What's new

Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

Hi, J-10A is not that important anymore. PLAAF in phase to retired most J-10A and replace with J-10C. Gifting some to NK is not that impossible plus, u think NK will pass J-10A aerodynamic secret to US?

Finally, China is no more nice guy to play within UN rules when Australia bypass nuclear control proliferation treaty and going to get nuclear submarine with blessing from US. Why u expect China to play within rules when US and western can do whatever they deem is correct even its illegal? NK is close allies of China. Giving some J-10A to beef up their airforce is nothing wrong.
China will abide by UN resolution, period.

China is one of P5, we are not Americans, we will do what we promised in UN.

North Korea doesn't need any more weapons, they need food, prosperity. North Korea security is guaranteed by Nukes.

If North Korea drop Nukes, China can and will revoke the UN sanctions, provides aids, conventional weapons, and prosperity.

North Korea choose Nukes instead of prosperity, their choice was made. They knew it very well that, they can't have both nukes and prosperity.

The rumor is completely bullshit. Mark my words.

Last but not least, China doesn't need North Korea buffer zone.
China can defend herself without any problem. Our military burden is quite manageable.

China has no intention nor need to do arm race with AUKUS. AUKUS can do whatever they want, China has enough confidence that their fantasy will fail anyway, sooner or later.

Time changed. They want to repeat Cold War, but China has moved forward, the rest of the world don't want Cold War 2.0 anyway. People want safety, clean water, food, jobs, prosperity.

History will prove that China's choice is right.
 
Last edited:
.
Hi, J-10A is not that important anymore. PLAAF in phase to retired most J-10A and replace with J-10C. Gifting some to NK is not that impossible plus, u think NK will pass J-10A aerodynamic secret to US?

Finally, China is no more nice guy to play within UN rules when Australia bypass nuclear control proliferation treaty and going to get nuclear submarine with blessing from US. Why u expect China to play within rules when US and western can do whatever they deem is correct even its illegal? NK is close allies of China. Giving some J-10A to beef up their airforce is nothing wrong.
China relationship with N Korea must also take into consideration S Korea relationship with N Korea.
 
. .
Last but not least, China doesn't need North Korea buffer zone. China can defend herself without any problem. Our military burden is quite manageable.

I don't agree with this.
China still need North Korea as the buffer zone. If we lost NK, in the worst case, Americans can deploy her land force just in our front door. We have to move our military resources from other places to this front line. It will increase our defense pressure greatly. There is an example, from south korea, the streight flying distance to Beijing is roughly 900km, but from north korea, the distance will shortened to less than 700km, which means it is lot easier for US boombers to threat Chinese core part.

Yes, our military burden is quite manageable, but we are still facing huge economic and social challenge in current stage. One dollar more on military expense means one dollar less on other issues.

The secret of winning a arm race is making your enemy to spend more on the same issue.
 
.
I don't agree with this.
China still need North Korea as the buffer zone. If we lost NK, in the worst case, Americans can deploy her land force just in our front door. We have to move our military resources from other places to this front line. It will increase our defense pressure greatly. There is an example, from south korea, the streight flying distance to Beijing is roughly 900km, but from north korea, the distance will shortened to less than 700km, which means it is lot easier for US boombers to threat Chinese core part.

Yes, our military burden is quite manageable, but we are still facing huge economic and social challenge in current stage. One dollar more on military expense means one dollar less on other issues.

The secret of winning a arm race is making your enemy to spend more on the same issue.
Possible.
But by your logic, China was hijacked by the North. No, we don't.

The North did whatever he wanted, so China don't have any obligation to protect the North. China has strong ties with both North and South, we are neutral.

US has many chances to settle a deal with the North, but US had chosen no deal is better deal. Once the North and South settled, and united. The first thing to happen will be US troop out of Korean Peninsula.

China doesn't fear US troops on our border at all. It will cost US an arm and leg. It's the US's decision to keep the North as a buffer.
 
.
Since PLAAF academy changed its pilot training program since 2018 from 4 phases to 3 (indoctrination - development - transition), in the final phase (transition) cadets are trained on jets re-commissioned from combat duties. Recently the 1st batch of cadets graduated from the new program with J-10 (J-10AS dual seater for accompanied flight, J-10A for solo flight) transferred from combat troops, see the link:

PLAAF flight academy introduces J-10 fighers in flight training program of pilot cadets - China Military
 
Last edited:
.
Ain't that true, typical blown-out-of-proportion euro stuff!


Now that's what we are talking about, real medium workhorses! Here is an opinion piece on 1V1 between the birds, quite a good read.

[Analytics] Chinese J-10C vs US F-16V: Which fighter would prevail in an air

View attachment 790469
J-10C '4++ generation' fighter jet pilot. Photo: Military Watch Magazine. Sketched by the Pan Pacific Agency.

Entering service in 2017 and 2018 respectively, the American F-16V and Chinese J-10C represent two of the most capable lightweight fighter jets in production today and considerable improvements over older baseline fourth generation designs. With each weighing approximately 13,000kg, deploying similarly sized radars, similar single engine configurations and similar weapons payloads, the aircraft are in many ways highly comparable. Both are being marketed for export today. Military Watch has observed both models.

The large majority of fighter jet classes in production today are configured with twin engines, from heavyweights such as the J-20 and F-15EX to medium designs such as the MiG-35 and Eurofighter, and even lightweight platforms such as the Kowsar and upcoming Taiwanese Brave Eagle. This places the J-10 and F-16 in a class of their own among modern fighter designs.

While other less prominent single engine designs are in production today, notably the Gripen, JF-17 and Tejas, these are all lighter and less capable than the American and Chinese platforms. The American F-35A is the only other prominent contemporary single engine fighter, although it is still very far from ready for high intensity combat and is unlikely to be until near the end of the decade. While the fifth generation design has considerable potential, it is much heavier, requires much more maintenance and is considerably more expensive to operate than the F-16 and J-10 which limits the possibility of making direct comparisons. Comparing the J-10C and the F-16V, however, can offer valuable insight into the state of Chinese and American military aviation – and which will prevail both in a potential conflict and on export markets.

The first F-16s entered service in 1978, meaning the airframe is now approaching 45 years old with no orders for the type from the U.S. Military for several years. The F-16V’s alterations to the original design are relatively conservative. There are no reductions to the radar cross section or applications of stealth coatings and no improvements to the F110 engine’s thrust have been made. Upgrades are restricted to avionics, with new cockpit displays, electronic warfare systems and an AESA radar all integrated. The fighter deploys the same AIM-120C missile as regular F-16 variants, although some reports indicate it could integrate AIM-120D missiles with a longer 180km range in future. The F-16V overall represents a cheaper idea for an ‘enhanced F-16’ to the F-16E – developed for the United Arab Emirates, the F-2 developed for Japan, and the F-21 concept currently being marketed to India – all of which have seen far more ambitious enhancements from high composite airframes and new more powerful engines.

The first J-10 fighters entered service in 2006, with the design benefitting from new technologies developed since the 1970s to provide a leading single engine platform. The fighter was slightly lighter than the F-16 but had a superior flight performance, with a more powerful AL-31 engine exceeding the capabilities of the American F110, a higher speed and operational altitude and superior manoeuvrability. Although its engine was more powerful, the airframe was slightly lighter which further increases its manoeuvrability advantage. There was not a single field in which the F-16 could boast superior capabilities over the J-10. Not only is the J-10 design more advanced, but the J-10C has seen more comprehensive improvements compared to the original design than the F-16V has relative to the original Fighting Falcon. These have included a reduced radar cross section, applications of stealth coatings, a greater use of composite materials a new more powerful AESA radar and integration of PL-15 air to air missiles. The PL-15 has an estimated range of 250-300km, comfortably outperforming any existing American design. The J-10C also benefits from integration of new WS-10B engines, which further increases the discrepancy between its own thrust and that of the F-16 with the new engine boasting considerably greater power than the AL-31. The WS-10B also benefits from three dimensional thrusts vectoring systems – the only non-Russian fighter to do so – providing a massive advantage in manoeuvrability. The F-16 has not integrated any kind of thrust vectoring engines.

Ultimately the superiority of the J-10C is overwhelming. The two jets may be well matched in terms of electronic warfare systems and situational awareness – although export variants of the F-16V will have a disadvantage due to downgraded avionics – the J-10C’s advantages in weaponry and flight performance are overwhelming. As stealth fighters continue to proliferate, the J-10 also has the advantage of integrating an infra red search and tracking system (IRST) allowing it to more effectively lock onto stealth fighters at medium ands short ranges. An IRST also allows the fighter to maintain high situational awareness without a radar signature if needed – something the F-16 cannot do. The discrepancy in the capabilities of the American and Chinese single engine fighters is reflected in the fact that the former much older design has not seen interest from the U.S. Air Force – while the J-10C continues to be mass produced and fielded by elite Chinese units.


Comparison is flawed. F-16 was developed after extensive US experience in warfare. US goes on perpetual wars because war is a business for USA. Its defence industry profits massively from these wars. So with that experience, USA developed a light fighter platform the features of which have been copied in later production fighter jets like JF-17 or J-10. It has been successful so much that almost 5000 have been sold. Even with 45 year old airframe, with upgraded avionics, F-16 is more than a match for current generation fighter jets.

J-10 being inducted by elite Chinese squadrons while F-16 is not being inducted by American Air Force is not a testament of J-10 capability. It shows Americans are generations ahead as they are now inducting 5th generation aircraft.

However, this does not mean J-10 is inferior. Just that it has not been battle tested.
 
.
The North did whatever he wanted, so China don't have any obligation to protect the North. China has strong ties with both North and South, we are neutral.

No, we do have obligation:

中朝友好合作互助条约

1641775900040.png


US has many chances to settle a deal with the North, but US had chosen no deal is better deal. Once the North and South settled, and united. The first thing to happen will be US troop out of Korean Peninsula.

There is no guarantee that US troop will leave Korean Peninsula once they are unified.

China doesn't fear US troops on our border at all. It will cost US an arm and leg. It's the US's decision to keep the North as a buffer.

No, it is opposite. South Korea is just US's ally not US homeland. US has no problem to win the war at the cost of last Korean. However, we are defending our homeland on this side. Just like Chairman Mao said, if we have to fight the war, we want to fight in other's land.
 
.
No, we do have obligation:

中朝友好合作互助条约

View attachment 807519



There is no guarantee that US troop will leave Korean Peninsula once they are unified.



No, it is opposite. South Korea is just US's ally not US homeland. US has no problem to win the war at the cost of last Korean. However, we are defending our homeland on this side. Just like Chairman Mao said, if we have to fight the war, we want to fight in other's land.
I stop here. Off-topic. You can start a new thread HERE if you like
 
. . . . .
But it's is nothing but a model, you can clearly see the Trumpeter logo on the box it is standing and the typical RAM-powered what-if AAM.

By the way, happy Chinese New Year ... and when will AVIC finally paint a real J-10 in such colours?

View attachment 812569
Great picture and happy new year of tiger to everyone!
 
. .

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom