PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
MastanKhan said:
Hi,

I can be corrected on this information---

Rafale has approx 850 TR modules

JF17 BLK3 has around a 1000 +-

J10 CE has about 1250 +-

+ the TR modules are different in types
Click to expand...

I honestly think that the radars on the planes were not the decisive factor(if they even got switched on by the PAF that .) but the AEW&C and the 'silent' kills of being guided by the AEW&C until they got into the terminal kill phase.
 
Very little has been discussed about the performance of Chinese jet engines in the recent conflict. Over of the years, thousands of posts relentlessly have criticized Chinese engine technology as unreliable and unsuitable—especially for single-engine fighters. Yet the recent conflict has decisively challenged that narrative. The J-10C, a single-engine fighter powered by a domestically produced engine, has performed impressively in combat. Its success in real-world air warfare has been so clear that the usual concerns about engine reliability have all but disappeared from the conversation.
@MastanKhan
 
Last edited:
UFC said:
Very little has been discussed about the performance of Chinese jet engines in the recent conflict. Over of the years, thousands of posts relentlessly have criticized Chinese engine technology as unreliable and unsuitable—especially for single-engine fighters. Yet the recent conflict has decisively challenged that narrative. The J-10C, a single-engine fighter powered by a domestically produced engine, has performed impressively in combat. Its success in real-world air warfare has been so clear that the usual concerns about engine reliability have all but disappeared from the conversation.
@MastanKhan
Click to expand...

The conflict had some very intense flying for sure, but was several days at best so within their overhaul intervals. We don't know much about the performance characteristics of the chinese engines yet.

They will have progressed quite a lot i suspect, but the Chinese have not been that transparent about their engines so it is difficult to have a debate on.

( Pakistan has been very adapt at using equipment with very low MTBO's in the past. )
 
Last edited:
Michael said:
The Poly Group is itself an arms trader. The presence of weapons in its companies is not surprising. However, there is no information to prove that it is an intact and genuine fighter jet.

There are a number of companies in China that make high-fidelity 1:1 display models of fighter jets. They even refurbish some old real fighter parts and use them in their display models.
The science museum in my city has many of these high precision models. Ordinary visitors can't tell the real ones from the fake ones.

Some of China's decommissioned fighters (including demonstrators used for testing) can be made available to organizations for public static displays after technical processing (removal of combat functions and classified information components).


I don't see the value in upgrading the F-16s at PAF.

In the current international situation, no one can provide F-16 upgrades to PAF for free.

Based on common sense, if PAF upgrades the F-16 (to or near F-16V standards), it will be a huge expense.

For reference: unit prices for upgrading F-16s in various countries
USAF: about 10 million dollars
Taiwan Air Force: about $32 million
Argentina: about 39 million dollars
The exact cost depends on the scope of the upgrade and the level of the upgrade.


The RD-93 engine generates less power (a common problem with Russian engines). This results in a very limited avionics system for the JF-17B3. I'm not sure about the RD-93MA.

The radar of JF-17B3, KLJ-7A, is very powerful and uses more electrical power. Using the RD-93 to power the KLJ-7A is very strenuous. It would have a hard time supporting longer radar runtimes at full power. Also, it limits the JF-17B3 from carrying more electronics.

The WS-21 engine follows the same technical path as the RD-93, but the details and materials are quite different. It is a very desirable alternative. However, the WS-21 engine is more expensive, it is very much more expensive than the RD-93 engine. ------ The J-35 foreign trade version uses all WS-21 engines. So, it certainly has enough power generation.


The biggest contributor to winning this air battle was the air warfare system platform behind it. J-10CE/JF-17B3+PL-15E.These are just the surface parts of this massive system. There are more and more powerful things hidden behind the scenes and they have not surfaced.

Objectively speaking, as far as fighter jets alone are concerned, the Rafale is a good fighter, and it is on a par with the J-10CE. In terms of overall performance, the Rafale is better than the J-10CE.

The root cause of India's air war losses is the chaotic and outdated air combat command system. In other words, they can't win this air battle even with F-22/F-35 and will lose to J-10CE as well.

Or, let me put it another way.
If we make some modifications to the PAF's F-7PG to make it support PL-15E, and a two-way datalink. Then, guided by other equipment (ground radar or AEW&C), it would be equally capable of launching a PL-15E in the same position to shoot down an IAF Rafale.
But we can't say that this F-7PG is much more advanced than Rafale . Right?
Click to expand...
When the engine’s life comes due, and if the WS-21 is mature, it really should be looked for a swap, for at least the jets with enough life in the air frame, going forward.
 
How many J-10C's do you think PAF is going for?
 
617ah said:
I tend to believe that Macron is negotiating with China to exchange the reduction of tariffs on Chinese goods for the J10C not participating in the air show. I don’t know much about the French; as an old rival of France, do you think that France will allow the J10C to participate in this air show?
Click to expand...
Would be great if Pakistan sends its J10's with indian kill markings
 
If anything, this conflict has transformed the relationship between the Pakistan military and Chinese defense technology firms from a conventional vendor-client model to a strategic partnership in both development and deployment. An increasing number of Chinese defense technology companies are expected to deepen their engagement, particularly in non-traditional domains.
 
Ali_Baba said:
I honestly think that the radars on the planes were not the decisive factor(if they even got switched on by the PAF that .) but the AEW&C and the 'silent' kills of being guided by the AEW&C until they got into the terminal kill phase.
Click to expand...
You hit the point on a lot of discussions like turning F7 or any jet into a shooter. With radar off and radio silent, you'd assume any jet could be the shooter but you might have missed that J10C's designs made it semi-stealthy and has IRST that senses threat even in radar-blind and communication-disrupted situations. That allows J10C approaches an enemy jet close enough for the shot and not be shot. I may be wrong but I'd think a F7 or H6 bomber cannot match J10C's battle efficiency in intense aerial battle that involves 4.5-gen enemy jets.
 
Oscar said:
I never said AEW was absent just that it was not ZDK-03
Click to expand...
I have a question brother.

Can PAF link up to any PLAAF AWACS that could be / would be covering the entirety of IIOJK?

It would be a scary dilemma for Hindustan to grapple with and this is something that the analyst Pravin Sawhney has been mentioning for years that future conflicts won't be fought on two fronts but a 'reinforced one front".
 
Pakistan Space Agency said:
I have a question brother.

Can PAF link up to any PLAAF AWACS that could be / would be covering the entirety of IIOJK?

It would be a scary dilemma for Hindustan to grapple with and this is something that the analyst Pravin Sawhney has been mentioning for years that future conflicts won't be fought on two fronts but a 'reinforced one front".
Click to expand...
So long as protocols are compatible - architecture scalable - encryption robust - the sky is not the limit.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top