CATIC bidding L-15B for PAF'S LIFT requirements

[CriticalThought]

But we will need a JF-17 OCU, Sharp Shooters will assume that role. There is already an FCU as No. 1 Sqn Rahbers, they will be given the new LIFTs

That's assuming they want to use B version for OCU. OCU in a JF-17 squadron looks like this: put pilot on simulator, send him up on a plane. So it can go either way.

 

[Basel]

Bhai Sharp shooter sqn esse hi nhi aya . apko paf vision 2030 ka patta hai?
Lift is to come swal yeh hai konsa atta hai aur kab

PAF may want lift so it will be easy to train for 5th gen birds as most lifts can be programmed for various type of fighter jets training.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Interestingly enough, Wikipedia describes FTC-2000 as basically an FT-7 with front fuselage replaced, and with side intakes and DSI. The engine remains the same. On the other hand, L-15 is the next iteration of K-8. In both cases, upgrading the MRO infrastructure should have similar effort.

Now an interesting proposition. We have deep expertise in MRO of the Snecmas in Mirages. So what if we take L-15, an marry it with the Snecmas?



I thought Sharp Shooters will become the FCU in the future with LIFT??? Because F-7s will be replaced completely, so no need for an F-7 OCU.

Can you take a look at these dimensions for the engines you are proposing to replace and then tell us if it is possible and how to get it done?

Al-222 (that powers L-15 & Yak-130)

• Type: Two-spool low-bypass turbofan
• Length: 1,960 mm (77.17 in)
• Diameter: 640 mm (25.20 in)
• Dry weight: 440 kg (970.03 lb) in base configuration, 560 kg (1,234.59 lb) in afterburning configuration

Snecma Atar 09C (that powers the Mirages)

• Type: Afterburning turbojet
• Length: 5,900 mm (232 in)
• Diameter: 1,000 mm (39 in)
• Dry weight: 1,456 kg (3,210 lb)

 

[CriticalThought]

Can you take a look at these dimensions for the engines you are proposing to replace and then tell us if it is possible and how to get it done?

Al-222 (that powers L-15 & Yak-130)

• Type: Two-spool low-bypass turbofan
• Length: 1,960 mm (77.17 in)
• Diameter: 640 mm (25.20 in)
• Dry weight: 440 kg (970.03 lb) in base configuration, 560 kg (1,234.59 lb) in afterburning configuration

Snecma Atar 09C (that powers the Mirages)

• Type: Afterburning turbojet
• Length: 5,900 mm (232 in)
• Diameter: 1,000 mm (39 in)
• Dry weight: 1,456 kg (3,210 lb)

Hey you need to modify the airframe as well. I wasn't suggesting a drop-in replacement.

 

[Deino]

AI-222-25 is a thrust vector capable engine also used on YAK-130 .

But i still don't see how L-15 is cheaper option than JF 17 lift oriented.

But asthetically its one sexy and attractive aircraft heck it can even have armed variants.

No; it is not ... it just adds an AB, nothing more.

....On the other hand, L-15 is the next iteration of K-8. In both cases, upgrading the MRO infrastructure should have similar effort.

Now an interesting proposition. We have deep expertise in MRO of the Snecmas in Mirages. So what if we take L-15, an marry it with the Snecmas?
.

Oh, come on. Describing the L-15 as a next iteration of the K-8, mating two SNECMA engines to it ... you surely have no aeronautical knowledge; don't you?

What you describe besides being utterly wrong and impossible is like driving since years with a small Vespa motorcycle and now wanting to add two Porsche motors onto a slightly larger one. Forget it.

If there is a requirement for a dedicated LIFT, then Pakistan has - besides a foreign option - three Chinese possibilities:

1. variant of L-15
2. FTC-2000G
3. JF-17B

And now they have to weight on cost vs. performance, how realistic/practical is it to introduce yet another type and ...

But surely not developing a LIFT out of a Vespa.

Hey you need to modify the airframe as well. I wasn't suggesting a drop-in replacement.

Which would be de facto a new aircraft. These ideas are as unrealistic as putting two RD-93 or one AL-31 or WS-10 into the JF-17 to "simply" enlarge it.

 

[CriticalThought]

No; it is not ... it just adds an AB, nothing more.




Oh, come on. Describing the L-15 as a next iteration of the K-8, mating two SNECMA engines to it ... you surely have no aeronautical knowledge; don't you?

What you describe besides being utterly wrong and impossible is like driving since years with a small Vespa motorcycle and now wanting to add two Porsche motors onto a slightly larger one. Forget it.

If there is a requirement for a dedicated LIFT, then Pakistan has - besides a foreign option - three Chinese possibilities:

1. variant of L-15
2. FTC-2000G
3. JF-17B

And now they have to weight on cost vs. performance, how realistic/practical is it to introduce yet another type and ...

But surely not developing a LIFT out of a Vespa.



Which would be de facto a new aircraft. These ideas are as unrealistic as putting two RD-93 or one AL-31 or WS-10 into the JF-17 to "simply" enlarge it.

Maybe you should first attempt to fully understand before using sarcasm against posters.

The JL-10 is designed by the same company that originally designed JL-8, which is renamed K-8 in Pakistan. In that sense I called it the next iteration. Externally, JL-10 further streamlines the airframe of JL-8. In terms of avionics, flight control, and power pack, it is a different aircraft.

Did I say that two engines should be replaced with twin SNECMAs? This is something you have dreamt up to sound like you know something. Instead of misrepresenting what I wrote, you should display the qualities of an international mod, and try to clarify if you need more insight. Changing the design of L-15 to incorporate a single SNECMA engine would be a good exercise for Pakistani designers. I am keen for them to start small scale projects involving significant changes to existing designs, so they gain expertise in end to end design and development of aircrafts. If you see this as infeasible, feel free to counter with solid arguments.

 

[denel]

Maybe you should first attempt to fully understand before using sarcasm against posters.

The JL-10 is designed by the same company that originally designed JL-8, which is renamed K-8 in Pakistan. In that sense I called it the next iteration. Externally, JL-10 further streamlines the airframe of JL-8. In terms of avionics, flight control, and power pack, it is a different aircraft.

Did I say that two engines should be replaced with twin SNECMAs? This is something you have dreamt up to sound like you know something. Instead of misrepresenting what I wrote, you should display the qualities of an international mod, and try to clarify if you need more insight. Changing the design of L-15 to incorporate a single SNECMA engine would be a good exercise for Pakistani designers. I am keen for them to start small scale projects involving significant changes to existing designs, so they gain expertise in end to end design and development of aircrafts. If you see this as infeasible, feel free to counter with solid arguments.

no friend. you are asking too much for change.

 

[CriticalThought]

no friend. you are asking too much for change.

PAC should get out of its comfort zone and do something extraordinary to establish its credentials.

 

[denel]

PAC should get out of its comfort zone and do something extraordinary to establish its credentials.

Friend... they need to be taken out of the clutches of PAF and their shenenanigans by being a completely independent institution which works directly with engineering universities. The issue is that of subservience... the pilot or the general knows best... they know next to nothing. their mental and vision scope is very limited like their gray matter if you get my drift.

If one thing they should learn from JF-17 project; do they have anyone in CATIC or other Chinese divisions filled with cadres? No, they will have excellent engineers with minimum Masters or PhD to work with. I hope PAC opens their eyes but that wont happen until there is a complete seperation of them.

@MastanKhan

 

[Deino]

....

The JL-10 is designed by the same company that originally designed JL-8, which is renamed K-8 in Pakistan. In that sense I called it the next iteration. Externally, JL-10 further streamlines the airframe of JL-8. In terms of avionics, flight control, and power pack, it is a different aircraft..

No, it is STRUCURALLY and concept wise a new aircraft. Everyone who does not see it and argues to the contrary, disqualifies himself right away to be taken seriously. By that logic, the Boeing 747, which is also designed by Boeing and is also used to transport persons - oh well, just a few more - is the next iteration of the 737.

Did I say that two engines should be replaced with twin SNECMAs? This is something you have dreamt up to sound like you know something. Instead of misrepresenting what I wrote, you should display the qualities of an international mod, and try to clarify if you need more insight. Changing the design of L-15 to incorporate a single SNECMA engine would be a good exercise for Pakistani designers. I am keen for them to start small scale projects involving significant changes to existing designs, so they gain expertise in end to end design and development of aircrafts. If you see this as infeasible, feel free to counter with solid arguments.

Then indeed I misunderstood your post and must apologise, but what you describe as "would be a good exercise for Pakistani designers" is neither that simple nor is it a good idea. Why using an old and unreliable engine from a soon to be retired type and incorporate it into a new design that also offers similar performance? Also, it would be a new aircraft since You need to change nearly everything and by the way, in the end you would get a type only worse the other option I mentioned, namely the FTC2000G.

Again, all these fancy ideas as if aircraft design is something like LEGO are unrealistic and as such even plain stupid.

 

[CriticalThought]

No, it is STRUCURALLY and concept wise a new aircraft. Everyone who does not see it and argues to the contrary, disqualifies himself right away to be taken seriously. By that logic, the Boeing 747, which is also designed by Boeing and is also used to transport persons - oh well, just a few more - is the next iteration of the 737.

From Wikipedia, this is JL-8

Whereas this is labeled as an early variant of L-15

and this if what it finally became

Notice in the second picture the nose is still conical, but the position of the wings and air intakes has been changed. Then finally, the nose has become more angular.

Why am I calling this the next iteration? Because, this is what wikipedia has to say about FTC-2000

The FTC-2000 is a JJ-7/FT-7 with a new wing, a forward fuselage with side air intakes, and a glass cockpit. The engine, empennage, and mechanical controls of the JJ-7/FT-7 are retained.

In the same sense, I see elements of JL-8 in the airframe of JL-10. Similarly, regarding the powerpack:

The JL-8, for the Chinese domestic market, was originally powered by the Ukrainian Ivchenko-Progress AI-25TLK turbofan jet engine with 16.9 KN of thrust, but this has been replaced by the WS-11, the Chinese-manufactured copy of the AI-25TLK.

Again, the powerplant is from the same Ukranian company. If you want to disagree, its your right. But I have explained my reasons.

Then indeed I misunderstood your post and must apologise, but what you describe as "would be a good exercise for Pakistani designers" is neither that simple nor is it a good idea. Why using an old and unreliable engine from a soon to be retired type and incorporate it into a new design that also offers similar performance? Also, it would be a new aircraft since You need to change nearly everything and by the way, in the end you would get a type only worse the other option I mentioned, namely the FTC2000G.

Again, all these fancy ideas as if aircraft design is something like LEGO are unrealistic and as such even plain stupid.

What is your criterion for old and unreliable? MRF has the facility for complete MRO of the engine. In effect, it can recreate the engine as brand new today. Mirages have been one of the most reliable platform in PAF. The SNECMA afterburning engine would provide cadets with a very wide range of power profiles to learn. There is every reason to leverage existing expertise to cut down costs. It seems stupid to you because maybe you don't understand the extent of PAC's capabilities.

Of course it would be a new aircraft structurally. But by sharing avionics, weapons, and ammunition, and overall external design, it should cut down costs. There are examples of such projects around the world. The Japanese modified the F-16 to essentially make a larger variant.

How is it worse than FTC-2000? Aircraft aren't lego, and I haven't proposed anything that has no parallel in the rest of the world.

 

[Deino]

From Wikipedia, this is JL-8

Whereas this is labeled as an early variant of L-15

and this if what it finally became

Notice in the second picture the nose is still conical, but the position of the wings and air intakes has been changed. Then finally, the nose has become more angular.

Why am I calling this the next iteration? Because, this is what wikipedia has to say about FTC-2000



In the same sense, I see elements of JL-8 in the airframe of JL-10. Similarly, regarding the powerpack:



Again, the powerplant is from the same Ukranian company. If you want to disagree, its your right. But I have explained my reasons.



What is your criterion for old and unreliable? MRF has the facility for complete MRO of the engine. In effect, it can recreate the engine as brand new today. Mirages have been one of the most reliable platform in PAF. The SNECMA afterburning engine would provide cadets with a very wide range of power profiles to learn. There is every reason to leverage existing expertise to cut down costs. It seems stupid to you because maybe you don't understand the extent of PAC's capabilities.

Of course it would be a new aircraft structurally. But by sharing avionics, weapons, and ammunition, and overall external design, it should cut down costs. There are examples of such projects around the world. The Japanese modified the F-16 to essentially make a larger variant.

How is it worse than FTC-2000? Aircraft aren't lego, and I haven't proposed anything that has no parallel in the rest of the world.

Pardon, but you are mis-quoting Wiki - which in fact never called the L-15 a development of the K-8 - and still want to be taken seriously???

Actually: I'm out.

 

[CriticalThought]

Pardon, but you are mis-quoting Wiki - which in fact never called the L-15 a development of the K-8 - and still want to be taken seriously???

View attachment 523926

Actually: I'm out.

Did I quote wikipedia? I said I personally view it as the next iteration. After consistently misunderstanding what I am writing, I think you should remain out.

 

[Deino]

Did I quote wikipedia? I said I personally view it as the next iteration. After consistently misunderstanding what I am writing, I think you should remain out.

At least you mention and post it as proof for your logical deduction.

And by the way, to be taken seriously in a forum, one need to argue and explain in a way it is understood and not by rephrasing things that are not possible and are simply wrong.

 

[CriticalThought]

At least you mention and post it as proof for your logical deduction.

And by the way, to be taken seriously in a forum, one need to argue and explain in a way it is understood and not by rephrasing things that are not possible and are simply wrong.

If someone tries to actively misunderstand, then its not my fault. The logical sequence of deductions is pretty obvious:

1. As explained on Wikipedia, JL-9 is 'basically an FT-7', even though the entire frontal fuselage has been completely changed.
2. If, after such drastic changes, two aircrafts can still be called related, then I see definite links between JL-8 and JL-10 which I have explained above.

Now, if you want to be taken seriously yourself, I advise you smarten up and pick up things without needing to be spoon fed.