J-10 In PAF Cammo!

[umair]

There has been a lot of talk going on about the PAF getting the J-10 which has just entered quantity production in China.According to some sources China has given the green light for the sale of this fighter to PAF.
So anyhoo here are two pics I found of the J-10 in an Air superiority grey color scheme in PAF cammo

http://combatsim.cpgl.net/paint/cemian/images2/j10_a_5.jpg

http://www.52dby.com/non-cgi/usr/5/5_83.jpg

The squadron markings are those of the "Golden Eagles"(that was in the 70s don't know what their present official name in urdu is now,as sooon as i find out it'll be here along with translations)I can't remember the squadron number.(Guess I'll have to send my younger brother to my former high school English teacher to borrow that old PAF book from her office once again :D )

[WebMaster]

According to my info, PAF isn't interested in J-10. The source says J-10 dose not meet PAF's requirements and that PAF is going to consider other options first and if it finds that no other option is reasonable then it would go for J-10. :?

[Londo Molari]

Pakistan will surely go for J-10... it may not meet their requirements, but everything that DOES meet our requirements is simply not for sale due to American political blocking.

So, J-10 WILL be in PAF colours... but not anytime soon. Probably AFTER the JF-17 has been started to be used in PAF in heavy numbers... the Chinese have to load up on J-10s themselves first...and right now they definitely cannot afford to give PAF J-10s because of the heavy U.S. presence.

[Oqaab]

According to my info, PAF isn't interested in J-10. The source says J-10 dose not meet PAF's requirements and that PAF is going to consider other options first and if it finds that no other option is reasonable then it would go for J-10. :?

Thats correct.

PAF didnt join the J-10 project and went for JF-17 instead. The negotiations for Mirage 2000-5 clearly shows that PAF wants to use European technology.

[gf0012-aust]

Is Pakistan not going near the J-10 because of the Israeli connection? The aircraft is basically a modified Lavi.

[umair]

You guys are maybe forgetting my post in the Aviation section!
Remember two pronged theory ;) I got that from a highly credible source(right 90%+ usually)
Oh and from the same source the Falcon given to China(that Falcon was written off when a wild Warthog ran onto the runway at SAFB and sheared off the front landing gear.It was perfectly ok otherwise) was used in the development of both the JF-17 and the Lavi(sic).So PAF has been involved and will take delivery of probably 100+J-10s.But not untill the problems with the engine(WS-10) have been rectified.

[gf0012-aust]

You guys are maybe forgetting my post in the Aviation section!
Remember two pronged theory ;) I got that from a highly credible source(right 90%+ usually)
Oh and from the same source the Falcon given to China(that Falcon was written off when a wild Warthog ran onto the runway at SAFB and sheared off the front landing gear.It was perfectly ok otherwise) was used in the development of both the JF-17 and the Lavi(sic).So PAF has been involved and will take delivery of probably 100+J-10s.But not untill the problems with the engine(WS-10) have been rectified.

Umair, seen this?

Israel's role in China's new warplane, By David Isenberg

THE recent unveiling (sort of) of China's first domestically designed (sort of) fighter jet was the culmination of a long saga of international military-hardware wheeling and dealing that has seen US-designed or -funded high-tech weaponry fall into the hands of potential military rivals.

The showpiece of many years' work, dating back to the late 1980s, recently happened -- albeit unobserved -- when China confirmed the existence of, but did not unveil, the Jian-10 fighter jet. It had been reported that the J-10 (F-10 being the export version, using North Atlantic Treaty Organization designation) would be shown in public for the first time during the fourth China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition (Airshow China 2002) held in Zhuhai in southern Guangdong province from November 4-10, but the plane did not appear.

The J-10 is a multi-role single-engine and single-seat tactical fighter, with a combat radius of 1,000 kilometers. Although billed as a domestically produced fighter, in truth the J-10 could not have happened without the help of other countries, especially Israel. The program began in the late 1980s and is thought to be based on an Israeli design.

It contains Israeli and Russian avionics, and is powered by Russian engines. Chinese engineers developed the J-10 from a single F-16 provided by Pakistan, and with assistance from Israeli engineers associated with Israel's US-financed Lavi fighter program, which was canceled in 1987, according to the Federation of American Scientists website.

The Lavi was based on the US F-16 and built with US$1.3 billion in aid from Washington. In 1983, when US support for the Lavi commenced, the program was opposed vigorously by the Defense Department, partly because of re-export concerns.

An early supporter of the Lavi was George Shultz, then secretary of state in the administration of US president Ronald Reagan. Shultz would later label his advocacy of the program a "costly mistake".

Only in early 1995 did the US government make public its concerns about Israel's Lavi-related technology re-exports to China. David Lari, director general of Israel's Ministry of Defense, acknowledged in an Associated Press interview that "some technology on aircraft" had been sold to China and that some Israeli companies may not have "clean hands".
Yet China's acquisition of the Russian Su-27, after China had attempted for years to develop the J-10 aircraft with equivalent technology to perform similar functions, is seen by some experts as a sign that China lacks confidence in its domestic industrial capabilities.

Though it has never been certain precisely what specific technologies and systems Israel provided, it was reported that the Jian-10's radar and fire-control system is the Israeli-made ELM-2021 system, which can simultaneously track six air targets and lock on to the four most threatening targets for destruction.

In December 1991, US intelligence officials announced that Israel planned to open a government-coordinated and -sponsored "arms office" in China. Given what the Israelis had to offer, and what the Chinese needed, it was most likely that a transfer of avionics and other technologies developed in the Lavi program would ensue, since there was a void in the Chinese avionics and fire-control system capability due to the 1989 termination of a US-Chinese program in response to Tiananmen Square. China and Israel started collaboration in the early 1980s and full-scale cooperation was under way officially by 1984.

As neither China nor Israel was capable of developing the propulsion system required by the J-10, in 1991 China acquired the AI31F turbofan engine from Russia for incorporation into the J-10 fighter. This engine is also used in the Su-27 air-superiority fighter that Chinese acquired from Russia.

As the performance of the AL31F engine is significantly better than that of the American PW1120 originally slated for the Lavi, it may be anticipated that the performance of the J-10 will be accordingly enhanced. Built by the Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Corp, the J-10 attempts to rival current fourth-generation Western fighters.

China has inked a 10-year deal with the Russian engine maker SRPC Salut for 300 Al-31F engines for its J-10 program and will begin production of the jets next year. The plane is said to have capabilities similar to the Su-27, the Russian MiG-29 and the US F-16 fighter jets, but with an estimated cost of less than $10 million, it could rival other jet makers on the international market.

In March 1997, despite official denials from Israeli officials, the US Office of Naval Intelligence in its unclassified "Worldwide Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare" restated more strongly than it had the previous year its belief that US-derived technology from the canceled Israeli Lavi fighter was being used on China's new F-10 fighter.
It said, "The design has been undertaken with substantial direct external assistance, primarily from Israel and Russia, with indirect assistance through access to US technologies."

In fact, according to the annual intelligence report, "the F-10 is a single-seat, light multi-role fighter based heavily on the canceled Israeli Lavi program".

Until it was canceled in 1987, much of Lavi technological development was paid for by the United States. Ironically, the potential capability of F-10 fighters was cited by both the US Navy and Air Force as one of the future threats justifying the expenditure of billions on new tactical aircraft, such as the F-22, F/A-18F, and Joint Strike Fighter.

The fact that possibly US-derived technology provided by an ally might be contributing to that potential threat is a delicate subject. However, this is not the first time accusations of illegal technology have been made.

A March 1992 report by State Department inspector general Sherman Funk, "Report of Audit: Department of State Defense Trade Controls", states that alleged Israeli violations of US laws and regulations "cited and supported by reliable intelligence information show a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorized transfers ... dating back to about 1983".

In the summer of 2000, the Washington Times reported that a memo circulating inside the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency told analysts they no longer had to gain input from the Defense Intelligence Agency before deciding whether controlled technology should be transferred to Israel.

The DIA had compiled evidence that Israel had violated US export regulations by transferring missile, laser and aircraft technology to China. Subsequently, when Israel tried to sell the Phalcon to India, the US government demanded that Israel limit arms exports. Israel was told that it must inform the US of all weapons transfers to 27 nations regarded as "countries of concern" such as China, India and Yugoslavia.

"Israel ranks second only to Russia as a weapons-system provider to China and as a conduit for sophisticated military technology, followed by France and Germany," stated a report this year by the US-China Security Review Commission, a panel established by Congress to examine security and economic relations between the two countries. "Recent upgrades in target acquisition and fire control, probably provided by Israeli weapons specialists, have enhanced the capabilities of the older guided missile destroyers and frigates" in the Chinese navy's inventory, it said.

The commission cited Israel as a supplier to Beijing of radar systems, optical and telecommunications equipment, drones and flight simulators. Arms exports have not only played a crucial role in offsetting Israel's trade imbalance but have also performed a key role in furthering its diplomatic efforts. The sale of arms and technology has become one of the most effective techniques to furthering Israeli goals overseas.

The quiet ties with China and India and the growing alliance with Turkey in the 1980s and the 1990s are good examples of strong links based on such cooperation. The J-10 is hardly the only result of Israeli-Chinese military cooperation. For example, the Chinese F-8, the same type of plane that collided with the US reconnaissance plane last year, is armed with Israeli Python-3 missiles.

The Python, adapted from the US ALM-9L Sidewinder missile, has a high degree of US technology. Ironically for Israel, China apparently sold its version of Python-3, called the PL-8, to Iraq. And, as was widely publicized, Israel was set to sell China the Phalcon, an airborne early-warning radar system, until it was forced by the United States to cancel the deal.

The US Central Intelligence Agency also believed Israel was marketing its STAR cruise missile in China. The STAR incorporates sensitive US technology. And former US officials report that both Israel and the Dutch company Delft made unauthorized sales of US thermal-imaging tank sights to, among others, China.

The sights were installed on China's 69 MOD-2 tanks, some of which were sold to Iraq. The United States acquired physical evidence of this transfer after these tanks were used against US marines in the 1991 Gulf War

[umair]

I've seen this gf, what my point which apparently didn't go through was that China also involved PAF in the J-10 programme.And this comes from someone higher in the force than my PAF uncle.
PAF is just waiting for the WS-10 and the new Chinese radar to be ready the other avionics in the PAF version will be of western origin.The Falcon was taken to China for two purposes use in the Thunder project as a benchmark and exactly for what in the J-10 I don't know.

[gf0012-aust]

I'd suggest that the Chinese were using it for aggressor comparisons. The F16 was considered to be the best single engine fighter of its day. Maybe this is why you guys are having probs getting more american aircraft - they don't like you giving them to the chinese for "evaluation"... ;)

They also may have been doing flyoffs between the F16 and the Lavi to see what major flight characteristics were affected by the revised canted wings and canards.

[Red aRRow]

There is no proof that PAF gave any aircraft to PLAAF. It's just rumours. I think possiblity is that the chinese may have come to Pakistan to have a look at it or something.

Maybe this is why you guys are having probs getting more american aircraft - they don't like you giving them to the chinese for "evaluation"...

Well then Israel would have been out of their equation too. It's just the American interests which dictate who to sell to or not. F-16 is an old platform and IMO will not make any significant impact in the Chinese aviation know how.
These kind of rumours are spread deliberately to discredit others...just to show that they are so bad that they have to look at western equipment which somehow is assumed to be better.
I mean the Chinese SU-30 are already much more superior to the F-16 As and Bs which Pakistan has. So why this need to have one imported???? :roll

[PAF GIRL]

NO PAF f-16s to the chinese. I don't know why people believe that!

J-10 in PAF scheme looks ggoood!

[Mukesh Patel]

After western fighters j-10 would be the best that pakistan can get. that coupled with a lots of jf-17 would make paf a force to wrecken with. Recently I heard that paf tested a BVR missile? something like 120km and is similar to SA's darter? now thats something to worry about for india!

[gf0012-aust]

There is no proof that PAF gave any aircraft to PLAAF. It's just rumours. I think possiblity is that the chinese may have come to Pakistan to have a look at it or something.

Maybe this is why you guys are having probs getting more american aircraft - they don't like you giving them to the chinese for "evaluation"...

Well then Israel would have been out of their equation too. It's just the American interests which dictate who to sell to or not. F-16 is an old platform and IMO will not make any significant impact in the Chinese aviation know how.
These kind of rumours are spread deliberately to discredit others...just to show that they are so bad that they have to look at western equipment which somehow is assumed to be better.
I mean the Chinese SU-30 are already much more superior to the F-16 As and Bs which Pakistan has. So why this need to have one imported???? :roll
Actually the F16 A's and B's were considered to be the best F16 models for dogfighting. The J-10 is very much an F16 derivative (from the original Lavi concept) so it would be a fast "turn and burner"

All these consipracy theories are enough to keep the "Guardian" alive for years to come... ;)

[Oqaab]

These kind of rumours are spread deliberately to discredit others...just to show that they are so bad that they have to look at western equipment which somehow is assumed to be better.
I mean the Chinese SU-30 are already much more superior to the F-16 As and Bs which Pakistan has. So why this need to have one imported???? :roll

Even the americans imported some MiG-29s from Moldovia (spell ??) for research. And as GF said, F-16 is the dangerous dogfighter. It even outclassed mirage 2000-5 in a dogfight.

[corsair7772]

The J-10 does incorporate a lot of F-16s technologies. Look at it this way. The lavi program which went to the chinese was from the F-16 and PAF also provided an F-16 to the chinese. From this we can assume tht the PAF was involved in the J-10 proj.

And abt its induction it is definitely a good aircraft and according to an interview in Janes with Kaleem Sadat who is the Air Chief Marshal of the PAF, he clearly stated tht the PAF will induct the J-10 when it becomes available (want the interview?) which we can assume it will be in 5-6 years?

And coming to the colour scheme, REALLY HOT. if there are any graphic designers here, cud they get the scheme in desert camo?

[umair]

The J-10 does incorporate a lot of F-16s technologies. Look at it this way. The lavi program which went to the chinese was from the F-16 and PAF also provided an F-16 to the chinese. From this we can assume tht the PAF was involved in the J-10 proj.

And abt its induction it is definitely a good aircraft and according to an interview in Janes with Kaleem Sadat who is the Air Chief Marshal of the PAF, he clearly stated tht the PAF will induct the J-10 when it becomes available (want the interview?) which we can assume it will be in 5-6 years?

And coming to the colour scheme, REALLY HOT. if there are any graphic designers here, cud they get the scheme in desert camo?

Ask Londo! :D He's good!Oh and this is not a conspiracy theory guys.I got this from a veeeerrrry reliable source, that we indeed gave an F-16 for evaluation after a wild pig "pighandeled" it upon landing.The timespan was early-mid 90s, when China didn't have many or rather any Flankers.

[Oqaab]

corsair7772,

I think the F-16 was given for JF-17s project .....

Anyways plzzz post a link which says that PAF will induct J-10.

[Red aRRow]

It even outclassed mirage 2000-5 in a dogfight.

Only dogfight I can recall between the two platforms was between Greek Mirage 2000s (Not 2000-5s even) and Turkish F-16s over International waters near Cyprus in 1996. One Turkish F-16 was shot down in which the pilot, Neil Erdogan, lost his life. And the battle was a dogfight and not a BVR scenario.

[Red aRRow]

Here are two more pictures from DefenceTalk.com's galleries:
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/albums/userpics/normal_J-10%283D%29-DefenceTalk.com01.jpg


http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/albums/userpics/normal_J-10%283D%29-DefenceTalk.com02.jpg

[Majin-Vegeta]

wow..that looks really nice :)

[Oqaab]

It even outclassed mirage 2000-5 in a dogfight.

Only dogfight I can recall between the two platforms was between Greek Mirage 2000s (Not 2000-5s even) and Turkish F-16s over International waters near Cyprus in 1996. One Turkish F-16 was shot down in which the pilot, Neil Erdogan, lost his life. And the battle was a dogfight and not a BVR scenario.

In simulated air combat between the F-16 and the Mirage 2000-5 conducted by the PAF on numerous occasions, the technologically inferior F-16A defeated the Mirage 2000-5 on every occasion.

Link = http://www.pakaviation.com/PVA/Aero_News/Item/Aviation_News_199908160.html

[JTF-2 HOPE]

Cool really looks great, but it is not to
clear. I think it would do much better if they add
abit of background and clear it up.

Good job anyway. :)

[elkaboingo]

You guys are maybe forgetting my post in the Aviation section!
Remember two pronged theory ;) I got that from a highly credible source(right 90%+ usually)
Oh and from the same source the Falcon given to China(that Falcon was written off when a wild Warthog ran onto the runway at SAFB and sheared off the front landing gear.It was perfectly ok otherwise) was used in the development of both the JF-17 and the Lavi(sic).So PAF has been involved and will take delivery of probably 100+J-10s.But not untill the problems with the engine(WS-10) have been rectified.

yes this DID happen, i read about it in a report done by a former officer.
j-10 is a hodge podge of all kinds of designs. f-16, lavi and even a some mig design features.

[shamsi]

I'd suggest that the Chinese were using it for aggressor comparisons. The F16 was considered to be the best single engine fighter of its day. Maybe this is why you guys are having probs getting more american aircraft - they don't like you giving them to the chinese for "evaluation"... ;)

They also may have been doing flyoffs between the F16 and the Lavi to see what major flight characteristics were affected by the revised canted wings and canards.

F-16s were stopped due to Pakistan modifying them and planning to use them for Nuke delivery. Hence when "Toss Drop" pictures came in from the eyes in the sky, F-16s were essentially blocked. This also accelerated Pakistan's efforts for SSMs. So, perhaps, you can thank Larry pressler for Pakistan's SSMs.

[gf0012-aust]

Presslers response is a classic example of Newtons second law at work.

[Red aRRow]

Presslers response is a classic example of Newtons second law at work.

So true. ;)

[Revival_786]

Those pics are beautiful :)

[adsH]

hey does any one know what it is made out of (the airframe)please don't tell me its aluminum!!. i would think its possible its made out of the same material as that JF-17(aluminum). but then i can't stop pondering what If they employed some sort of composite in the construction. it looks like a nice light weight craft and then the israelis played a part in the development. And about people saying the craft won't be available to PAF becasue of american heavy presence well!!.it was practically built with the help of israelis so i don't see how the americans won't know about the airframe its abilities and its electronics. and about PAF not accepting any thing that has remotely any thing to with Israelis well i don't think PAF has the luxury to reject what litle they can get there hands onn!! (not being biased but only real) and plus, there may not be any official links between pakistan and israel but there were atleast number of direct and indirect exchanges between them in the 80's soviet wars!
THIS WILL BRING EVERY THING IN INFRONT I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE READ THIS BOOK ITS A GOOD READ it details the upgrades provides by Israelis to the Pak army on the basic chinese t-59 tanks

http://www.politics-now.com/books/charliewilsonafghanistan.htm


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE1DE163EF936A15756C0A9659C8B 63




BTW CHECK THIS SITE OUT ABOUT, I GUESS EVERY THING LOOKS GOOD
http://www.aeronautics.ru/

[gf0012-aust]

hey does any one know what it is made out of (the airframe)please don't tell me its aluminum!!. i would think its possible its made out of the same material as that JF-17(aluminum). but then i can't stop pondering what If they employed some sort of composite in the construction. it looks like a nice light weight craft and then the israelis played a part in the development. And about people saying the craft won't be available to PAF becasue of american heavy presence well!!.it was practically built with the help of israelis so i don't see how the americans won't know about the airframe its abilities and its electronics. and about PAF not accepting any thing that has remotely any thing to with Israelis well i don't think PAF has the luxury to reject what litle they can get there hands onn!! (not being biased but only real) and plus, there may not be any official links between pakistan and israel but there were atleast number of direct and indirect exchanges between them in the 80's soviet wars!
THIS WILL BRING EVERY THING IN INFRONT I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE READ THIS BOOK ITS A GOOD READ it details the upgrades provides by Israelis to the Pak army on the basic chinese t-59 tanks

http://www.politics-now.com/books/charliewilsonafghanistan.htm


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE1DE163EF936A15756C0A9659C8B 63




BTW CHECK THIS SITE OUT ABOUT, I GUESS EVERY THING LOOKS GOOD
http://www.aeronautics.ru/

Musharraf was keen on having a non-aggression pact with Israel in the late 90's (similar to Egypts relationship with Israel.) Musharraf was quite keen on getting access to Israeli expertise in military equipment, so it's highly possible that some tech transfer was drip fed through in this period.

[adsH]

hey does any one know what it is made out of (the airframe)please don't tell me its aluminum!!. i would think its possible its made out of the same material as that JF-17(aluminum). but then i can't stop pondering what If they employed some sort of composite in the construction. it looks like a nice light weight craft and then the israelis played a part in the development. And about people saying the craft won't be available to PAF becasue of american heavy presence well!!.it was practically built with the help of israelis so i don't see how the americans won't know about the airframe its abilities and its electronics. and about PAF not accepting any thing that has remotely any thing to with Israelis well i don't think PAF has the luxury to reject what litle they can get there hands onn!! (not being biased but only real) and plus, there may not be any official links between pakistan and israel but there were atleast number of direct and indirect exchanges between them in the 80's soviet wars!
THIS WILL BRING EVERY THING IN INFRONT I HOPE YOU GUYS HAVE READ THIS BOOK ITS A GOOD READ it details the upgrades provides by Israelis to the Pak army on the basic chinese t-59 tanks

http://www.politics-now.com/books/charliewilsonafghanistan.htm


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE1DE163EF936A15756C0A9659C8B 63




BTW CHECK THIS SITE OUT ABOUT, I GUESS EVERY THING LOOKS GOOD
http://www.aeronautics.ru/

Musharraf was keen on having a non-aggression pact with Israel in the late 90's (similar to Egypts relationship with Israel.) Musharraf was quite keen on getting access to Israeli expertise in military equipment, so it's highly possible that some tech transfer was drip fed through in this period.

i am sure Musharaf wanted israelis to have an embassy in islamabad and a counslate in karachi but in the 90 he did not hold a position to even push this ahead(but he is pushing ahead now with an active punlic running poll which is constantly registering votes concering the acceptance of israel) i guess PAK Armed forces are more in sync with Turkey's Mandate being more secular so they can be the only properly developed powerfull institution in pakistan that can be called moderates.!! Musharaf will press aheadwith relations with Israel. he thinks that if the arab countries around israel can acknowledge its existence so why can't a nation thousands of miles away. good thinking i would say.

[gf0012-aust]

It's interesting to note that the division of how the Pakistani Govt deals with Israeli is divided amongts the military and the ISI. It has appeared to be that the military seeks recognition of Israeli and that the ISI are closer to the fundamentalist and non recognition camp.

Jordan and Israeli have made substantial gains in the last few years in trying to reach accomodations. Although in Jordans case, they were glad to be rid of the Palestinians themselves. People seem to forget that Jordan was one of the Arab States that was actively harassing its own Palestinians in the 80's and early 90's.

A benign relationship with Israel would also mean that Jordan can release itself from sheltering Palestinians - a cost burden which it has been increasingly complaining about.

Israel has made accomodations with Egypt, Jordan and Turkey. It actively participates in Turkish weapons programmes - in real terms Turkey is the most powerful Islamic nation in the region - and yet there is no animosity between the 2.

[adsH]

It's interesting to note that the division of how the Pakistani Govt deals with Israeli is divided amongts the military and the ISI. It has appeared to be that the military seeks recognition of Israeli and that the ISI are closer to the fundamentalist and non recognition camp.

Jordan and Israeli have made substantial gains in the last few years in trying to reach accomodations. Although in Jordans case, they were glad to be rid of the Palestinians themselves. People seem to forget that Jordan was one of the Arab States that was actively harassing its own Palestinians in the 80's and early 90's.

A benign relationship with Israel would also mean that Jordan can release itself from sheltering Palestinians - a cost burden which it has been increasingly complaining about.

Israel has made accomodations with Egypt, Jordan and Turkey. It actively participates in Turkish weapons programmes - in real terms Turkey is the most powerful Islamic nation in the region - and yet there is no animosity between the 2.

Exactly rite but the fact ISI is for non recognition of israel is not correct ISI inter service group is not full of fundamentlist as i see it it is a powerless institution of the armed forces now directly controlled by the Pres/Gen Pervez (he controls every thing ) ( a real dictatorship ) so the army may have deap divisions but they stick together and when divisions casue fracters those fractures are dealt with counter mechnanism i think you get the picture (i am sure this basic rule apply for such an institution)
think of ISI and ARMY as one institution and the rest of the democracy bearing institutions as the oponent who would be more powerfull. in a civilized modern nation the democracy would rule but in country that had almost defaulted where poverty is all time high and curruption endless (the fact, but its improveing now )
the army would certainly shine and stand out which sole purpose is the defence of the nation but now there are two dimensions defence from external atacks and defence from falling appart (regardless of what casues the colapse feuds or moentery collapse).

[Gangsternation]

Yes it looks very :eek

its so hot! :D

[adsH]

the ISI was directly involoved with Israeli and pentagon scientist in the development and deployment and use of the weapons that were being created for the battle feild in Afghanistan the fighter there lacked the expertise and aptitude to operate GPS (very new at that time ) systems (note GPS systems in the 80's) Mortars which were modified, apperntly to contain guidance systems lazer site designators to instruct American bombers to conduct bombing of certain targets in the region. these critically needed systems were designed and used primarilly to break the spirits of the Soviates to continuosly develop tech every 3 months and to show them that they could not have a possible defence. and it was all done by Pakistan ISI Pakistan Army Israeli Expertise US pentagon Scientists.

[ipfreak]

from what i read in chinese, j-10 uses more than 35% but less than 40% of composite materials. jf-17 doesn't use any. those new j-10a have been fit with ws-10. can't find any data in terms of performance.

it is said that both j-10 and jf-17 have great potential for upgreat, espcially air intake modification, new, more powerful engine.

the problem is that chinese are obsesssed with ambuguity, even with fc-1 and j-11 (su-27sk). every news was kina nebulous ...

but i doubt j-10 will be with paf any time soon though.

according to PLAAF's strategy of "high-end, mid-level and low-end", j-10 seem to fit in the mid-level position. jf-17 would be in the low-end, i guess. but fc-1 was clearly considered equal to f-16/a/b in terms of perforcemance (public statement from both paf and cac). then what about j-7e, j-8ii?

whatever j-10a could do, it defintely leave a lot of room for guessing and deabting ...

[adsH]

from what i read in chinese, j-10 uses more than 35% but less than 40% of composite materials. jf-17 doesn't use any. those new j-10a have been fit with ws-10. can't find any data in terms of performance.

it is said that both j-10 and jf-17 have great potential for upgreat, espcially air intake modification, new, more powerful engine.

the problem is that chinese are obsesssed with ambuguity, even with fc-1 and j-11 (su-27sk). every news was kina nebulous ...

but i doubt j-10 will be with paf any time soon though.

according to PLAAF's strategy of "high-end, mid-level and low-end", j-10 seem to fit in the mid-level position. jf-17 would be in the low-end, i guess. but fc-1 was clearly considered equal to f-16/a/b in terms of perforcemance (public statement from both paf and cac). then what about j-7e, j-8ii?

whatever j-10a could do, it defintely leave a lot of room for guessing and deabting ...


I don't think the chinese would bother putting Composite on the JF-17 but i think PAF will i think there Cockpit will be made out of it i don't know if they would make those composite cockpits in pak but i would think the Pakistanis would not put anything in PAF that is sub standard!!! believe it or not to PAF even in the given state it is still values its pilots more then its AC(any professional modern AF would)!!

[yasin_khan]

ZABARDAST :mrgreen

[P.A.F]

J-10 doesn't appeal to me man :( . i rather looks like a cone with a match box at the bottom of it. much prefer the gripens :smokingc:

[umair]

It's not the looks but the BANG which counts.And this baby will have a lot of bang to boot.Informal talks have already begun with thales regarding avionics and EW system customisation packages for the J-10s which would eventually be acquired by the PAF

[P.A.F]

True. but i'd much prefer it if it looks as good as it can bang.

[adsH]

True. but i'd much prefer it if it looks as good as it can bang.

Effectiveness is important.usually effectiveness can be achieved by poor looking design. but what i personally believe is that, hypothetically speaking if you have a Mig 21 that can achieve the same as an F-16, then alot would perfer teh Mig. well i wouldn't, i would still perfer an F-16, simply because the F-16 is a pritty intimidating looking machine, a Mig can only show its effectiveness by actually doing something, while an F-16 can possibly scare the enemy. therefore intimidation can be a deterrent, by my understanding.

Like in IAF the word SU30 mki MKi inspires confidence while in PAF it inspires feer to an extent, this is the psychological intimidation i am onn about.