Pakistan Air Force | News & Discussions.

[fatman17]

simulators aside, once the JF-17 is inducted in large numbers, a twin-seater' will become necessary IMO.

 

[SQ8]

simulators aside, once the JF-17 is inducted in large numbers, a twin-seater' will become necessary IMO.

Perhaps.. however.. even for the F-35 there is no twin seater on the immediate roadmap. It is envisaged that pilots having spent time on the simulator would be very familiar with the flight characteristics of the jet as to not need a checkride with an instructor.
And the various recovery options available to a newbie F-35 driver would eliminate the need for an instructor.
Maybe PAC should look into this for the JF as well.

 

[Aamir Hussain]

I may be wrong here but if JFT is going to be used in future as a nuclear weapons carrier, they would need to use a twin seater for that as they would need an ordinance/navigation officer along with the pilot. This is being done to ensure dual control and safety.

That is why we see relatively higher numbers of twin seaters ordered/acquired as compared to previous orders for both Mirage's and F-16's.

 

[fatman17]

Perhaps.. however.. even for the F-35 there is no twin seater on the immediate roadmap. It is envisaged that pilots having spent time on the simulator would be very familiar with the flight characteristics of the jet as to not need a checkride with an instructor.
And the various recovery options available to a newbie F-35 driver would eliminate the need for an instructor.
Maybe PAC should look into this for the JF as well.

yes but they have modern jet trainers, while we still operate the T-37 and K-8 for our pilots for advanced jet training.

maybe what i shd have written was the need for a dual-seat / dual-role OCU

 

[SQ8]

yes but they have modern jet trainers, while we still operate the T-37 and K-8 for our pilots for advanced jet training.

maybe what i shd have written was the need for a dual-seat / dual-role OCU

With the current finances, no one knows..
Perhaps its not a bad idea to bring in the JL-9 at a later stage.
Although the JL-15 was a very attractive option.. economics of scale favor the JL-9.

 

[MJaa]

With the current finances, no one knows..
Perhaps its not a bad idea to bring in the JL-9 at a later stage.
Although the JL-15 was a very attractive option.. economics of scale favor the JL-9.

Sir i think PAF should only choose dual seater version of JF-17 for LIFT role

This will keep the much need money in home

Increased production will also reduce the overall price of JFT

Additional JFT available for the attack role if required.

Reduce logistic support due to decrease in number.

Another market for JF-17 Tunder in LIFT to compete in especially in Middle East

 

[SQ8]

Sir i think PAF should only choose dual seater version of JF-17 for LIFT role

This will keep the much need money in home

Increased production will also reduce the overall price of JFT

Additional JFT available for the attack role if required.

Reduce logistic support due to decrease in number.

Another market for JF-17 Tunder in LIFT to compete in especially in Middle East

The Thunder "B" would be a very large LIFT then.. would it not?
And there is already competition from existing designs such as the T/A-50 from Korea, the M-346, the Mig-AT and not to mention the L-15 itself.

For a home role too it would seem redundant to have a relatively medium sized jet performing LIFT duties, unless they strip it down to the bare minimum.
the RD-93 does not come without its spare supply constrained.
A JL-9 offers faster conversion for the Mianwali based units.. and much easier logistical transition. After all, it will simply be a F-7 with a redesigned nose.

 

[MJaa]

The Thunder "B" would be a very large LIFT then.. would it not?

JF-17 LIFT will be of same size as that of South Korean T/A-50 Golden Eagle


General characteristics
Crew: 2
Length: 12.98 m
Wingspan: 9.17 m
Height: 4.78 m
Empty weight: 6,450 kg
Max takeoff weight: 13,500 kg
Powerplant: 1× General Electric F404 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 53.07 kN
Thrust with afterburner: 78.7 kN

L-15 comes very close in size at around 10,000kg have twin engines and almost same price offer not to mention the promotion of it by china as light figher (Should PAF help its cause by purchasing it?)

Max takeoff weight: 10,000kg
Max Speed: Mach 1.4
2x AI-222-25F afterburning 42 KN (Total of 84KN)

Real LIFT Trainer for European air forces was EADS Mako which got cancelled due to lack of funding


Crew: 1, attack variant; 2, trainer
Length: 13.75 m
Wingspan: 8.25 m
Height: 4.5 m
Empty weight: 6200 kg (5800 in trainer variant)
Max takeoff weight: 13000 kg
Powerplant: 1 × General Electric F414M (up to 22.000 lb thrust (98 kN) with afterburner)
Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 1.5
Range: 3700 km Ferry
Service ceiling: 15240 m
Armament
Guns: 1x 27 mm gun
Hardpoints: 7 with a capacity of 4.500 kg


and advantages of local production, reduce cost, reduce types, less training time (as pilots will next move to the JF-17 itself) ability to modify as required are way too many to to ignore

as far as spare supply constrain is concerned if it doesn't effect PAF plans for 250 JF-17s why would it effect 50 odd LIFT versions

A JL-9 offers faster conversion for the Mianwali based units.. and much easier logistical transition. After all, it will simply be a F-7 with a redesigned nose.

PAF is already looking at the JF-17 as a replacement for its F-7 (i know it will be atleast another decade before it will be out of service) but still JL-9 is a interim solution for PLAAF.

L-15 is still being developed as JL-9 while cheap cant meet all the LIFT requirements of modern 4th and 5th gen aircrafts.

 

[SQ8]

Then it makes no sense to make a JF LIFT at all.. Why have a handicapped jet when you can have a fullt capable one?
Its better to have students training on a no frills spared JF-17B.. then move onto operational units.
Which works okay with the F-7 OCU..
But then you need another OCU for the Mirages and the F-16.. and others.
There will always be need for new pilots to go on the F-16(while it lasts..as the FC-20 comes in).

A fully operational Jet worth millions training students that make mistakes??
Not a good idea..

The problem isnt even a LIFT.. the K-8 can serve that purpose (if a little less efficiently) as well.
The problem is having an intermediate platform..

 

[tenantfile]

Nice information.I am interested in updating my news information related to Air Force.I saw your this post first time.Find interesting things.Thanks.

 

[fatman17]

With the current finances, no one knows..
Perhaps its not a bad idea to bring in the JL-9 at a later stage.
Although the JL-15 was a very attractive option.. economics of scale favor the JL-9.

there is a deal where china will supply 4 trainers to the PAF for evaluation (reported elsewhere). it is most likely the JL-9 or FT-2000 dual-seal advanced trainer which BTW has been selected by the PLAAF over the L-15

 

[fatman17]

we have always had OCU for the Mirages, F-16s, F-7P/PGs. another OCU at Mianwali wont make much difference as the Mirages will be de-commissioned steadily.

 

[humza_313]

there is a deal where china will supply 4 trainers to the PAF for evaluation (reported elsewhere). it is most likely the JL-9 or FT-2000 dual-seal advanced trainer which BTW has been selected by the PLAAF over the L-15

yes i heard about these trainers, a few weeks back. China is supplying an initial batch of 4 trainers, free of cost to PAF. this AJT would be the best option to replace the T-37 for BFT purposes..

 

[fatman17]

yes i heard about these trainers, a few weeks back. China is supplying an initial batch of 4 trainers, free of cost to PAF. this AJT would be the best option to replace the T-37 for BFT purposes..

well its not FOC. the deal is worth nearly 60mUSD plus training.

 

[MJaa]

Then it makes no sense to make a JF LIFT at all.. Why have a handicapped jet when you can have a fullt capable one?
Its better to have students training on a no frills spared JF-17B.. then move onto operational units.
Which works okay with the F-7 OCU..
But then you need another OCU for the Mirages and the F-16.. and others.
There will always be need for new pilots to go on the F-16(while it lasts..as the FC-20 comes in).

A fully operational Jet worth millions training students that make mistakes??
Not a good idea..

The problem isnt even a LIFT.. the K-8 can serve that purpose (if a little less efficiently) as well.
The problem is having an intermediate platform..

K-8 is serving as basic and advance jet trainer but it is simply not capable of LIFT (or intermediate platform as you call it) role as it cant prepare PAF pilots for supersonic performance and new generation of advance weapons training.

Simply putting there is no LIFT (beside JL-9 which is technological obsolete) which will cost less. South Korean T/A-50 cost around 25 million and Chinese are promoting L-15 at around 15 million which is also the cost of baseline JF-17 thunder.

So why should PAF go for less capable aircraft which will cost almost same, require higher maintaince due to double engines, new logistical support system, cost of introducing new type and paying to a foreign company which will push it as competitor in light weight fighter category over JF-17 Thunder which will keep our production lines running, bring the over all cost of JF-17 thunder down and potential to enter into a new market with JF-17B