PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Ak01]

This is not an OPSEC breach because it is technical speculation based on open standards and publicly known system limitations. An OPSEC breach would involve confirming classified capabilities, system configurations, or deployment details that are not publicly acknowledged.

At the end of the day - how sure are any of us that it was truly link-17 that day?

as i said, once big words start coming out, some of us start to lose our minds and start screaming opsaxxx and khlassified saar

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

Please do some research on your own and if you can’t find the answer, humbly request senior members to shed some light on it. We are discouraged to share sensitive information on public forums so don’t expect anything sensitive.

 

[Dasboot42]

feel free to ask questions. Ask to your hearts content. Ignore these types.

Tiny tiny insecure so called "men" who have personnel vendettas of ego and that too in the cyber world, I laugh at how they deal with issues in the real world.

My fellow patriotic Pakistanis here, we old timers used to give it HARD to the Indians, especially the posers. The majority of Hindus are the real scum of the planet, an inferiority complex ridden vermin who fantasize about mass rapes of our mothers, sisters and daughters. Yet here we are so caught up in an insane illusion of self importance that we let these Indian rats infiltrate and wreak havoc on our Nat Sec infos.

It truly breaks my heart to see that most admins on this forum are self delusional aman ka asha type begharaits that they cannot sniff a dirty hateful smelly Indian posing as Pakistani and gleefully divulge all.

This is and has been the great bane of our nations so called intellectual elite.

How many Tariq Habib Afridis do we know?? What kind of name is this? Why is he asking so many particular peculiar specific questions? And the admins here are shamefully divulging all and encouraging this ........... to ask questions freely??????

To the garbage has this forum degraded due to the lax attitude of the admins.

We used to ban and curse these Indian infiltrators out at the first hint.

 

[Pakistanithinktank]

This is not an OPSEC breach because it is technical speculation based on open standards and publicly known system limitations. An OPSEC breach would involve confirming classified capabilities, system configurations, or deployment details that are not publicly acknowledged.

At the end of the day - how sure are any of us that it was truly link-17 that day?

Even Indian analysts acknowledged Pakistan used only 10% of its military capabilities during the 4 days conflict, deliberately showing restraint while achieving key strategic goals:

1) Proved Deterrence: Successfully intercepted Indian missiles, validating its air defenses without full escalation.

2) Gained Real-World Data: Tested new tech (electronic warfare, joint operations) in combat conditions, improving preparedness for a longer war.

3) Sent Strategic Messages: Demonstrated nuclear-age brinkmanship by balancing force with restraint, preserving infrastructure and international sympathy.

4) Ambiguity as Strength: Concealed full capabilities, leaving India uncertain about Pakistan’s true wartime potential.

Pakistan turned a short conflict into a high value military exercise, exposing Indian vulnerabilities while avoiding costly all out war.

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

This is not an OPSEC breach because it is technical speculation based on open standards and publicly known system limitations. An OPSEC breach would involve confirming classified capabilities, system configurations, or deployment details that are not publicly acknowledged.

At the end of the day - how sure are any of us that it was truly link-17 that day?

Exactly

Tiny tiny insecure so called "men" who have personnel vendettas of ego and that too in the cyber world, I laugh at how they deal with issues in the real world.

My fellow patriotic Pakistanis here, we old timers used to give it HARD to the Indians, especially the posers. The majority of Hindus are the real scum of the planet, an inferiority complex ridden vermin who fantasize about mass rapes of our mothers, sisters and daughters. Yet here we are so caught up in an insane illusion of self importance that we let these Indian rats infiltrate and wreak havoc on our Nat Sec infos.

It truly breaks my heart to see that most admins on this forum are self delusional aman ka asha type begharaits that they cannot sniff a dirty hateful smelly Indian posing as Pakistani and gleefully divulge all.

This is and has been the great bane of our nations so called intellectual elite.

How many Tariq Habib Afridis do we know?? What kind of name is this? Why is he asking so many particular peculiar specific questions? And the admins here are shamefully divulging all and encouraging this ........... to ask questions freely??????

To the garbage has this forum degraded due to the lax attitude of the admins.

We used to ban and curse these Indian infiltrators out at the first hint.

Dear Basboot42,


I understand your concerns about our discussion on Link 16 and Link 17 appearing on a public forum, but I assure you that no classified or sensitive information was shared. Our conversation about whether Link 17 can connect Pakistan’s aircraft and missiles, was purely speculative and rooted in basic engineering concepts, like how fast data travels (similar to Wi-Fi speed) or how devices share information (like syncing smartphones). These ideas—bandwidth, latency, and system integration—are standard in tech discussions, taught in college courses (i have studied them in PIEAS (BSCIS), NUST SEECS(MS), and it is covered in public sources like Wikipedia’s Tactical Data Link or defense websites. We didn’t mention specific details, like secret codes or exact system designs (such as exact frequencies or encryption), only general possibilities based on well-known principles anyone can read about. For example, Link 16’s data limits (115–238 kbps) are openly documented, and our guesses about Link 17’s capabilities are just that—guesses, like debating if a new router can handle 4K streaming. Nothing we discussed compromises sensitive information or goes beyond what’s commonly available in tech forums and articles.

For reference you can find such generic information on below links

• Tactical Data Link Overview
• Link 16 Technical Details
• Communication Engineering Basics
• Wireless Communications Fundamentals
• Sensor Fusion Concepts
• MIL-STD-6016 for Link 16
• Link 16 Limitations
• Tactical Data Link Enhancements

Regards

 

[MH.Yang]

Hi,

I havent posted in ages, but am forced to do so now seeing how lax some senior members are with classified info. I am a old timer from Pakdef and OG pk related defence forums from the 90s.

But what I have shockingly observed now is the complete disregard for secrecy and the multitude of Indians newbies posing as Pakistanis trying to obtain peculiar sensitive information.

Tariq Habib Afridi is clearly an Indian and shame on Oscar gleefully answering all of his queries.​

Group admins need to assert themselves again with an Iron hand as was done in the old days with Indian posers.

Esteemed senior members of old always ensured that real sensitive info was not relayed and rather fed BS and disinformation to obvious Indians. These types of Indians posers would be banned permentaly in a jiffy after being exposed and insulted with classic gali galooch.

A sad travesty to watch senior members here being petty enough to relay info just to highlight their insights on info and self serve their small ego. PATHETIC!!!!

What does “gali galooch” mean? I'm curious. Can you explain? Maybe it can get promoted in Chinese forums.

 

[Tariq Habib Afridi]

What does “gali galooch” mean? I'm curious. Can you explain? Maybe it can get promoted in Chinese forums.

it means abusing (gali means abuse)

 

[Venom]

Another thing, other than the "certain capabilities" that Pakistan had asked for from our Chinese friends, as a precaution. The Chinese were in the dark till the 7th and as the operation was progressing and as the iaf aircraft had been shot down. The Chinese ambassador was informed, who, along with the air attache, in the early hrs of the morning, rushed to the PAF control room, where they were informed of wt had gone down and he subsequently informed Beijing, after which our Chinese friends decided to come all out in our support.

What were the Chinese in the dark about ? Why would they meet PAF?

 

[Toxic]

What were the Chinese in the dark about ? Why would they meet PAF?

Generally they aren't going to informed about single step of the preparations, they were probably informed because this was a massive escalation.

 

[rafale]

1. Link 17 AFAIK uses TDMA like Link 16 but may incorporate limited mesh or dynamic slot allocation concepts. No indication it uses CDMA.

2. Bandwidth is likely comparable or slightly higher than Link 16, but not enough for full raw radar data. Missile guidance would need much more.

3. To guide PL-15 from Erieye, Link 17 would need at least 10 Mbps and sub-millisecond latency plus synchronized processors. Unlikely in current form.

4. It could enable limited networked targeting with heavily pre-processed tracks. Main barriers are latency, bandwidth, and lack of unified processing.

5. integration is not the problem. bandwidth is.

6. A hybrid model is possible but would still fall short of CEC. Would need new hardware, CEPs, and a real-time DDS-like system.

7. Today it’s likely used for situational awareness, basic targeting, and track sharing. Not yet capable of true offboard fire control.

8. Incorporating Chinese data link tech is more feasible than Swedish. Would be more seamless but would still require deep integration across systems. However, PAF prefers proprietary systems which begs the question - perhaps the PAF has done some upgrades and implemented something new which is not declared @arslank01

9. To handle high-speed targets, Link 17 would need updates every 50–100 ms. Dwell-by-dwell updates would need a completely new architecture.

10. Solid proof would be raw radar sharing, CEP presence, and identical fused track files across platforms. Only US, China and select allies have CEC-like nets today.

@Oscar

if SAABs didn't provide the tracking and targeting all the way to PL15, what did? Ground based systems?

 

[rafale]

im a very strong advocate for either CAMM or IRIS-T inductions, in larger numbers then using them as an offshoot basis for a LR/MR sam.

India is using its MRSAMs as basis for 40N6E style missiles, so is turkey and so did the euros via aster.

IMO having a 'dart', like CAMM or IRIS T would build uo that vital qrsam layer for shorad/mrsams which would carry the bulk of interception work against brahmos etc. then using them with boosters etc like india or turkey to form a longer ranged network of really agile, really capable sams. IRIST even offers a whole family, diehl is developing a HTK interceptor for upper tier ad with it!

Isn't Pakistan already evaluating the Diehl options?

 

[rafale]

Even Indian analysts acknowledged Pakistan used only 10% of its military capabilities during the 4 days conflict, deliberately showing restraint while achieving key strategic goals:

1) Proved Deterrence: Successfully intercepted Indian missiles, validating its air defenses without full escalation.

2) Gained Real-World Data: Tested new tech (electronic warfare, joint operations) in combat conditions, improving preparedness for a longer war.

3) Sent Strategic Messages: Demonstrated nuclear-age brinkmanship by balancing force with restraint, preserving infrastructure and international sympathy.

4) Ambiguity as Strength: Concealed full capabilities, leaving India uncertain about Pakistan’s true wartime potential.

Pakistan turned a short conflict into a high value military exercise, exposing Indian vulnerabilities while avoiding costly all out war.

Well, the AVM Aurangzeb revealing that PAF could intercept the voice comm channels of Rafale pilots, if true, that was not needed to be revealed to Indians. It is a big NO NO

 

[Psyko70]

This is not even plarform to share such info. @RescueRanger

 

[Psyko70]

Well, the AVM Aurangzeb revealing that PAF could intercept the voice comm channels of Rafale pilots, if true, that was not needed to be revealed to Indians. It is a big NO NO

That was ruse

 

[Ak01]

@Oscar

if SAABs didn't provide the tracking and targeting all the way to PL15, what did? Ground based systems?

the j10s will have.

Youd suffer with the same limitations, whether its erieye, whether its gb radars