PAF shows interest in YAK-130

[Maarkhoor]

Pakistan shows interest in Russia's Yak-130 trainer aircraft | Russia Beyond The Headlines
Pakistan could become the fourth country to operate the Yak-130 combat trainer aircraft, the website Defenseworld.net has reported, saying that Islamabad has expressed an interest in the aircraft. The website claims that the parties have already held preliminary talks.


Industry sources told defenseworld.net that Pakistan Air Force officials have been talking to executives from Rosoboronexport and Irkut.

According to the report, the Pakistani side has evaluated the flight performance of the Yak-130 and noted “its unique feature of mimicking the flying characteristics of a number of fighter aircraft such as the F-16 and JF-17, which will make the task of transiting from a trainer to a fighter a lot easy for pilots.”

The Yak-130 is designed for training flying school cadets in piloting skills and combat engagements against ground and air targets specific to fourth- and fifth-generation aircraft.


For a training flight, the aircraft can be programmed to suit different weather conditions and take into account the specific type of aircraft for which the pilot is trained – from the Russian Su-30 to the US F-35 and the French Rafale.

Pakistan’s acquisition of the Yak-130 would be the second purchase the country has made of Russian aircraft. In 2014, Russia lifted its arms embargo against Pakistan, and a contract for the supply of four Mi-35M transport and attack helicopters was concluded.


- Pakistan shows interest in Russia's Yak-130 trainer aircraft | Russia Beyond The Headlines)

A single bird cost 15 million USD instead of that we should purchase F-16

 

[HAIDER]

There are many other reasons beyond just standardization. For one, the US and to a much lesser degree, the UK, have multiple defense organizations that produce innovative technologies, jets and all. They have to be given business so they continue to produce newer products and services.

In reality and ideally, Four platforms with naval versions would do just fine for any AF, like a Hi-Lo, Strike and a Trainer. So an example would be, theoretically, for air operations in the USAF, a large number of F-22 and F-35 is enough (Hi-Lo). Something like an T-38 or an F-16 can do training and LIFT (-16's older versions as the newer ones are more than a medium multi-role platform). You would obviously Navalize the -35 for the USN. For other specialized roles, theoretically, you could keep a few squadrons of B1's, B2's, B-57's, and other specialized aircraft in limited numbers. But that would reduce innovation.

Now, for Pakistan, I think they need to expand the JFT's air-frame in the block III to have 9-10 hard points (unless they want to use the -15 style multiple ejector racks). But JFT block II (2 seat version) should be able to beat Yak-130. IMO, Yak-130 isn't needed.

JFT Block III needs to turn into a Medium multi-role platform to supplement the -16 truly. Then, if there is money, I'd get a heavy platform like a J-11D and J-31 to cover for the 5th Gen. So the PAF would have the -16, the JFT (Block II and III's), J-11D (or used -15's??), and J-31. A total of 4 platforms.



K8 is a basic jet trainer. T-38 is a more,close to a fighter type of a trainer. I think they want this as they want their pilots to have experience using twin-engine aircraft starting after K8's. That would mean, if the PAF acquires heavy platforms, your pilots will come trained to use twin engine platforms. So the training, tactics and integration, would be MUCH easier.

If you are talking about T38, why Turkish give PAF 34 out there 67 recently upgrade T38 trainer. TAF already looking for alternate . Our Turkish forum member totally deny and call it misquote .Its T37 not T38.

 

[MastanKhan]

No export on the subject but I think manoeuvring tactics need to be learned in the presence of an instructor. You can fly JF-17 but your learning curve would be reduced when you learn tactics from a mentor.

Hi,

That is why you are going for the twin seater JF17----. But then---you have pilots coming into the JF17 who are already gone thru advanced training----.

So---I don't understand what this drama is all about---. You had the same pilots go to the F 16's after being trained in the mirages and the F7's----so I don' t know suddenly what the big deal is all about---.

Our needs are now needs----we need an air superiority fighter aircraft---and not some tiddley widdley trainer---.

 

[black-hawk_101]

I think its better for PAF to go for the Italian ones or Korean ones, if money problem then Chinese L-15s on manufactured rates just because of CPEC.

Though now PAF training can be said like this:
T-37s Basic JET Trainer
K-8 Intermediate Jet Trainer
L-15 Advance Jet Trainer

Firstly, when we were discussing about the T-37s. I was confused between the roles of Super Mushak and T-37s. Now I clearly understand it. T-37s are Basic trainers in Jet Training where as Mushak are just Basic Trainers.

I think its better for PAF to gather as many T-37s as possible from former and current operators for Engine and Air Frame spares too.

 

[Viper0011.]

If you are talking about T38, why Turkish give PAF 34 out there 67 recently upgrade T38 trainer. TAF already looking for alternate . Our Turkish forum member totally deny and call it misquote .Its T37 not T38.

T-37 is better, its less modern than the T-38, but still has Twin Engines, with some weapons too, a machine gun, some bombs, rockets or sidewinders. T-38 doesn't have weapons options outside of a few aircraft which were modified later. But its avionics and equipment is newer.

I think the T-37 is better, even with lesser modern equipment; as you can get combat trained on it for a future twin engine or a single engine aircraft as your future jet. T-37 provides you with the ability to not only use the twin engines, but also get trained on weapons, including missile firings (Sidewinders), Rockets, Bombing runs and Guns. Very good bang for the buck!!

 

[HAIDER]

T-37 is better, its less modern than the T-38, but still has Twin Engines, with some weapons too, a machine gun, some bombs, rockets or sidewinders. T-38 doesn't have weapons options outside of a few aircraft which were modified later. But its avionics and equipment is newer.

I think the T-37 is better, even with lesser modern equipment; as you can get combat trained on it for a future twin engine or a single engine aircraft as your future jet. T-37 provides you with the ability to not only use the twin engines, but also get trained on weapons, including missile firings (Sidewinders), Rockets, Bombing runs and Guns. Very good bang for the buck!!

Pak T37 are buck naked...they don t have Dragonfly configuration.

 

[Viper0011.]

Pak T37 are buck naked...they don t have Dragonfly configuration.

I was referring to the ones you are getting from Turkey....

 

[Shabi1]

Pakistan is looking for trainer or Plane for battle field support ? . Yak is totally different class, its Warthog class. T50 has price of $29.8 million per unit. .
YAK two seater trainer made for ground attack, it has nothing to do with air combat. Pakistan has to go for two seater JF17 for better training and save the cost.


Sir but in the presence of K8 , why Pakistan still towing out T37 from Turkish garage. Do you think Pakistan is desperately looking for a good trainer.

Why replace something that is working, T-37s are still working. PAF bought used T-37s/Dragonflies before as well, it acquires them for spares to keep its existing fleet operational, not to increase numbers. It is about priority. PAF has more urgent issues which need funds for eg a dedicated air superiority aircraft..

 

[HAIDER]

I was referring to the ones you are getting from Turkey....

Turkish Ts have same issue. They grounded Ts in 2000. Dragonfly still in service in Central America I think for COIN.

Why replace something that is working, T-37s are still working. PAF bought used T-37s/Dragonflies before as well, it acquires them for spares to keep its existing fleet operational, not to increase numbers. It is about priority. PAF has more urgent issues which need funds for eg a dedicated air superiority aircraft..

PAF even after commissioning JF17 is some how in uncomfortable zone. It feels JF17 is not giving expected outcome.

 

[graphican]

Hi,

That is why you are going for the twin seater JF17----. But then---you have pilots coming into the JF17 who are already gone thru advanced training----.

So---I don't understand what this drama is all about---. You had the same pilots go to the F 16's after being trained in the mirages and the F7's----so I don' t know suddenly what the big deal is all about---.

Our needs are now needs----we need an air superiority fighter aircraft---and not some tiddley widdley trainer---.

Thanks and you've explain there is no current need for a platform like this. News is about Yak-130 and if it is true, does that mean a twin-engine platform is nearing procurement?

 

[Viper0011.]

Turkish Ts have same issue. They grounded Ts in 2000. Dragonfly still in service in Central America I think for COIN.

PAF even after commissioning JF17 is some how in uncomfortable zone. It feels JF17 is not giving expected outcome.

T-37's can be upgraded for a few hundred thousands even in Turkey. Not a big deal.

No one's uncomfortable with the JFT. The AF loves it and adding multiple ejector racks will fill the gap of not having 9 hard points. Block III will be more advanced. PAF has issues with training aircraft as they want a twin engine trainer so the next batch of pilots is used to twin engines and can be readily made available for advance training should the J-11D, or another heavy platform is acquired.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

PAKISTAN AND YAK-130? NOT LIKELY

There has been quite a bit of discussion on a recent news piece claiming that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) is interested in the Yakovlev Yak-130 lead-in-fighter-trainer (LIFT) aircraft. It is no secret that LIFT aircraft such as the Yak-130, KAI/Lockheed Martin T-50, Alenia Aermacchi M-346 and Hongdu L-15 are catching on with a number of air forces to bridge pilots from basic and intermediate training to converting on their respective air force’s fighter platforms.

In a May 2015 interview with AirForces Monthly, Air Chief Marshal (ACM) Sohail Aman discussed that the PAF did in fact look at various LIFT options, namely the South Korean T-50 (developed by Korea Aerospace Industries and Lockheed Martin) and Chinese Hongdu L-15. Although understanding the inherent value of such systems in preparing new pilots for advanced multi-role platforms, ACM Aman said, “but the difficulty is many like the KAI T-50 and Hongdu L-15, with their afterburners, are like fighters, and will cost around the same as an F-16. We cannot afford that now.”

These LIFT aircraft are expensive. In fact, they are basically lightweight fighters not unlike the JF-17 currently in use with the PAF! For reference, the KAI/LM T-50 costs around $25 million per unit. So it begs the question, why would the likes of the Royal Air Force or United States Air Force go for such systems? Well, one just needs to look at the reality that the RAF and USAF operate expensive platforms, acquiring systems such as the T-50 would be genuinely cost effective and safe. There is an actual cost difference between operating a Eurofighter Typhoon and KAI T-50. With this in mind, it would be disingenuous to extrapolate the realities of the RAF upon the PAF.

Yes, the JF-17 Block-3 onwards will in all likelihood end up being fairly expensive platform in of itself (Active Electronically Scanned Array radars do not come cheap!), but the actual JF-17 platform (stripped of its various upgrades and changes) is not expensive. In fact, while a dual-seater is slotted to resolve the PAF’s LIFT needs, the PAF could go a few steps further.

The PAF can use the dual-seat JF-17 as a basis for developing an actual LIFT system. This would not be too different from what the U.S did in developing the T-38 Talon, which was based on the Northrop F-5 Tiger II. In the end, a LIFT JF-17 would have complete commonality with the PAF’s JF-17 fighter fleet, thereby eliminating the difficulty of inducting and maintaining an entirely new aircraft type. Moreover, given the fact that the typical PAF fighter trainee would join the fleet on the JF-17, conducting his or her fighter conversion training on a near-identical platform would greatly ease the operational conversion process.

All that said, there may be one variable that could – possibly – steer the PAF to something like the Yak-130, and that is if the Yak-130’s acquisition and operational costs are meaningfully lower than that of a dual-seater JF-17. If the PAF is in fact looking at the Yak-130, then there may be a chance, but like the reports about the PAF looking at the Czech L-159, it is unlikely its interest here will result in anything.

 

[bdslph]

the Yak 130 will be a good buy for PAF and with that Jf17 pilots they can train

 

[MastanKhan]

PAF even after commissioning JF17 is some how in uncomfortable zone. It feels JF17 is not giving expected outcome.

Please elucidate.

 

[knight11]

Hi,

It does not make sense---because the single seat JF 17 was touted to be so easy to fly. If the air force has done a commendable job so far with the current assets----then why do they need a different trainer.

Why not invest in a dual seater JF 17 which actually is in design / production stages.

That money should be spent for an air superiority / strike aircraft

You are right and I was also thinking why not use tandem seat jf-17 for the superlative Lift with CAS capability instead of YAK-130 and by the way its price is 20 million USD. Using JF-17 twin seater will have the commonality of spares and maintenance with the existing fleet. One more point I want to add PAF can try to explore various fighter planes/trainer but why thread after thread of the speculated news of PAF interested in that without any official and confirm news.