Chengdu J-10C for Pakistan

The standard flying time for the MKI is 2 hours. That's not the case for LCA.

A pilot already flies 2 sorties a day on flying days. If you ask them to do 3 sorties, you will send them to an early grave.
Actually, it is not 2, but 2.5 sorties per day (while turnaround time of 2-3 hours). USAF even did this in older blocks of F-16.
And avg. sortie time is not 40 min, but 50 mins -1.15 .

Even with a pessimistic approach, we consider 200 days of availability in a year (2 sorties a day with 40 min), that's around 280 hours in a year. That is still far higher than any jet we have right now.
And that is pessimistic, it easily could touch 300-330 hours on average per year.

Also, I think IAF go for this, to reduce the stress and fatigue on MKI fleet, and reduce the flying hours on that with each passing year to stabilize on 130-160 hours per year on average.

The F-16C model has undergone a service life extension program (SLEP), raising its lifetime hours to 8,000; however, by 2012 the average F-16C already had nearly 5,500 hours. Some observers believe that the SLEP added a maximum of 10 more years to the airframe, which would imply an annual flight rate of 250 hours per year. As of 2011, the Air National Guard stated that the F-16C required 20.6 Flying Hours / Crew / Month [nearly 250 hours/year], but it had funded 18.6 Flying Hours / Crew / Month [nearly 225 hours/year]. The F-16D required 10.3 Flying Hours / Crew / Month [nearly 125 hours/year], but it had funded 9.0 Flying Hours / Crew / Month [nearly 110 hours/year].

Studies have indicated that flying 13 sorties permonth would do away with the need for a squadron pre-combat spin-up program. The squadron would be ready to deploy to a combat location immediately. Given an average average sortie duration (ASD) of 1.2 hours, the total number of flying hours for the year would be 187 hours. In 1999 the 31st FW out of Aviano Italy utilization rate was 550 hrs/aircraft, when the wing was deployed for over 50% of the time in direct support of Operation ALLIED FORCE.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SammyBoi
Actually, it is not 2, but 2.5 sorties per day (while turnaround time of 2-3 hours). USAF even did this in older blocks of F-16.
And avg. sortie time is not 40 min, but 50 mins -1.15 .

Even with a pessimistic approach, we consider 200 days of availability in a year (2 sorties a day with 40 min), that's around 280 hours in a year. That is still far higher than any jet we have right now.
And that is pessimistic, it easily could touch 300-330 hours on average per year.

Are you referring to India?

In the IAF, it's 10 flying days per month, with 2 sorties per flying day. That's 240 sorties per year.

Mig-21 does 30 minute sorties = 120 hours = 4800 hours for 40 years
LCA Mk1/A can do 40 minute sorties = 160 hours = 6400 hours
LCA Mk2 can do 1 hour sorties = 240 hours = 9600 hours
MKI and Rafale should be the same as LCA Mk2.

MKI's TTL is 25 years or 6000 hours = 240 hours per year

The numbers change when pilots go out for exercises where they combine multiple sorties over a week or two-week long period.

Based on your quote, Mk2, Rafale and MKI should meet F-16C requirements, whereas LCA Mk1/A won't 'cause it doesn't fly as much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guynextdoor
Are you referring to India?

In the IAF, it's 10 flying days per month, with 2 sorties per flying day. That's 240 sorties per year.

Mig-21 does 30 minute sorties = 120 hours = 4800 hours for 40 years
LCA Mk1/A can do 40 minute sorties = 160 hours = 6400 hours
LCA Mk2 can do 1 hour sorties = 240 hours = 9600 hours
MKI and Rafale should be the same as LCA Mk2.

MKI's TTL is 25 years or 6000 hours = 240 hours per year

The numbers change when pilots go out for exercises where they combine multiple sorties over a week or two-week long period.

Based on your quote, Mk2, Rafale and MKI should meet F-16C requirements, whereas LCA Mk1/A won't 'cause it doesn't fly as much.
Because you considering for Mk1A, IAF adopts Russian-style logistic, maintenance, and flying practices, which is very unlikely.

They more adopt F-16 flying practices,,,,
And in Mk2, it actually gets reduced, with the advent of flying simulators, and you get away with training sorties.
 
Any jet flying above 10000 feet will get detected,,, and on 27th Feb SUs were flying high to create the furball. While Mirages and Mig were flying low for the interception, it has nothing to do with RCS.
Then how did the f-16's fire the amraam's without a lock?
 
Because you considering for Mk1A, IAF adopts Russian-style logistic, maintenance, and flying practices, which is very unlikely.

They more adopt F-16 flying practices,,,,
And in Mk2, it actually gets reduced, with the advent of flying simulators, and you get away with training sorties.

The logistics and maintenance don't matter, it's all about the internal fuel load.

The Mk1 has been designed to fly out to 100Km or so and fly around for 30-40 minutes or so. It's 2.3T fuel load is sufficient only for this. The F-16C has 3.3T of fuel, its designed to fly out to the same range and fly around for 50 min or so. This is pretty much the normal sortie that the everyday pilot does usually.

Majority of the operational flights are just that.

Look at the number you quoted, it says 20.6 hours per month for the F-16C. How do you wanna divide it? I'd say the usual, 20 sorties, 1 hour each.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guynextdoor
Here is the soundbyte from the Pakistan Information Minister, saying it will be the JS-10:
In reality, it will be the J-10CE MRCA, which is the export designation of ex-PLAAF J-10B variant, whose poster I have uploaded below. The PAF’s decision to acquire them were known last year itself, as evidenced by this video:

1641147365203.jpeg

In fact, I had written late last year itself in FORCEmagazine that a PAF contingent had arrived in November 2020 at the PLAAF’s flight-test/evaluation & operational conversion air base at Dingxin (40.4014015 N, 99.7893982 E) for operational conversion to the J-10B, which uses the KLJ-7 (Type-1478) MMR developed by CETC’s 14th Research Institute (also known as the Nanjing Research Institute of Electronic Technology, or NRIET). The KLJ-7’s look-up detection range is 105km and look-down range is 85km, and it offers only 14 modes of operation. Efforts by the PAF to procure the Grifo-S7 (on the JF-17) for the J-10B have been unsuccessful. The PAF wanted this MMR as it has more than 30 different operational modes offered to support air-to-air and air-to-surface missions, and navigation. Utilising low, medium and high PRF for optimal target detection in any clutter condition, and incorporating adaptive pulse compression technology, this air-cooled MMR has a scanning coverage +/-60 degrees in both azimuth and elevation, weighs less than 120kg and has a MTBF in excess of 220 hours. Look-up detection range is 150km, while look-down range is 100km. Up to 10 targets can be tracked in TWS mode.

1641147402406.jpeg


The PL-10E SRAAM (see uploaded poster above) is in reality a re-engineered variant of the LUCH-developed ‘Gran’ (Verge) from Ukraine. The latter was first showcased back in 2006. The Gran incorporates a PR-611 combined aerodynamic and gas dynamic control system. The missile is 2.5 metres long, 170mm in diameter, weighs 105kg and its aerodynamic scheme uses cruciform wings of long chord and narrow span, plus cruciform tail surfaces—all also found on the PL-10E, which is intended to allow all-aspect engagement of highly manoeuvrable airborne targets (up to 12 G) flying at speeds of up to 1,500 Knots and altitudes of 65,000 feet. It can be launched from aircraft flying at 350-1,350 Knots, and has a maximum flight-time of 25 seconds and has a maximum range of 20km and a minimum range of 300 metres during rear-hemisphere attacks. The PL-10E features a multi-element, two-colour thermal imaging IR seeker with a 180-degree look angle and 120-degree/second track rate. High agility is provided by using body lift and thrust vector control. The inertial measurement unit (IMU) can handle up to +/-500 degrees/second) G-loads and linear accelerations up to 30 G.
The PL-12 BVRAAM (not the PL-15, which is not integrated with any J-10 variant) for the J-10B is equipped with active radar-homing seeker developed by Radionix of Ukraine (see uploaded poster below). It uses a dual-thrust solid rocket motor and can exceed Mach 4 and endure 38 G. The missile’s omnidirectional sensors are accurate to within 1 metre. Its active radar seeker is the Ka-band ‘Onyx’ from Radionix, which has a range of 25km, search area of +/-40 degrees in azimuth and elevation and offers “fire-and-forget” capabilities. It has a 24kg warhead and uses a radio proximity fuse. Initial versions of the PL-12 had used the Russia-origin Agat/Istok 9B-1350E Ku-band seekers. All the above-mentioned data had been published in the November 2021 issue of FORCEmagazine.
1641147440920.jpeg


Now to the most important data: Due to national financial bankruptsy, the PAF has been unable to secure product-support from the US for its F-16 fleet and consequently fleet cannibalisation is now being resorted to. At the same time, since Russia has not authorised China to re-export AL-31FN turbofans, China is LEASING the J-10Bs to the PAF, i.e. the PAF will not be the owner of the J-10Bs and they will be returned after China starts delivering the twin-engined Shenyang FC-35s to the PAF by 2025. This now has resulted in a severe air-defence vulnerability/gap that the PAF cannot address/fill and it is precisely due to this that the Pakistan Army has had to induct HQ-9P/FD-2000 HIMADS and LY-80E LOMADS for securing its own air-defence requirements, instead of relying on the PAF.
1641147473223.jpeg


No variants of the FWS-10 turbofan are in service with any China-developed MRCA since the turbofan is still plagued by compressor-blade failures. Same goes for the low-TBOs (less than 80 hours) of the TVC nozzles (compared to 200 hours of those of the Su-30MKI). Hence the PAF J-10Bs won’t have them on-board, contrary to what several internet fanboys are speculating about.
Posted
 
Last edited:
Why Did Russia not object to the Leasing of J 10s if they are powered by Al 31s
Why should they ? It’s Win Win for all three.
Russia: Engine sales ( to China)
China: Fighter jet sales to Pakistan + Strengthening of Pakee defences against common enemy India
Pakistan: They got a jet without any money. WTF more do you want 😂
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SammyBoi
Yeah, the reason for the HQ-9 and LY-80 under army control is exactly because the PAF is no longer a decent fighting force.

Makes sense that the PAF is leasing the J-10C.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker
I think acquisition has the possibility of extreme widespread mass destruction.

When fit with lota bomb, katori bomb etc. Shek Rasheed might fly around the world begging at supersonic speeds.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: AbRaj
China is LEASING the J-10Bs to the PAF, i.e. the PAF will not be the owner of the J-10Bs and they will be returned after China starts delivering the twin-engined Shenyang FC-35s to the PAF by 2025.
LEASING !!! LOL! WTF??? LEASING fighter jets! What next leasing bullets?
Why should they ? It’s Win Win for all three.
Russia: Engine sales ( to China)
China: Fighter jet sales to Pakistan + Strengthening of Pakee defences against common enemy India
Pakistan: They got a jet without any money. WTF more do you want 😂
If Pakistan is leasing then russia has nothing to complain because engines are still owned by China!

I wonder what will be terms of leasing. Will there be Chinese on Pakistan's base to verify that Pakistan is following lease terms? Thats funny as hell!
 
LEASING !!! LOL! WTF??? LEASING fighter jets! What next leasing bullets?

If Pakistan is leasing then russia has nothing to complain because engines are still owned by China!

I wonder what will be terms of leasing. Will there be Chinese on Pakistan's base to verify that Pakistan is following lease terms? Thats funny as hell!
Russian can do a lot, I doubt they will do anything as it’s profitable for them too.
And by “Leasing” Chinese have helped them with face saving too even if India complains.
 
Russian can do a lot, I doubt they will do anything as it’s profitable for them too.
And by “Leasing” Chinese have helped them with face saving too even if India complains.
Leasing also means one more thing. There is no Pakistan specific customisation. We had to pay through our nose to get Rafale fit in Indian context. This now seems more and more like Pakistan loaning its pilot and bases to China to host its planes. I think there will be Chinese there to direct them. Not a first for Pakistan who have a similar experience with USA, a certain Chuck whose plane IAF blew on ground making him India's enemy forever.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: AbRaj
I think acquisition has the possibility of extreme widespread mass destruction.

When fit with lota bomb, katori bomb etc. Shek Rasheed might fly around the world begging at supersonic speeds.
Ah per Sekhu “Jab main jawan tha to Saari Bollywood ki Heeroin mujpe fida hua karti thi”
He is essentially Pakistan’s official Love Charger. Paav bhar ka (to be precise). 😝
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Guynextdoor
Leasing also means one more thing. There is no Pakistan specific customisation. We had to pay through our nose to get Rafale fit in Indian context. This now seems more and more like Pakistan loaning its pilot and bases to China to host its planes. I think there will be Chinese there to direct them. Not a first for Pakistan who have a similar experience with USA, a certain Chuck whose plane IAF blew on ground making him India's enemy forever.
For PAF and their Armed Forces in general, User Specific customisations are now a luxury they don’t need nor can afford, as barring few things here and there,all their weapons are going to be Chinese anyway in coming decades. So integration will be seamless and no different than any other PLAAF unit. All they have to do it is translate the user manuals from Chinese to Urdu or English language or even adapting mandarin as an official military language (similar to how Urdu/Farsi language used to be).
For us it will be a big relief in peace time (as same resources will be sufficient to counter both front) and a bigger headache during war (rapid replenishment of war attrition owing to large industrial capacity of Chinese)
@randomradio

And tactically it’s in Pakees interest to load themselves/get hired by the more resourceful Chinese against a common enemy. Historically It’s how Punjabis and Pashtuns used to volunteer themselves to invade the richer Southern Indian subcontinent. All the invaders used to defeat local Punjabi and Pashtun Sardars and hire their military to invade further into South
 
Last edited:
China is LEASING the J-10Bs to the PAF, i.e. the PAF will not be the owner of the J-10Bs and they will be returned after China starts delivering the twin-engined Shenyang FC-35s to the PAF by 2025.
Funny because I just mentioned this few days ago and got my post deleted by a mod because our friendly neighbor had to troll my post which I didn’t respond to anyway.
At least try to behave like Grown ups. @safriz @AbRaj @Paro