New J-10 Thread III

[plawolf]

Looks like the J10s in the first pic are packing LGBs, strange that we have never seen J10As carry laser designatory pods on their intake hard points even though they are designed to do so and are carrying LGBs like in this picture.

Anyways, best not tell the Indians about J10s in Tibet or they might freak.

[Bltizo]

Looks like the J10s in the first pic are packing LGBs, strange that we have never seen J10As carry laser designatory pods on their intake hard points even though they are designed to do so and are carrying LGBs like in this picture.

Anyways, best not tell the Indians about J10s in Tibet or they might freak.

I think this is the first proper pic of J-10s carrying any tyep of PGM in flight (we've had pics of them dropping LT-2s I think)

[hmmwv]

I think this is the first proper pic of J-10s carrying any tyep of PGM in flight (we've had pics of them dropping LT-2s I think)

You are right, and the second pic is the first time I've seen J10 carrying bombs on a cluster pylon on the center line hard point in addition to the four under belly bomb/pod only hard points. Which means in a future strike mission the J10 can carry two drop tanks, 10 FT-3 smart bombs, and two PL9 AAMs. Alternatively, it may carry two drop tanks, 6 FT-3 smart bombs, 4 PL12 and 2 PL9 AAMs.

[Schumacher]

You are right, and the second pic is the first time I've seen J10 carrying bombs on a cluster pylon on the center line hard point in addition to the four under belly bomb/pod only hard points. Which means in a future strike mission the J10 can carry two drop tanks, 10 FT-3 smart bombs, and two PL9 AAMs. Alternatively, it may carry two drop tanks, 6 FT-3 smart bombs, 4 PL12 and 2 PL9 AAMs.

How much of J10's famed agility will be compromised by such a payload ?

[siegecrossbow]

Pretty Chick in J-10:

[Quickie]

Pretty Chick in J-10:

What's with the what seems to be bluish metallic paint? Come to think of it, it would be quite something if the J-10 is paint in that colour.

[t2contra]

Pretty Chick in J-10:

I need to see the full face.

[hmmwv]

How much of J10's famed agility will be compromised by such a payload ?

A lot, that's a given for any fully loaded fighter, even for fighter with internal carriage because it packs more weight.

[T-U-P]

What's with the what seems to be bluish metallic paint? Come to think of it, it would be quite something if the J-10 is paint in that colour.

The PLAAF August 1 Demonstration Team have J-10s in blue paint. I think that would be the only place where you can find blue J-10s.

[Quickie]

The PLAAF August 1 Demonstration Team have J-10s in blue paint. I think that would be the only place where you can find blue J-10s.

That looks like metallic blue rather than blue. It could be just a photoshop effect but we'll know for sure if the J-10s women squadron has a different paint scheme when more pictures come in.

[plawolf]

I really doubt they will give female piloted planes a different paint job, especially since pilots share planes in the PLAAF. They have certainly not done so when women have flown other planes in the PLAAF, and there is no reason for them to start now. Even if they were going to give the planes a different paint job, they would not go with that colour as there isn't even a pretence at camo effect.

For now, I think the first batch of female J10 pilots will only number 5 or 10 girls, so they will obviously start off as part of a male unit, but I do wonder if, after they have built up enough numbers, wether the female pilots will be consolidated into a single all-female regiment or will they just keep mixed sex units throughout the PLAAF?

I can see pros and cons with both ways of doing things, but what the PLAAf decide should give interesting insight into what their views on the capabilities and role of women are in a combat role within the air force.

[hmmwv]

It's simply a over saturated picture, the planes are the same color.

[asif iqbal]

it is fine for women to be in the airforce, Pakistan has them and they perform well, but they will not fly during war time, simply because its not practical to consider a women down in enemy territory or killed by being shot down

the same is true for familys who have only 1 son, they can fly but during war they will not fly because the loss of the only son is a price too high for any mother, these are rules for Pakistan not sure about other countrys

[Schumacher]

.......

the same is true for familys who have only 1 son, they can fly but during war they will not fly because the loss of the only son is a price too high for any mother, these are rules for Pakistan not sure about other countrys

This can't be true for PLAAF, all of them is the only son.

[plawolf]

it is fine for women to be in the airforce, Pakistan has them and they perform well, but they will not fly during war time, simply because its not practical to consider a women down in enemy territory or killed by being shot down

the same is true for familys who have only 1 son, they can fly but during war they will not fly because the loss of the only son is a price too high for any mother, these are rules for Pakistan not sure about other countrys

What is the point in investing all that time and money to train fighter pilots if they are not allowed to do their job during the only time that matters? I think the PAF should either not recruit single sons or else do away with this unusual exemption.

As for women fighter pilots, well that is just sexism, and that really should be consigned to history as soon as possible by all nations.

In the modern age, women should have the same rights and responsibilities when it comes to the defense of their homeland, especially in all volunteer cases.

If those women are willing to put their lives on the line for their country, what right does anyone else have to refuse them?

I would think it perfectly acceptable for women to participate in extremely physically demanding military roles like frontline infantry and special operations units provided they can make all the grades.

If they are as capable as their male counterparts, then there is no reason to categorically deny them places in those services or hold them back during war.

The only time I would consider holding them back as being appropriate is if the enemy was an unconventional force, or a conventional force that does not follow the rules of civilized warfare and the women would likely be subject to sexual abuse if they fell into enemy hands.