Pakistan Eyes Acquisition of Chinese Training Aircraft

[ice_man]

is it just me or does the L-15 look alot like the JF-17 but with dual engine....& i am starting to worry thinking is JF a good trainer for the world that we are considering as our front line fighter....

 

[sherdil76]

this plane has not been inducted into PLAAF so its too far for Pakistan to get it

interests and requirements of PLAAF and PAF are defferent, so they procure accordingly e.g. JF17 will not enter PLAAF but good to fly in Pak and same could happen to this lil bird

 

[illuminatus]

this plane has not been inducted into PLAAF so its too far for Pakistan to get it

Rubbish. Just because PLAAF hasn't thus far shown any interest or commitment doesn't mean that PAF won't get it. If PAF shows genuine interest you'll see it flying in Pakistani stripes and colours. The L-15 has been pitched to Pakistan before. The Chinese are interested in selling this wonder bird to Pakistan. You'd better get used to it.

 

[fatman17]

a lot of answers remain un-answered

PAF has a large fleet of T-37s and recently received 20 additional upgraded examples from USAF EDA stocks - as AC K/Tufail has indicated that a lot of money has been spent on this system, so until we find a 'buyer' like BDAF, there arnt many operators of the T-37 left.

further, the F-7P /PG system will be replaced in the mid-term by the JF-17, and if the L-15 is a 'lead-in' trainer for this system, what happens to the L-15 after the F-7s are retired esp, since there will be a JF-17b (twin-seat) trainer available!

 

[illuminatus]

is it just me or does the L-15 look alot like the JF-17 but with dual engine....& i am starting to worry thinking is JF a good trainer for the world that we are considering as our front line fighter....

Bro, please stop comparing cucumbers with tomatoes. All advanced fighters have a similar look as L-15. Secondly, have you actually compared the specs of JF-17 and L-15? If not, please do that before making such a comment. Also, who told you that JF-17 is a front-line fighter of PAF? JF-17 is a cheap alternative meant to replace obsolete PAF fighters. A cheap alternative which fulfils the urgent need for a much needed BVR platform. JF-17 will serve as a workhorse and backbone of PAF. The JF-17 will make up the numbers, but you'll see a mix of different batches with different configurations (high-medium). The 4th gen front-line fighters of PAF are F-16 and FC-20 in the near future.

 

[illuminatus]

a lot of answers remain un-answered

PAF has a large fleet of T-37s and recently received 20 additional upgraded examples from USAF EDA stocks - as AC K/Tufail has indicated that a lot of money has been spent on this system, so until we find a 'buyer' like BDAF, there arnt many operators of the T-37 left.

further, the F-7P /PG system will be replaced in the mid-term by the JF-17, and if the L-15 is a 'lead-in' trainer for this system, what happens to the L-15 after the F-7s are retired esp, since there will be a JF-17b (twin-seat) trainer available!

That's true and a very valid argument. Still, ruling out the acquisition of L-15 in my opinion doesn't do any justice. Perhaps PAF might be looking into buying an elite squadron of advanced trainers in order to guarantee a smoother transition to F-16 and FC-20.

 

[Super Falcon]

i think it is a copy of russina latest trainer and will fit in paf colours for sure our pilots deserve these

 

[mean_bird]

further, the F-7P /PG system will be replaced in the mid-term by the JF-17, and if the L-15 is a 'lead-in' trainer for this system, what happens to the L-15 after the F-7s are retired esp, since there will be a JF-17b (twin-seat) trainer available!

Well, the question is how sure are we about this? Is pakistan (and china) willing to invest in a twin seater version of the JF-17 anytime soon?

The investment in a twin-seater, and time required both for design and testing might have lead towards the L-15 as a cheaper alternative.

 

[Dazzler]

Ice man

There is a difference between trainer/fighter and dedicated fighter. L-15 is former and the jf-17 is latter. A trainer will always remain a trainer and it cannot replace a dedicated fighter. This difference will always remain.

 

[PAFAce]

I don't understand why we are giving up on the K-8. It was co-produced, it is partially our product. Why give up on your own product for a foreign system, especially when JF-17 trainers are right around the corner. The K-8 design could be improved by allocating some resources, and it could even be a base for our own airframe and engine R&D. I just don't get it.

I thought the PAF had it all set-up for the next decade or so. Mushshaq for Flight Training, K-8 for Jet Training, JF-17/FT-6 trainer for Operational Conversion and then off to squadron based flying. Where does the L-15 fit in here?

 

[mean_bird]

I don't understand why we are giving up on the K-8. It was co-produced, it is partially our product. Why give up on your own product for a foreign system, especially when JF-17 trainers are right around the corner. The K-8 design could be improved by allocating some resources, and it could even be a base for our own airframe and engine R&D. I just don't get it.

I thought the PAF had it all set-up for the next decade or so. Mushshaq for Flight Training, K-8 for Jet Training, JF-17/FT-6 trainer for Operational Conversion and then off to squadron based flying. Where does the L-15 fit in here?

I tend to agree with you..I am not very happy about this news either.

However just to put a few things into perspective, irrespective of what happened to the LCA across the border, they do now have an industrial base set up. If we had one, and some time, it would have been possible for enhancing the K-8 airframe ourselves. But without the industrial base, it depends on the Chinese and they preferred an all new design. Making K-8 go supersonic, requires a "whole new wing design", and possibly much powerful engine so in effect, it would be a whole new plane.

Designing and developing a plane requires lots of investment that we, at this point in time, simply cannot afford.

Secondly, until now, we had been operating Mirages, F-7s, and early block F-16s. Except for the F-16s, most were stable designs without FBW tech and not so cutting edge. Now, lasest F-16s, FC-20s and JF-17s (all with FBW) and if PAF will go for any future advanced jet, K-8 is simply in appropriate. Sophisticated instruments also require sophisticated training. We might be able to build FBW for K-8, but it still won't be the same. The L-15 has a different flight regime.

However, it is a bit surprising given that for the mean time FC-20 will have twin seaters. Can't say if and when the jF-17 will have it. Ideally, having L-15 for advanced training is quite good, but for cash- starved PAF, it seems priorities should have been elsewhere.

 

[DaRk WaVe]

A very valid remark.

I just hope this does not signal that there won't be a twin seater JF-17, atleast in the near future. Also going for a twin-engined trainer would just raise the running expenditure as well as maintenance.

Unless ofcourse, this signals the possible arrive of a future twin-engined jet in PAF, but for the moment this news is indeed a bit confusing.

will you explain please

 

[nightrider_saulat]

i think K-8 is enough to meet our requirement
just because that JL-15 is a twin engine trainer
which is truly against the single engine powered fighter aircraft our our air force

 

[Tomahawk]

L-15:

 

[Tomahawk]

L-15 Pics: