Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

[SQ8]

Its ok brother man have some faith, Numbers are not the entire story. Remember in '65, we handed their *** to them. A highly motivated and trained guy with a stick trumps the other jack *** with the sword all the time!

No we didn't actually, we could have.. but we did not.
Better to learn from the mistakes made in the past then thump chests over it.

 

[sancho]

J10 is not necessary , The avionics found in j10A are same for jfthunder the difference is range and power. This explains that the upgrade package j10b can mostly be implemented on jft.

First of all there are certain advantages by design itself that the J10 offer, but more importantly is, will the Chinese be ready to offer JF 17 the upgraded AESA or avionics of J10? JF 17 block 1 didn't have the same KJ 10 radar as the J10A right?
So even if we expect AESA radar and IRST in JF 17 Block 3, it doesn't mean it has to be the same versions as in the J10. That means if PAF wants more capable fighters and techs, J10B could be a good choice above the JF 17, but if they believe that the difference isn't that much and that a JF 17 Block 3 could bridge the gap to the next decade till a 5th gen fighter might be available for PAF, J10B is wasted money.

China is not the US and will put less restictions on Pakistan and it's forces, but China isn't dumb either, they know how to make money and exporting J10 even more important to them, than exporting JF 17, which they see as an export fighter anyway. That's why they will keep an eye on how much Chinese parts there will be in JF 17 (radar, weapons, avionics and of course the engines in future), or of course on what technical limits it must have, to make J10B more interesting.

I said the same as Araz often before and think PAF should compromise and stick to JF 17 in higher numbers. Maybe not the most capable solution, but more suitable to PAFs finacial situation today and in the long run, which might free some more money to buy a 5th gen fighter later.
Pakistan as a whole could benefit from waiting even more than, procuring a foreign J10B today, since your defence industy could use available fund to develop an own AESA radar for example, that in future could not only be used in JF 17 B3, but in an upgraded version even in J31. That would not only increase commonality between JF 17 and J31, besides possibly the engines and weapons, but also would increase the indigenous content in both fighters.

JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, not as a discussion point!

LCA MK2 is meant to get an indigenous AESA radar and certain avionics, that later are aimed to be improved for AMCA. The Kaveri/Snecma engine (if developed) is aimed not only for AMCA, but also for LCA upgrades, so in both fighters can benefit from common techs at a point, which reduces costs and increases the indigenous content by far.

 

[SQ8]

First of all there are certain advantages by design itself that the J10 offer, but more importantly is, will the Chinese be ready to offer JF 17 the upgraded AESA or avionics of J10? JF 17 block 1 didn't have the same KJ 10 radar as the J10A right?.

I think there is a big confusion on the KJL series and how the KJL-7 and 10 differ.
They are inherently along the same lines of thought that went into the APG-63 and the APG-66.
The APG-63 is incapable of fitting into the nose of the F-16 and also has differing power and cooling requirements.

The KJL-10 is the Chinese equivalent of what would be the APG-70...while the KJL-7 is the equivalent of the APG-68 albeit with a non-existent SAR mode(software) and reduced capabilities in the GMTI modes.
It has been deemed equivalent to the APG-68 or in some cases better in the A2A and sorting modes.
Again, published data provides highly sketchy and inaccurate details of the system.
The KJL-10 system is no longer being pursued by the Chinese in favor of AESA.

 

[sancho]

I think there is a big confusion on the KJL series and how the KJL-7 and 10 differ.
They are inherently along the same lines of thought that went into the APG-63 and the APG-66.
The APG-63 is incapable of fitting into the nose of the F-16 and also has differing power and cooling requirements.

The KJL-10 is the Chinese equivalent of what would be the APG-70...while the KJL-7 is the equivalent of the APG-68 albeit with a non-existent SAR mode(software) and reduced capabilities in the GMTI modes.

But the nose difference between an F15 and an F16 is obviously much bigger than between J10 and JF17, which makes it possible to integrate a (if at all) slightly modified KJ10 and not a less capable KJ7 to JF 17. So there are limitations on what China provides as well and it will be interesting to see, if the AESA/PESA they offer with J10B, will be the same that would be available to JF 17 B3.

 

[Nishan_101]

So how much we are getting I am sure that everyone wants to have about 70 in PAF service till 2015...

 

[SQ8]

But the nose difference between an F15 and an F16 is obviously much bigger than between J10 and JF17, which makes it possible to integrate a (if at all) slightly modified KJ10 and not a less capable KJ7 to JF 17. So there are limitations on what China provides as well and it will be interesting to see, if the AESA/PESA they offer with J10B, will be the same that would be available to JF 17 B3.

Ill reiterate , that the difference between the KLJ-10 and KLJ-7 is now very much in terms of dish diameter only and not in terms of capability. Whatever improvements APART from dish size have been incorporated on the JL-10 radar are also implemented on the KLJ-10 system.

I think there has been a general impression upon members due to the non-purchase of J-10B that the Chinese are in some way giving the PAF less capable systems. This is fairly incorrect. The reasons for not purchasing the J-10B or the Chinese giving the PAF the J-10 or the PAF getting the HQ-9/10 series have little to do with technology restrictions but with availability of funds.

Most if not all of the PAF's current purchases are on loans including the JF-17's factory setup. So even being a joint development, we "invested" loans from the Chinese into the program. The Chinese were/are ready to provide further loans to purchase the J-10B, implement an all AESA solution on all JF-17 blocks and offer the Shenyang Fifth generation aircraft whenever its ready as long as the PAF pays for it(takes loans from the Chinese).
It must also be clear that the Chinese do NOT give military aid to Pakistan like the US does. It is not a bank account to use on whatever as long as restrictions are followed. It is a loan based on goodwill that lets the Pakistan military buy whatever it wishes to from the Chinese weapons industry without any restrictions or otherwise.
However, while these are soft loans they are still loans and they do warrant a monthly payment.
Currently the economic conditions of Pakistan have left it struggling to meet even the interest on these loans ..leave the principal amount. So while even today the Chinese are willing to provide more loans to purchase whatever Pakistan likes since to them its a win-win as the money goes back into their system. The PAF is not willing to risk jeopardizing its goodwill with the Chinese if it can manage to hold a certain level with its current purchases in the hopes that economic conditions will improve where it may make a purchase later of a better system than the J-10B and again up the ante.

 

[SBD-3]

Most if not all of the PAF's current purchases are on loans including the JF-17's factory setup. So even being a joint development, we "invested" loans from the Chinese into the program. The Chinese were/are ready to provide further loans to purchase the J-10B, implement an all AESA solution on all JF-17 blocks and offer the Shenyang Fifth generation aircraft whenever its ready as long as the PAF pays for it(takes loans from the Chinese).

I mean i really find it confusing because Shenyang's J-31 is a privately funded project (much like JF-17 or F-15SE) but it appears that AVIC is also not involved with with the project. Even at current Zhuhai airshow the supposedly model of J-31 had a different canopy design and more interestingly still "under development" by AVIC professionals. Moreover, we did have some rumors from Chinese fora that a multirole stealth program was underdevelopment at CAC. Further precisely we later heard that PAF officials atcually visited Chengdu where they were briefed upon the development project of CAC. I find it difficult to digest that PAF would risk J-31 when she has been doing satisfactory business with CAC.

 

[SQ8]

I mean i really find it confusing because Shenyang's J-31 is a privately funded project (much like JF-17 or F-15SE) but it appears that AVIC is also not involved with with the project. Even at current Zhuhai airshow the supposedly model of J-31 had a different canopy design and more interestingly still "under development" by AVIC professionals. Moreover, we did have some rumors from Chinese fora that a multirole stealth program was underdevelopment at CAC. Further precisely we later heard that PAF officials atcually visited Chengdu where they were briefed upon the development project of CAC. I find it difficult to digest that PAF would risk J-31 when she has been doing satisfactory business with CAC.

PAF has also done business with Shenyang. It deals with CATIC directly and through them Chengdu and Shenyang.
In the past due to the F-7 and JF-17 programs the PAF has dealing within chengdu. Given requirements it will deal with Shenyang.

 

[SBD-3]

PAF has also done business with Shenyang. It deals with CATIC directly and through them Chengdu and Shenyang.
In the past due to the F-7 and JF-17 programs the PAF has dealing within chengdu. Given requirements it will deal with Shenyang.

But then again PAF's interest in SAC's project is still a "what if". And it wouldn't it also be foolish to think that CAC would let SAC steal a project which would have more business prospect (since J-20 will see limited induction against a MR 5th Gen) and a good customer who promote her international goodwill?

 

[Dazzler]

But then again PAF's interest in SAC's project is still a "what if". And it wouldn't it also be foolish to think that CAC would let SAC steal a project which would have more business prospect (since J-20 will see limited induction against a MR 5th Gen) and a good customer who promote her international goodwill?

Our F-6 farmers were made by Shangyang,, so we have been doing business with them since 1965, CAC only stepped in during 80s There is no rivalry between the two, CAC is known recently for their innovation and original design (excluding the F-7 series off course) whereas Shangyang is more known for copying, modifying Russian Sukhois, borrowing intel from existing and tested designs.

 

[SQ8]

But then again PAF's interest in SAC's project is still a "what if". And it wouldn't it also be foolish to think that CAC would let SAC steal a project which would have more business prospect (since J-20 will see limited induction against a MR 5th Gen) and a good customer who promote her international goodwill?

That depends entirely on the PAF's financial position in the next five years.

 

[Thunder_Rider]

J-10B is a beautiful single engine jet, China version of F-16 jet. In the J-10B platform, will appear J-10C,J-10Detc updated multi-role fighter.

Future J-10B will become the main export jet of China weapons into the international weapon market.

Really ?
Well it looks more like a China's Single Engined Typhoon rather then the US F-16

 

[Manticore]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...3818-j-10-fighter-photos-videos-thread-7.html

 

[sancho]

Ill reiterate , that the difference between the KLJ-10 and KLJ-7 is now very much in terms of dish diameter only and not in terms of capability. Whatever improvements APART from dish size have been incorporated on the JL-10 radar are also implemented on the KLJ-10 system.

Good if that is the case, sadly we don't have similar KJ10 specs, but why would the Chinese develop 2 different puls doppler radars for 2 fighters, if only the diameter size is the difference? They could have simply downsized the KJ 10, or used a bigger KJ7 for their own fighters right?

I think there has been a general impression upon members due to the non-purchase of J-10B that the Chinese are in some way giving the PAF less capable systems.

More that there is a difference between J10 and JF17, although both were mainly developed by China and that China neither seems to procure the latter for their own forces, while PAF should procure J10. And that has nothing to do with the budget or loans, I am aware of that, but as I said earlier, J10 makes only sense for PAF if there is a clear operational advantage, but if the only difference as you say is the design, while techs, payload capabilities and weapons will be the same, I agree with Araz that J31 offers more than J10B.
I just think, there must be technical capabilities that makes J10B different to a future JF17 B3 as well and where China does draw a line between both fighters.

 

[Viper0011.]

Good if that is the case, sadly we don't have similar KJ10 specs, but why would the Chinese develop 2 different puls doppler radars for 2 fighters, if only the diameter size is the difference? They could have simply downsized the KJ 10, or used a bigger KJ7 for their own fighters right?

The KJ 10 was designed for a larger nose and diameter. The KJ 7 is a miniaturized version of the KJ 10, specifically built for JF-17. It is the same technology and the architecture. Just reduced range and processing due to the smaller size.