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

[jupiter2007]

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.

I thought Pakistan was interested in YAK-130. I guess we evaluate YAK-130 and compared it performance with L-15.
If the performance is same or close, Pakistan might be considering L-15.

 

[cabatli_53]

It’s being done in a bid to win the PAF’s LIFT requirement which calls for an after burning engine.

It seems There is an ongoing tender for Pakistani jet trainer aircraft and powerful thrust requirement. Is there anybody who is aware of requirements of this program ?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

It seems There is an ongoing tender for Pakistani jet trainer aircraft and powerful thrust requirement. Is there anybody who is aware of requirements of this program ?

Just my opinion, but if Turkish Aerospace can fit a RD-93 to the HurJet, then that too could compete.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Alan Warnes reported it.

Yes but up until now PAF was fine using simulators, Super Mushaq, K8, F7 for training pilots...and it's working too

PAF should replace F7s role in training with JF17B so that way it can double as a fighter jet(to be used in war) in addition to training new pilots.

Clearly PAF has demonstrated that it can train pilots without having the luxury of something like L15...so it can continue down that path and invest it's limited resources in JF17B instead.

@Oscar @Quwa could u shed some light on this?

 

[araz]

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.

There are big flaws with your argument. Changing a twin engined AC to a single engined one will change all parameters and require redesign. This could set your project back by3-5 year's.
How do you take care of the metal fatigue in the engine parts. Atar9C is fast becoming a headache for PAC as spares supply is not available and we are relying on scavanging which is why we have the biggest graveyard of M3/5.
Do you think you will use French tech in this plane and they will let you. They will demand that they do the integration of their product. So there goes 150 million$ which you dont have. How do you feel the Chinese will feel about handing them their plane for the engine integration. So how do you propose to negotjate between the 2.
Life is not as simple as that when you talk about planes. You have just seen the hassle of integrating an AESA into JFT and we are delayed by 2-3 years.
At the end of the day if you want a single engined LIFT get FT2000. If you want the safety of a twin engined one then L15/L139.
However how is all of this going to get financed is something I am scratching my head about. To me this is just an evaluation and anything weighty will have to wait at least till 2022 when we start showing signs of economic recovery.
A

 

[CriticalThought]

There are big flaws with your argument. Changing a twin engined AC to a single engined one will change all parameters and require redesign. This couls set your project back by3-5 year's.
How do you take care of the metal fatigue in the engine parts. Atar9C is fast becoming a headache for PAC as spares supply is not available and we are relying on scavanging which is why we have the biggest graveyard of M3/5.
Do you think you will use French tech in this plane and they will let you. They will demand that they do the integration of their product. So there goes 150 million$ which you dont have. How do you feel the Chinese will feel about handing them their plane for the engine integration. So how do you propose to negotjate between the 2.
Life is not as simple as that when you talk about planes. You have just seen th3 hasssle of integrating an AESA into JFT and we are delayed by 2-3 years.
At the end of the day if you want a single engined LIFT get FT2000. If you want the safety of a twin engined one then L15.
However how is all of this going to get financed is something I am scratching my head about. To me this is just an evaluation and anything weighty will have to wait at least till 2022 when we start showing signs of economic recovery.
A

Don't we have complete control over the Snecma engines in the Mirages?

 

[araz]

Don't we have complete control over the Snecma engines in the Mirages?

You never hae complete control over any produce made by another Privider. That is a general principal of things and how OEMs make money. Because of the products low priority to OEMs you might get certain leeways but even those need OEMs approval and therefore money.
A

 

[MystryMan]

I think we should just acquire surplus FT-7/FT-7PG for LIFT until a suitable platform is selected.

 

[CriticalThought]

You never hae complete control over any produce made by another Privider. That is a general principal of things and how OEMs make money. Because of the products low priority to OEMs you might get certain leeways but even those need OEMs approval and therefore money.
A

If we were to 'buy' the design and development rights, how much would it cost?

 

[araz]

If we were to 'buy' the design and development rights, how much would it cost?

it is 50s technology so buying the rights is a mute point. There needs to be an understanding that Jet propulsion is the pinnacle of metallurgical research and no country in its right mind will just hand it over to you. The Chinese have invested billions in research over metallurgical materials suitable for use in turbine blades and are still not there. Even if you were to produce engines under licence the Critical Turbine blade manufacturing will not be handed over and you will need to do your own research. The projected figures could run into 20 billion US dollars Plus.
If you are going to manufacture engines for which you do not have the metallurgical base you will first need to set up a specialized steel plant which could set you back 3-5 billion$. You will then need to buy the right to manufacture engines which could be in the rane of 1-2 biliion just for the licence. So essentially you are looking at very big bucks which you dont have. We have limitied manufacturing of some parts but engine manufacturing even under licence is big ticket item.
A