PAF J-10CE News, Updates and Discussion

[Deino]

Hence why I ask if it’s possible the PAF is seeking a dedicated EW variant of the J-10. Improvements to the engine to maximize electrical output and modifications to the airframe to be able to carry 3 jamming pods as well as two long range anti radiation missiles. The dorsal spine could house the ESM electronics or more fuel.

Yes, surely all doable … but will Pakistan pay for its development just for a few airframes?

 

[FuturePAF]

1. All known dedicated electronic warfare fighters (EA-18G/J-15D/J-16D) are two-seat aircraft. This involves extensive workloads, and pilots cannot simultaneously process large amounts of information while flying the aircraft. It requires dedicated operators to process this information.
The J-10AS is too old and unsuitable. The J-10C does not have a two-seat version.

2. Dedicated electronic warfare fighters require significant space and power. The J-10C's WS-10 engine can only provide limited power. Its interior is also very limited.

The 4th/4.5th-Gen fighters have external electronic warfare pods, and the 5th-Gen fighters have built-in electronic warfare capabilities. These are primarily for self-defense rather than offense. They are completely different from the electronic warfare offensive capabilities of dedicated electronic warfare fighters.

If it’s really this difficult, the PAF may have to go for a twin seat J-35 variant for EW, especially if the J-35 will be used in the offensive role.

Considering China may want to operate such a platform (possibly for a future carrier variant when the WS-19 engines are mature and possibly a land based variant), the costs could be spread out and the PAF could get an export approved variant.

 

[Michael]

If it’s really this difficult, the PAF may have to go for a twin seat J-35 variant for EW, especially if the J-35 will be used in the offensive role.

1. The 5th-Gen fighter jet itself has some electronic warfare capabilities, but they are primarily for self-defense. It is not suitable for conversion into a dedicated electronic warfare fighter.
Once electronic warfare is activated, it effectively tells the enemy, "I'm coming." ------ The enemy's radar system is disrupted. It may not know your exact location, but it will definitely know you're coming. This contradicts the concept of stealth warfare.

2. Given the PAF's current situation, I personally believe it doesn't need a dedicated electronic warfare fighter. The IAF's systems are too outdated and disorganized. The PAF only needs a limited electronic warfare self-defense capability.
The IAF's Rafale fighters rely on pilots to visually observe their wingmen and communicate with headquarters via intercoms. Using dedicated electronic warfare fighters to deal with such an opponent would be a waste.

 

[Yasser76]

That and the limited weight carriage by the J-10 are the two issues I can for see for the J-10. But considering the PAF can’t get the J-16D, it may have to make do with the J-10 as the platform.

Yeah, quite a load to carry once you add fuel tanks too

 

[amuqeetk]

1. The 5th-Gen fighter jet itself has some electronic warfare capabilities, but they are primarily for self-defense. It is not suitable for conversion into a dedicated electronic warfare fighter.
Once electronic warfare is activated, it effectively tells the enemy, "I'm coming." ------ The enemy's radar system is disrupted. It may not know your exact location, but it will definitely know you're coming. This contradicts the concept of stealth warfare.

2. Given the PAF's current situation, I personally believe it doesn't need a dedicated electronic warfare fighter. The IAF's systems are too outdated and disorganized. The PAF only needs a limited electronic warfare self-defense capability.
The IAF's Rafale fighters rely on pilots to visually observe their wingmen and communicate with headquarters via intercoms. Using dedicated electronic warfare fighters to deal with such an opponent would be a waste.

The Indians should crying themselves to sleep everyday if their tip of the spear is this pathethic

 

[FuturePAF]

1. The 5th-Gen fighter jet itself has some electronic warfare capabilities, but they are primarily for self-defense. It is not suitable for conversion into a dedicated electronic warfare fighter.
Once electronic warfare is activated, it effectively tells the enemy, "I'm coming." ------ The enemy's radar system is disrupted. It may not know your exact location, but it will definitely know you're coming. This contradicts the concept of stealth warfare.

2. Given the PAF's current situation, I personally believe it doesn't need a dedicated electronic warfare fighter. The IAF's systems are too outdated and disorganized. The PAF only needs a limited electronic warfare self-defense capability.

We can’t expect Indian capacities to stay limited for much longer. The EW J-35 may lose its stealth profile, but that doesn’t mean other J-35 can’t come in from a different axis.

 

[ARMalik]

China has between 200 to 300 J-10s. USA has over 800 F-16s. Hence it is hard for me to believe China wants to halt the production of J-10s. Maybe in the next 7 to 10-years but not immediately. And people saying that it would be hard for China to produce another 50 J-10s for Pakistan are seriously joking.

By the way, US has over 600 F-35s minus its allies. China has around 200 J-20s. There is a LOT OF CATCHING UP TO DO as far as China is concerned. As it currently stands, US has major advantages over China.

China needs well armed allies.

 

[FuturePAF]

Yeah, quite a load to carry once you add fuel tanks too

It maybe why a dorsal spine was added. But, they maybe too many limitations on the airframe to warrant the change. Perhaps Pakistan will have to wait for the J-35 to be available to operate as a twin seat twin engine capable enough platform to allow the PAF to have a dedicated fighter jammer platform.

 

[RajaBaja]

A special modified version of the J-10C was once exposed.
View attachment 141983
View attachment 141984
Ultimately, the PLAAF abandoned this plan and adopted an external electronic warfare pod approach.
View attachment 141985
These circumstances indicate that the J-10C is not suitable for conversion into a dedicated electronic warfare aircraft.
So, your topic is over.

You are absolutely right. Secondly, we have massive ground based long range jamming capability for our operations theater. Our area to defend is smaller. J-16D carries 5 pods because it will encounter 5 different spectrums from US / Taiwan / SC / Japanese systems. While we can cover what India has, from the ground. The only thing left is a self protection pod against lock-on's and homing. For that, one external POD is the standard.

 

[huanghong]

The only issue is, Pakistan won‘t be able to get them since China does not export its Flanker versions.

Perhaps this system can be installed on the JH-7 and sold. After all, as an electronic warfare aircraft, it does not need too strong flight performance.
The JH-7 is indeed capable of carrying the same type of electronic warfare pod as the J-16D

 

[Michael]

We can’t expect Indian capacities to stay limited for much longer. The EW J-35 may lose its stealth profile, but that doesn’t mean other J-35 can’t come in from a different axis.

Perhaps this system can be installed on the JH-7 and sold. After all, as an electronic warfare aircraft, it does not need too strong flight performance.

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.

 

[Ak01]

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.

 

[Yasser76]

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.

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.

 

[FuturePAF]

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.

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.

 

[Ak01]

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.

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