JF-17 PFX program

[Khanivore]

Also, China maybe reluctant to share cutting edge WS-19 tech, but maybe more comfortable with sharing WS-10 technology, possibly even license production.

Respectfully, I think the focus should be on acquiring the engine (WS-10, 15 or 19) rather than ToT/Tech sharing. Franky, Pakistan isn't ready for that.

 

[FuturePAF]

Respectfully, I think the focus should be on acquiring the engine (WS-10, 15 or 19) rather than ToT/Tech sharing. Franky, Pakistan isn't ready for that.

I agree. But it’s about planning for a conversation from the onset; not to ask for something that is not likely to happen, while starting from the point of understanding China’s sensitivities as well as working with mature tech, which we have experience with via the J-10CE.

As we saw with the JF-17, we didn’t ask for cutting edge tech, but worked with off the shelf options to be able to field something quickly but within our budget and meeting our needs.

Btw, once the WS-15 is mature, and China has started initial trials of its variable cycle engines, they maybe more likely to share WS-10 tech (if by then we have gotten our act together economically and brought on board investors into the program such as the Saudis). The WS-10C has serrated nozzles to lower the IR signature, while the WS-10G variant may match the same max thrust as the F-119. So developing a full scale McDonnell Douglas JAST inspired PFX would then be very realistic.

Working with SAC, the full sized front section could be shifted over from the J-35A design, with the intakes changed to fit a single engine design rather than a twin engine design. This could be shared in common with PAF J-35A fighters. The innovation would be implementing the Lamba wing and Pelikan tail of the JAST and working out the layout of the weapons bay.

Ignore the hovering option and watch from 0:15-1:38

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[PakShaheen_79]

PAF lacks strike/bomber platform and this was exposed very badly during May 2025 conflict. Relying on multi-role fighter in light weight category only shows our defensive mindset in aerial combat prepardness. Deterrence comes with clear demonstration of destructive power that could punish the enemy. PAF suffered damages on airbases without being able to inflict similar kind of damage on enemy due to lack of firepower. India is a massive country. A huge target. We need bigger birds with capacity to carry tons of weapons during single sortie like Indians can do thanks to their huge fleet of MKIs. F-16s can carry decent payload but unfrotunately we don't have access to long range strike weapons for them plus political strings attached further complicate the equation. I wonder why PAF didn't go for Su-35 when it was offered few years back? Even a smaller quantity of these aircrft would have allowed PAF to have access to Russian long range A2G missilesl like KH-31P. Chinese have developed YJ-91 based on this weapons but again I am not sure if they can export it to Pakistan or not.

 

[Michael]

The PFX will definitely have to be a clean sheet design. The JF-17 has reached the limits of its design. The question now remains if the PFX will use the RD-93/WS-13/WS-19 OR the WS-10B engine (144 kn). I hope they go with the WS-10B. Even if Pakistan gets access to that design, focusing on a single engine fighter at 70-75% the weight of the F-35A would make it a competitive aircraft. Enough space to house larger and more modern missiles internally, focused on A2A, but with enough space (in a single central bay) to house decently sized A2G munitions, while not going for an exquisitely “cutting edge” and costly platform.

WS-10B?
What are the differences between this and the J-10CE?
Do you think China would support Pakistan in producing a fighter jet that would compete with its own?

Single-engine stealth fighter jet?
China has already developed several UCAVs in this direction.

AFAIK - the sino-russian agreement on the flanker is tied to their general relationship. But would it work now?
Technically, China is stuck with the global mood against Russia but also has an opportunity to become a sino-flanker supply for Russia - my assumption is Russia cannot churn out enough Su-35s or 57s and needs to augment its numbers.

But if there may be experts on this relationship it would be @Deino or @Michael

Are you referring to the J-16 fighter jet?

If China itself were willing to sell J-16 fighter jets to other countries, then China would have many ways to address Russia's concerns. This is not the core reason for the problem.

1. Price factor. The J-16 fighter jet is very expensive; the standard version's price is close to that of the J-20 fighter jet, and the EW version is even more expensive than the J-20. This is completely beyond the affordability of the target customer base for Chinese fighter jets. We haven't even discussed the subsequent maintenance costs of these fighter jets. Its cost (purchase cost, operating cost, maintenance cost) is not comparable to that of Russia's Su-35 series fighter jets.

2. China's strategic security considerations. This issue is not suitable for detailed discussion. However, we can observe that when China exports weapon systems to other countries, it does not export its active main battle weapon systems, especially to neighboring countries. We learned a very painful lesson during the Sino-Vietnamese War.

3. China's current stance on India-Pakistan relations is one of strategic balance. If the PAF possessed J-16D fighter jets, then, with the help of the J-16D, other older PAF fighter jets could also freely fly over Delhi... This does not align with China's current national policy.

Therefore, discussing the export of the J-16 fighter jet at this time doesn't make much sense. However, when the J-16 fighter jet is eventually allowed for export, I believe the export of the J-20 fighter jet will also be opened up. At that time, which would you choose, the J-16 or the J-20?

Respectfully, I think the focus should be on acquiring the engine (WS-10, 15 or 19) rather than ToT/Tech sharing. Franky, Pakistan isn't ready for that.

Pakistan already possesses the WS-10B engine. It has been supplied to Pakistan as the engine for the J-10CE aircraft.
The WS-15/19 engines will not be exported now or for a considerable time in the future.

Btw, once the WS-15 is mature, and China has started initial trials of its variable cycle engines, they maybe more likely to share WS-10 tech (if by then we have gotten our act together economically and brought on board investors into the program such as the Saudis). The WS-10C has serrated nozzles to lower the IR signature, while the WS-10G variant may match the same max thrust as the F-119. So developing a full scale McDonnell Douglas JAST inspired PFX would then be very realistic.

The WS-10C is a compromise and emergency solution based on the WS-10B, and there are no revolutionary upgrades between the two. More accurately, it is a product that sacrifices fuel efficiency for performance. The WS-10C2 has better optimized fuel efficiency, but the fundamental nature of the situation remains unchanged.

There is currently no reliable information confirming the existence of the WS-10G. It only circulates in fake news reports from self-media outlets.

 

[Night Memory]

A lot of this has to do with potential workshare on the TFX, but even that is highly speculative, and there's no firm details as far as I'm aware. But where in any of this does it say that Türkiye and Pakistan jointly produce the JF17 in Kamra? That was what you claimed.

Hes a troll lmao

 

[Night Memory]

The more i read about the PFX program the more it seems its not going to happen. We have heard no official news on it for a long time.

But what begs the question is if we are potentially going to have J-35 or TFX then what is the point of PFX? If JF-17’s airframe has reached its limit then why not just get license production of J-10 and upgrade the line at PAC Kamra. Or if you want to keep the line running, then simply get a workshare agreement with Turks on TFX.

 

[FuturePAF]

WS-10B?
What are the differences between this and the J-10CE?
Do you think China would support Pakistan in producing a fighter jet that would compete with its own?

Single-engine stealth fighter jet?
China has already developed several UCAVs in this direction.

Are you referring to the J-16 fighter jet?

If China itself were willing to sell J-16 fighter jets to other countries, then China would have many ways to address Russia's concerns. This is not the core reason for the problem.

1. Price factor. The J-16 fighter jet is very expensive; the standard version's price is close to that of the J-20 fighter jet, and the EW version is even more expensive than the J-20. This is completely beyond the affordability of the target customer base for Chinese fighter jets. We haven't even discussed the subsequent maintenance costs of these fighter jets. Its cost (purchase cost, operating cost, maintenance cost) is not comparable to that of Russia's Su-35 series fighter jets.

2. China's strategic security considerations. This issue is not suitable for detailed discussion. However, we can observe that when China exports weapon systems to other countries, it does not export its active main battle weapon systems, especially to neighboring countries. We learned a very painful lesson during the Sino-Vietnamese War.

3. China's current stance on India-Pakistan relations is one of strategic balance. If the PAF possessed J-16D fighter jets, then, with the help of the J-16D, other older PAF fighter jets could also freely fly over Delhi... This does not align with China's current national policy.

Therefore, discussing the export of the J-16 fighter jet at this time doesn't make much sense. However, when the J-16 fighter jet is eventually allowed for export, I believe the export of the J-20 fighter jet will also be opened up. At that time, which would you choose, the J-16 or the J-20?

Pakistan already possesses the WS-10B engine. It has been supplied to Pakistan as the engine for the J-10CE aircraft.
The WS-15/19 engines will not be exported now or for a considerable time in the future.

The WS-10C is a compromise and emergency solution based on the WS-10B, and there are no revolutionary upgrades between the two. More accurately, it is a product that sacrifices fuel efficiency for performance. The WS-10C2 has better optimized fuel efficiency, but the fundamental nature of the situation remains unchanged.

There is currently no reliable information confirming the existence of the WS-10G. It only circulates in fake news reports from self-media outlets.

The Saudis have a requirement for a 5th gen platform and may not want to be seen going in for a clearly Chinese option, such as the J-35A, for international prolifically reasons as well as a desire to build up their own industries.

Therefore a design that is below the capabilities of the J-35A but above those of the J-10CE is sought. They could afford to fund such a program and it would be a way for the Saudis to buy a lot of Chinese munitions, while the platform is a joint effort of China, Pakistan and Saudi industries. Would this platform compete with the J-10CE, sure, but the sale of Chinese munitions should offset any loss, similar to the sale of the JF-17; a joint venture itself.

The use and possible ToT of the WS-10 engine in the project would probably come with a firm commitment to buy 72-96 for the Royal Saudi Air Force, following their pattern of acquisitions, as well as support to Pakistan to fill its needs to probably buy approx. 90-180 over the course of a production run. Seeing its success, it would probably be acquired by other GCC countries as well as countries such as Bangladesh and possibly Egypt. A production run of 250-400, and an annual production rate of 18-24, would not be impossible, and could beat the Turkish KAAN to market, helping it to win orders, and cement Chinese sales of fighters in to one of the lost lucrative fighter markets in the world, as well as a strengthen military ties, but not at the expense of other relations of the GCC countries. The PFX, with a mature Chinese engine, would build on the Pak-Saudi defense agreement.

The WS-10 engine ToT would in the course of this process, as an older engine, would probably be seen as an acceptable ToT. With limited risk that sharing this technology with the Saudis and Pakistanis would reveal any cutting edge tech should the information get out by external entities looking into the three way partnership.

As far as UCAVs, there is still a demand for manned fighters, especially to lead such fighters in the midst of battle.

What is the max thrust of the WS-10C2? Also how much of a degradation are we talking about with the WS-10C2 engine in terms of fuel efficiency and engine life?

 

[Oscar]

1. Price factor. The J-16 fighter jet is very expensive; the standard version's price is close to that of the J-20 fighter jet, and the EW version is even more expensive than the J-20. This is completely beyond the affordability of the target customer base for Chinese fighter jets. We haven't even discussed the subsequent maintenance costs of these fighter jets. Its cost (purchase cost, operating cost, maintenance cost) is not comparable to that of Russia's Su-35 series fighter jets.

2. China's strategic security considerations. This issue is not suitable for detailed discussion. However, we can observe that when China exports weapon systems to other countries, it does not export its active main battle weapon systems, especially to neighboring countries. We learned a very painful lesson during the Sino-Vietnamese War.

3. China's current stance on India-Pakistan relations is one of strategic balance. If the PAF possessed J-16D fighter jets, then, with the help of the J-16D, other older PAF fighter jets could also freely fly over Delhi... This does not align with China's current national policy.

Not the J-16D - but specifically a variant of the sino-flanker that can serve as Unmanned control platform. Specifically one that can function closer to the border and more importantly for longer loitering time while being able to defend itself if needed.. These may not be Chinese supplied unmanned assets it controls.

 

[Michael]

Not the J-16D - but specifically a variant of the sino-flanker that can serve as Unmanned control platform. Specifically one that can function closer to the border and more importantly for longer loitering time while being able to defend itself if needed.. These may not be Chinese supplied unmanned assets it controls.

Currently, we primarily know of two types:

1. UCAV/CCA. This type of UAV is mainly commanded and controlled in collaborative combat operations by the J-20S. According to official reports, the J-35A also possesses some command capabilities in this regard.

2. Medium and large UAVs. China has many medium and large UAVs that are active in the Western Pacific region. These UAVs are primarily used for reconnaissance and patrol, with long flight ranges, high altitudes, and extended endurance. Some UAVs can carry self-defense and offensive weapons, possessing independent combat capabilities. They are mainly commanded by ground control stations, large surface warships, and AEW&C platforms. Their data can be synchronized with fighter jets, but they do not directly receive commands from fighter jets (requiring other platforms to relay instructions).

There are currently no credible reports on the capabilities of Chinese Flanker-series fighter jets in this area. The PLAAF has released news regarding the coordinated operation of large and medium-sized UAVs with Chinese Flanker-series fighter jets, but these UAVs are not directly commanded by the Flanker-series fighter jets.

Therefore, for the UAV-related activities you mentioned, the PAF's various AEW&C aircraft and ground control stations can effectively accomplish the relevant tasks.

The Saudis have a requirement for a 5th gen platform and may not want to be seen going in for a clearly Chinese option, such as the J-35A, for international prolifically reasons as well as a desire to build up their own industries.

Therefore a design that is below the capabilities of the J-35A but above those of the J-10CE is sought. They could afford to fund such a program and it would be a way for the Saudis to buy a lot of Chinese munitions, while the platform is a joint effort of China, Pakistan and Saudi industries. Would this platform compete with the J-10CE, sure, but the sale of Chinese munitions should offset any loss, similar to the sale of the JF-17; a joint venture itself.

The use and possible ToT of the WS-10 engine in the project would probably come with a firm commitment to buy 72-96 for the Royal Saudi Air Force, following their pattern of acquisitions, as well as support to Pakistan to fill its needs to probably buy approx. 90-180 over the course of a production run. Seeing its success, it would probably be acquired by other GCC countries as well as countries such as Bangladesh and possibly Egypt. A production run of 250-400, and an annual production rate of 18-24, would not be impossible, and could beat the Turkish KAAN to market, helping it to win orders, and cement Chinese sales of fighters in to one of the lost lucrative fighter markets in the world, as well as a strengthen military ties, but not at the expense of other relations of the GCC countries. The PFX, with a mature Chinese engine, would build on the Pak-Saudi defense agreement.

The WS-10 engine ToT would in the course of this process, as an older engine, would probably be seen as an acceptable ToT. With limited risk that sharing this technology with the Saudis and Pakistanis would reveal any cutting edge tech should the information get out by external entities looking into the three way partnership.

As far as UCAVs, there is still a demand for manned fighters, especially to lead such fighters in the midst of battle.

What is the max thrust of the WS-10C2? Also how much of a degradation are we talking about with the WS-10C2 engine in terms of fuel efficiency and engine life?

Bro. Your ideas have gone beyond reality. Please return to reason.

 

[Deino]

well. I know.

No, you only now how to spread lies and fake - as that alleged J-10 doing the falling leaf! - you are a TROLL! Nothing more

 

[PakShaheen_79]

The more i read about the PFX program the more it seems its not going to happen. We have heard no official news on it for a long time.

But what begs the question is if we are potentially going to have J-35 or TFX then what is the point of PFX? If JF-17’s airframe has reached its limit then why not just get license production of J-10 and upgrade the line at PAC Kamra. Or if you want to keep the line running, then simply get a workshare agreement with Turks on TFX.

Agree but the real picture will emerge in next Nov (2026) during IDEAS 2026.

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

ignoring the above speculation,

i think its becoming increasingly clear the PAF is going to need a proper twin seater if it wishes to get behind the loyal wingman trend.

The J-10 cant do the job, pilot workload would be significant

The JF-17 i fear may just not be able to have space for all the additional kit required, plus, youd probably be looking at a cockpit redesign, plus with little fuel capacity and whatnot, its not an ideal solution

Unless the Chinese come up with a twin seat J-35, which i guess isnt unlikely but isnt the most optimal solution (maintenance intensive, high cost, high cpfh, more sensitive etc)

i do feel like if the PAF had an option, it would want some sino flankers... I wonder if theres ANY way in the world the PAF can get their hands on them...

the Russian MiG 35 offer to Pakistan was effectively like, heres an airframe, customise it as you wish.

With Russia tied up in Ukraine, i do wonder, if there was a genuine solid push from Pak, could Russia grant China licenses to export something to Pakistan...

Because even now, i wonder whether the PAF would buy new F-16's, or would the PAF make a push for F-15s or 18's instead if the US option was on the table.

Typhoons i guess are the PAF's only real option, but the issue is of the restrictions that would come with, particularly when it comes to a strike focused, LwM config, not many countries would want to get behind that as theres a real risk of nuclear wpn carriage.

I just think, the PAF, if serious about the next gen, may need to switch over its procurement priorities and start looking for something heavier and better suited for being a node in a larger combat system, or rather, something capable of handling command and control. The issue with a JF-17XL is China is much more interested in the bigger fish, will they want to dedicate resources to a project that isnt going to be massively commercially viable? On top of that, will the PAF even be able to afford it? etc etc. I do wonder what the PAF is thinking on this front, it needs something on this front

@puttputt @Oscar

Not the J-16D - but specifically a variant of the sino-flanker that can serve as Unmanned control platform. Specifically one that can function closer to the border and more importantly for longer loitering time while being able to defend itself if needed.. These may not be Chinese supplied unmanned assets it controls.

Could it be a dual-seater KAAN Jet? Although it will take some good time.
what about a modified L15?
Also, what if we go for the Sea Sultan type route or use AWACS type system for this purpose?

 

[Ak01]

Also, what if we go for the Sea Sultan type route or use AWACS type system for this purpose?

the issue is our AEW in its current form cant support this, and in future form it has distinct issue which will cause problems...

mainly, LO LwM's will want to make use of highly directional, low 'noise' datalinks, these are shorter ranged, you will then risk having aew's on the front lines to keep those wingmen 'silent', the aew solution doesnt work, this is very much a problem that can only be solved by having assets far forward.

Dual seat kaan could work, but it creates a secondary issue in the sense that we now operate two fgfa's.

I do wonder whether the PAF can just hold off on an FGFA for a little bit, end up seeking out Kaan so that we're able to freely integrate stuff, something i think the turks will be more open to, itll be particularly useful with LwM's.

But all in all, the PAF has to induct a proper twin seater next, jf17 cant do the job, im sure of it

 

[SiliconBit (silicon0000)]

the issue is our AEW in its current form cant support this, and in future form it has distinct issue which will cause problems...

mainly, LO LwM's will want to make use of highly directional, low 'noise' datalinks, these are shorter ranged, you will then risk having aew's on the front lines to keep those wingmen 'silent', the aew solution doesnt work, this is very much a problem that can only be solved by having assets far forward.

Dual seat kaan could work, but it creates a secondary issue in the sense that we now operate two fgfa's.

I do wonder whether the PAF can just hold off on an FGFA for a little bit, end up seeking out Kaan so that we're able to freely integrate stuff, something i think the turks will be more open to, itll be particularly useful with LwM's.

But all in all, the PAF has to induct a proper twin seater next, jf17 cant do the job, im sure of it

Sorry I may not be able to tell properly, i didn't mean Awacs, what i want to say a jet or plane like Awacs which do the job of loyal wingman operations (not a proper Awacs which do Awacs job) or may i say a new special purpose plane for this role, like, take a plane like an Embraer Lineage 1000E business jet or some other better-suited jet/plane and modify it to do the job.

 

[Pioneer]

No, you only now how to spread lies and fake - as that alleged J-10 doing the falling leaf! - you are a TROLL! Nothing more

haha. Calm down. Avoid extreme emotions. For your health.