Look PAF looked at the rafale very closely before going for j10c
When and where did the PAF take a very close look at the Rafale? Care to provide a source for that? I'd like to learn more about this.
which is tailored to take on the rafale .....
Says who? where did you get the information that the J-10A was tailored to take on the Rafale? Are you saying that when the Chinese first planned to build a multi-role aircraft for China's specific needs and supposedly went to the apartheid entity to ask if they could copy the Lavi which was nothing but an F-16XL copy in the first place with minimally functioning canards and then said "yes, we will build our version of the Lavi which will be solely tailored to countering the French Rafale"? That's what you're saying?
Or were they simply trying to build their own and 1st indigenous fighter they were hoping to turn into an air superiority platform to defend the South China Seas and the mainland? That's why they built it and "tailored" to and not to counter the Rafale.
But having said that all ac have certain advantages n disadvantages n it is up to the pilot n the af to amplify n maximize the the ac full spectrum of advantages.
Everyone and their sisters knows that. That's a moot point since this is only about platform to platform capabilities and not pilots.
Eg f 16 vs vie the rafale.....rafale iwould have the advantage at higher altitudes while the f16 at lower altitudes will eat the rafale alive for breakfast , lunch n dinner....provided the pilot knows wt he's doing.
We're talking about the F-16 now? I thought the comparison was between the J-10C and Rafale not the F-16 why bring that up? Besides, there's not a shred of supportive evidence of the F-16 even being so superior at low altitude A2A combat vs the Rafale, quite the opposite which has been proven. You dismiss the power, agility, weapons systems, prowess, potency, ECM caps, maneuverability AND combat record in your sweeping generalization and frankly ridiculously baseless claims. I don't mean to be nasty, not my intention at all as this can be easily perceived as such. But there's no other way to counter your claim which is unsupportive without being frank. Your claims are based solely on you're own, personal and biased hearsay.
So in a any flight I would have j10c flying top cover n the f16 or the jf17 flying low.....I would be bold enough to say that PAF would come out trumps in 9 out of 10 times in any such encounter.
9 out of 10 times?! Did I read that right, 9 out of 10 times, right?
And which one out of those 3 you just listed are you specifically referring to coming out on top 9 out of 10 times?
Let's not clog the field, here. We're talking strictly about the J-10C vs Rafale comparison, not the F-16 or JF-17 or all three for that matter.
Let's take a quick looksee at statistical differences between the
J-10C & Rafale. This is just a quick article I found but is pretty much spot on the money with sourced and listed statistics of both fighters.
For starters, J-10CE is the export variant (E for export) of the J-10Caircraft which is the third improved variant of the Chinese J-10A which in turn is a copy of the Israeli fighter IAI Lavi. It is a single-engine, lightweight,
multirole combat aircraft with decent performance but nowhere near to that of Rafale.
The J-10C has an empty weight of 8,850 kg against Rafale’s empty weight of 9,850 kg. The Rafale is heavier by one ton when empty but has a far greater thrust coming out of its engines. The two M88 engines of Rafale churn a thrust of 100/150 kN (dry/afterburner) against 79/125 kN (dry/afterburner) thrust of the J-10C.
Quantitatively, Rafale has 20% more thrust and only 11% more weight than the J10C. This means that Rafale has a much better thrust-to-weight ratio than the J10C for the same fuel and gun weight. This means greater agility and higher energy, which are the determinants of WVR combat. But what is really important here is that the Rafale short-range missile (MICAIR) is many generations ahead of the J10C’s PL8 / 9 missile. MICAIR has an imaging infrared (IIR) viewfinder as opposed to the PL8’s infrared (IR) viewfinder, which also has a much higher range, off-bore shooting capability, G resistance, and kill probability. Assuming of course the PAF is using the PL8 and not an improved version or something else. The off-boresight capability difference right off the bat would give the Rafale the much greater advantage in the exact scenario you were referring to, close A2A combat/dog-fighting.
Beyond-Visual Range (BVR) Combat: In BVR combat, the two devices are of paramount importance. An excellent radar that sees the enemy before it sees it, and an excellent BVR missile that can reach far and attack the enemy. Radar: The J10C has a Chinese AESA radar (active electronically scanned array) with a 1,200 T/R module (transceiver). This is a huge number, but the J10C’s single AL31 motor isn’t powerful enough to power all 1,200 T / R modules. Therefore, radar operates with less power. The article does make the correction further down of the J-10C being powered by the WS-10 now and not the AL-31. So above paragraph is based on the older, temporary engine so guessing it's not applicable in this case. Unless the PAF J-10s are all equipped with the AL-31?
The Rafale radar is an RBE2 AESA radar with 838 T/R modules. All T/R modules are functional and technically superior radars. Both the J10C and Rafale have a similar radar cross-section of 1 m2, but Rafale has a greater advantage in detecting the J10C due to the higher detection area of Rafale’s RBE2. For other tasks like air-to-ground, RBE2 has better modes and higher reliability. Because we don't have any real concrete info on the Chinese radar, it's difficult to be certain of the above claim.
The J-10, which has been called a “Firebird” by NATO, is a single-engine, light multirole fighter that can fly in all weather conditions. It was designed for the People’s Liberation Army Air Force to carry out strike and air-to-air combat operations. Not tailored to counter the Rafale. 
The J-10C variant, on which the FC-20E is based, is powered by the indigenously developed WS-10 Taihang engine. Engine correction.
In contrast, the Rafale is a twin-engine fighter that can operate from either an aircraft carrier or a land base. All combat aviation missions can be carried out by the fully adaptable Rafale, including air superiority and air defense, close air support, in-depth strikes, reconnaissance, anti-ship strikes, and nuclear deterrent.
And of course, the Rafale carries the METEOR which as of today and for the distant future is the best A2A missile out there and will stay at the top even as others come out since it too will only improve on itself.
Your claim of the F-16 (which I have no idea why you brought that up) is actually the opposite of what you said, the Rafale is significantly better in maneuverability in close A2A & dogfighting than the F-16. SIGNIFICANTLY better.
Even the Rafale's EWC far exceed those of the F-16 and most of the 4++ generation aircraft out there as its built-in EW systems are highly advanced with its superb sensor fusion technology that incorporates all data to the pilot so that a single Rafale can easily take on enemy territory interdiction missions solely and without the need for additional EW aircraft support. Another reason why you just simply cannot make such bold and sweeping biased comparisons.
Just to be clear - in no way shape or form am I suggesting that the J-10C is a bad or inferior fighter, not at all. Quite the opposite, I'm a fan of all aviation which makes me more inclined to obtain accurate, comparative information on the capabilities of all the different types and makes. When I see a bold claim (and exuberantly passionate but unfortunately an extremely biased one), I can't help but take it to task, especially when it's without any reliable information to support it.
