China’s J-10B fighter to Pak worries India

The recent official offer of the Chinese to raise a squadron of its home-grown advanced multi-role, all-weather fighter aircraft J-10B to Pakistan has worried Indian defence experts. Pakistan will be the only other country apart from China to have this sophisticated fighter aircraft.

Air Commodore (Retd) Jasjit Singh, director, New Delhi-based Centre for Air Power Studies (CAPS), told DNA: “India now not only faces the possibility of a two-front war but has to also deal with a two-front military modernisation programme with China supplying its latest weaponry to Pakistan.”

He said India faces a 10-year window of vulnerability as the Indian Air Force’s (IAF’s) present squadron of 34 is way below the sanctioned strength of 39 squadrons. “It will take 10 years for the IAF to get back to its sanctioned strength of 39 squadrons. While Pakistan at present, with 24 squadrons, is raising its strength rapidly with China’s support,” said Singh, who is also the former director of Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis.

Former Vice Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal PK Barbora, however, said China’s offering Pakistan a squadron of the J-10s may not threaten India’s air superiority. “China does not have a great record of producing a world-class aircraft. All they do is reverse engineer and manufacture aircraft. Secondly, by raising just one squadron Pakistan may not benefit much,” he said.

However, Pakistani media reports indicate that it is looking at raising two squadrons of the fourth generation aircraft to counter India’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, which is still under development. Besides, according to US military and defence technology news website, Defense Update, the Chinese designed Joint Fighter (JF)-17 (commonly known as ‘Thunder’) is already under production in Pakistan and is actively being promoted for export in the world market.

Despite his optimism, Air Marshal Barbora warned that the slow pace of India’s defence indigenisation (read LCA Tejas, in particular) is a cause for worry. “We will be adding 300 more Su-30 MKIs; getting 126 medium multi role combat aircraft; and upgrading the Mirage 2000s, Jaguars and the MiG-29s. The same cannot be said of some pathetic status of indigenous programmes like the Light Combat Aircraft, which has been delayed for years now,” he says.

***Shades of Eurofighter Typhoon and D-M Rafale***

The J-10 or J-10B should be the most advanced in ChiCom inventory after the J-20. It (J-10) is, IMO, also void of any traits in relations to the planes you’ve described in the above therefore, IMO, neither the Typhoon or the Rafale can claim credit.

I mean given [the stiff tech transfer restrictions] placed upon the ChiComs, re-engineering anything western is IMO like trying to find a needle not in a haystack but to find a needle in the middle of the Pacific ocean.

Anyhow, if you wish to place blame, I’d say you should first blame Chinese engineers for their [aggressive] and [competitive] nature; then blame SAAB, yes [SAAB], for inspiring (yes, inspiring, not copying) Chinese engineers to adopt the canards and delta layout; and, last but not least, blame either MiG-1.42 or the F-16 or both for [inspiring] the chin intake option.

I mean seriously speaking, how many layouts are there to be had when designing a fighter plane anyhow? Not much! Every idea had practically been explored. There are only three options to the designing of a fighter, any fighter, and those options are: lateral intake, chin intake, or under belly intakes. All aircraft designs in the world, with the exception of some stealth ideas, have to go for one or the other of the three. There are no ifs, buts, or maybes about it.

Simply put: Let’s not underestimate the ingenious and creatives sides of Chinese, Indian, Russian, or American engineers, artists, doctors, dentists, scientists, mathematicians, economists, or even (:) Kung Pao chicken servers (:) to express the creative side of themselves — wherever they work...

The J-10 is basically equivalent to earlier block F-16 variants. While externally it may seem a tad similar to the Rafale (close coupled canards) and Eurofighter (general layout if one squints), it is actually VERY different (and very inferior) to those two aircraft. For one it only has one engine (and not a very good one at that, with the Chinese being forced to use the Russian AL-31 series following continued problems with Chinese attempts at their own engine), the avionics are not anywhere close to the European planes (comparing the J-10's ECM with the Rafale's Spectra, or the J-10's radar with the Eurofighter's captor, would be laughable), the kinematics totally different (the European planes are much better), and even the structure totally different.

All in all, the J-10 is a good attempt by the Chinese to create a 4th generation plane. They also did a good job copying the Lavi prototype (the Israeli-American project that the J-10 is based on). However, the only reason why the J-10 is a threat is not because of its capability (I'd rather have a modernized MiG-29), but rather because the Chinese will be making very many of them, and selling them to 'beautiful' countries like our 'good ally' Pakistan. It is a decent aircraft, and in sufficient numbers is definitely a problem since it can fly alright, has an alright radar and will carry alright weapons. In a fight having an 'alright capability' can be very important, especially when you have large numbers. An 'alright capability' in high numbers can defeat an 'advanced superlative capability' in smaller numbers, as seen when American and Russian tanks overwhelmed the far superior Nazi tanks in WW2. However, the J-10 is really not equivalent to any modern Western plane (or Russian for that matter), which is something that many Chinese fanboys in other forums do not realize. Comparing a J-10 to a Eurofighter (because they look 'similar' if one squints) or a J-10 to a Rafale (because they both have close-coupled canards) is like comparing a Yugo with a quarter tank of fuel and 2 bad tires to an Enzo Ferrari. The difference is literally that stark.

The only problem is China is making a lot of those Yugos!

The J-10 is a total copy of the Israeli LAVI with Russian engines..... and a cheap job at that as you can expect of Chinese engineering. Nothing is ever original in the Chinese inventory. The LAVI project was closed by Israel and they handed over the blue prints to the Chinese. And contrary to your claims, the Chinese have been benefactors of American technology under Clinton administration and also via industrial espionage. In that respect Chinese engineering workmanship hardly deserves any credit. The J-10 is still basically a dud fighter which is still struggling with engines, radars and avionics.

” the avionics are not anywhere close to the European planes (comparing the J-10’s ECM with the Rafale’s Spectra, or the J-10’s radar with the Eurofighter’s captor, would be laughable), the kinematics totally different (the European planes are much better), and even the structure totally different. “

The problem with Chinese quick and dirty reverse engineering is that you can produce “look-alikes” which are nowhere close to the actual performance of their original copies. The Chinese simply try to copy a fighter design to jump ahead and skip the evolutionary process of fully understanding and maturing an aircraft design and to bring it to its ultimate performance levels. It takes years of design knowledge and experience, a huge gap that Chinese engineers haven't been able to fill out yet even with all their drive for aggressive modernization.

***I dont think Chicom creativity extends too far beyond Kung Pao chicken***

actually, the prepping and the art of kung pao chicken is much more sophisticated and much more challenging than you may think. example: come bbq season, i’d put together the most mouth watering big mac you can find, in no time flat, because the processes is such a simple one.

however, the putting together of a samosa, a kungpao chicken, or a paela dish, on the other hand, is a very complicated processes — it requires creativity and enginuity.

truth: it’s all about funding. you have the funding for the programs, then people with creative ideas (engineers scientists the world over) will come oozing out of the frameworks like cockroaches in the dark of the night and they will pour their hearts out into the realizing of their dreams and...

...if your dreams is that your kung pao chicken is better than that of the competition, then why not?

... even the Xods will sell their soul to the devil which as how the oppenheimer project was such a success story...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.