PAF J-10C News, Updates and Discussion

[Windjammer]

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

View attachment 906368

Dragon Riders, assigned to the 33rd Tactical Wing’s No. 15 ‘Cobras’ Squadron, rests on the tarmac after intense training sorties, somewhere in the PAF Central Air Command area-of-responsibility.

 

[siegecrossbow]

View attachment 906368

 

[nomi007]

View attachment 906368

Helmets look awesome.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

J-10 duo

 

[Trango Towers]

View attachment 906368

These boy need to go running...looking a bit healthy

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,

 

[Horse_Rider]

China has no issues with marketing, it just has no need for aggressive marketing. It's not competing in a highly competive environment, they target countries who would struggle obtaining similar equipment due to political reasons or price restrictions, removing most other options off the table. And then they approach them with their own offers directly for negotiation.

This doesn't require aggressive public marketing as much.

Once they entire a competitive environment with customers who have a choice for western/Russian aircraft included and don't need to restrict too much on budget, they will show you just how capable they are at marketing. Might be the case for the J-35 if they pitch to the Arabs.

I'd disagree with your thoughts, with respect. China knows it needs to do aggressive marketing to sell it's defense equipment, and that's why they setup Zhuhai airshows and go to other global events. No business or government in the world wants to say NO to billions of dollars worth of business that they can generate!

JF-17 is NOT being pitched as a lower cost fighter. with block III around $ 50 Million and block II was $ 35+ Million or so with various packages. This is no little amount. One can get new Russian jets (vast range), or, used Mirage-2000-5's, used F-16's, Gripen, Tejas, etc, minus the F-16's if one isn't in US's good books. But, J-10 or JFT being Chinese, the customer's mind has to be reset in terms of their higher quality and "mil spec grade" technology, etc, because Chinese products in global consumer's mind are "cheap and low quality". That's clearly not the case here.

It is a very cultural Asian / Pak-Indo way of thinking " we can sell everything if the price was cheap". In Western mindset, the defense companies understand they are good at building defense equipment and not marketing. For which, they contract and hire top end marketing capability. How many international channels show Chinese product marketing in Chinese (outside of China)? There is your answer.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Dragons Line up

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.

 

[LeGenD]

Yes, he would be a guy with access to these data (he is American fwiw). If you look at PLAAF, they don't really put J-10C in front line anymore. But that's purely due to range. I would be absolutely comfortable have J-10Cs along with KJ-500s defending Chinese air space against F-35s.

For the interior redesign, I think it's worth noting that China did the redesign from J-10A to J-10B back in late 2000s. F-16C/D came out in the early 80s. Whatever you think about China, I think it should be obvious that China would've had access to more advanced electronically systems back in mid to late 2000s vs what America had access to back in early 80s. As such, they would be able to design interior of an aircraft that will be able to more closely match the interior subsystems that are currently available. And just as importantly, J-10B itself was a testbed for technologies they eventually put on J-20. Obviously, J-20 came latter and had space/power for more advanced systems. But J-10B itself was quite the upgrade over J-10A.

Which version of E-3 your contact alluded to?

E-3A Block 10/15
E-3B/C Block 20/25
E-3B/C Block 30/35 with ESM and RISP
E-3G Block 40/45 with DRAGON

- - -

Using J-10C to defend against F-35?

F-35 is relatively much more advanced and also much more difficult to detect than J-10C from a distance.

Japanese data for reference:

KJ-500 is equipped with more advanced radar system than the one found in E-3 but to what extent it can make it possible for the J-10C to engage F-35 from a distance? KJ-500 itself will be struggling to detect and track F-35 in real time because principles of radar detection have not changed by much in themselves.

Pay close attention to what experienced pilots have to say about F-35 in following links:

5th-Gen vs 4th-Gen: F-35 Fighter Pilots Compare 4th-Gen Jets to F-35

By Kris Osborn - President & Editor-In-Chief, Warrior Maven With all of the discussion, debate and criticism swirling around the F-35 regarding its long term

warriormaven.com

Further perspective in following link:

Can the same tech on the F-35 be put on a 4th generation fighter like F/A-18's or F-16's? Forget stealth, that clearly can't be an option.

James Smith's answer: Some of it can; the USAF’s F-16s and USMC’s F/A-18s are both receiving new AESA radars similar in technology to the F-35’s (although they’re receiving smaller and less capable versions due to limitations in radome size and cooling). USAF F-15s have also already received AESA...

www.quora.com

Connect the dots.

- - -

Americans have a history of coming up with aircraft designs and even vehicle designs that could accomodate electronics decades ahead of their time with limited amendments.

There was no need to redesign F-16 from Block 15 [rolled out in 1973] to variants all the way up to Block 72 in the present. This speaks volumes about the level of expertise that was reached in terms of conceptualizing and putting together an aircraft in the 1970s on the American side.

Notable amendment was following:

The Viper's Heterogeneous Intakes

© Pit Aquaheart Most people aren't aware that the iconic F-1...

glomilstrat.blogspot.com

This amendment is in line with the engine offered.

The J-10 project was launched in 1988 and provided invaluable insight to China in terms of HOW to conceptualize, develop, and improve an aircraft from scratch in time. As a neutral observer, I appreciate the effort and respect the machine that came out from it in the form of J-10C in the present.

I am not sure why the Chinese feel the need to draw conjectural parallels between Chinese and American projects of similar nature without being mindful of American headstart in numerous fields. This leads to needless contention and underappreciation of Chinese projects just to set things straight.

This isn't about what I think about China but setting things straight. I think highly of China otherwise.

 

[Windjammer]

Is the PLAAF also inducting the Comuflage version of the J-10.