PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Oscar]

By 2028, the year I expect another shootdown with Pakistan, the IAF will have 76 Rafael [AF + navy], with 69 available. From 250 Su-30MKI with a 70% availability rate, 175+ Su-30MKI can be available. That makes 244 fighter planes. Add 40 or so Tejas, and you have 284 fighters. Now, if you count Mirage 2000 with 80% availability and MiG 29 with 60% availability, the max comes out to be 364. Not counting Jaguar in this number. Compare that to PAF, F-16, J-10C, and JF-17 blk 3 with 90% availability, that is 127. Add JF-17 blk 2 + blk 1 with 80% availability, the numbers will be 211 plus 40 J-35 to make it 251. So the equation will be 251 to 364 fighters. PAF will be 70% of the strength of IAF with 5th-gen fighters to dominate. Add 13 PAF AEWCS and 6 EW platforms to 6 IAF AEWCS and 6 EW platforms, and you have a complete picture. Still seems to be in favor of PAF.

Wut?

Lets be a little realistic.
On the IAF side, your 80% availability for the 76 Rafales gets you about 61 realistically , not 69+. Su-30MKI has never crossed 60% consistently and will hit 65% on an optimistic day from a 250-strong fleet, so that’s 150–163 (call it ~160), not 175. Mirage 2000 is barely scraping 70% from ~50 airframes for 35 available, nowhere near 80%. MiG-29s manage 50–55% on ~66 jets for about 35 due to age, fatigue and maintenance hell, not 60%. Tejas? Forget the “40 or so” – it’s irrelevant beyond low single digits like 9 for second-line work. Add Jaguars at a generous 50% from ~120 still staggering on, that’s 60 tops (and probably worse). Total it up: 61 + 160 + 35 + 35 + 5 + 60 = 356 IAF fighters available but they usually think of dedicating a small percentage of the fleet, even single digits like 5–10%, as reserve against other threats (China, etc.). Pakistan doesn’t have that problem. Subtract say 20–35 jets held back, and your actual IAF surge force drops to 320–336.

On the PAF side, your estimation is pure fantasia. Break it down: F-16s (~75 total) at 70–75% age-adjusted gives 55 available, not 90%. J-10C (~36 jets) might hit your 80% for 29 . JF-17 Block 3 (~36) at a realistic 60–70% is 24 . Older JF-17 Blocks 1/2 (~90 total) barely manage your 60–70% band for 60 . And “40 J-35”? No guarantee you’ll even have them, but at 60% for a finicky VLO platform that’s 24 available max, not 40 plugged straight in. Total PAF: 55 + 29 + 24 + 60 + 24 = 192 available fighters. You’re in the low 190s–200s at best, not 251.

So with your own numbers: IAF ~356, PAF ~192. That’s PAF at 54% of IAF strength (192/356), not 70% and the gap widens from the original post because your side’s 90% fairy tale takes a bigger hit than IAF’s does. That “PAF with 5th-gen dominance” line doesn’t survive real math; once you ditch Western test-pilot readiness dreams for both fleets, IAF’s numerical edge is even clearer on paper, but execution is where PAF has any chance and historically where it pulls ahead. The Saabs and EW platforms? Sure, knock off a couple for maintenance either way doesn’t move the needle on this lopsided tally.

 

[Yasser76]

Wut?

Lets be a little realistic.
On the IAF side, your 80% availability for the 76 Rafales gets you about 61 realistically , not 69+. Su-30MKI has never crossed 60% consistently and will hit 65% on an optimistic day from a 250-strong fleet, so that’s 150–163 (call it ~160), not 175. Mirage 2000 is barely scraping 70% from ~50 airframes for 35 available, nowhere near 80%. MiG-29s manage 50–55% on ~66 jets for about 35 due to age, fatigue and maintenance hell, not 60%. Tejas? Forget the “40 or so” – it’s irrelevant beyond low single digits like 9 for second-line work. Add Jaguars at a generous 50% from ~120 still staggering on, that’s 60 tops (and probably worse). Total it up: 61 + 160 + 35 + 35 + 5 + 60 = 356 IAF fighters available but they usually think of dedicating a small percentage of the fleet, even single digits like 5–10%, as reserve against other threats (China, etc.). Pakistan doesn’t have that problem. Subtract say 20–35 jets held back, and your actual IAF surge force drops to 320–336.

On the PAF side, your estimation is pure fantasia. Break it down: F-16s (~75 total) at 70–75% age-adjusted gives 55 available, not 90%. J-10C (~36 jets) might hit your 80% for 29 . JF-17 Block 3 (~36) at a realistic 60–70% is 24 . Older JF-17 Blocks 1/2 (~90 total) barely manage your 60–70% band for 60 . And “40 J-35”? No guarantee you’ll even have them, but at 60% for a finicky VLO platform that’s 24 available max, not 40 plugged straight in. Total PAF: 55 + 29 + 24 + 60 + 24 = 192 available fighters. You’re in the low 190s–200s at best, not 251.

So with your own numbers: IAF ~356, PAF ~192. That’s PAF at 54% of IAF strength (192/356), not 70% and the gap widens from the original post because your side’s 90% fairy tale takes a bigger hit than IAF’s does. That “PAF with 5th-gen dominance” line doesn’t survive real math; once you ditch Western test-pilot readiness dreams for both fleets, IAF’s numerical edge is even clearer on paper, but execution is where PAF has any chance and historically where it pulls ahead. The Saabs and EW platforms? Sure, knock off a couple for maintenance either way doesn’t move the needle on this lopsided tally.

Very realistic. I would argue that PAF at around 55% the strength of IAF is the best we have had it in history. If you take out non AESA/200km plus 4.5th Gen/5th Gen aircraft this becomes more favourable for PAF. You include IAF Jaguars and not PAF Mirages/F-7s (rightfully so as they will be retired, yet include IAF Jaguars which will eb retiring soon). You take out the IAF Jaguar fleet (personally I think IAF never has a serious intention of using these against us, they are kept to maintain Sqd numbers at a politically acceptable level) then the IAF number comes down to around 280-290 v PAF of 190-200.

That is odds PAF will happily accept any day.

 

[Ak01]

Wut?

Lets be a little realistic.
On the IAF side, your 80% availability for the 76 Rafales gets you about 61 realistically , not 69+. Su-30MKI has never crossed 60% consistently and will hit 65% on an optimistic day from a 250-strong fleet, so that’s 150–163 (call it ~160), not 175. Mirage 2000 is barely scraping 70% from ~50 airframes for 35 available, nowhere near 80%. MiG-29s manage 50–55% on ~66 jets for about 35 due to age, fatigue and maintenance hell, not 60%. Tejas? Forget the “40 or so” – it’s irrelevant beyond low single digits like 9 for second-line work. Add Jaguars at a generous 50% from ~120 still staggering on, that’s 60 tops (and probably worse). Total it up: 61 + 160 + 35 + 35 + 5 + 60 = 356 IAF fighters available but they usually think of dedicating a small percentage of the fleet, even single digits like 5–10%, as reserve against other threats (China, etc.). Pakistan doesn’t have that problem. Subtract say 20–35 jets held back, and your actual IAF surge force drops to 320–336.

On the PAF side, your estimation is pure fantasia. Break it down: F-16s (~75 total) at 70–75% age-adjusted gives 55 available, not 90%. J-10C (~36 jets) might hit your 80% for 29 . JF-17 Block 3 (~36) at a realistic 60–70% is 24 . Older JF-17 Blocks 1/2 (~90 total) barely manage your 60–70% band for 60 . And “40 J-35”? No guarantee you’ll even have them, but at 60% for a finicky VLO platform that’s 24 available max, not 40 plugged straight in. Total PAF: 55 + 29 + 24 + 60 + 24 = 192 available fighters. You’re in the low 190s–200s at best, not 251.

So with your own numbers: IAF ~356, PAF ~192. That’s PAF at 54% of IAF strength (192/356), not 70% and the gap widens from the original post because your side’s 90% fairy tale takes a bigger hit than IAF’s does. That “PAF with 5th-gen dominance” line doesn’t survive real math; once you ditch Western test-pilot readiness dreams for both fleets, IAF’s numerical edge is even clearer on paper, but execution is where PAF has any chance and historically where it pulls ahead. The Saabs and EW platforms? Sure, knock off a couple for maintenance either way doesn’t move the needle on this lopsided tally.

I’d be very surprised if we were getting 80% availability out of J-10s also!

 

[Yasser76]

I’d be very surprised if we were getting 80% availability out of J-10s also!

Got more then that during May 2025 so I am not surprised at all

 

[Ak01]

Got more then that during May 2025 so I am not surprised at all

Inferred mission capable rate =/= availability rate

 

[Yasser76]

Inferred mission capable rate =/= availability rate

Mission capable was 20 planes out of 20 in the air that night. Your point is?

 

[hasssanali8998]

Mission capable was 20 planes out of 20 in the air that night. Your point is?

its was 18 , 18 were in the air on 7 may

 

[Yasser76]

its was 18 , 18 were in the air on 7 may

My bad, 18 out of 20, which makes it a 90% missions capable rate right? That is also assuming all 20 had been delivered by then.

My point is @Oscar 's estimate of 80% mission capable is very realistic

 

[Ali_Baba]

My bad, 18 out of 20, which makes it a 90% missions capable rate right? That is also assuming all 20 had been delivered by then.

My point is @Oscar 's estimate of 80% mission capable is very realistic

The J10CE are basically brand spanking new, and they have been "debugged" during their long service in the PLAAF service. They should be relatively bug free and have the highest availability rates in the PAF as a function of their age and easy spare parts supply from China.

Given the importance of the J10CE/PL15E combo to the PAF, their availability would be tracked very closely until the fleet gets a bit larger and there is more comfort on availability levels.

 

[Yasser76]

The J10CE are basically brand spanking new, and they have been "debugged" during their long service in the PLAAF service. They should be relatively bug free and have the highest availability rates in the PAF as a function of their age.

Yeah, so unsure why people were questioning the 80% availability rate

 

[Taimoor]

Mission capable was 20 planes out of 20 in the air that night. Your point is?

18 airborne and 2 on standby ready for scramble if needed, thats 100% availability.

 

[Yasser76]

18 airborne and 2 on standby ready for scramble if needed, thats 100% availability.

It is another thing to keep in mind, the vast number of trained manpower China has and the depth of engineering talent PAF has,

Many countries can buy high end items but will fall down on trained manpower resource.
Even US and Europeans struggle to support new export sales with full packages and countries have to use private contractors. In our case PLAAF can help as well as OEM

 

[Corax]

Yeah, so unsure why people were questioning the 80% availability rate

It's the age old argument between the US/Western camp vs China camp. Those who still want to cling on the teat of Unkil Sam and those who see where the wind is blowing. We can't beg or borrow from Unkil anymore.

 

[Yasser76]

It's the age old argument between the US/Western camp vs China camp. Those who still want to cling on the teat of Unkil Sam and those who see where the wind is blowing. We can't beg or borrow from Unkil anymore.

Yeah, it is really interesting that, despite a few exceptions, May 2025 J-10C performance is really being downplayed in the West.

Had we been using Typhoons or F-35s can you imagine the mega orgasm commentators and "experts" would be doing right now?

Lockheed would be in full on roadshow mode globally

 

[Corax]

Yeah, it is really interesting that, despite a few exceptions, May 2025 J-10C performance is really being downplayed in the West.

Had we been using Typhoons or F-35s can you imagine the mega orgasm commentators and "experts" would be doing right now?

Lockheed would be in full on roadshow mode globally

Yeah, because you know, darker skinned black haired people can't possibly come up with a superior system, only the tall, blonde haired, blue eyed Arian master race is entitled to that.