PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

[ghazi52]

.,.,.,

 

[Kompromat]

Absolutely hate this camouflage.

 

[NooriNuth]

with EOTS, it is integrated to j10c

I guess EOTS is via the add on pod?
That's why the chin hard point for a Pod?

 

[luciferdd]

Is the pic true or not?

 

[Deino]

Actually I highly question this even if from an official PAF brochure.

32,000lbs ??? If I’m not mistaken this would be 142.34 kN, which is IMO impossible, since this is the thrust rating often given for the J-20‘s WS-10C but not for the WS-10B.

As such and since we have seen so many official brochures including wrong data and since this contradicts the official one from AVIC/CAC I’m not sure if simply one from the PAF staff googled a bit and used this. For the WS-10B this thrust is not even given for the J-16 but always something around 136-138 kN.

 

[Reichmarshal]

We should stay level headed n well clear of these bull sh!t slogans like "game changer" n not over hype things like the Indians n in the process face great embarrassment n heart ache when the outcome is diff from expectations.

The world is moving towards 6th gen ac n by the time we have fully inducted j10 a 4th gen ac, the first prototypes of the 6th gen. should be carrying out their maiden flights.
So let's not go indias way

 

[tphuang]

Actually I highly question this even if from an official PAF brochure.

View attachment 908297

32,000lbs ??? If I’m not mistaken this would be 142.34 kN, which is IMO impossible, since this is the thrust rating often given for the J-20‘s WS-10C but not for the WS-10B.

As such and since we have seen so many official brochures including wrong data and since this contradicts the official one from AVIC/CAC I’m not sure if simply one from the PAF staff googled a bit and used this. For the WS-10B this thrust is not even given for the J-16 but always something around 136-138 kN.

this is confirms by Patch.

Deino, you have to stop underestimating Chinese engines. The reason why they have been so slow with WS-15 is because WS-10C has already reached the original designed specs for WS-15.

 

[Deino]

this is confirms by Patch.

Deino, you have to stop underestimating Chinese engines. The reason why they have been so slow with WS-15 is because WS-10C has already reached the original designed specs for WS-15.

Well, I think it is not underestimating them, but putting them within a realistic frame.

But I wonÄt complain if I am wrong.

 

[tphuang]

E-3 is a time-tested and battle-proven platform. The latest E3G variant (Block 40/45 standard) is equipped with technologies that are relevant for modern warfare needs. E3G was able to monitor, process, and facilitate activities in Syrian airspace where SyADF (Syrian), VKS (Russian), USAF (American), and USN (American) were active for relevant missions and neighboring countries such as Israel and Turkey would get involved intermittently with air arms for distinct pursuits, to avert accidents and make sure that American mission on the ground will succeed. E3G was also involved in incidents in which NATO aircraft engaged and shot down VKS aircraft in the region.

time-tested and battle proven = OLD

E-3 can't detect J-20s adequately. This is from Pacific Air Force chief. What more do you need to know?

E-3 insufficient for timely detection of J-20: Pacific Air Forces chief

US Air Force (USAF) General Kenneth Wilsbach says that the Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS fleet is suffering significant obsolescence issues, and that the Boeing F-15EX is ideally suited to conflict in North Asia.

www.flightglobal.com

USAF is retiring half of its E-3s before there is even a replacement. What does that tell you? It's too OLD.

Air Force to Retire Half Its AWACS Fleet, Most JSTARS, Leaving ‘Small Gap’ in ISR | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force plans to retire half of its E-3 AWACS fleet and most E-8C JSTARS, leaving a “small gap” in ISR.

www.airandspaceforces.com

E-3G is unlikely to struggle with detecting and tracking J-10C from a respectable distance but it might struggle to detect and track J-20 from a respectable distance. Enter E-2D.

E-2D is equipped with superior AN/APY-9 radar system, and solves the problem of detecting and tracking all types of Chinese aerial assets from a respectable distance for USAF and USN. J-20 is designed to deflect and absorb radar waves across frequency bands ranging from S to Ku by virtue of its shaping and Chinese RAM application but less effective in either extremes and beyond; canards and all-moving vertical stabilizers are a significant source of specular reflection across a large area.

Yes, E-2D can do the work of detecting modern aircraft.

Don't underestimate J-10C. According to my contact, it's borderline LO in PLAAF service. But keep in mind, PLAAF has a wide fleet of EW aircraft that can mess with adversary radar system. And in PLAAF, J-10C can more effectively limit emissions because it can rely on other platform to do sensor fusion and pass it the targeting data. It can be guided by AWACs. But if PAF gets similar aerial assets from China, it can make J-10C a lot harder to detect.

Many Chinese do not understand how US might fight a war with a near-peer adversary and on what grounds. F-35 has limited capacity to ingress into Chinese mainland on its own. USAF will have to deploy air refueling tankers to support F-35 in this capacity. But US doesn't need to adopt this approach to take on Chinese defenses in the relevant region.

absolutely not. F-35 can be detected very easily within first island chain. According to both Chinese sources and verified by my contact. This is entirely off topic, but USAF isn't going to be able to deploy F-35As or tankers. All the surrounding air bases will get destroyed in the event of a westpac conflict. The recent DoD alluded this as much. Everything inside of Guam will be lost in the opening hours.

B-2A might be the aircraft of choice to ingress into Chinese mainland to take on Chinese defenses and infrastructure:

Not even close to happening. That's why B-21 is needed. B-2 is 30 years old and in limited numbers. And very hard to maintain and have low availability.

But US will not stress a single platform for a military operation inside China - Tomahawk Block 4 cruise missiles might be unleashed from ships* and submarines** to complement operations of B-2A to do the needful.

lol, you are talking about the most well defended air space in the world. A few hundred missiles aren't going to do much. Especially something that can as easily intercepted as subsonic cruise missiles. Even in operation desert storm, half of the tomahawk missiles were intercepted.

Why don't you take a look at how many ships USN has in 7th fleet and how many are in the port at any given time and how many tomahawk missiles they can hold (not how many VLS cells, but how tomahawk missiles they can actually hold). Hint: not every MK-41 cells can hold a tomahawk missile on Burke class ship. Due to age and excessive usage, USN ships have to spend a long time in port.

And then why don't you take a look at how many CRUDES China has right now and how many of them are new and have high availability.

*Arleigh Burke class destroyers and Ticonderoga class cruisers are equipped with an assortment of well-developed munitions that can be used to intercept cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, UAVs, and aircraft. These ships can work together to create a common picture of the threat environment and will not be easy to defeat. China is expected to use DF-21D and DF-26 ASBM to engage USN ships in the Pacific. USN has conducted a large number of live-fire tests to develop the capability to intercept ASBMs. But USN will attempt to take out launchers of DF-21D and DF-26 as well.

You do realize hypersonic missiles are a lot harder to intercept than subsonic missiles, right? any this YouTube clip is out of date. The most threatening missile facing USN right now is DF-17, which uses HGV, so it is actually a lot hard to detect and intercept than DF-21D. DF-21D is almost 10 years old. It's irrelevant to a future conflict.

**Ohio-class submarine(s) do not need to surface for a long period of time courtesy of the onboard power plant technology and can get close to a country without warning to do their bidding.

you need to stop watching YouTube clips and get into reality. Ohio class according to my nuclear sub contacts are constantly breaking down because they are so old.

F-35 might be used to provide ISR to USN and engage PLAAF if it comes after USN in the Pacific.

F-35 is designed to deflect and absorb radar waves across a number of frequency bands ranging from L to V by virtue of its shaping and RAM application. These measures allow F-35 to reduce line-of-sight of various radar systems for it to maneuver through the threat environment.

Those radar systems which can detect F-35 such as Chinese YLC-8E might not be able to track it in real time for long -- F-35 is equipped with state-of-the-art broadband EW capabilities for good reason. Combat tactics is another factor -- F-35 offers unprecedented situational awareness to the pilot who in turn will not wait for the kill chain to establish and work against him but engage and destroy valuable targets at earliest opportunity. If this is not possible then F-35 can be used to illuminate YLC-8E among other radar systems on the surface for the USN to take out with a barrage of Tomahawks. The benefits of CEC are boundless. Radar systems on the surface are vulnerable to decapitating strikes but airborne platforms like E-2D can survive with air escort. You might have faith in A2/AD systems like HQ-9 but virtually nothing could stop a volley of Tomahawks from approaching desired targets in conflicts around the world and these cruise missiles are kept up to date. Tomahawks have onboard EW capabilities, can be programmed to bypass threat zones, can be instructed to change course, and adopt terrain-hugging approach to reach desired targets. The window of opportunity to detect and intercept these cruise missiles is very small and a volley is virtually impossible to stop.

But PLAAF is in the air? Enter squadrons.

Imagine dozens of F-35 operating in a threat environment taking cues from each other as well as from other assets including E-2D and E3G. Imagine the effectiveness of this force.

For perspective:

A Blue Force composed of 8 jet fighters (F-35B = 4; Others = 4), was able to achieve a kill ratio of (20 - 1) against a RED Force composed of 20 jet fighters in a RED FLAG event scheduled in 2017. These F-35B were older Block 2B standard and pilots were coming to terms with its capabilities.

Seems like you've spent too much time reading US military propaganda. CEC is nothing new. China has that and sensor fusion. If you don't have these things, it's not fifth generation. J-20s have them. Even J-10Cs might have them (can't remember for sure). I'm not sure why you are constantly downgrading J-10C capabilities.

Detecting and then locking onto F-35s is not that difficult for PLA. KJ-500s are locking onto F-35s constantly. That's why you see Wilsbach talking about how they want to break the PLAAF kill chain where KJ-500s can guide long range AAMs to USAF aircraft.

Keep in mind that USAF considers J-20's frontal stealth to be comparable to earlier blocks of F-35As. That's why the aggressor squad for J-20 uses earlier F-35As. In comparison, USAF uses F-16s to simulate Su-57.

To be fair, J-10C, J-16, and J-20 are better than these. But F-35 is much more capable at Block 3F standard in comparison to Block 2B standard and E-2D can add a whole new dimension to its operations in a threat environment.

RED FLAG is also being revisited in its representation of threat environment(s) with new entrants and perceived complexities as pointed out in here, here, and here, and J-20 is being simulated as a part of the training regime for the Blue Force in the present.

F-35 Stealth Fighters Are Revolutionizing The USAF's Aggressor Force

We spoke to the boss of the 65th Aggressor Squadron, flying the F-35 — the Air Force’s latest red air incarnation.

www.thedrive.com

You can see how advanced Aggressor Squadrons have become.

USAF and USN are training to fight PLAAF.

you really need to read more than just what US military is doing. Seriously.

PL-15 is impressive but a pilot needs to obtain "weapons-grade lock" on the target to use it which will be very difficult to achieve in the BVR regime against an F-35 in view of the aforementioned.

The point is that PL-15 has large AESA seeker, so it can be a fire and forget weapon. The threshold for weapon grade locking aren't as high as something using an older mechanical seeker like every other AAMs out there.

It's again amazing to me here that Pakistani fans aren't appreciating what a great AAM you just got.

F-35 will be able to obtain "weapons-grade lock" on every PLAAF jet fighter from a respectable distance with support of E-2D and to lesser extent E3G on the other hand in view of the aforementioned. AIM-120D is very capable in the BVR regime.

F-35 is very capable in the WVR regime as well due to its formidable EW capabilities and sensor fusion, and the pilot has the option to use both AIM-9X and AIM-120D to engage opposing aircraft in the WVR regime. AIM-120 class can deliver results in the WVR regime as well.

How many jet fighters PLAAF is willing to loose to engage and defeat each F-35 operating in a system of airborne assets? (20 - 1)? (15 - 1)? (10 - 1)? (5 - 1)? Get my drift?

Again, you spent too much time with this decade long Lockheed propaganda. F-35 is a great aircraft, but what is has right now is nothing special compared to J-20. I'm not sure why you are wasting this much breaths on F-35 on a J-10 thread.

- - -

Marketing items? Japanese data is credible. The AWACS in question might be Japanese E3 variant. RCS figure(s) of the jet fighters are corroborated with official revelations and relevant patents and valid for S-band.

KJ-500 is equipped with a radar system having AESA TRMs which is great but are you privy to its algorithms, waveform technique, and peak transmit power? What I know is that it can detect up to 100 airborne targets and operates in the L-band. The radar system might be good enough to detect cruise missiles and possibly J-20 but... F-35 is VLO across bands ranging from L to V with formidable EW capabilities (see above). This is why I am of the view that KJ-500 itself will be struggling to detect and track F-35 in real time.

It really isn't. J-20 and F-35 radar signature from the front is quite comparable once you get to S band or lower. Again, USAF uses a F-35 to simulate J-20 and it uses F-16 to simulate Su-57.

Speaking of sources, Venezuela claimed to have detected and discouraged an F-22A operating nearby courtesy of the Chinese JY-27A radar system - a story that was used to create unrealistic hype of this radar system in here (hundreds fooled) but a realistic take on this radar system is in here. Americans didn't even bother to address this claim. You might have heard of Luneburg lens. You should request your contact to take you to RED FLAG - let me know your findings.

JY27A is a very old export radar.

People that are actually working with US military and have up to date classified information are all taking J-20, KJ-500 and UHF/VHF radar very seriously. And they are investing serious money into NGAD and B-21 in order to penetrate Chinese air space, because the current generation of aircraft cannot do so.

Frankly, my initial post was to explain to people here that J-10C and PL-15 are very capable platforms for PAF to use. PAF is clearly happy with what they got.

Somehow, you got triggered. It's not my problem that the thought of US military losing badly in a westpac conflict is so shocking to you. But these Chinese weapons are very capable and it's your loss for not understanding that.

 

[Deino]

this is confirms by Patch.

Deino, you have to stop underestimating Chinese engines. The reason why they have been so slow with WS-15 is because WS-10C has already reached the original designed specs for WS-15.

PS: I need to apologise ... I opened indeed an old file but after checking the latest info I compiled to the new Flanker book I have the following likely / estimated performances:

 

[FuturePAF]

PS: I need to apologise ... I opened indeed an old file but after checking the latest info I compiled to the new Flanker book I have the following likely / estimated performances:

View attachment 908316

Do you believe the following video is a credible reference to corroborate the claim?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1608480997099831296

 

[Talon]

@Windjammer

 

[Windjammer]

View attachment 908385

@Windjammer

Thank you for that sir.
Albeit, I was going to post this last week but needed further confirmation first.

 

[LKJ86]

Do you believe the following video is a credible reference to corroborate the claim?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1608480997099831296

It was from PLAAF's official Weibo account about 4 years ago.

 

[vi-va]

Do you believe the following video is a credible reference to corroborate the claim?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1608480997099831296

No, I don't think so.