What's new

PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

Paf should opt new colour scheme thunder and falcon schemes sucks

Like rose mist colour with purple or blue discharge due to light reflection?
: ) Well that could be the same theory which people were discussing here OR it could be referring to island of Taiwan.. As Taiwan also comes under One country policy of China.

So, yeah Pakistan will become only second country to have these 2 birds ;)

So, J-10C is coming?
 
.
Exocets cant be tossed around. The air launched versions cant be modified. PAF specifically modified a squadrons of Mirages for anti ship missions. The PAF will use both Mirages/JF17s for anti shipping operations. PN will provide Orions/Propellers/Helicopters for its air arm.

Neither the PAF nor the PN will carry out a long range anti shipping mission for which a SU35 would be needed. Pakistans coastline is not too far. Can easily be covered by existing platforms let alone land based launchers.
Exocets (AM-39) were bought in 1979 to be used by Mirage VPA3/Atlantique/Sea Kings and were actually funded by PN. They are now being solely used by PN Sea Kings. No 8 Sqn is now operating armed with REK SOW.

As far as long range AS platform is concerned, do you think Russia will release KH-35 or any other long range Anti ship missile to Pakistan even if Su-35 are sold?

Best bet would be a Chinese twin heavy platform. Which PAF most probably has already evaluated.
 
Last edited:
.
This is my assessment too ...Chinese already tested J10 against S400 ..... for India it's only a useful anti ballistic missile weapon..

Until that too is countered with the new hypersonic gliders / MaRV warheads on top of higher energy carbon fiber canister launched smaller missiles with the same ranges as the current missiles. But that’s a topic for another thread.


1641598432007.png
 
Last edited:
.
J-10 is a low wing mounted fuselage - wing design. F-16 is a mid wing mount. These two are aerodynamically extremely different. Not to mention canard vs conventional layout difference between the two which again makes J-10 more different to F-16 than F-18 is to F-16. Another massive aerodynamic difference is F-16's intake type vs J-10's J-10A uses a different intake type than F-16 and J-10B and C both use DSI which again is different. Three different separate intake types used between J-10A, F-16, J-10B and C.

Wing fuselage blend is used by both but Su-27 and Mig-29 also use wing fuselage blend. Same as Mirages, Rafales, EF Typhoon. This doesn't mean that much since many 4th gen fighters use these lateral wing fuselage blends. Just because there are similarities between J-10 and F-16 doesn't mean any allegedly fuselage section was used as a direct set of inspirations for very general design choices. If there ever was some fuselage section given over, I'm sure they are studied and notes formed but their value is highly doubtful.

It's not hard for anyone even some here to give a general design of a fuselage. Give yourself a pen and paper and you can think of 10000 but do they work well is down to specific details. Since J-10 is not even close to 1:1 copy of F-16 fuselage, they are formed based on very different choices but similar engineering principles. That is true for every other fighter based on similar engineering principles back in the 4th generation.

1641601250344.png

\
Mid mounted wings where F-16's bottom side looks like J-10's top side in terms of how much of the back fuselage is supported below wing mount.

1641601292627.png


Nearly Mirage 2000 flatness on bottom side with low mount wing design.

1641601401272.png

low wing mount.

1641601436664.png

mid wing mount.

F-16 fuselage if ever even given to China, was clearly not used as a direct design choice for J-10. Maybe they looked at it and thought okay Americans are at this level, look at their surface finish, how they rivet it, materials, thickness, thermal conductivity and so on. Not the design. Design part is both easiest and hardest because easiest since anyone can draw some and make some various ideas work is hard especially work in combination with every other aspect of the aircraft such as internal systems.
 
Last edited:
.
The Frenches are good technical cooperation partner,you can nearly get everything you want from them as long as you can pay for it.
The French and European are scheme businessman unlike american. They know China will sooner master such technology. So why not make some money while u still can?

The Holland ASML are now trying to sell lithography machine to China despite US objection. Becos China now has just started delivered such machine of 28nm grade. Soon 14nm to 5nm are on the way. Why waste such opportunity to make money?
 
.
You clearly aren’t understanding what I am inferring to - knowledge was transferred to China from a variety of sources that helped in the design of the J-10. That doesn’t mean they used the exact HUD or even the rivet size from the F-16 or Lavi.
I mean this scene" When the F-16 first arrived in Pakistan a visiting PLAAF general was invited to look at it. As he sat in the cockpit he took his two fingers and started measuring the heads up display which caused the US support staff to panic. Now why was one of the most senior PLAAF officer measuring the HUD of a US fighter? Was he trying to copy it? Or take the information back to your engineers ? " is not exist,OK?China had been sended their pilots to Europe to drive their new Jet include Mirage 2000 for test at 1980S.Researching a wreckage of F16 maybe has some help,but it's not a determining factor.
 
.
I mean this scene" When the F-16 first arrived in Pakistan a visiting PLAAF general was invited to look at it. As he sat in the cockpit he took his two fingers and started measuring the heads up display which caused the US support staff to panic. Now why was one of the most senior PLAAF officer measuring the HUD of a US fighter? Was he trying to copy it? Or take the information back to your engineers ? " is not exist,OK?China had been sended their pilots to Europe to drive their new Jet include Mirage 2000 for test at 1980S.Researching a wreckage of F16 maybe has some help,but it's not a determining factor.
Ok
Lets agree to disagree. Ill believe a former PAF AVM who was there at the time of the incident and ACdre who even wrote about it.. You on the other hand have no credentials to back up your dismissal of events
 
.
Ok
Lets agree to disagree. Ill believe a former PAF AVM who was there at the time of the incident and ACdre who even wrote about it.. You on the other hand have no credentials to back up your dismissal of events
Heard this even from a PAF Senior Engineering Officer assigned to a Viper squadron at the time.
 
. .
Ok
Lets agree to disagree. Ill believe a former PAF AVM who was there at the time of the incident and ACdre who even wrote about it.. You on the other hand have no credentials to back up your dismissal of events
“took his two fingers and started measuring the heads up display" and then you can copy a HUD,LOL....do you really believe it?Why not imagine the general scaned the whole F-16 and copy one? :omghaha:
 
.
I've seen some hesitations on this and other thread about purchasing Chinese weapons, whether it's J-10C or Z-10. So, I will try to put you guys at ease about this. There has been huge technological advances in the Chinese military industrial complex in the past 20 years. But for the sake of this thread, I will just use fighter jet as an example. Back 20 years ago, China was still iterating through J-8II variants as its best aircraft. Just last month, they flew the first twin-seated 5th generation aircraft in the world.

If you look at Rafale's development from its first flight in 1991 until now and compare that to J-10 from 1998 until now. There has been a greater improvement in J-10 over a shorter timeframe. Just take a look at how long it took the Europeans to put AESA radars on the Eurocanards. China did not even have a modern mechanically scanned radar on a fighter jet until early 2000. The reason is pretty simple. China has put far more investment in its military industrial complex in the past 20 years. The gap in that investment will keep increasing as the Chinese economy keep growing.

As PAF receives its JF-17 and J-10C, it will also see their combat capabilities go up more quickly than IAF's Rafale. We may not see changes from external appearance, but you can make a lot of upgrades with software upgrades and also with newer generation electronic equipment. One good example is J-20 two seaters. From the outside, it looks like they just added a second seat, but this project was actually delayed by a couple of years as they are trying to incorporate the latest technological upgrades. And supposedly these changes will allow them to achieve a level of situation awareness that's not even possible with the original J-20. That's a lot of where future upgrades for these fighter jets come from. How good are their situation awareness? How good are they at keeping themselves hidden from different opposing fighters? I'd bet over the next 10 to 15 years, you will see greater improvements in this area in J-10C than Rafale as it leverages some of the gains from J-20 program.

When JF-17 first came out, PAF did not feel comfortable with Chinese avionics. How many people have the same hesitations now with JF-17 Block 3? I'm sure everyone on this board and with PAF has seen how much improvement have been made in block 3 compared to the original version. Have faith that you will see the same improvement in J-10 or Z-10 or whatever else Pakistan might be interested in the future.

There has been a view that Chinese product is behind the west and Russia. Chinese training is also behind. In fact, I find that's something Indian Internet warriors (and maybe even more serious people inside Indian military) hold on to in order to justify their belief that all the stuff China is building is overhyped. I don't have a problem with it. Even I'm surprised by some of the improvements they have made. It's hard to keep track of all the improvements they've made. I will use China and Russia as an example. You may have noticed that PLAAF and RuAF have not had any joint exercises even though China has annual exercises with PAF. The main reason from Chinese side is that they don't want to embarrass the Russians (who have helped them a lot to get to this point). When they got su-35, they could not believe how much of a gap existed in the radar/avionics between their own J-16 and Su-35. They asked the Russians repeatedly and that really was the best that the Russians could offer. You know Su-30MKIs are in trouble when the most realistic future upgrade plan is to use the same radar/EW suites that Su-35 uses. While J-10C and JF-17 block 3 are smaller, they will be able to have much better situation awareness than MKIs through this newer generation of electronics. Rafale is a different story, but IAF has a limited number of them. The biggest mistake India made was getting themselves into the MKI project and than into Su-57. These 2 Russian projects have squandered all the financial advantage they have over PAF.

There has also been a desire on this thread for flankers. I think flankers do have a pretty big advantage over J-10/JF-17 by being just a lot larger. They basically fitted the largest and most power consuming radar/avionics they can put on J-10 and JF-17. But obviously, there are realistic space limitations on J-10 compared to flankers. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure China would never export flankers due to its Russian relationship. It actually would be of help for PAF I think. J-16D recently entered into service with PLAAF. I think it's going to be a true force multiplier. I don't think IAF has a dedicated EW aircraft. If PAF can work with China to get a dedicated one (whether based on like a two seat version of J-10 or something larger), it would give PAF quite an advantage here.
I don't think it's a matter of Chinese having little aerial exercise with Russia gonna do with less embarrassment for Russia. PLAAF could have sent less advance fighter but they didn't.

Remember China even send J-20 for first foreign exercise with Russian. Seems like they are not afraid of revealling it's RCS signature to Russian. Also it's a big trust from China compare to aerial exercise with Pakistan where J-20 is still secretive and not included.

 
. . . . .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom