etc) it can from China ? or are you saying that China will not approve it ?

 

[帅的一匹]

Now when you are mentioning China and France, you must keep Pakistan in mind and how Pakistan upgrades simple weapon systems to modern standards. Lesser stuff on J-10, we will see.

1. Evolution of JF-17 into Block-II with advanced weapons and in future Block-III while China's top tier became J-20.
2. T-59 into Al-Zarrar while China's top tank was Type-99 and Type-59 being retired.
3. ROSE upgrades of Mirages while India was conceiving 126 x MRCA tender. True that there is no comparison between Mirage-5 Vs Rafale, however PAF had brought it as closer to Mirage-2k as it could in strike role.

Pakistan took all the above to their maximum capability of lethality, serviceability, life, survivability, electronics, and weaponry in every sense.
So what will Pakistan do with J-10 ?

J10c will keep improving per requirement: weapon system, engine, EW, stealthy coating, you just name it.

 

[Signalian]

J10c will keep improving per requirement: weapon system, engine, EW, stealthy coating, you just name it.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[serenity]

In terms of ?

While Rafale is the best for France as well as India, the J-10 is the best for Pakistan so why will PAF stop from getting the best tech(weapons, electronics etc) it can from China ? or are you saying that China will not approve it ?

Not saying China would not approve that. Who knows on that. I won't assume it's J-10CE or J-10C or PL-15E or PL-15. But what we can safely assume is that it would be very difficult to pick and choose subcomponents for a fighter aircraft.

Pakistan would receive the "best" of what J-10C can export to Pakistan. Whatever level that actually is - regarding export versions or not.

I'm saying Rafale is the best of France while J-10C (even the PLAAF ones) are nowhere near the best of China. That is why I would at least consider Rafale to be superior to J-10C as a 4.5 gen fighter. Then we know for certain that Rafale carries more fuel, has greater range (by how much unknown), and more payload capacity. So while both are similarly modern in technology and subcomponents, Rafale is best France has and can offer while J-10C is China's make it fast and affordable 4.5 gen fighter designed to work next to and assist J-16 and J-20 and AWACS, EW platforms, and ECAVs in a way specific for PLAAF and PLAN. It is a lift in capability for PAF but certainly not as tailor made for PAF or tailor made to counter IAF Rafale. It may not need to be to deter India from even skirmishes but who knows again. Let's simply not be complacent with assumptions. Rafale should certainly not be underestimated and honestly IAF shouldn't either as every spanking PAF gave IAF, IAF tries to adopt and learn and improve.

 

[帅的一匹]

In terms of ?

While Rafale is the best for France as well as India, the J-10 is the best for Pakistan so why will PAF stop from getting the best tech(weapons, electronics etc) it can from China ? or are you saying that China will not approve it ?

Best missile, radar, EW. Aerodynamics , J10c has its limit, so J35 is the future.

3 squadron of j35 will make PAF overwhelmingly superior than IAF.

The only choice left for India is inducting F35 with unaffordable price.

 

[Maula Jatt]

Only needs dhobi patka

Pulled outta kabbadi move that doubt many on this forum would know

 

[帅的一匹]

J10c is more than enough to deal with Rafale in BVR engagement.

Not saying China would not approve that. Who knows on that. I won't assume it's J-10CE or J-10C or PL-15E or PL-15. But what we can safely assume is that it would be very difficult to pick and choose subcomponents for a fighter aircraft.

Pakistan would receive the "best" of what J-10C can export to Pakistan. Whatever level that actually is - regarding export versions or not.

I'm saying Rafale is the best of France while J-10C (even the PLAAF ones) are nowhere near the best of China. That is why I would at least consider Rafale to be superior to J-10C as a 4.5 gen fighter. Then we know for certain that Rafale carries more fuel, has greater range (by how much unknown), and more payload capacity. So while both are similarly modern in technology and subcomponents, Rafale is best France has and can offer while J-10C is China's make it fast and affordable 4.5 gen fighter designed to work next to and assist J-16 and J-20 and AWACS, EW platforms, and ECAVs in a way specific for PLAAF and PLAN. It is a lift in capability for PAF but certainly not as tailor made for PAF or tailor made to counter IAF Rafale. It may not need to be to deter India from even skirmishes but who knows again. Let's simply not be complacent with assumptions. Rafale should certainly not be underestimated and honestly IAF shouldn't either as every spanking PAF gave IAF, IAF tries to adopt and learn and improve.

Yes, Rafale can carry more payload, more ferry range, but it hasn’t nothing special against J10 in BVR situation. Kill and run, that’s J10c does.

 

[White and Green with M/S]

J10c is more than enough to deal with Rafale in BVR engagement.


Yes, Rafale can carry more payload, more ferry range, but it hasn’t nothing special against J10 in BVR situation. Kill and run, that’s J10c does.

No rafale is still better than j10c especially in terms of EW

 

[帅的一匹]

If India keep provoking China alongside the border, we will not hesitate to sell J35 to Pakistan.

No rafale is still better than j10c especially in terms of EW

Too early to say that

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Best missile, radar, EW. Aerodynamics , J10c has its limit, so J35 is the future.

3 squadron of j35 will make PAF overwhelmingly superior than IAF.

The only choice left for India is inducting F35 with unaffordable price.

First j35 will go for product for plastic and plan than its comes out for export in later this decade

And remember brother Pakistan has in his own 5th gen fighter program named AZM

 

[serenity]

I want China to sell J-35 to Pakistan eventually. But J-35 is shown at the moment to only be a carrier fighter. It is unknown whether there is a PLAAF version of J-35.

But while that puts PAF well over IAF in certain capabilities (not necessarily overall), that is something quite unaffordable for PAF. Where will Pakistan find the money to buy dozens of J-35? Yes it may force India to purchase F-35 or brand their AMCA as enough to counter it but Pakistan itself is economically not in a position for arms racing India.

Even with J-35 being sold at China's own acquisition price which would be the lowest they can sell at without considering any strategy to provide them for even cheaper just so PAF has good defence and capability against India if the relations between India and China are at that low level, it is still going to be expensive to buy!