PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Yasser76]

It’s about doctrine and the enemy profile we face. The Indians will be increasing their SAM coverage and the Field Marshall has indicated Pakistan is shifting towards being able to take the war to the Indians; offensive missions, potentially into enemy territory.

I wouldn’t call it expeditionary, but more in contested if not denied airspace.

Big jammers on biz jets can do that at safe stand off distances, but get your point

 

[FuturePAF]

Yup, add that to the lift of stuff like

"Pak Marines should be like USMC"

"Pak Army should have an airborne brigade"

"PAF should have C-17s"

Stuff like that looks cool online and in magazines and because US or others adopt it we must.

Except in this case, air power is the key decisive domain where the PAF has to operate at world class levels to maintain the decisive edge.

The PAF BVR performance was world class in shooting down those Rafales, this past May.

 

[FuturePAF]

a powerful standoff array would do a better job and be more survivable, like the G6000

It’s not either or, but both. The Havasoj is definitely needed, for area ops, but when aircraft need to go on offensive ops, having a couple of dedicated EW fighters alongside a package of 6-8 strike platforms could be decisive to survival and mission success.

 

[Ak01]

Except in this case, air power is the key decisive domain where the PAF has to operate at world class levels to maintain the decisive edge.

how would j10 jammers do this when a far more capable and power system would do it in a safer manner

 

[Ak01]

It’s not either or, but both. The Havasoj is definitely needed, for area ops, but when aircraft need to go on offensive ops, having a couple of dedicated EW fighters alongside a package of 6-8 strike platforms could be decisive to survival and mission success.

this is why our fighters operate escort jammers, but again havasoj etc are aesa based jammers and thus directional, so they can do that anyway.

 

[FuturePAF]

This is a completely feasible option, and it's well-suited for the PAF.
1. The JH-7E is an export model.
2. China's domestically produced version already features a large electronic warfare pod.
3. It's affordable. The combat radius, cruising time, load capacity and other aspects are all good.
View attachment 141991
View attachment 141992

The JH-7E could be a good stop gap (if procured from PLAAF stocks) in this regard, but the PAF would want to consolidate on aircraft types, and would want one of their planned or existing fighter types to carry these pods.

 

[FuturePAF]

how would j10 jammers do this when a far more capable and power system would do it in a safer manner

Distance.

Havasoj would be 100s of km back. The dedicated EW fighters alongside would be within 10s of km of its flight package.

If the strike package has to penetrate enemy air defense and EW defenses to fire off a series of munitions to take out isr nodes, the Havasoj may not be effective from hundreds of km back. Especially against popup threats.

 

[Ak01]

Distance.

Havasoj would be 100s of km back. The dedicated EW fighters alongside would be within 10s of km of its flight package.

If the strike package has to penetrate enemy air defense and EW defenses to fire off a series of munitions to take out isr nodes, the Havasoj may not be effective from hundreds of km back. Especially against popup threats.

again, havasoj will be an extremely powerful system, it would also have far better directionality and band covg, these are all things you wont find on a fighter. havasoj is literally designed to be extremely effective from STANDOFF ranges

 

[FuturePAF]

again, havasoj will be an extremely powerful system, it would also have far better directionality and band covg, these are all things you wont find on a fighter. havasoj is literally designed to be extremely effective from STANDOFF ranges

I hope you are right. I’m sure the PAF will assess, especially at the full scale Shaheen exercises against the S-400, and procure any further systems if the Havasoj doesn’t cover it.

 

[Yasser76]

I hope you are right. I’m sure the PAF will assess, especially at the full scale Shaheen exercises against the S-400, and procure any further systems if the Havasoj doesn’t cover it.

Only 4 countries operate the S-400. Two of them are Turkey and China. Would be amazed if PAF does not know the system inside out already

 

[Ak01]

not enough to avoid one of your awacs down.

nothing is impossible in ones dreams

 

[Yasser76]

not enough to avoid one of your awacs down.

Bon Plan Did @Musings Not tell us all you had the same IP as a banned ID?

You cannot resist coming back heh!?

Wet dreams again?

 

[MH.Yang]

This is a completely feasible option, and it's well-suited for the PAF.
1. The JH-7E is an export model.
2. China's domestically produced version already features a large electronic warfare pod.
3. It's affordable. The combat radius, cruising time, load capacity and other aspects are all good.
View attachment 141991
View attachment 141992

I remember that the JH-7 production line has been discontinued for nearly 10 years.

 

[Dreamer]

You seem to have forgotten.
Why is the JF-17 fighter jet called “JF-17”?

If you are suggesting they were to replace the F-16, that's not the case.

I once explained it on the older than old forum. It is the same reason our navy Frigates are called F-22P. The 'F-17' comes after the F-16, and the J added for joint venture. The F-22 frigates came after the type-21 frigates. The JF-17's were to complement the F-16's and the F-22's to complement the Type-21's ,not to replace them.

The naming also has to do with those in charge at the time wanting to make a statement. The JF-17 and F-22P projects are both from similar time frame. It was a difficult period for the armed forces. Both have a basis in late 90's (reaching completion later). Those familiar with the era would understand better.

 

[Oscar]

sorry but this J-10 EW stuff is retarded.

PAF does not need fighter based standoff jammers like the EA-18 because its simple.

The USN needs the EA18 for expeditionary ccapabilities, the PAF doesnt. A Very powerful global 6000 based jammer would keep every iaf asset well handled.

Not exactly but the issue also is PAF’s needs to strike in depth. You’re not risking the global 6000 crossing in depth - however that doesn’t necessarily mean an escort jammer and just decently powerful pods will do as well.