PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Mighty_Dragon_Strike]

I think you've completely misunderstood me. Unfortunately, the blurring of different perspectives makes things more complicated than MK's black-and-white portrayal:

I'm interested in facts, especially facts regarding Chinese systems, and not as a spy, because then I wouldn't still be working as a chemistry teacher. Even more so then I would hide who I am ...

So, to reiterate, I'm interested in facts, and if idiots weren't constantly spreading nonsense—whether out of stupidity, malice, or nationalism—it's irrelevant, then I wouldn't have to comment on it!

Therefore, as @Ak01 nicely put it, I'm not the problem, but rather "the incompetent morons."

IDK, you seem to know better.

 

[Deino]

IDK, you seem to know better.

Again, it is not the point of "I know better"; even though I would certainly describe myself as someone knowledgeable about the subject (perhaps arrogantly so), I still have much to learn, and I'm open to it, because—and I want to reiterate this—I'm interested in facts. I'm also always willing to change my mind and be corrected.

However, if someone like MK comes along and claims, contrary to all established knowledge, that the Block 3 uses an Italian engine, has enlarged wings and tails, that the cockpit walls contain fuel tanks because they're green, and that it can also fire American AMRAAM missiles, then that's simply wrong, and I won't let that go unchallenged, because otherwise other uninformed people will spread their nonsense.

 

[Oscar]

Just like to get this straight:

PAF cant afford the J-16D, because its too expensive.

But PAF can afford to buy the J-10D which would be a fully custom version, designed only for the PAF, with R&D, Certification, testing and then production lines/facilities set up, purely for an order of maybe, 10 aircraft? at a push 12?

Do you see how silly this sounds?

What do you think it would cost to develop a 'J-10D'?

The development budget for the EA-18G, as an offshoot of the FA-18SH, was $1bn.

Heck, just the development budget of the upgrade of the NGJ-MB, to NGJ-MBX was $200 million.

So now, please let us know how it would be cheaper to custom develop a version of the J-10 for EW, particularly one that would be procured in low quantities. Id love to hear this.

So I know a bit about this one due to a passing discussion back in Jan 2025 with a short term TA/DA trip holder.

The Chinese Flanker derivatives are still “not for sale but for sale but we need a lot of money to violate the handshake with the Russians”

So there was a study done for a J-10 based variant early on by CAC but specifically for a J-10 “CJ” type variant not a “EJ-10” analog.
Where the idea would be hang off more EW pods off the jet versus the current single (centerline??) variety. That CY doesn’t really have much going for it in terms of space so while it could maybe hold some additional stuff the whole CG/dist aspects come into play.

You don’t get the same level of:

Distributed, dedicated receive arrays and antennas built into the airframe
High‑capacity power and cooling margin reserved for EW systems
Crew concept and cockpit layout optimized around managing the electromagnetic battle

 

[Corax]

Again, it is not the point of "I know better"; even though I would certainly describe myself as someone knowledgeable about the subject (perhaps arrogantly so), I still have much to learn, and I'm open to it, because—and I want to reiterate this—I'm interested in facts. I'm also always willing to change my mind and be corrected.

However, if someone like MK comes along and claims, contrary to all established knowledge, that the Block 3 uses an Italian engine, has enlarged wings and tails, that the cockpit walls contain fuel tanks because they're green, and that it can also fire American AMRAAM missiles, then that's simply wrong, and I won't let that go unchallenged, because otherwise other uninformed people will spread their nonsense.

Andreas, you've reminded me of all the ridiculous claims we saw...the green coloured fuel tank around the cockpit was the best

 

[Ak01]

So I know a bit about this one due to a passing discussion back in Jan 2025 with a short term TA/DA trip holder.

The Chinese Flanker derivatives are still “not for sale but for sale but we need a lot of money to violate the handshake with the Russians”

So there was a study done for a J-10 based variant early on by CAC but specifically for a J-10 “CJ” type variant not a “EJ-10” analog.
Where the idea would be hang off more EW pods off the jet versus the current single (centerline??) variety. That CY doesn’t really have much going for it in terms of space so while it could maybe hold some additional stuff the whole CG/dist aspects come into play.

You don’t get the same level of:

Distributed, dedicated receive arrays and antennas built into the airframe
High‑capacity power and cooling margin reserved for EW systems
Crew concept and cockpit layout optimized around managing the electromagnetic battle

the problem is though, youve got a single crewman, unless we're looking at a J-10C twin seat, plus, i guess the other sort of downside is how much can you really dangle off it. At the end of the day, its a poor solution.

Im not too sure what the obsession with fighter based OECM is anyway, the PAF has always relied on bizjets, and it works out to create a far better solution, unless we're looking at carrying what, 3-5 jammers per aircraft for full spectrum attack capabilities, or then take a hit on some of that capability in exchange for bags. Bizjet based solutions seem far superior, in most ways atleast. Nothing to say carrying a couple of pods like the PAF does currently is a bad idea, but, i dont think its worth the investment into the J-10 Platform.

Perhaps the JF-17B could make a better platform for this, it would probably be sluggish as hell, but you could easily get 3-5 jammers, plus bags on it, or otoh, have them in flights of two, with one set focusing on set freq bands, and the other on others etc.

 

[Oscar]

the problem is though, youve got a single crewman, unless we're looking at a J-10C twin seat, plus, i guess the other sort of downside is how much can you really dangle off it. At the end of the day, its a poor solution.

Im not too sure what the obsession with fighter based OECM is anyway, the PAF has always relied on bizjets, and it works out to create a far better solution, unless we're looking at carrying what, 3-5 jammers per aircraft for full spectrum attack capabilities, or then take a hit on some of that capability in exchange for bags. Bizjet based solutions seem far superior, in most ways atleast. Nothing to say carrying a couple of pods like the PAF does currently is a bad idea, but, i dont think its worth the investment into the J-10 Platform.

Perhaps the JF-17B could make a better platform for this, it would probably be sluggish as hell, but you could easily get 3-5 jammers, plus bags on it, or otoh, have them in flights of two, with one set focusing on set freq bands, and the other on others etc.

The only need for the fighter platform is survivability in hostile territory.

Bizjets cannot accompany you too far into a deep strike and always are more vulnerable than a more agile platform.

That being said - the way things are moving the quantity needed soon to really break through the EW spectrum especially with what is being stockpiled and integrated in the east is a challenge that requires funds aplenty

 

[Ak01]

The only need for the fighter platform is survivability in hostile territory.

Bizjets cannot accompany you too far into a deep strike and always are more vulnerable than a more agile platform.

But this is never going to be able to align with the PAF's needs anyway. Deep strikes would surely be limited and not too common, rather, for clearing up the immediate threats on the border, having powerful bizjets that can operate within our borders seems far more ideal. Then as the border gets cleaned up, you can start to move closer etc.

For the deep strike missions we've got a fair few escort jammers stocked up, not ideal, but im sure that part of the equation has been planned for.

 

[Cipher212]

I don't agree with your take " India having full reach inside Pakistan" agree with the rest.

Pretty sure their missiles have range to make it anywhere in Pakistan. Interception har dafa nahi honi.

Combined AD of US+ UK + Israel and even some Arab countries along the way could not stop Iranian missiles from hitting Tel Aviv. India is next door.

 

[Ak01]

Combined AD of US+ UK + Israel and even some Arab countries along the way could not stop Iranian missiles from hitting Tel Aviv. India is next door.

@JamD might be a good time to explain the different types of intercept, particularly how we could be in a better position by using BPI tech perhaps if youve got time

 

[PakShaheen_79]

But this is never going to be able to align with the PAF's needs anyway. Deep strikes would surely be limited and not too common, rather, for clearing up the immediate threats on the border, having powerful bizjets that can operate within our borders seems far more ideal. Then as the border gets cleaned up, you can start to move closer etc.

For the deep strike missions we've got a fair few escort jammers stocked up, not ideal, but im sure that part of the equation has been planned for.

Really a big ask with current PAF inventory. Decades of neglect to induct dedicated strike platform like Flanker and relying on single engine MR fighters has now come to bite us. China can't sell, PAF can't get it directly from Russians considering Indian stratgem of keeping Pakistan away from Russians weapon. Now there is chatter of IAF getting SU-57. The argument was we are smaller AF with constraint budget and don't need heavies like Flankers. Ironically, it should have been the size of adversary's landmass and natrual advantage it offer to it driving the decision instead of own size. May 2025 exposed PAF's limited strike capability badly despite owning the skies earlier in conflict. India, meanwhile, is weighing even stronger strike options. Situation is challenging indeed if not alarming!

 

[mythbuster]

the problem is though, youve got a single crewman, unless we're looking at a J-10C twin seat, plus, i guess the other sort of downside is how much can you really dangle off it. At the end of the day, its a poor solution.

Im not too sure what the obsession with fighter based OECM is anyway, the PAF has always relied on bizjets, and it works out to create a far better solution, unless we're looking at carrying what, 3-5 jammers per aircraft for full spectrum attack capabilities, or then take a hit on some of that capability in exchange for bags. Bizjet based solutions seem far superior, in most ways atleast. Nothing to say carrying a couple of pods like the PAF does currently is a bad idea, but, i dont think its worth the investment into the J-10 Platform.

Perhaps the JF-17B could make a better platform for this, it would probably be sluggish as hell, but you could easily get 3-5 jammers, plus bags on it, or otoh, have them in flights of two, with one set focusing on set freq bands, and the other on others etc.

For $ 20 millions you can get a 7 seater bizjet that can stay in the air for 6/7 hours , ample space for all kinds of systems and ample energy.... easy Modifications because of easily available space.

 

[Ak01]

Really a big ask with current PAF inventory. Decades of neglect to induct dedicated strike platform like Flanker and relying on single engine MR fighters has now come to bite us. China can't sell, PAF can't get it directly from Russians considering Indian stratgem of keeping Pakistan away from Russians weapon. Now there is chatter of IAF getting SU-57. The argument was we are smaller AF with constraint budget and don't need heavies like Flankers. Ironically, it should have been the size of adversary's landmass and natrual advantage it offer to it driving the decision instead of own size. May 2025 exposed PAF's limited strike capability badly despite owning the skies earlier in conflict. India, meanwhile, is weighing even stronger strike options. Situation is challenging indeed if not alarming!

IMO, the PAF will need to move to larger twin seat fighters to act as control nodes for drones etc at some point. I dont think the PAF could use something like the j35 for this because they will likely need something that is a bit less closed off to be able to integrate other assets to it. Turkish, domestic, Chinese etc.

i wonder what they'd pick though

 

[the vicious kind]

For $ 20 millions you can get a 7 seater bizjet that can stay in the air for 6/7 hours , ample space for all kinds of systems and ample energy.... easy Modifications because of easily available space.

And for £190 Million, you co-found the Al-Qadir University Trust with your wife, and illegally funnel the money to your brother in laws and family.

 

[Corax]

I think most of the jamming in 2019 and 2025 was done by ground based systems, there's no way 2 aging Dassault DA20s, despite the upgrades years ago, are enough for airborne jamming for Pak airspace. The PAF haven't sought to increase standoff jammers until now with speculation of the Turkish aircraft.

 

[Ak01]

I think most of the jamming in 2019 and 2025 was done by ground based systems, there's no way 2 aging Dassault DA20s, despite the upgrades years ago, are enough for airborne jamming for Pak airspace. The PAF haven't sought to increase standoff jammers until now with speculation of the Turkish aircraft.

the DA-20s were upgraded with modern kit. The airframes themselves are tired, but the kit onboard is the same as the ground based stuff we use. Atleast for comjam, we use the JN1011 onboard the DA20s and on the ground too