Hi,
The J10 cannot carry two 1000 Kg each anti ship missiles---. It basically is not designed for that role at all.
The J10 is your fighter interceptor aircraft. Your naval weapons carrier airship going on anti ship strike missions must and must carry two heavy antiship missiles.
Two missiles are better than one---. One opportunity shows up---your one anti ship missiles fizzles out---fails to launch---after the launch goes haywire---enemy shoots it down---it is all about the percentages---about when you get the opportunity---you launch the first and then the second one for surety---.
as I have already acknowledged my next to no military aviation knowledge so I knew my suggestions were flawed.
I had to go back a read up a little more and as you jave pointed out that naval versions are heavy lifters with stronger structure and endurance and better sea skimming performance.
before the site went down I was going to write the following points knowing also they were a nonstarter
PN scope and doctrine changes from the current confines (with or without CPEC as a strategic element)
PN rescuers itself from PAF directives on how to conduct and shape its airborne naval strategy
envisions use of air strips on artificial islands ( LIKE China) within our territorial waters to extend defensive offensive reach of a air arm of PN.
PN Had a scope and a doctrine back in 60s or 80s which was valid back then but I doubt it cant be revisited and extended for the future.
maybe there was no need to duplicate resources and facilities if PAF was willing to lend its jets, pilots and facilities for PN duties but every procurement would be dictated by PAF. PAF might choose or reject a platform with its primary use for PAF and then a secondary use if suitable to Pakistan navy. I don't even want to imagine and speculate the red tape and unnecessary chain of command maneuvering needed to release the men and resources for an immediate PN needs when PAF itself is expecting an imminent need to defend or respond to aggression from India.
still with me? I am in principle agreeing with you (whether or not I fully understood what you are saying but I think I got the gist of it).
so PN is allowed to build its own combat air arm. raises say 2 squadrons of Mirage/ JF17s under direct PN command with PN exclusive facilities and personal (duly trained and helped by PAF). and once its free to think on its own then it starts looking for such air platforms that are built with primary Naval focus. here we have an issue.
list the jets out say F/A 18 hornets, Mig 29Ks, J-15/16 and JH 7s and then eliminate the ones that dont fit the bill for affordability, availability or compatibility reasons.
I dont know if China will part with its jets and how much time and resources are needed to adapt for PN use. since since China might replace JH 7as with J 15/16s so there is no chance of a modern 4.5 generation version of JH7s or a Naval version of twin engine J-10 (I only saw some fan based CGI art).
expecting PAC and CAC to build a twin engine version of JF 17 with Naval strike as a primary focus doesn't make sense due to huge setup costs and future potential use/ export potential to justify the spend.
in short I see a solid Vancouver dam wall. we are not getting anywhere.
