Qasim:
I am not convinced by your reasoning. While no one is rich enough to buy everything he wanted, China isn't exactly short of money. In case you have not noticed, per soldier spending for China now exceed Taiwan and close to South Korea. When you consider the low wage, the amount of money to spend on the new toys is more than apparent. The fact that China would invest in expensive toys like J-20 means China is willing to trade quality for quantity.
I still maintain my argument that J-10 is a better buy due to performance. The effective price for PLA will not be different enough to make FC-1 attractive, even if J-10 is more expensive after all the accounting. The fact that WS-10 is domestically produced while RD-33 is not is enough for PLA to chose J-10 over FC-1. Despite of similarities, there will still be additional logistic cost associated with additional aircraft type. So balance is even more tilted toward J-10.
Your argument on the airshow performance strike me as a bit desperate. PLA knows better then anyone the true performance of J-10, and is hence not likely to be swayed. And there is plenty of reason why China chose not to show J-10's full capability -- safety, it's not looking to sale the aircraft, and secrecy. If I remember correctly, J-10s flied in formation, while FC-1 as a single aircraft. And in formation flying, one do need to be much more conservative, due to the risk of collision. So the comparison may not be fair, to begin with.
The only reason I can think of for PLA to buy FC-1 is for it to serve as Pakistani strategic reserve, in case war between India and Pakistan starts. In which case China would just fly the fighters to Pakistan to the hands of the Pakistani pilots already trained to operate them. Even as such, FC-1 have no chance of being a mainstay of the Chinese Air Force.
, so what tonnage is required for an attack helicopter?