J-10 Thread IV

[siegecrossbow]

Which base is this?

My guess would be in Gansu, but it isn't specified.

 

[Terminator]

Pakistani Armed forces are running on a shoestring budget, that believes in fielding elite, advance, state of arm equipment that enable them to fight enemies larger than them.

And still they are managing to do that even on a shoe string budget! Just look at the long acquisition list of the Pakistan Navy and now PAF too. Army is also trailing close behind by inducting new artillery rocket systems, tanks and SAM systems

 

[Gloire_bb]

So you can get rid of them by selling some of those used Su-35s to the Pakistan Navy for deep strike missions . As Chinese flankers seem to be off limits for exports.

Don't think it's legally possible, nor is there much point in offloading them asap.

Furthermore, there is very little sense doing it for Pakistan - adding yet another - unique - engine type in a short while.
Sensible purchases from commonality PoW are either fc-31(perhaps with rd-93) or hypothetical J-20e.

 

[Terminator]

There is a way to interpret this in the opposite way (and, in fact, it's the former mainstream way).

The longer fighter stays within the engagement area - the more vulnerable it is, be it to enemy attack, counterattack, or ambush. Hence, the right way is a single attack under external guidance, at highest energy state possible, as fast as possible, as short as possible. After the attack, disengage ASAP.

J-10 is very suitable for this approach - with just enough missiles&single supersonic tank under centerline - it's sleek, fast, highly agile at low Mach numbers - delta canard at its best. Yes, it won't outlast heavy fighters - but it will engage them equally (or even under advantage) for a while.

In ground strike roles, it's enough for a fighter to carry PL-10's on wingtip which it can't do and laden the the rest of the plane with guided missiles/bombs and fuel tanks. In that configuration any modern jet of same category would perform better. Like F-16 or Rafale. There's utility for each type of weapons load. You don't need to fly at high supersonic speeds or pull crazy G's to deliver ground attack SOW/precision strike munitions. And there would also be fighters escorting you who would be fully configured in air superiority role. That's the difference between a multi/Omni role fighter and a limited fighter.

 

[tphuang]

I can't provide you exact numbers. But there is a general perception that J-10C is limited in A2G role due to it's weird hard points design/configuration when we compare it to F-16 or the Rafale. Limited weapons choice in A2G mode like precision guided munitions and SOW. Even JF-17 are considered more suitable for multirole missions with vast array of munitions and missiles integrated to choose from in A2G.

You might negate this perception by showing the latest capabilities of J-10 carrying a plethora of variety of modern munitions and payloads like what west does with like the Rafale.

It's not just a general perception. Up to this point, they have not used J-10C in that role. For most of its short tenure, J-10C was the primary frontline fighter jet for PLAAF air defense. As such, it was not really used for A2G roles. And over the past 5 years where I've been absent, it doesn't seem like they made much progress in precision strike capabilities. That's probably due to the desire to quickly improve their air superiority capabilities. The number of new AAMs they've added in the past 10 years is quite impressive. The improvement in their radar and EW capabilities has also been very impressive.

However, I don't think that means J-10C can't do this role. In fact, I think it can do it pretty well once PLAAF puts its mind into it. J-16 should be even better suited for this role and we haven't seen PLAAF really use PGMs on there. As J-20 production really ramped up in the past year and JH-7 series slowly fades away, those roles will have to shift to J-10 and flankers. At a minimum, we should see more training photos of J-10C with PGMs and such. I think this Ukraine conflict has shown how important it is to have PGM capabilities across the board. The lack of familiarity with PGMs has been a huge problem for RuAF. PLAAF will study this conflict very closely and realize it needs to put PGM integration and draining on afterburners. Seeing J-10 with YJ-83K shows me that they are moving in this direction, but it will take a couple of years for more photos of this to come out.

And yes, incorporating more multi-role capabilities into J-10C will also be good for its export potential.

 

[ougoah]

Doesn't J-10 carry YJ-91 and KD-88 along with a host of guided bombs?

J-10 has never been a stranger to air to ground. It's just that the primary purpose is air superiority.

 

[Terminator]

It's not just a general perception. Up to this point, they have not used J-10C in that role. For most of its short tenure, J-10C was the primary frontline fighter jet for PLAAF air defense. As such, it was not really used for A2G roles. And over the past 5 years where I've been absent, it doesn't seem like they made much progress in precision strike capabilities. That's probably due to the desire to quickly improve their air superiority capabilities. The number of new AAMs they've added in the past 10 years is quite impressive. The improvement in their radar and EW capabilities has also been very impressive.

However, I don't think that means J-10C can't do this role. In fact, I think it can do it pretty well once PLAAF puts its mind into it. J-16 should be even better suited for this role and we haven't seen PLAAF really use PGMs on there. As J-20 production really ramped up in the past year and JH-7 series slowly fades away, those roles will have to shift to J-10 and flankers. At a minimum, we should see more training photos of J-10C with PGMs and such. I think this Ukraine conflict has shown how important it is to have PGM capabilities across the board. The lack of familiarity with PGMs has been a huge problem for RuAF. PLAAF will study this conflict very closely and realize it needs to put PGM integration and draining on afterburners. Seeing J-10 with YJ-83K shows me that they are moving in this direction, but it will take a couple of years for more photos of this to come out.

And yes, incorporating more multi-role capabilities into J-10C will also be good for its export potential.

PLAAF had the luxury of a lot of specialized fighter/bombers but not so for the PAF. So I hope in future even if PLAAF chooses to ignore that aspect PAF would and should push the boundaries of what it can get out of J-10CP in multirole capabilities, if they are planning to induct them in large quantities.

Even after retiring legacy fighter bombers, PLAAF would have flankers and dedicated bombers as strike platforms. On the other hand Pakistan had suppressed it's need to induct long range high altitude only defensive SAM systems as they don't provide the flexibility and offensive options which a multirole fighter is capable of in addition to air defense as well.

 

[tphuang]

PLAAF had the luxury of a lot of specialized fighter/bombers but not so for the PAF. So I hope in future even if PLAAF chooses to ignore that aspect PAF would and should push the boundaries of what it can get out of J-10CP in multirole capabilities, if they are planning to induct them in large quantities.

Even after retiring legacy fighter bombers, PLAAF would have flankers and dedicated bombers as strike platforms. On the other hand Pakistan had suppressed it's need to induct long range high altitude only defensive SAM systems as they don't provide the flexibility and offensive options which a multirole fighter is capable of in addition to air defense as well.

Actually, we've been having a discussion on this. PLAAF does not have enough specialized fighter/bombers. It is also silly for China to try replicating Russian model of having su-24/25/34 to do all the ground attacks and tactical strikes.

If they do get into a Taiwan scenario, J-10s have the range and the payload (the central hard points can only hold pods and bombs) to do a lot of precision attack. In fact, I don't see why J-10 would be inferior in that role to JH-7A. It's entirely logical for them to use J-10s to drop bombs or launch stand off missiles and then fly back to their base. We will have to wait and see, but my current expectation is that J-10 series as a whole will be used a lot more in this area over the next couple of years.

 

[Deino]

Guys ... if you want to discuss the PAF J-10Cs and to contradict some stupid Indian claims, they cannot be refuelled in flight, then please continue this in the PAF thread, but not here!

Such BS is ridiculous!

 

[TK3600]

Guys ... if you want to discuss the PAF J-10Cs and to contradict some stupid Indian claims, they cannot be refuelled in flight, then please continue this in the PAF thread, but not here!

Such BS is ridiculous!

J10cp is offtopic?