Su-30MKI? I don't see flankers taking risks in Pakistan. This is what Artillery, ballistic missiles are for. How are PAF going to deal with the massive short range, accurate firepower of the IA?
Good point. I was also wondering why they would add on the weight of additional hardpoint on the wings when dual rail launchers achieve the same thing for less. If they are adding extra fuel tanks, which could happen, they will diffenitly benefit from Russias newer versions of RD-33 engines for the light stealth fighter. Looks like the lack of thrust could be dealt with over time as Russia is replacing the RD-33 engines with something new. However, this may not fix the reliability issue.
1, Chinese missiles were and could still be assisted by Russian seekers and even engines.
2. The difference in arsenals is an advantage for Tejas, not becuase the missiles are better which they are not compared to Gripen, but because it gives tactical intelligence something to think about on sorties. Varieties will help deter counters to these threats.
Could should would, not here yet. The JF-17 though old beat Tejas in some regards, even though with questionable safety standards.
I have an answer. But for that you need ask another question. Why did China buy Su-35s from Russia and received them in 2016? when they had J-20s inducted in 2017? Does this sound like PLAAF has trust in the J-20 capabilities? All lot about China is hype. They are not so advanced as the average fanboy perceives.
Well then they should have made the missile smokeless.
I know its not directed to me but who cares about CFT. JF-17 should not have a need for CFT, internal fuel capacity needs should have been met in early design and concept stages. Do you think the JF-17 is a copy of the F-16? Because its not. Its a mutilated version of the J-7 with concepts of the F-1 project hence the name JF-17. Like wise the J-10 is even more mutilated but at least the Chinese tried with J-10.
Chinese don't like to hear it, but the J-10 like J-8 and many others are a mutilation of the J-7. Internally the J-10 is drastically different, but from facts of construction of frames, they went with what was cheap, available, in abundance and most importantly, what they understood well. There should be no need for CFT. And I also don't know how it would effeect a cigar shaped design like J-17.