I would like to see J-10 have wingtip weapon stations one day.
They are not going to crop the delta just for two more pylons for PL-10s (or whatever SRAAMs). This would require re-engineering the FCS and the entire manufacturing line for the wings.
What is this fascination for carrying as much as an aircraft can take off with?
J-10 has about the same payload capability as F-16. They both feature similar performance engines. The F-16 is slightly smaller and lighter but as an F-16 is armed to the brim, it cannot fly anywhere near as well, anywhere near as far, anywhere near as long, and will impart much less energy on its weapons, compared to the same F-16 loaded
optimally
There is an optimal payload configuration for each fighter (plus propulsion) and for something like the J-10/F-16 size with a F110/ WS-10B level engine, the optimal payload level is where the J-10 has it, NOT where a marketing driven F-16 photo-op has it.
An F-16 carrying 4 more MRAAMs than a J-10C is going to waste an extra four MRAAMs.
Noobs everywhere talking about payload levels without even the most rudimentary understanding of basic high school physics.
The J-10's aerodynamics are no lesser than F-16's. Delta canard has better high altitude high speed instantaneous (generally) while F-16 would have superior sustained rates. Similar lift and drag ratios for both overall ... being competent heavy thrust 4th gen designs and all etc etc.
J-10 can carry like crazy if they wanted to. It would just be a stupid risk and stupid waste. How noobies around the internet still don't get this, can only conclude there are many children talking about military topics, all about being armed to the teeth like in their video games.
The maths and science illiteracy among humans is... disappointing. I mean to even have these conversations on payload where the answers to why are very clear and obvious.
Weapons are expensive. Not using them properly means wasting them. Carrying more just to waste is one way to lose a battle/war. Having the option to use the inner pylons for missiles though is another matter. Can only say CAC and PLAAF didn't even think it necessary to equip those inner pylons with A2A missile capability (unless they rejig the electrics allegedly which simply takes too long to not be worth it). PLAAF has determined the J-10's best A2A loadout considering its level of energy and propulsion to be three tanks + 4 MRAAMs, + 2 SRAAMs. An F-16's optimal loadout for A2A would be not too different. At most another 2 MRAAMs since its pylons are wired to allow. Tanks quipped depend on mission profile, ranges, support, tankers etc. J-10 can missile up those pylons for wing mounted tanks if missile profile shifts the calculus of what's optimal.