Su-30MKI & JF-17 Air Fight

[Munir]

Thus far Pakistan have ordered 42 JF17 for definite.

There is a loan arrangement of $650m for PAF to buy these from China.

This is a follow on from 8 prototypes that are currently going thru IOC.

Recently a PAF spokesman suggested the first PAF JF17 wil,be raised by the year end 2009 early 2010.

All these other posts of 250 JF17 with western radar and weapons a new engine and AESA etc are threads started on this forum..

Whislt i appreciate that JF17 like LCA SU30MKI or Typhoon. wil have different tranches with each tranche improving on the other what i don,t see happening is the time line being suggested of 250 JF17 by 2015.

If the JF17 is being treated as a true 4TH GENERATION FIGHTER as some claim it is ... Then it can,t be built or acquired in the nos suggested so quickly. Let me explain the argument.

Even the first basic 42 JF17 are coming via soft loans. Where will PAF find enuf funds to buy 250 IN 5 YEARS.

Secondly if the next batch of 50 are to incorporate new engine radar and weapons surely this will take time to intergrate and test before induction. Yet again thev cost issue is also to be factored.

What about the infrastucture and pilots to support these planes . The workshops. JF17 is currently relying on a Russian engine we all know how they take their time delivering hardware/spares/ Ask the indians...

The chinease are asking for 5 years to deliver a improved FC20 for PAF and 36 of these will arrive by 2015. thats 6 years to deliver 36 planes.

Su30mki entered service in 2003. In 2009 we have barely 90 SU30MKI in SERVICE. despite both Russia & india delivering them now. It will take 10 possibly 12 years to deliver 230 planes from 2004.

The Typhoon and i live in UK so i know as barely touched 40 planes. This in 3 years.
I can see why PEOPLE say 250 JF17 by 2014 ITS TO COUNTER the 230 SU30MKI by 2014. But SU30MKI programme started 5 years ago. JF17 will start 2010..

Its takes time to fully build air bases, workshops, license production, tranche improvements and lots and lots of money.

UK France India have between them 10 to 5 times the air force budgets of PAF yet they struggle to induct more than 10 planes per year. The reasons i have listed above.

Would je expect from China to produce j10b or copy Flanker while a decade ago they will doing Mig19's (J6's) and would have tough times with copying mig21F (J7)? That is because they have the money, the workforce and the will to do it faster and better. It is not Indian style with big words and zero items. WE have seen LCA and now even the Indians accept planes that crashes and being overweight... Why no topics about that?

 

[BATMAN]

This is a follow on from 8 prototypes that are currently going thru IOC.

Your statement above suggest that it is useles to furnish answers to your inquiries... you are simply here with intents of sabotage.
PAF have already inducted, one full squardon of JF-17 and if you are not willing to accept it than why bother discuss it!

PEOPLE say 250 JF17 by 2014 ITS TO COUNTER the 230 SU30MKI by 2014

and what is the basis of your claim of 230su30 by 2014?

 

[hj786]

Try to understand that this is a fighter vs fighter comparison, not a fighter plus added this and that, just to let the JF 17 look a bit better comparison.
I think they are in different classes and comparing them like that is pointless. One costs 12 million dollars, the other costs ~40 million.


And even if you do so, you have to add it on both sides and you will see that it still remains inferior.
The JF has many advantages also.


The Mki has also AWACS support,
But that doesn't mean the JF's AWACS support doesn't count, does it?

it has BVR missiles with longer range and can carry more of them,

- According to some sources, SD-10 has range of ~100km.
- The No Escape Zone is far more important than max range and you don't have reliable NEZ figures for either missile.
- China has their own stockpiles of R-77, so I don't think they'd develop an inferior missile.
- Won't the flanker just jettison most of its missiles as soon as an SD-10 or AMRAAM is on its way?

the Mki provides more power to the EWS to jam missiles.
Of course. But according to you guys even the Mig-21 bison provides enough power to the EWS to stop F-15 and F-16 firing at it in exercises, so does that argument hold water? How much jamming power is needed? How important is jamming power compared to jamming technique?

Compare facts that are given now and not anytime in future, compare it equal with all capabilities on both side not only in favour for JF 17, otherwise you will also look like a fanboy.
Then this whole argument is pointless because as far as we know, the JF is not integrated with all the systems in its specifications. It still isn't finished, the flanker is.
[/COLOR][/B]

I said it often enough, the JF 17 seems to be (it's not operational and not all capabilities are ready yet) a good fighter (against Mig 21 and 27, Jags, Mirage 2k and LCA mk 1), but it will remain BEHIND F16
block 52 (no doubt) and J10 when it comes to capabilities.
What do you know about J-10's capabilities? The JF appears to have the same MAWS as the J-10B. What does that say about your argument?

So a comparison of PAFs and IAFs most capable fighters would make much more sense!
I agree.

Why you always post things first and deny them later?

So as you can see (again), I don't have to put anything in your mouth and denying his own words instead of arguing is what I would call desperate.

But you ARE trying to put words into my mouth. I never denied what I wrote at all.

In that first quote I make a statement about 250 JF + AEWC and 230 MKI, in the other I make a statement about what PAF should have inducted by 2015. They have nothing to do with each other.

You're proving just how desperate you are to put me down.

 

[SBD-3]

MKIs though, are potent fighters but provided that the senario over pakistani airspace I think the extensive sam network along with BVR capable JF-17s along with AEW&C MKIs will face a game on not to mention J-10s and possible J-11s

 

[holysaturn]

Would je expect from China to produce j10b or copy Flanker while a decade ago they will doing Mig19's (J6's) and would have tough times with copying mig21F (J7)? That is because they have the money, the workforce and the will to do it faster and better. It is not Indian style with big words and zero items. WE have seen LCA and now even the Indians accept planes that crashes and being overweight... Why no topics about that?

correction.india did not accept migs now.lca still not accepted fully accepted..
a big AF defenitely will have more crashes when compared to smaller ones.

russians dont use single engined fighters(mig-29,su-27),u no y because they no that even their best engines r not highly reliable.jf-17 has the rd-93 which is not even the best russian engine,the other case j-10(which resulted in a crash due to the engine).so i think we will see some crash activity from the jf-17 in a decade if pak continues with this engine.

 

[Youdiedz]

Jf-17 is a good plane IMO. Pakistan and China ^^. Anyways, i found an article on this while i was searching jets.

In December 2008, rumors were rife of the J-10's latest incarnation, the J-10B, had taken off for the first time. Now in April 2009, we see the initial leak of images for this plane. The J-10B appears as the next iteration of China's vaunted 4th Generation fighter and looks to take the J-10 to the 4.5 Generation level.

The differences that have been identified from the earlier J-10 include a DSI intake, similar to the one on the FC-1/JF-17. The nose is now oval, more similar to an F-16's and is slightly canted downwards. An IRST similar to the J-11Bs also feature on top of the nose. Slanted radome paint along with some of the other features suggest an AESA radar.

The J-10B incorporates a new small ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer and this stabilizer also appears to be longer and ending in a "shark-fin". The ECM housing is similar to the housing on the JF-17. The two ventral fins are also extended further and are larger irrespective of the shark-fin. The aerodynamic refinements of the longer vertical stabilizer and the ventral fins appear to be a result of the DSI intakes which create greater lateral forces on the aircraft.

The wide angle HUD featured on the J-11Bs seem to have also appeared on the J-10B. While it cannot be confirmed, it appears that the cockpit itself has been redesigned extensively. Other than the new ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer, new MAWs appear on the tail bump. Just below these, curious breaks appear on the fuselage that some observers are referring to as possible formation lights "slime lights", but expert opinion from a Lockheed Martin source suggest that they are FLIR sensors. A redesigned satellite communication unit appears right behind the cockpit.

A retractable refueling probe is likely, given the development of the J-10 thus far, and is possibly located on the port side, not visible in the latest photographs. The photographs also suggest new under-wing pylons. These appear to be strengthened for a variety of possible uses, ranging from larger drop tanks to ASMs.

The engine is likely to be either a redesigned WS-10A (B?) or possibly the WS-15, a new generation engine currently in advanced development. This would not only have higher thrust than the AL-31s, but also feature TVCs, giving the J-10Bs vaunted agility an even greater boost. The actual engine on the aircraft presently on the released pictures, is the AL-31.

Like the J-10S, a J-10BS is also eventually likely. This would be an advanced trainer with the 360 degree view similar to the J-10S. EW/Wild Weasel variants could also eventually be possible.

PAF

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has shown a great deal of interest in the J-10 project as a possible substitute for Western combat aircraft for its high end requirements. The PAF, however, wanted a more modern version. Just as the FC-1s (and before the FC-1, the F-7s) were significantly upgraded due to the PAF's push for improvements, the J-10 appears to be going through a similar phase. The reason for this is that the PAF has a far closer view of Western technologies and trends and thus can provide deeper insight than more insulated Chinese expertise. The J-10B in all likelihood has had major input from the PAF and is the FC-20 that the PAF has ordered.

While there were rumors of the PAF receiving its first J-10s as early as 2009, the purchase has been delayed to 2014/2015. However, there is no doubt that the PAF sees its future inextricably linked to the J-10Bs/FC-20s. Informed sources suggest that PAF is not only looking to purchase, but to set up the necessary infrastructure to maintain and upgrade these birds. According to well informed sources, the aforementioned delay is primarily as a result of engine issues. The AL-31 would create maintenance and logistics problems for the PAF, given the lack of a working relationship with Russia. The WS-10A/B has not met quality standards. This leaves the PAF high and dry for now vis-a-vis the J-10. Their engine options now are to either to wait for a more reliable WS-10A version or to go for the WS-15, a new generation engine with similar dimensions.

WS-15 Milestone Celebration

The delay in procurement is critical for PAF as it needs a quality high end to counter the larger IAF with her MKIs, Mirage-2000s and MRCA. With a new sensor rich environment dominated by AWACS on both sides and a large number of BVR platforms, higher altitude BVR engagements would become vital. J-10s are ideally suited for such combat given their aerodynamics including low wing loading in an A2A configuration. The instantaneous turn rates achievable on the J-10 (or the Euro canards) are likely to give an advantage in such engagements, as opposed to the high wing loadings on the over-evolved F-16s which were essentially designed for turning dog fights rather than high altitude BVR slash and dash maneuvers.

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.

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.

The J-10s, F-16s and JF-17s also fit into the AFFDP-2019 requirements. The AFFDP-2019 is the core document on the strategic planning of Pakistan's armed forces over 15 years. While this document is not available in the public domain, informed sources note that the PAF has been assigned procurement of only single engine combat aircraft. The J-10Ps/FC-20s coupled with the JF-17s and F-16s thus ideally meet these requirements.

In the event that the Indian Air Force decides to procure massive numbers of Western 4.5 generation fighters, beyond the 126 MRCA, while increasing the Su-30MKI numbers and upgrades their MiG-29s and Mirage-2000s, the PAF has a clear charted path in increasing JF-17s and FC-20s, having by then set up the infrastructure and training for these planes. Further, the 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 PAF is looking to add as much potency as possible, within its budget constraints; shopping for avionics from Western sources to add further potential to its JF-17s and FC-20s. Thus far, Chinese developments have been so rapid that by the time decisions were to be made at the PAF, the Chinese would meet or exceed requirements and the competition at a lower price. It remains to be seen if this can be pulled off again by the Chinese when PAF goes shopping for the next block of JF-17s and the new FC-20s. For the FC-20s, EW, cockpit interface and reliability of the new Chinese AESA radar will play a critical role. The PAF is meanwhile keeping open options with European equivalents, including the M-AESA (Multi-role Active Electronically Scanned Antenna) being developed by Saab and Selex and a French AESA, yet to be revealed.

By 2014, some of PAF's F-16s would be ready for retirement as well. While they have been better kept than many other air forces, some of these birds would by then have been in service for more than 30 years. FC-20s could also be used to replace these.

J-10Bs for Iran?

There have been some reports of Iran being interested in purchasing the J-10Bs from China. Looking at Iran's present arsenal, there is no doubt Iran needs new planes. In fact, it has been seen as surprising that Iran has not procured new fighter planes from China since a small purchase of J-7s. They certainly have shown interest in the new J-7Gs and the JH-7s, both perfect substitutes for Iranian F-5s, Su-24s and F-4s. With some Israeli lineage in the J-10s, some commentators have questioned if their may not be an agreement that these birds never be sold to Iran, as a condition for Israeli technical help. Another reason is that Iran and China have not always seen eye-to-eye on patent related issues. Life is stranger than fiction it appears, as China has had issues with its products being reverse-engineered by Iran.



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.

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.

Chinese 5th Gen
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

The 5th Generation Chinese stealth plane is what would eventually close down J-10 production. The XXJ or J-XX as it is often referred to, has been the subject of intense competition between China's two premier fighter design institutions - CAC and SAC. While CAC's 611 Institute lost the bid to SAC's 601 Institute, both entities have begun joint development of the new fighter. How the rivalry plays out remains to be seen. It appears Chengdu has the upper hand as it is perceived to have been more successful. J-10 program director Liu Gaozhou recently stated that, " we are researching and developing a fourth generation to meet the requirements of defending the motherland." China's fourth generation is of course, the 5th generation we refer to in the West.

The design is a conventional layout in direct similarity to the F-22. The J-XX will be powered by the WS-15, a new generation engine in development. Normal TO weight would roughly measure to 20 tons and thus be in the heavy fighter class.The J-XX would possibly be superior to all but the PAKFA and the F-22, being inferior to the latter.

What has escaped most observer radars is the MiG-E and a yet unnamed fighter from China that represent a direct counterpart to the F-35. According to an informed source, the configuration of the MiG-E is a canard delta while the configuration for the Chinese equivalent is hitherto not known. It is however, this author's opinion that we will not see (as in leaked photographs on the internet) any development on the 5th Generation front for at least the next decade. Meanwhile, we will see steady evolution of the J-10 and J-11 with every new block and reworked configurations.

Just wanted to show you that topic. The J-10b would be more advanced than anything that india would field and and could counter the MRCA.

 

[Cockpuncher]

dont forget ECONOMY (ability to sustain battle)
the one with a better economy almost always wins. eg. cold war

 

[holysaturn]

Jf-17 is a good plane IMO. Pakistan and China ^^. Anyways, i found an article on this while i was searching jets.

In December 2008, rumors were rife of the J-10's latest incarnation, the J-10B, had taken off for the first time. Now in April 2009, we see the initial leak of images for this plane. The J-10B appears as the next iteration of China's vaunted 4th Generation fighter and looks to take the J-10 to the 4.5 Generation level.

The differences that have been identified from the earlier J-10 include a DSI intake, similar to the one on the FC-1/JF-17. The nose is now oval, more similar to an F-16's and is slightly canted downwards. An IRST similar to the J-11Bs also feature on top of the nose. Slanted radome paint along with some of the other features suggest an AESA radar.

The J-10B incorporates a new small ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer and this stabilizer also appears to be longer and ending in a "shark-fin". The ECM housing is similar to the housing on the JF-17. The two ventral fins are also extended further and are larger irrespective of the shark-fin. The aerodynamic refinements of the longer vertical stabilizer and the ventral fins appear to be a result of the DSI intakes which create greater lateral forces on the aircraft.

The wide angle HUD featured on the J-11Bs seem to have also appeared on the J-10B. While it cannot be confirmed, it appears that the cockpit itself has been redesigned extensively. Other than the new ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer, new MAWs appear on the tail bump. Just below these, curious breaks appear on the fuselage that some observers are referring to as possible formation lights "slime lights", but expert opinion from a Lockheed Martin source suggest that they are FLIR sensors. A redesigned satellite communication unit appears right behind the cockpit.

A retractable refueling probe is likely, given the development of the J-10 thus far, and is possibly located on the port side, not visible in the latest photographs. The photographs also suggest new under-wing pylons. These appear to be strengthened for a variety of possible uses, ranging from larger drop tanks to ASMs.

The engine is likely to be either a redesigned WS-10A (B?) or possibly the WS-15, a new generation engine currently in advanced development. This would not only have higher thrust than the AL-31s, but also feature TVCs, giving the J-10Bs vaunted agility an even greater boost. The actual engine on the aircraft presently on the released pictures, is the AL-31.

Like the J-10S, a J-10BS is also eventually likely. This would be an advanced trainer with the 360 degree view similar to the J-10S. EW/Wild Weasel variants could also eventually be possible.

PAF

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has shown a great deal of interest in the J-10 project as a possible substitute for Western combat aircraft for its high end requirements. The PAF, however, wanted a more modern version. Just as the FC-1s (and before the FC-1, the F-7s) were significantly upgraded due to the PAF's push for improvements, the J-10 appears to be going through a similar phase. The reason for this is that the PAF has a far closer view of Western technologies and trends and thus can provide deeper insight than more insulated Chinese expertise. The J-10B in all likelihood has had major input from the PAF and is the FC-20 that the PAF has ordered.

While there were rumors of the PAF receiving its first J-10s as early as 2009, the purchase has been delayed to 2014/2015. However, there is no doubt that the PAF sees its future inextricably linked to the J-10Bs/FC-20s. Informed sources suggest that PAF is not only looking to purchase, but to set up the necessary infrastructure to maintain and upgrade these birds. According to well informed sources, the aforementioned delay is primarily as a result of engine issues. The AL-31 would create maintenance and logistics problems for the PAF, given the lack of a working relationship with Russia. The WS-10A/B has not met quality standards. This leaves the PAF high and dry for now vis-a-vis the J-10. Their engine options now are to either to wait for a more reliable WS-10A version or to go for the WS-15, a new generation engine with similar dimensions.

WS-15 Milestone Celebration

The delay in procurement is critical for PAF as it needs a quality high end to counter the larger IAF with her MKIs, Mirage-2000s and MRCA. With a new sensor rich environment dominated by AWACS on both sides and a large number of BVR platforms, higher altitude BVR engagements would become vital. J-10s are ideally suited for such combat given their aerodynamics including low wing loading in an A2A configuration. The instantaneous turn rates achievable on the J-10 (or the Euro canards) are likely to give an advantage in such engagements, as opposed to the high wing loadings on the over-evolved F-16s which were essentially designed for turning dog fights rather than high altitude BVR slash and dash maneuvers.

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.

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.

The J-10s, F-16s and JF-17s also fit into the AFFDP-2019 requirements. The AFFDP-2019 is the core document on the strategic planning of Pakistan's armed forces over 15 years. While this document is not available in the public domain, informed sources note that the PAF has been assigned procurement of only single engine combat aircraft. The J-10Ps/FC-20s coupled with the JF-17s and F-16s thus ideally meet these requirements.

In the event that the Indian Air Force decides to procure massive numbers of Western 4.5 generation fighters, beyond the 126 MRCA, while increasing the Su-30MKI numbers and upgrades their MiG-29s and Mirage-2000s, the PAF has a clear charted path in increasing JF-17s and FC-20s, having by then set up the infrastructure and training for these planes. Further, the 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 PAF is looking to add as much potency as possible, within its budget constraints; shopping for avionics from Western sources to add further potential to its JF-17s and FC-20s. Thus far, Chinese developments have been so rapid that by the time decisions were to be made at the PAF, the Chinese would meet or exceed requirements and the competition at a lower price. It remains to be seen if this can be pulled off again by the Chinese when PAF goes shopping for the next block of JF-17s and the new FC-20s. For the FC-20s, EW, cockpit interface and reliability of the new Chinese AESA radar will play a critical role. The PAF is meanwhile keeping open options with European equivalents, including the M-AESA (Multi-role Active Electronically Scanned Antenna) being developed by Saab and Selex and a French AESA, yet to be revealed.

By 2014, some of PAF's F-16s would be ready for retirement as well. While they have been better kept than many other air forces, some of these birds would by then have been in service for more than 30 years. FC-20s could also be used to replace these.

J-10Bs for Iran?

There have been some reports of Iran being interested in purchasing the J-10Bs from China. Looking at Iran's present arsenal, there is no doubt Iran needs new planes. In fact, it has been seen as surprising that Iran has not procured new fighter planes from China since a small purchase of J-7s. They certainly have shown interest in the new J-7Gs and the JH-7s, both perfect substitutes for Iranian F-5s, Su-24s and F-4s. With some Israeli lineage in the J-10s, some commentators have questioned if their may not be an agreement that these birds never be sold to Iran, as a condition for Israeli technical help. Another reason is that Iran and China have not always seen eye-to-eye on patent related issues. Life is stranger than fiction it appears, as China has had issues with its products being reverse-engineered by Iran.



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.

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.

Chinese 5th Gen
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

The 5th Generation Chinese stealth plane is what would eventually close down J-10 production. The XXJ or J-XX as it is often referred to, has been the subject of intense competition between China's two premier fighter design institutions - CAC and SAC. While CAC's 611 Institute lost the bid to SAC's 601 Institute, both entities have begun joint development of the new fighter. How the rivalry plays out remains to be seen. It appears Chengdu has the upper hand as it is perceived to have been more successful. J-10 program director Liu Gaozhou recently stated that, " we are researching and developing a fourth generation to meet the requirements of defending the motherland." China's fourth generation is of course, the 5th generation we refer to in the West.

The design is a conventional layout in direct similarity to the F-22. The J-XX will be powered by the WS-15, a new generation engine in development. Normal TO weight would roughly measure to 20 tons and thus be in the heavy fighter class.The J-XX would possibly be superior to all but the PAKFA and the F-22, being inferior to the latter.

What has escaped most observer radars is the MiG-E and a yet unnamed fighter from China that represent a direct counterpart to the F-35. According to an informed source, the configuration of the MiG-E is a canard delta while the configuration for the Chinese equivalent is hitherto not known. It is however, this author's opinion that we will not see (as in leaked photographs on the internet) any development on the 5th Generation front for at least the next decade. Meanwhile, we will see steady evolution of the J-10 and J-11 with every new block and reworked configurations.

Just wanted to show you that topic. The J-10b would be more advanced than anything that india would field and and could counter the MRCA.

prove it pal.

 

[Munir]

prove it pal.

Idians need prove and the rest can live with their paper projects.

 

[sancho]

But you ARE trying to put words into my mouth. I never denied what I wrote at all.

In that first quote I make a statement about 250 JF + AEWC and 230 MKI, in the other I make a statement about what PAF should have inducted by 2015. They have nothing to do with each other.

You're proving just how desperate you are to put me down.

First of all, I never tried to put you down or something, if I wanted I directly replied to your post, but I only replied to Pakpower and later answerd to you!
The fact that I mentioned you name was, because you did field half of PAF to compete Mki (your last sentence in that particular post, which I missed to copy was: For 230 flankers? Yes it is!), so you can't deny that it was not related to Mki and that you didn't compare the actual Mki with upgraded JF 17 as I showed before.

I think they are in different classes and comparing them like that is pointless. One costs 12 million dollars, the other costs ~40 million.

Of course they are, not because of their costs, but mainly because of there different capabilities. And still you and many others keep saying that it will be a match.

The JF has many advantages also. Did

But that doesn't mean the JF's AWACS support doesn't count, does it?

That's what I meant, if you count awacs support in future on the one side, you have to count it on the other side too!

- According to some sources, SD-10 has range of ~100km.
- The No Escape Zone is far more important than max range and you don't have reliable NEZ figures for either missile.
- China has their own stockpiles of R-77, so I don't think they'd develop an inferior missile.
- Won't the flanker just jettison most of its missiles as soon as an SD-10 or AMRAAM is on its way?

As far as I know China got some techs of R77 and developed on that base the SD 10, but the most sources I saw and like I said before many Pakistani members here confirmed, speakes about a range around 70 km and not the 100+ Km that R77 and AMRAAM have. Can you have a reliable source for 100 Km?
They first will try to outperform, or jam the missile, what you are talking about might be the last possibility, but I don't think a JF 17 pilot would do differently?

Of course. But according to you guys even the Mig-21 bison provides enough power to the EWS to stop F-15 and F-16 firing at it in exercises, so does that argument hold water? How much jamming power is needed? How important is jamming power compared to jamming technique?

I never said that and I won't, cause I know it will be a mix of power and a good EWS. Imo the Bisons are a good aircraft for IAF at the moment, cause unlike many of PAF fighters they offer BVR capabilities and the same situation that you talked about for JF 17 (low RCS and BVR with awacs support) is already available for them with Mki, or now Phalcon support. But without and especially WVR I don't think they will have a big chance.

Then this whole argument is pointless because as far as we know, the JF is not integrated with all the systems in its specifications. It still isn't finished, the flanker is.

No it is not, you can compare the actual Mki and it's capabilities with the JF 17 and the capabilities that it should have in the operational block 1 version (BVR weapons, radar, t/w ratio, range, weapon stations...).

What do you know about J-10's capabilities? The JF appears to have the same MAWS as the J-10B. What does that say about your argument?

I know at the moment that it has the more powerful engine compared to JF, the longer range radar (Zhuk ME), it is more maneuverable with canards and these are only the points for J10A. The B version with AESA, possibly TVC and more new techs will be much better and like I said several times before, it will be the main threat to IAF for the near future.

 

[Arsalan]

Idians need prove and the rest can live with their paper projects.

yeap!!
atleast i am!!

 

[Cockpuncher]

Jf-17 is a good plane IMO. Pakistan and China ^^. Anyways, i found an article on this while i was searching jets.

In December 2008, rumors were rife of the J-10's latest incarnation, the J-10B, had taken off for the first time. Now in April 2009, we see the initial leak of images for this plane. The J-10B appears as the next iteration of China's vaunted 4th Generation fighter and looks to take the J-10 to the 4.5 Generation level.

The differences that have been identified from the earlier J-10 include a DSI intake, similar to the one on the FC-1/JF-17. The nose is now oval, more similar to an F-16's and is slightly canted downwards. An IRST similar to the J-11Bs also feature on top of the nose. Slanted radome paint along with some of the other features suggest an AESA radar.

The J-10B incorporates a new small ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer and this stabilizer also appears to be longer and ending in a "shark-fin". The ECM housing is similar to the housing on the JF-17. The two ventral fins are also extended further and are larger irrespective of the shark-fin. The aerodynamic refinements of the longer vertical stabilizer and the ventral fins appear to be a result of the DSI intakes which create greater lateral forces on the aircraft.

The wide angle HUD featured on the J-11Bs seem to have also appeared on the J-10B. While it cannot be confirmed, it appears that the cockpit itself has been redesigned extensively. Other than the new ECM housing on the vertical stabilizer, new MAWs appear on the tail bump. Just below these, curious breaks appear on the fuselage that some observers are referring to as possible formation lights "slime lights", but expert opinion from a Lockheed Martin source suggest that they are FLIR sensors. A redesigned satellite communication unit appears right behind the cockpit.

A retractable refueling probe is likely, given the development of the J-10 thus far, and is possibly located on the port side, not visible in the latest photographs. The photographs also suggest new under-wing pylons. These appear to be strengthened for a variety of possible uses, ranging from larger drop tanks to ASMs.

The engine is likely to be either a redesigned WS-10A (B?) or possibly the WS-15, a new generation engine currently in advanced development. This would not only have higher thrust than the AL-31s, but also feature TVCs, giving the J-10Bs vaunted agility an even greater boost. The actual engine on the aircraft presently on the released pictures, is the AL-31.

Like the J-10S, a J-10BS is also eventually likely. This would be an advanced trainer with the 360 degree view similar to the J-10S. EW/Wild Weasel variants could also eventually be possible.

PAF

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has shown a great deal of interest in the J-10 project as a possible substitute for Western combat aircraft for its high end requirements. The PAF, however, wanted a more modern version. Just as the FC-1s (and before the FC-1, the F-7s) were significantly upgraded due to the PAF's push for improvements, the J-10 appears to be going through a similar phase. The reason for this is that the PAF has a far closer view of Western technologies and trends and thus can provide deeper insight than more insulated Chinese expertise. The J-10B in all likelihood has had major input from the PAF and is the FC-20 that the PAF has ordered.

While there were rumors of the PAF receiving its first J-10s as early as 2009, the purchase has been delayed to 2014/2015. However, there is no doubt that the PAF sees its future inextricably linked to the J-10Bs/FC-20s. Informed sources suggest that PAF is not only looking to purchase, but to set up the necessary infrastructure to maintain and upgrade these birds. According to well informed sources, the aforementioned delay is primarily as a result of engine issues. The AL-31 would create maintenance and logistics problems for the PAF, given the lack of a working relationship with Russia. The WS-10A/B has not met quality standards. This leaves the PAF high and dry for now vis-a-vis the J-10. Their engine options now are to either to wait for a more reliable WS-10A version or to go for the WS-15, a new generation engine with similar dimensions.

WS-15 Milestone Celebration

The delay in procurement is critical for PAF as it needs a quality high end to counter the larger IAF with her MKIs, Mirage-2000s and MRCA. With a new sensor rich environment dominated by AWACS on both sides and a large number of BVR platforms, higher altitude BVR engagements would become vital. J-10s are ideally suited for such combat given their aerodynamics including low wing loading in an A2A configuration. The instantaneous turn rates achievable on the J-10 (or the Euro canards) are likely to give an advantage in such engagements, as opposed to the high wing loadings on the over-evolved F-16s which were essentially designed for turning dog fights rather than high altitude BVR slash and dash maneuvers.

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.

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.

The J-10s, F-16s and JF-17s also fit into the AFFDP-2019 requirements. The AFFDP-2019 is the core document on the strategic planning of Pakistan's armed forces over 15 years. While this document is not available in the public domain, informed sources note that the PAF has been assigned procurement of only single engine combat aircraft. The J-10Ps/FC-20s coupled with the JF-17s and F-16s thus ideally meet these requirements.

In the event that the Indian Air Force decides to procure massive numbers of Western 4.5 generation fighters, beyond the 126 MRCA, while increasing the Su-30MKI numbers and upgrades their MiG-29s and Mirage-2000s, the PAF has a clear charted path in increasing JF-17s and FC-20s, having by then set up the infrastructure and training for these planes. Further, the 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 PAF is looking to add as much potency as possible, within its budget constraints; shopping for avionics from Western sources to add further potential to its JF-17s and FC-20s. Thus far, Chinese developments have been so rapid that by the time decisions were to be made at the PAF, the Chinese would meet or exceed requirements and the competition at a lower price. It remains to be seen if this can be pulled off again by the Chinese when PAF goes shopping for the next block of JF-17s and the new FC-20s. For the FC-20s, EW, cockpit interface and reliability of the new Chinese AESA radar will play a critical role. The PAF is meanwhile keeping open options with European equivalents, including the M-AESA (Multi-role Active Electronically Scanned Antenna) being developed by Saab and Selex and a French AESA, yet to be revealed.

By 2014, some of PAF's F-16s would be ready for retirement as well. While they have been better kept than many other air forces, some of these birds would by then have been in service for more than 30 years. FC-20s could also be used to replace these.

J-10Bs for Iran?

There have been some reports of Iran being interested in purchasing the J-10Bs from China. Looking at Iran's present arsenal, there is no doubt Iran needs new planes. In fact, it has been seen as surprising that Iran has not procured new fighter planes from China since a small purchase of J-7s. They certainly have shown interest in the new J-7Gs and the JH-7s, both perfect substitutes for Iranian F-5s, Su-24s and F-4s. With some Israeli lineage in the J-10s, some commentators have questioned if their may not be an agreement that these birds never be sold to Iran, as a condition for Israeli technical help. Another reason is that Iran and China have not always seen eye-to-eye on patent related issues. Life is stranger than fiction it appears, as China has had issues with its products being reverse-engineered by Iran.



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.

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.

Chinese 5th Gen
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->

The 5th Generation Chinese stealth plane is what would eventually close down J-10 production. The XXJ or J-XX as it is often referred to, has been the subject of intense competition between China's two premier fighter design institutions - CAC and SAC. While CAC's 611 Institute lost the bid to SAC's 601 Institute, both entities have begun joint development of the new fighter. How the rivalry plays out remains to be seen. It appears Chengdu has the upper hand as it is perceived to have been more successful. J-10 program director Liu Gaozhou recently stated that, " we are researching and developing a fourth generation to meet the requirements of defending the motherland." China's fourth generation is of course, the 5th generation we refer to in the West.

The design is a conventional layout in direct similarity to the F-22. The J-XX will be powered by the WS-15, a new generation engine in development. Normal TO weight would roughly measure to 20 tons and thus be in the heavy fighter class.The J-XX would possibly be superior to all but the PAKFA and the F-22, being inferior to the latter.

What has escaped most observer radars is the MiG-E and a yet unnamed fighter from China that represent a direct counterpart to the F-35. According to an informed source, the configuration of the MiG-E is a canard delta while the configuration for the Chinese equivalent is hitherto not known. It is however, this author's opinion that we will not see (as in leaked photographs on the internet) any development on the 5th Generation front for at least the next decade. Meanwhile, we will see steady evolution of the J-10 and J-11 with every new block and reworked configurations.

Just wanted to show you that topic. The J-10b would be more advanced than anything that india would field and and could counter the MRCA.

this is from rupeenews.com its a crap website famous for producing crap articles

 

[hj786]

First of all, I never tried to put you down or something, if I wanted I directly replied to your post, but I only replied to Pakpower and later answerd to you!
The fact that I mentioned you name was, because you did field half of PAF to compete Mki (your last sentence in that particular post, which I missed to copy was: For 230 flankers? Yes it is!), so you can't deny that it was not related to Mki and that you didn't compare the actual Mki with upgraded JF 17 as I showed before.

Wrong. Show where I stated PAF needs that entire list to fend off 230 flankers? You can't because you are talking crap.

If you want to have a discussion about semantics rather than aeroplanes, I suggest you take that BS to an english literature discussion board, I'm not interested.

Of course they are, not because of their costs, but mainly because of there different capabilities. And still you and many others keep saying that it will be a match.
Different capabilities due to cost. Yes, under certain conditions they can be a match.

That's what I meant, if you count awacs support in future on the one side, you have to count it on the other side too!
But your country fellows are saying the MKI is a mini-AWACS, it doesn't even need AWACS support to "dominate"? Does it or doesn't it? If it does, so what? You don't seem to understand, if both aircraft have AEWC support then they are equal in situational awareness and if datalinked for remote targeting, equal in terms of BVR capability.

As far as I know China got some techs of R77 and developed on that base the SD 10, but the most sources I saw and like I said before many Pakistani members here confirmed, speakes about a range around 70 km and not the 100+ Km that R77 and AMRAAM have. Can you have a reliable source for 100 Km?
I can give you something straight from the manufacturer.



"Operation Range: >= (greater than or equal to) 70 km"
So basically, you don't know the max. range and you don't know the no escape zone. You DO know the designers studied R-77 to build it. The fact that you are mentioning AMRAAM in the same sentence as R-77 would be considered laughable by many analysts and goes to show how important the missile's "max. range" is. It isn't.


They first will try to outperform, or jam the missile, what you are talking about might be the last possibility, but I don't think a JF 17 pilot would do differently?
No, he wouldn't. Do you deny that the flanker jettisoning most of his missiles removes the advantage of carrying more missiles?

I never said that and I won't, cause I know it will be a mix of power and a good EWS. Imo the Bisons are a good aircraft for IAF at the moment, cause unlike many of PAF fighters they offer BVR capabilities and the same situation that you talked about for JF 17 (low RCS and BVR with awacs support) is already available for them with Mki, or now Phalcon support. But without and especially WVR I don't think they will have a big chance.
So in other words you have no idea how a "lack of power" will affect the JF's EW performance. What you DO know is that it will have more power than any of the bison's systems due to a more powerful turbofan engine. I've never seen anyone complain about lack of power for the bison's jammers, rather they are glorified because of their Israeli origin.


I know at the moment that it has the more powerful engine compared to JF, the longer range radar (Zhuk ME), it is more maneuverable with canards and these are only the points for J10A. The B version with AESA, possibly TVC and more new techs will be much better and like I said several times before, it will be the main threat to IAF for the near future.
The JF will be getting a more powerful engine, this has been confirmed by Chinese sources if you check the JF-17 thread. Chinese sources say J-10 is using a Chinese radar. Will it be the main threat to InAF if JF-17 is full of similar technologies? Like I said before, the J-10B already appears to have the same missile approach warning system as the JF. Sensors look exactly the same and are in the same position.

12345

this is from rupeenews.com its a crap website famous for producing crap articles

Crap article to YOU only. They seem to have copied the article from elsewhere and it seems to be very comprehensive.

 

[SBD-3]

dont forget ECONOMY (ability to sustain battle)
the one with a better economy almost always wins. eg. cold war

Dear dont expect regular war between the countires now it would be only a limited war and to talk about economy when one side will exhaust,it will resort to its nukes

 

[Cockpuncher]

Dear dont expect regular war between the countires now it would be only a limited war and to talk about economy when one side will exhaust,it will resort to its nukes

why dint USSR use nukes then? dont be