J-10 Thread IV

[siegecrossbow]

India is hardly keeping its mouth shut. In fact, they are pressing (overcompensating) on their airbase missile strike narrative and deliberately ignoring the air to air component.

Which to me indicates that there was nothing good to share on that front so they'll never share it.

It is likely heavy. I recall reading a tweet on the night of the seventh of an Indian military watcher lamenting that he had some bad news to share before it got scrubbed from the internet. Many of the jets also got hit but it is not known whether they successfully limped back to base. At least one such example can no longer be repaired, so hull loss.

 

[AndrewS]

J-10 was only inducted into service in 2004. That's much lower than typical 30 year service life. Most J-10A are likely around 15 years old. Isn't it too early to retire them?

Did China already retire some J-10As?

The issue is that the J-10A doesn't have a mission anymore.

It used to be local airspace defence, but now air superiority over China (and the immediate neighborhood) is a given.

Plus air superiority missions now require a stealthy airframe.

---

The Chinese Air Force is shifting towards long-distance power projection.

That means bigger, twin-engine fighters.

 

[tamsen_ikard]

The issue is that the J-10A doesn't have a mission anymore.

It used to be local airspace defence, but now air superiority over China (and the immediate neighborhood) is a given.

Plus air superiority missions now require a stealthy airframe.

---

The Chinese Air Force is shifting towards long-distance power projection.

That means bigger, twin-engine fighters.

I think J-10's focus should be on being second line defense and multi-role striker with aerial refueling. J-10 does not have the range to work like J-16 but as China's tanker fleet comes along, J-10 can probably do missile truck role.

As for upgrading the J-10As, if we look at PLA's track record, they have upgraded all the old Sovremenny, Type 052s, Type051s during their midlife and kept them relevant even though they were only 1-2 ships per class. Designing upgrade itself is quite costly, so they didn't have to waste design resource on just 1-2 ship per class. But they did it anyway.

This tells me that PLA doesn't like to waste any hardware. So, I doubt China will let these J-10As to go to waste. They will likely come with an upgrade for them as well. Just using these J-10s for training is not their primary function. They need some kind of combat role as well.

 

[Maikeru]

Not every mission requires SotA aircraft. J10 and J11 variants can continue as for example cruise missile & drone interceptors, or air policing, for many years, saving cost and airframe life of 5th and 6th gens.

 

[AndrewS]

I think J-10's focus should be on being second line defense and multi-role striker with aerial refueling. J-10 does not have the range to work like J-16 but as China's tanker fleet comes along, J-10 can probably do missile truck role.

Second line air defence would still require datalinks and preferably an AESA radar.
For that mission, there are still 220 J-10C

---

As for the missile truck role, look at the likely air fleet composition in 2030.

1000+ 5th Gen stealth fighters
1100+ 4th Gen fighter-bombers (note this number excludes the J-10A)

If all those 4th gen fighters could become missile trucks? So you can quickly see that:

a) expensive missiles will run out very quickly

b) even if they all become missile trucks, that would be way overkill for the First Island Chain. So after the initial phases, it would be better to switch to glide-bombs instead.

c) There would be more than enough twin-engine heavyweight fighter-bombers to act as bomb/missile trucks (220 J-11B, 100 Su-30/35, 200 JH-7, 400 J-16). Plus there are an additional 200 H-6 bombers.

As for upgrading the J-10As, if we look at PLA's track record, they have upgraded all the old Sovremenny, Type 052s, Type051s during their midlife and kept them relevant even though they were only 1-2 ships per class. Designing upgrade itself is quite costly, so they didn't have to waste design resource on just 1-2 ship per class. But they did it anyway.

This tells me that PLA doesn't like to waste any hardware. So, I doubt China will let these J-10As to go to waste. They will likely come with an upgrade for them as well. Just using these J-10s for training is not their primary function. They need some kind of combat role as well.

By using the J-10A in a combat training role (launching dummy missiles), wouldn't they effectively become a reserve comprising 3rd line aircraft?

 

[Gloire_bb]

Second line air defence would still require datalinks and preferably an AESA radar.
For that mission, there are still 220 J-10C

China is a big country, with huge exposed border (like only Russian one is relatively secure, and only if Russia itself isn't part of the conflict).

There's merit in keeping reserve airframe updated for rear intercept duties, especially when there's useful free pilot pool for them. Just in case.
Given the modern security climate, doesn't look like a vane long term expenditure.

Also, as we increasingly see, any aircraft that went through a rocket coming of age ritual is turning into a valuable asset.

 

[siegecrossbow]

The issue is that the J-10A doesn't have a mission anymore.

It used to be local airspace defence, but now air superiority over China (and the immediate neighborhood) is a given.

Plus air superiority missions now require a stealthy airframe.

---

The Chinese Air Force is shifting towards long-distance power projection.

That means bigger, twin-engine fighters.

Not necessarily true. It still has an important role intercepting cruise missiles.

 

[Atomicfrog]

Not necessarily true. It still has an important role intercepting cruise missiles.

Or intercepting cheap long range suicide drones... even a TA-20 with a gun could be a usefull asset for that task. A large number of J-10A would certainly be usefull in a way.

 

[AndrewS]

Or intercepting cheap long range suicide drones... even a TA-20 with a gun could be a usefull asset for that task. A large number of J-10A would certainly be usefull in a way.

In a 2030 timeframe, for the cruise missile interceptor mission, we're still looking at:

1000+ 5th gen stealth fighters
700+ 4th gen heavyweight fighters-bombers
220 4th gen medium weight fighter-bombers (J-10A)

---

With this orbat, I expect a bare minimum of 50 aircraft with 300+ AAMs can be scrambled to any location on China's eastern border

I just don't see large enough incoming cruise missile attacks to justify retaining the J-10A in active status.

 

[tamsen_ikard]

In a 2030 timeframe, for the cruise missile interceptor mission, we're still looking at:

1000+ 5th gen stealth fighters
700+ 4th gen heavyweight fighters-bombers
220 4th gen medium weight fighter-bombers (J-10A)

---

With this orbat, I expect a bare minimum of 50 aircraft with 300+ AAMs can be scrambled to any location on China's eastern border

I just don't see large enough incoming cruise missile attacks to justify retaining the J-10A in active status.

I think China's overall Air force should be expanded significantly to atleast 3000 fighters + 400 bombers. This is necessary to attain complete dominance over western pacific with both US and its ally plane+air defence numbers accounted for.

China used to have a very large air force at 3000+ fighters. But for the last 20 years they have reduced it down to current 2000 fighter range. There is no reason to keep at that level.

China is in the heartland of Asia. just with Air force alone China can project power all over Asia including even the Middle East, South Asia, Malacca Straits and even the Black Sea. All within Range of Chinese long range bombers and long range fighters. Persian gulf is 2500 KM from China's western edge which is smaller than distance from China to Guam. Which means Chinese Bombers and long range fighters can operate all the way in Persian Gulf just from their own Borders.

The Black Sea also 3000 KM China's Borders. Australia is within 3000 KM from Spratly bases.

What this means is that China does not need to rely on Carrier based fighters to project power all over Asia. This is an advantage China has that US does not which is to be in the heart of Asia. China should utilize this advantage to the fullest.

So, instead of retiring planes like the J-10A, the better approach should be keep them in lower echelon forces and actually bring online new Air brigades or revive older ones.