Replacing the F-16: Will Pakistan’s Top Fighter Squadron Transition to Chinese J-10Cs?

[jupiter2007]

Anyone suggesting to upgrade old mirage frames with AESA and different engine is not right in his mind. That would be completely waste of time, money and resources.
We need to focus on JF-17 block 3 and possibly further upgrade to block 3.
J-10 for possible stop gap purpose, AZM or JV on 5th generation fighter.

 

[MH.Yang]

Strong Words , Indians Cant Even Control their Own Missiles which Sent Their own Helicopters Spiraling out of the Sky.

India's economy has always had great hidden dangers, such as their foreign debt.
Now the USA is over issuing currency. The over issued dollar will impact the global financial market, and then the USA will adopt tightening policies to harvest the wealth. Obviously, India is the key target of this harvest. Wall Street has lowered India's national credit rating again and again, The sovereign economic rating is the lowest BBB. Because of the devaluation, the US media publicized the Indian Rupee as "the world's worst currency". This is hedge capital telling the world that India is unable to resist the attack of the dollar.US hedge capital has led to 1.1 trillion rupees of foreign capital to withdraw from India. This resulted in India's public debt reaching $1.17 trillion, but its foreign exchange reserves were only $500 billion. The Fed has nearly $2 trillion in quantitative easing that can be used for attack, and now India has no resistance to it. Now no one can stop the United States from turning India into an economic colony. Because of the decline in national strength, the USA is strategically shrinking around the world, including South Asia. The USA weakens their deployment in South Asia, but will not give up their interests in South Asia. So they hope to cultivate another Israel in South Asia. It is normal for the USA to let the media incite Indian nationalism and control India through India's right-wing political parties. If the USA wants to incite Indian nationalism, it is bound to frighten Indians with China.
Of course, India cannot receive good treatment like Israel. Considering India's potential, the USA will completely control and parasitize India's economy, control their media and politicians, and will not give India any chance to challenge the old order.
In the future, part of every rupee earned by Indians will flow to the USA, and the rest will support politicians controlled by the USA, who will become slaves. It will be like Thailand after 1998.
There can be no large-scale war between India and China. China understand, India understand, and the USA understand. Therefore, the real purpose of the USA is to control India.

 

[CriticalThought]

We are not replacing french mirage engines but AESA would be cost effective solution. They would be an excellent mate with block 3.

AESA brings its own cooling and power requirements which cannot be met with existing engine on Mirages. According to user denel, a Mirage equipped with RD-93 is exactly the Cheetah program from South Africa. I am more in favor of delta wings on a Thunder frame and RD-93.

 

[GumNaam]

AESA brings its own cooling and power requirements which cannot be met with existing engine on Mirages. According to user denel, a Mirage equipped with RD-93 is exactly the Cheetah program from South Africa. I am more in favor of delta wings on a Thunder frame and RD-93.

oh heck no, delta wings are almost certain to make the aircraft a single turn fighter like the m2000 or rafale where you either get the shot in the first turn or get out cuz otherwise you're gonna start bleeding speed and fuel super fast after the first turn. that is not acceptable in air combat.

 

[CriticalThought]

oh heck no, delta wings are almost certain to make the aircraft a single turn fighter like the m2000 or rafale where you either get the shot in the first turn or get out cuz otherwise you're gonna start bleeding speed and fuel super fast after the first turn. that is not acceptable in air combat.

Who said that is the only variant we will have? The delta will be a compliment to the existing Thunder.

 

[BON PLAN]

On your comment about the Viper and 'Agile Falcon', that was actually adopted by the Japanese as the Mitsubishi F-2, and for their requirements has actually been quite good.

Yes and no.
Yes the F2 has greater and totally new wings, but the frame is also bigger than those of F16 or Agile Falcon.
D2 is a kind of super agile falcon.

We are not replacing french mirage engines but AESA would be cost effective solution. They would be an excellent mate with block 3.

A good solution to improve the efficiency, but what kind of radar? I only see a chinese solution, and the chinese weapon problem is always the same : not war proven.

 

[SQ8]

Still enjoying the “replacing the F-16” argument standing on straws. An aircraft that even in 5 years will still be one of the most effective multi-role platforms for which the PAF has ample spares stocked away should be replaced.

Meanwhile, 50 year old museum antiques with rebuild upon rebuild in them and tubrojets whose blades are near cracking are considered for millions of dollars of AESA upgrades.
At most the mirages need a decent HOBs missile paired with a HMD so they have some hope of surviving their missions in hostile territory along with a SPJ.

There is no replacement for the F-16s until they are done with their useful lives in the late 2030s. Especially not with the J-10CE which has a whole other gap to somewhat try and fulfill.

 

[BON PLAN]

the J-10CE which has a whole other gap to somewhat try and fulfill.

You can explain what is this gap?

 

[araz]

We are not replacing french mirage engines but AESA would be cost effective solution. They would be an excellent mate with block 3.

Well I then have to ask whether technically this is possible. Will the engine be able to provide enough energy. What sized AESA can we fit in the M3/5 Radome and how are we going to circumvent the issue of
A. Cooling
B if Air cooled Radar then degradation of signal as the Radar heats up.
What advantage does an AESA bring to a platform which has only 5 hardpoints 2 being totally dedicated to fuel tanks.
Personally I dont think PAF will go down the route as the niche which it uses M3/5s can still be served by them as long as they have top cover.
Ilook forward to a detailed response from you as the idea you have put forward is novel and disagreement aside I would like to hear your view point.
Kind regards
A

Anyone suggesting to upgrade old mirage frames with AESA and different engine is not right in his mind. That would be completely waste of time, money and resources.
We need to focus on JF-17 block 3 and possibly further upgrade to block 3.
J-10 for possible stop gap purpose, AZM or JV on 5th generation fighter.

You could have asked the question as to why the poster suggested the idea instead of declaring people lunatics. At least hear them out. Is it not the right way or are people on this forum so rigid in their ideas that they cannot even hear out another idea fully without pontificating first?
A

 

[SQ8]

You can explain what is this gap?

Penetrating standoff strike fighter and high end air superiority asset focused on usage of PL-15 weapons system to its maximum potential.

There are airbases some 1000km east that need to be attacked and assets to return safely. The J-10CE can do that.

 

[messiach]

Inadvertently stepped on sensitive grounds.

1) Snecma - short answer is No. Indepth Yes while using GaN/SiC transmitters in distribution. @CriticalThought
2) Cooling - GaN/SiC has low lattice mismatch, low expansion and very high thermal conductivity. Non issue.
3) Will it fit in the Radome - i am unable to answer. But read my answers carefully.

Well I then have to ask whethwr technically this is possible. Will the engine be able to provide enough energy. What sized AESA can we fit in the M3/5 Radome and how are we going to circumvent the issue of
A. Cooling
B if Air cooled Radar then degradation of signal as the Radar heats up.
What advantage does an AESA bring to a platform which has only 5 hardpoints 2 being totally dedicated to fuel tanks.

 

[SQ8]

Inadvertently stepped on sensitive grounds.

1) Snecma - short answer is No. Indepth Yes while using GaN/SiC transmitters in distribution. @CriticalThought
2) Cooling - GaN/SiC has low lattice mismatch, low expansion and very high thermal conductivity. Non issue.
3) Will it fit in the Radome - i am unable to answer. But read my answers carefully.

If its for the Mirage V Then Chilean Pantera 50 is the closest analogy to what you are proposing but that too involved an uprated engine and changed nose.
The Agave radar that goes into the Mirage V-PAs provides a max range of 40nm so I don’t think the V series is worth the effort.

Lets say that is the same fitting used and using GaN/SiC TERs used for the ROSE-I airframes might be a good idea but the air to air aspect would be fairly limited other than running interceptions at night(wont the Jf-17 be just better for it?)

The other aspect could be on the AESA being sophisticated enough in terms of processing to conduct Inverse SAR and A2A at the same time to allow for Target acquisition.

But the cost benefit still lies in murky waters since the real benefit the mirages bring is payload(through volume) and a stable bombing platform.

Still, beggars cant be choosers so if the cost/benefit analysis of this versus additional new airframes seems better to the PAF then it should be looked at.

 

[LeGenD]

If Pakistan does induct J-10C I doubt it will be in the same form as the chinese ones, we’re already hearing they want better radars with them. PAF would want the J-10 to be as good as possible before they buy it, historically speaking Pakistan has always configured Chinese weapon purchases to its liking before buying them too.

While I would say the F-16V is still a slightly superior platform Than the J-10C due to its better engine and higher payload capacity, but those aren’t really an option anymore and PAF needs something to make up for that.

However the platform being slightly inferior is made up by the weapon systems of the J-10. The current Chinese missiles are very good, PL-10E is comparable to the AIM9X and the PL-15 is definitely better than the AIM120C5/C7 and probably even the AIM120D (the AIM260 is meant to be the answer to PL-15 but that’s not ready yet and even when it is ready won’t be cleared for export for a while). J-10C also has some other advantages like better airframe makeup (materials and RCS + DSI, it’s newer after all, the F-16 airframe is rather basic) as well as a good future due to its younger age.

Pakistan doesn’t have the latest F-16s, so for Pakistan the J-10 would definitely be a major capability boost as they’re better than the Block 52+ in nearly every category. Yes, all this considered, its not an ideal situation, but PAF has hardly ever had an ideal situation in its existence, they do good with what they have.

Fifth-Gen is still too far off to just hold out until those come. Gripen still has issues for us as it uses some American origin technology, and to be completely honest the Gripen isn’t that much of an upgrade from a JF-17 block 3 in its role and capability. We also have to remember that purchasing the aircraft isn’t the only thing, the weapons you purchase with it matter a lot, We cannot get any good BVR missiles for gripen since it uses French MICA, American AIM120 (we have C5s and they’re still decent but those are only enough for our F-16 fleet and they’re not comparable to modern BVRs) or European meteor (which also has a French part to it and wasn’t available to us when we tried to get eurofighter so I doubt it’ll be available now.)

Pakistan is kind of limited to the J-10 option, and it’s thankfully not the worst option, even if it isn’t the best.

As for cost, inducting the J-10 would actually be the cheapest among any of the possible options, due to its shared weapon systems with the JF (another advantage is how the tech from J-10 will trickle down to future JFs) and due to it’s Chinese origin (we know Pakistan gets preferential treatment from China).

Any other aircraft like SU35, EF, Gripen would require entirely new weapon systems which wouldn’t be shared with our other aircraft. In a world where Pak-US relations were different, F-16V would have been the only better option than J-10, but it’s currently not an option at all.

Slighty superior? Comparison(s) with F-16 Block 70/72 is not a good idea in fact.

J-10C is difficult to evaluate due to lack of information in Public domain and customer testimonials:

I do get the impression that F-16 Block 70/72 is better on many counts.

1. About the radar system in use in J-10C?

KLJ-X AESA with 1200 TRMs? Similar to KLJ-7a AESA or older design? Chinese 1st generation or 2nd generation?

- - -

F-16 Block 70/72 is equipped with AN/APG-83 LPI (300 KM detection range for airborne targets and can produce a fire solution for up to 20 targets in short order). This is a derivative of the very impressive AN/APG-81 LPI radar system in use in F-35 variants. These are 4th generation AESA radar systems in American terms - more advanced than RBE-2AA AESA in use in Rafale F3R.

AN/APG-83 LPI have extensive EW/EP capability of its own and seamless integration with next generation AN/ALQ-254(V)1 Viper Shield DEWS - a significant leap from the (combat-proven) AN/ALQ-211 family of EW systems in use in relatively older F-16 Blocks worldwide including Pakistan.

Source: MilitaryLeak

F-16 Block 70/72 can also be equipped with cutting-edge Legion IRST solutions (Embedded; Pod).

F-15 Uses New Infrared Pod To Shoot Down Target F-16 With AIM-120 Missile

The F-15's new Infrared Search and Track pod has just proved its ability to provide targeting data needed to make a long-range missile kill.

www.thedrive.com

F-16 Block 70/72 brings some of the best warfighting technologies to the table in short.

- - -

J-10C also features an embedded IRST solution, and an ECM system (SPO-15LM Beryoza or modernized extrapolation of it?)

China could learn about JAS 39 Gripen C- and D- variants from excercises with Thailand but this is not actual combat. According to independent reports, J-11 flopped but J-10C fared much better against Gripen C- and D- in these events.

F-16 Block 70/72 is on another level in comparison to Gripen C- and D- however.

Therefore...

- - -

2. Fuel capacity of J-10C?

4500 kg? Maximum ferry range is noticeably lower than the same of F-16s in fact.

I do not recall any live demonstration of J-10C with CFTs.

It remains to be seen how CFTs will affect performance of J-10C if (or when) applied.

- - -

Fuel capacity of F-16 Block 70/72 = 4715 kg (internal) + 2268 kg (CFTs* = 2)

*CFTs of F-16 are shaped and constructed with materials to ensure minimum impact on the maneuverability aspects of the jet fighter.

"The CFTs have very little adverse effect on the F-16’s renowned performance. A set of CFTs carries 50 percent more fuel than the centerline external fuel tank, but has only 12 percent of the drag. The aircraft retains its full 9-g capability and flight envelope with the CFTs installed. The drag impact is very small, less than one percent in combat configuration at cruise conditions.” - Major Timothy McDonald (USA)

The aforementioned characteristics are necessary to conduct military operations deep inside hostile environments (e.g. India). Cruise missiles are in limited quantities so jet fighters should be able to substitute them in various missions. Refueling aircraft are vulnerable targets on the other hand.

- - - - -

Fuel capacity of F-16 Block 52+ and MLU configuration = 3175 kg (internal) + 2268 kg (CFTs = 2)

- - - - -

3. Payload capacity of J-10C?

6000+ kg?

- - -

Payload capacity of F-16 Block 70/72 = 7350 kg

Bigger payload have its benefits in modern warfare.

4. Quality factor of J-10C?

F-16 Block 70/72 is developed with very high quality components including engine. MTBF is stated to be 12000 hours which is a breakthrough. This is much higher than the same of many jet fighters in service around the world.

F-16 Block 70/72 also have Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (AGCAS) to recover from risky maneuvers near surface.

- - -

All said and done, F-16 Block 70/72 is ideal option for PAF to counter Rafale F3R over Indian airspace and conduct strikes deep inside Indian terrain in forseeable future, should the need arise.

US-Pakistan relations however?

- - -

JF-17 Block 3 will bridge the gap between J-10C and JF-17 Thunder platform to large extent.

J-10C is good option for replacing some of the older jet fighters in the inventory of PAF nevertheless.

PAF can/should also take a look at JAS 39 Gripen E- variant.

- - -

To replace F-16s, PAF should aim for a jet fighter that can be used to counter Rafale F3R head-on and go deep inside India (in case).

J-16 can substitute F-16s but not for sale unfortunately.

Eurofighter Tranche 5 perhaps? Joint venture with Turkey otherwise?

 

[iLION12345_1]

Slighty superior? Comparison(s) with F-16 Block 70/72 is not a good idea in fact.

J-10C is difficult to evaluate due to lack of information in Public domain and customer testimonials:

I do get the impression that F-16 Block 70/72 is better on many counts.

1. About the radar system in use in J-10C?

KLJ-X AESA with 1200 TRMs? Similar to KLJ-7a AESA or older design? Chinese 1st generation or 2nd generation?

- - -

F-16 Block 70/72 is equipped with AN/APG-83 LPI (300 KM detection range for airborne targets and can produce a fire solution for up to 20 targets in short order). This is a derivative of the very impressive AN/APG-81 LPI radar system in use in F-35 variants. These are 4th generation AESA radar systems in American terms - more advanced than RBE-2AA AESA in use in Rafale F3R.

AN/APG-83 LPI have extensive EW/EP capability of its own and seamless integration with next generation AN/ALQ-254(V)1 Viper Shield DEWS - a significant leap from the (combat-proven) AN/ALQ-211 family of EW systems in use in relatively older F-16 Blocks worldwide including Pakistan.

Source: MilitaryLeak

F-16 Block 70/72 can also be equipped with cutting-edge Legion IRST solutions (Embedded; Pod).

F-15 Uses New Infrared Pod To Shoot Down Target F-16 With AIM-120 Missile

The F-15's new Infrared Search and Track pod has just proved its ability to provide targeting data needed to make a long-range missile kill.

www.thedrive.com

F-16 Block 70/72 brings some of the best warfighting technologies to the table in short.

- - -

J-10C also features an embedded IRST solution, and an ECM system (SPO-15LM Beryoza or modernized extrapolation of it?)

China could learn about JAS 39 Gripen C- and D- variants from excercises with Thailand but this is not actual combat. According to independent reports, J-11 flopped but J-10C fared much better against Gripen C- and D- in these events.

F-16 Block 70/72 is on another level in comparison to Gripen C- and D- however.

Therefore...

- - -

2. Fuel capacity of J-10C?

4500 kg? Maximum ferry range is noticeably lower than the same of F-16s in fact.

I do not recall any live demonstration of J-10C with CFTs.

It remains to be seen how CFTs will affect performance of J-10C if (or when) applied.

- - -

Fuel capacity of F-16 Block 70/72 = 4715 kg (internal) + 2268 kg (CFTs* = 2)

*CFTs of F-16 are shaped and constructed with materials to ensure minimum impact on the maneuverability aspects of the jet fighter.

"The CFTs have very little adverse effect on the F-16’s renowned performance. A set of CFTs carries 50 percent more fuel than the centerline external fuel tank, but has only 12 percent of the drag. The aircraft retains its full 9-g capability and flight envelope with the CFTs installed. The drag impact is very small, less than one percent in combat configuration at cruise conditions.” - Major Timothy McDonald (USA)

The aforementioned characteristics are necessary to conduct military operations deep inside hostile environments (e.g. India). Cruise missiles are in limited quantities so jet fighters should be able to substitute them in various missions. Refueling aircraft are vulnerable targets on the other hand.

- - - - -

Fuel capacity of F-16 Block 52+ and MLU configuration = 3175 kg (internal) + 2268 kg (CFTs = 2)

- - - - -

3. Payload capacity of J-10C?

6000+ kg?

- - -

Payload capacity of F-16 Block 70/72 = 7350 kg

Bigger payload have its benefits in modern warfare.

4. Quality factor of J-10C?

F-16 Block 70/72 is developed with very high quality components including engine. MTBF is stated to be 12000 hours which is a breakthrough. This is much higher than the same of many jet fighters in service around the world.

F-16 Block 70/72 also have Automatic Ground Collision Avoidance System (AGCAS) to recover from risky maneuvers near surface.

- - -

All said and done, F-16 Block 70/72 is ideal option for PAF to counter Rafale F3R over Indian airspace and conduct strikes deep inside Indian terrain in forseeable future, should the need arise.

US-Pakistan relations however?

- - -

JF-17 Block 3 will bridge the gap between J-10C and JF-17 Thunder platform to large extent.

J-10C is good option for replacing some of the older jet fighters in the inventory of PAF nevertheless.

PAF can/should also take a look at JAS 39 Gripen E- variant.

- - -

To replace F-16s, PAF should aim for a jet fighter that can be used to counter Rafale F3R head-on and go deep inside India (in case).

J-16 can substitute F-16s but not for sale unfortunately.

Eurofighter Tranche 5 perhaps? Joint venture with Turkey otherwise?

Well, you mentioned most of the benefits of F-16V, as I did with J-10C. F-16V looks superior because we don’t know enough about J-10C, however I won’t disagree with you on what you presented, I doubt J-10C has superior EW and radar capabilities to F-16V. (the Radar in J-10C is unknown, however in previous J-10B it was a scaled up version of the KLJ or LKF series, C has a better radar, possibly current gen Chinese AESA. but PAF seems to want an even better one, probably points to the fact that currently the C does not have the best China has to offer). F-16V definitely has more range and a much better engine though, and can carry more for sure as well. The airframe life is obviously another positive.

But OTOH there are things in the J-10Cs favor, DSI and likely lower RCS, possibly better airframe makeup due to use of more composites (only because the aircraft is newer, doesn’t really give it much advantage overall). inbuilt IRST, Much better BVR missiles (AIM-260 is not ready and won’t be for a while, AIM120 cannot match up to PL-15, despite being a very good BVR), comparable if not better WVR missiles (PL-10E versus AIM9X). Also payload capacity for J-10C exceeds 7000KG iirc. Because for the original J-10A model it was reported to be 6800KG. J-10C is also cheaper than an F-16V, so we can’t exactly compare them 1:1.

So I’d still stand by what I said, F-16V overall imo is slightly superior to J-10C.

Then you have to look at its benefits specifically for Pakistan, in Pakistans use case, F-16V does not have as long a range as J-10C, because J-10C has IFR and F-16V doesn’t (in Pakistans case). J-10C is less sanction prone, easier to deliver, will benefit JF project etc etc. these obviously don’t make it a better aircraft objectively than the F-16V but in Pakistans case they definitely matter. In an ideal scenario where PAK-US relations are good I’d definitely want the PAF to get F-16V, heck the PAF would even pick the F16V over the J-10C now if somehow the option was present to get them in large numbers.

As for other options, I already explained why gripen is not good, it doesn’t bring much capability above JF block 3 and PAF cannot get any good BvRs for it. EF is also off the cards for now, much more expensive, really expensive to fly, and meteor wasn’t an option, maybe in the future it still will be but I doubt it, PAF can wait for FGFAs with Azm + TFX + J31/J35, which is imo the next step after J-10 for Pakistan.

 

[Riz]

This all depends on whether the PAF can (or should) acquire more Vipers (it has historically aimed for a fleet of over 100),

As fast taliban heading towards kabul as fast chances of getting F-16v is increasing, we might see a deal with USA in next month or so