PAF shows interest in YAK-130

[GreenFalcon]

I think the YAK-130 is a great option for the PAF because knowing our pilots, even these advanced trainer jets would be enough for tackling the indian air force. We wouldn't even need to pull out our F-16s or JF-17s.

@Windjammer

 

[Indus Falcon]

WTF are you talking about mate. T-50 is a 5th generation stealth fighter and Yak-130 is a advance jet trainer which Russia will use to train its pilots for 4 4.5 5 generation fighters. Yak-130 purchase will open doors to Russian fighter jets in PAF as well and This purchase will be a gold

I think he means the south korean - Lockheed T-50

T-50 Multirole Trainer · Lockheed Martin

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

Well when I tell this to the Indians, they go nuts, now it's the Pakistanis turn to go nuts.

1) You don't get kickbacks when you buy local hardware. YAK-130 today costs at least $20m+/- per unit, spares are separate.

2) Why isn't the JF-17 program being expanded to a 2 seater LIFT program?

3) Why buy a new platform and create logistical and maintenance headaches?

 

[New World]

WTF are you talking about mate. T-50 is a 5th generation stealth fighter and Yak-130 is a advance jet trainer which Russia will use to train its pilots for 4 4.5 5 generation fighters. Yak-130 purchase will open doors to Russian fighter jets in PAF as well and This purchase will be a gold

sir ji, t-50 ye hai KAI T-50 Golden Eagle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

T-50 is very good LIFT & Light Attack plane which can defend itself but it has two issues when it comes to Pakistan purchasing it, 1) It is expensive to purchase and operate, 2) It is highly prone to sanctions as it uses US equipment in it.

Yak-130 is good option but in this category its derivative M-346 which could also be available to Pakistan will be good competitor??

kya russia pakistan me sanction nahy laga sakta??

 

[Indus Falcon]

Yak-130
A.S.Yakovlev designe bureau –:– programs –:– new –:– Yak-130

T50 - T-50 Multirole Trainer · Lockheed Martin

 

[MilSpec]

I think the YAK-130 is a great option for the PAF because knowing our pilots, even these advanced trainer jets would be enough for tackling the indian air force. We wouldn't even need to pull out our F-16s or JF-17s.

@Windjammer

 

[Quwa]

There is only one way the PAF might get Yak-130 and that is if it ends up being cheaper to procure and operate than a dual-seat JF-17. While that probably isn't the case right now (though operation costs on the Yak might be lower), when Block-3 and others roll around, the unit price of the JF-17 will be quite high (AESA doesn't come cheap). In that case, the PAF would either put out a simplified twin-seat JF-17 OR potentially commit to a dedicated LIFT platform such as Yak-130. But unless the Yak-130 is significantly cheaper, I think it'll opt for JF-17 in that the JF-17 doesn't necessitate a new induction stream.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

There is only one way the PAF might get Yak-130 and that is if it ends up being cheaper to procure and operate than a dual-seat JF-17. While that probably isn't the case right now (though operation costs on the Yak might be lower), when Block-3 and others roll around, the unit price of the JF-17 will be quite high (AESA doesn't come cheap). In that case, the PAF would either put out a simplified twin-seat JF-17 OR potentially commit to a dedicated LIFT platform such as Yak-130. But unless the Yak-130 is significantly cheaper, I think it'll opt for JF-17 in that the JF-17 doesn't necessitate a new induction stream.

JF-17 can not full fill every role. Why would USAF or RAF even IAF operate AJT even if they have dual seat fighters...

 

[Quwa]

JF-17 can not full fill every role. Why would USAF or RAF even IAF operate AJT even if they have dual seat fighters...

We can't easily extrapolate the operational procedures of every air force with that of the PAF, each force has different realities and requirements. For example, the RAF and USAF operate generally more expensive (much more expensive) platforms, so dedicated LIFT aircraft are a lot cheaper for them to buy and operate.

The PAF on the other hand has an affordable platform in the form of JF-17, and it seems the acquisition cost difference between it and a typical dedicated LIFT are negligible.

If you think about it, what is T-38? A specially modified dual-seat F-5 Tiger II. What would stop the PAF from developing a special training variant based on the dual-seat JF-17?

 

[Peace seeker]

if so then it would be a better deal........

 

[Shabi1]

L-15 seems to have better specs and is cheaper than the Yak-130. But with the presence of K-8P and upcoming dual seat JF-17 doesnt seem to be very important.

My guess is PAF is just window shopping. My own opinion is they regularly evaluate and show interest in new platforms just to give feedback to the Chinese so they can improve their own products and make them better for Pakistani procurement.

 

[Quwa]

Pakistan and Yak-130? Not likely

By Bilal Khan

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.”[1]

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.

[1] Alan Warnes. “Exclusive Interview with the new Pakistan Air Force Chief. PAF’s Cutting Edge Grows.” AirForces Monthly. June 2015 #327. Page 68.

 

[graphican]

WTF are you talking about mate. T-50 is a 5th generation stealth fighter and Yak-130 is a advance jet trainer which Russia will use to train its pilots for 4 4.5 5 generation fighters. Yak-130 purchase will open doors to Russian fighter jets in PAF as well and This purchase will be a gold

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

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.

 

[HAIDER]

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.

L-15 seems to have better specs and is cheaper than the Yak-130. But with the presence of K-8P and upcoming dual seat JF-17 doesnt seem to be very important.

My guess is PAF is just window shopping. My own opinion is they regularly evaluate and show interest in new platforms just to give feedback to the Chinese so they can improve their own products and make them better for Pakistani procurement.

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.

 

[SecularNationalist]

It,s great we are slowly switching to russia.

 

[Viper0011.]

JF-17 can not full fill every role. Why would USAF or RAF even IAF operate AJT even if they have dual seat fighters...

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.

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.

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.