PAF should've invested more on J-10s rather than JF-17s

[hj786]

JF-17 and AWACS is all PAF need. It is replacing upgraded Mirage ROSE, A-5, F-7, even F-16 when the future advanced variants are produced. The only reason J-10/FC-20 are needed is to give PAF something very advanced that can go to very high altitude (higher than JF-17) and give top cover for the JF, just like the F-104 did for the F-86 in 1965.

All-Green you hit the nail on the head - a small, easy to maintain jet with around-the-clock readiness that can take off from highways will constantly be a thorn in the InAF's side - they will never be able to give close air support to their army if they are forced to engage JF-17 all the time.

Agree bro...but if we needed it experience/feel/performance/avionics etc why 18??why not a fleet of 6 only???

Bro there is a reason F-16 is still being produced and sold, even today. It is simply an excellent jet and is PERFECT to fly with the Erieye AWACS system. PAF would have bought Gripen to go with Erieye, but what is the point? F-16 can do almost everything Gripen can do and PAF already knows everything about F-16.
If they bought something like Gripen, they would have to spend LOADS more cash on infrastructure, maintenance facilities, pilot training... why spend money on that when F-16 can do the job?

I'm telling you bro, the combination of Erieye and F-16 with AMRAAMs was pretty much designed to stop the Soviet air force, what chance does the InAF have? If they want to come play in Pak airspace when Erieye and F-16 are on patrol they're in for a shock.

Even the guys on Western forums say this - they say that PAF should buy lots and lots of used but upgraded F-16 and Gripen to go with Erieye and InAF will never get through. They're right, but for a sanction-proof air force, PAF are buying the Chinese jets. Once they programme datalinks for JF and J-10 that work with the Erieye system, PAF won't need F-16s anymore.

I think perhaps to get 500 AMRAAMs from USA and MLU kits for the old jets, PAF had to place an order of block 52 F-16. Remember the Air Chief said he is impressed with block 52, and he has already seen what is on FC-20! He is a decorated PAF pilot who flies F-16 too, so he is certainly a wise man.

 

[iceman2009]

I agree with HJ786 the real war plane in the PAF today and in the future is the F16 /52..

The AMRAAMS are arguably the best BVR missle around.

But from an IAF point of view there is nothing else that worries THEM about the PAF.

NOT YET ANYWAYS

May change if they realLy do get those 36 J10s from china cause they look really cool

 

[batmannow]

I agree with HJ786 the real war plane in the PAF today and in the future is the F16 /52..

The AMRAAMS are arguably the best BVR missle around.

But from an IAF point of view there is nothing else that worries THEM about the PAF.

NOT YET ANYWAYS

May change if they realLy do get those 36 J10s from china cause they look really cool

iceman2009, sir
As you described by yourself,"those 36 J10s from china cause they look really cool", surly F16 /52, would be leading the front in future ,but it will not be seen as the "ultimate future of PAF".

 

[All-Green]

Let us see what we get in the form of FC-20.
IMO, final word can only be after PAF evaluates it against its F-16 BLK-52s, especially in air superiority role!
(let us hope we get the BLK-52s...things are ok so far but who knows...)
I am confident that FC-20 will be an excellent strike platform.
Let us hope that it enables us to ditch western platforms.

As far as JF-17 is concerned; if IAF indeed is not worried about JF-17then that makes it even better for PAF.

 

[Super Falcon]

only JF 17 and few J 10 cannot defend us with IAF 125 F 16+100 SU 30MKI+ PAK-FA

where are you mate we cannot defend with 4 gen fighter jets with fighting with indians 5 gen fighter jets yes i agree for some extent we can have few kills over indians SU 30 and F 16 but what we do when we face PAK-FA which is RAPTOR of russia

can you compare J 10 JF 17 with F 22 no way and PAK-FA is Comparable to RAPTOR

 

[hj786]

But from an IAF point of view there is nothing else that worries THEM about the PAF.

Rubbish. JF-17 with SD-10 worries them a lot because Chinese have studied R-77 technology.

only JF 17 and few J 10 cannot defend us with IAF 125 F 16+100 SU 30MKI+ PAK-FA
where are you mate we cannot defend with 4 gen fighter jets with fighting with indians 5 gen fighter jets yes i agree for some extent we can have few kills over indians SU 30 and F 16 but what we do when we face PAK-FA which is RAPTOR of russia
can you compare J 10 JF 17 with F 22 no way and PAK-FA is Comparable to RAPTOR

Why do you keep typing this newby crap? If you don't know anything, why keep posting?
India does not have PAK-FA or F-16 and will not have them for many years.
Will you please grow up.

 

[Rafael]

Rubbish. JF-17 with SD-10 worries them a lot because Chinese have studied R-77 technology.

yar how would he know the exact capabilities of jf-17. when they are grown up watching these sort of indian propaganda...haha...

 

[Arsalan]

PAF should've invested more on j-10s rather than jf17s.
=========================================================
certain people are putting the comparisons like this..

1]jf17 (block1) = 70% of f16c/jas39 grippen
2]jf17 (block2) = 90% of f16c/jas39 grippen
3]j10 = 85% of f16c/jas39 grippen

(i might be wrong)..
...
...

couldnt agree more,,

all this seems quite real facts,

 

[Arsalan]

mean-birds reply to antibody is quite intresting

as far as i think, jf17 is very important plane for us. basically its an export oriented option to replace our aging F7 flleet. as both friends have said, it have huge potential for upgrades so it is good item for the export maarket as it can be modefied to ordered specs!!

for the j10 they are important to give high tech support to the JF17,

a squadron or two of a fifth generation fighter will add alot to PAF's capabilities.

for the f16 issue i totally agree with antibody

and yes the JF17 is quite capable to compete with the mirages, you can have a look at specs of both the planes!!

thankyou both antibody and mean bird

 

[Arsalan]

so to conclude we can say that we need to have both the JF17 block 1/2 to fill in for our fleet size and the J10 superior that su 27, comparable to su 30. the current J10 is nothing like this so we need upgrades.

few fifth generation planes from china (when ever available) must also be accquired to counter the Su30 and PAK FA threat!!

what is you say on this matter

 

[Patriot]

yar how would he know the exact capabilities of jf-17. when they are grown up watching these sort of indian propaganda...haha...

nBf-5MnoBh0[/media] - JF-17 Simulator

HAHAHA
What a dumb reporter.Everyone should watch this video.

 

[Rafael]

===========================
why even bother putting this baboon news on this blog site which only show native aspect of indians mongoners.

I just needed a good laugh ...nothing more than that..

did you enjoyed that??

 

[spurdozer]

Very much Raheel

 

[Manticore]

i've heard some people are going to china to quickly get some j10s in the wake of the new tension... ?

 

[Manticore]

[mods, i'm sorry to post in a month old topic, but i found some good answers to the questions in this topic, on the net... infact some of them are from the distinguished members of this forumn]
.

The PAF is looking for a total of 150 high end aircraft like the F-16 Block 52s and the FC-20 (J-10Bs or J-10Ps). The FC-20s could be procured in greater numbers, depending on relations with the U.S. and the operability of the F-16s.

==>The J-10Ps and the JF-17s make a perfect pair - one ideal for high altitude air superiority and deep strike missions while the other ideal as a true multirole fighter.

==>Where the J-10 lacks in deep strike, the F-16s make up for it.

==>Where the J-10s lack in CAS, the JF-17s make up for it.

==> Where the JF-17 lacks in high altitude BVR engagements, the J-10s make up for it.

With the AESA equipped new J-10Bs, higher thrust engines and better EW/Avionics, PAF would reclaim the qualitative edge over the IAF. These J-10s would be superior in air combat than anything that the IAF fields today and would only be matched by a possible MRCA acquisition by India.

==> Even then, with the 5 present contenders left in the MRCA, only the Eurofighter (assuming AESA radars) would be able to match the J-10 in air-to-air combat.

J-10 Vs F-16 Technical Comparison

The F-16 was designed from the outset as a dog-fighter. The moderate sweep of the wings and aspect ratios were ideal for this. The trade-off however, was greater supersonic resistance. The thrust offered by the two engine options on the F-16 is impressive even to this day. TWR in air combat is about 1.15, ensuring impressive climbing rates and sustained turn rates. As noted, the F-16 sacrificed supersonic performance, not only in its wing design but also in its fixed air intakes. In supersonic flight, engine thrust is lost. While it can reach Mach 2.0, pragmatically it has poor supersonic performance.

While the F-16 sacrificed supersonic performance for subsonic dogfighting, the J-10 did not make the same sacrifice. Thus, while when the F-16 was designed, turning dogfights were what was projected as the bread and butter of air combat, when the J-10 was being designed, the BVR era had arrived (or re-arrived). The J-10s aerodynamic design, including wing design and inlet design, take this into account. For instance, the J-10 visibly has greater wing sweep and a variable inlet. With the J-10B, a DSI intake. While the J-10B sacrifices maximum theoretical top speeds with its DSI intakes, for all relevant combat speeds, it gives the J-10 superior performance.

Under modern BVR conditions and higher altitude combat, the J-10 is significantly superior to the F-16. This is also reflected in its higher instantaneous turn rates. The Mirage-2000s have been a point of major concern both for the Pakistanis and the Turkish air forces, because of these aerodynamic issues, despite the Mirages weak engines. The Greeks, who operated both the Mirage 2000 and F-16C considered the F-16 to be better at low altitude, low speed, hard turning fights, and Mirage 2000 to be superior at hi-hi.The F-16 would have to attempt to survive the first merge in an air combat scenario, which becomes increasingly suicidal with high off-bore sight missiles. BVR further compounds these problems for the F-16s. In previous eras, flying hi and fast was fine, but you often had to come down low to engage a low flying enemy aircraft. Today, that becomes less relevant with longer range BVR missiles and look-down shoot-down capabilities.




JF-17s would not only allow PAF to counter numbers, but also allow her to maintain larger numbers of FC-20s and F-16s for war-time and lower their depreciation - providing a low cost training aircraft to fly liberally during peacetime. This would be a similar arrangement to how the Israeli Air Force uses F-16s to keep meet the flight time allocations of its F-15 pilots.


The F-16 has also been adding weight over time and attempting to counterbalance this with increased engine thrust. However, since wing area remained the same, maneuverability has been sacrificed. Higher wing loading is particularly detrimental for higher altitude maneuverability. The J-10 on the other hand, has all the wing area it could ever need with a delta canard layout.

The newer block F-16s however, are great for low altitude air-to-ground missions. The high wing loading favors low fliers and the moderate wing sweep helps handling at lower speeds often necessary during ordnance delivery. The J-10 is thus not ideal for the CAS role. However, because of the range and payload advantages, the J-10 can be considered an effective deep striker. CAS was never a pressing need for the PLAAF, and the PAF has the JF-17 which is ideal for that role.

complete article
Grande Strategy: The Dragon's New Claws: The J-10B Emerging




found someother article aswell

FC-1 / J-10 Pairing
There have been various comparisons between the FC-1 & J-10 pairing, including the F-16 & F-15 pairing and the F-20 & F-16. However, one comparison pairing still to be analyzed is the MiG-29 and Su-27 pairing. If you think about it, the FC-1 is the equivalent of a single engined MiG-29 and the J-10 a single engined Su-27. The difference between them is relatively (and admittedly not absolutely) the same. Given that the modern equivalents of these planes – the MiG-35 and the Su-35 are even more closely matched in terms of performance, radar capability and range, the point of painting the FC-1 & J-10 pairing black seems perhaps a bit more tenuous.If we compare the initial JF-17 with the initial F-16A Block-10/15 aircraft, JF-17 is a superior aircraft, compared to the Block-20 it is equally effective

PL-12

Indicating a major advance in its AAM technology, in 2001 Chinese sources began revealing the first data on the Leihua Electronic Technology Research Institute (LETRI) SD-10, later PL-12 active radar guided AAM. It is likely that at about the same time that the PLA was negotiating to purchase the R-77, it was also pressing Russia’s missile concerns for technology to support an indigenous Chinese program. Russia’s missile radar maker AGAT reportedly sold China drawings of the 9B-1103M radar for the active-guided version of the R-27 AAM. But China presumably also gained insights from the AGAT 9B-1348 radar on the R-77.[11] The PL-12 also reportedly has a “passive” seeking mode that would allow it to home in on an emitting target, such as a jamming or AWACs radar aircraft.[12] However, the SD-10 uses a Chinese-made missile motor, which when combined with a “lofted” flight profile, can achieve a maximum range of 70km, about 10km less than the R-77. Nevertheless, in the PL-12 the PLA has a modern self-guided AAM that is in the same class as the U.S. AIM-120 and the Russian R-77. In 2002 China revealed basic data about the SD-10 and began to display models of the missile at air-shows, such as Zhuhai in November 2002. By 2005 to 2006 the PL-12 began to appear in photos of PLA fighters, especially the Chengdu J-10 and some versions of the Shenyang J-8II. It has also been tested on the Shenyang J-11B, now in advanced development, and has been seen in at least on photo on a wing pylon of a Xian JH-7A fighter attack fighter.

chinese fifth gen missiles
http://www.defence.pk/forums/wmd-missiles/19447-air-air-missiles-command-air.html#post374190

However, there remains a great deal not yet known about the J-10 performance. The estimates above from the March 2007 issue of Aviatsya i Vremya gives the J-10’s range with external tanks as 2,900km, whereas another published estimate holds that the large fuel tanks of the J-10 give it a 2,500km radius, or a potential 5,000km total range.[10] Such a range would be astounding for basically an F-16 size fighter. The J-10 is usually estimated to have a 550km to 600km combat radius. But one cannot be sure due to China’s refusal to reveal real numbers. The radar for the J-10 is another “indigenous” Chinese design which has drawn heavily from Russian and possibly, Israeli technology. At the 2004 Zhuhai Airshow Russian sources revealed that China is claiming this radar can guide four simultaneous air-to-air missile engagements, while the Russian believed the radar could only successfully guide two under fast moving air combat conditions.

The J-10 can carry two to four SD-10A/PL-12 self-guided air-to-air missiles. The PL-12’s self-guidance radar is derived or copied from a Russian Vympel radar similar to that which guided the Vympel R-77. However, the PL-12 uses a “lofted” missile flight profile which allows the PL-12 to achieve a 70km head-on engagement range, compared to 50km for the R-77 against a maneuvering target.[11] Louyang’s PL-9C is derived from the Israeli Python-3 air-to-air missile. At the 1997 Zhuhai Airshow the author learned that China had equipped this missile with a copy of the Ukrainian Arsenel helmet sight to increase its short-range combat potential. China may also sell Iran additional “Chinese” air defense assets like the YJ-91, which Asian sources have told the author combines an Israeli technology anti-radiation seeker with the motor of the Russian Zvezda Kh-31 ramjet powered attack missile. The YJ-91 would prove ideal for attacking AWACS aircraft or AEGIS air defense destroyers that might be supporting a U.S. or Israeli strike packages.

The J-10 is also a fully capable all-weather offensive strikes. It will be equipped with a new low-light targeting pod, developed with Russian assistance, which can mark targets for laser and navigation-satellite guided weapons. New Chinese precision guided weapons include Louyang’s laser-guided LS-2 and CMIEC’s 100kg, 250kg and 500kg nav-sat guided bombs. It appears that the J-10 may be able to carry up to eight 250kg bombs, along with two refueling tanks and two PL-9C AAMs. Iran already produces copies of the Chinese anti-ship missiles that could arm the J-10, to include the C-802 and shorter range missiles like the Kosar/C-701 and the JJ/TL-10A, both of which use optical guidance for attacking a range of targets. The J-10’s offensive potential is also represented by its ability to provide escort for other conventional or future nuclear weapon armed Iranian strike aircraft.

International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > Chengdu J-10 Fighters for Iran