What's new

Pakistan Eyes T-50 as Trainer Option

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan is considering purchase of the South Korean KAI T-50 Lead In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) to revamp its Air Force training program, although some viable alternatives remain.

Interest in the T-50 comes amid moves to improve Pakistani-South Korean defense industry collaboration, possibly including a new shipyard in the Pakistani port of Gwadar.

On March 26, a memorandum to ensure mutual standards of quality was signed by South Korea's Defence Agency for Technology & Quality and Pakistan's Ministry of Defence Production.
Korea-defence-visit1t.jpg


Pakistan's Secretary for Defence Production Lt. Gen. Tanvir Tahir said, "Pakistan is examining the [T-50] and assessing our needs and requirements accordingly."

Author, analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley said, "It is apparent that the Koreans are serious about further collaboration, they are not going to waste their time on a meaningless visit but they can be expected to examine options very carefully."

Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said new training aircraft could be needed once the current Chengdu F-7 variants are retired and stealth aircraft possibly acquired.

Currently, trainees transition from the subsonic intermediate K-8P jet to the supersonic FT-7P, which "seems to be sufficient for now," he said, adding that the K-8P appears to be performing satisfactorily in the LIFT role.

If a higher performance type is required, the T-50 fits the bill, but Shabbir said financial restrictions may dictate selection of a more affordable Chinese option. The Hongdu JL-10/L-15 has previously been examined by the Pakistan Air Force and could therefore be a more realistic option.

Douglas Barrie of the International Institute for Strategic Studies highlights the potential benefits of operating a twin-seat JF-17, currently under development in China.

"As far as LIFT goes, a training pipeline using the K-8 as the intermediate jet trainer and then pilots doing advanced jet training with a two-seat JF-17 would be one option. An alternative would be to use an L-15-class aircraft as an advanced jet trainer with pilots only doing type conversion on front-line squadrons to the JF-17, although again this could be done using a two-seat version. Using a two-seat JF-17 for advanced jet training would avoid introducing another aircraft type into inventory."

Justin Bronk at the Royal United Services Institute is also unconvinced of the need for a supersonic LIFT and said the "K-8's suitability for continued use will depend on fleet fatigue, life remaining and avionics fit, rather than performance characteristics per se."

He said a dedicated supersonic LIFT would cost as much to operate as an F-16, and that a twin-seat JF-17 would be preferable.

"A twin-seat JF-17 would certainly make it easier for new pilots to transition to the type straight from a K-8/Yak-130-class trainer. Being only slightly more expensive to operate than a T-50, its introduction to service would probably kill much of the rationale for a Pakistani purchase of the latter," he said.

Even possible acquisition of the Shenyang J-31/F-60 may not justify a supersonic LIFT.

"I would regard potential acquisition of the FC-31 for Pakistan as far enough away in terms of any meaningful operational capability that I'd disregard it as a significant factor in evaluating current requirements for advanced jet trainers in the PAF," he said.

Still, a new type may be required, said analyst, author, and former air commodore Kaiser Tufail, who added that use of T-37 and K-8P jets for basic and advanced training is undesirable.

"Use of turbojets/turbofans for basic training is contrary to the current trend, where turboprops have virtually taken over this role. Turboprops do not lack in performance in the training regime compared to turbojets/turbofans, and are much cheaper to operate all the same," he said.

"Looking at this trend, the PAF would do well to start looking at turboprop trainer options to replace the T-37s, just as the Turkish Air Force is doing by developing the Hurkus as a T-37 replacement."

The Turkish Aerospace Industries Hurkus is being promoted to Pakistan, but is not yet in Turkish service and therefore has limited attraction for Pakistan. Turkish deliveries are expected beginning in 2018.

JF-17 as LIFT variant is not possible?
 
.
Well now check how the JF-17 fits in all these above mentioned roles and you will see what i am pointing to. After canceling all these one on one basis, in the end the JF-17 additionally provides uniformity of platform, giving all the above mentioned suport to a home grown plane and expanding our own potential :)

It does fit some roles but not training. JL-9 though fits the role but it is under development. Guizhou JL-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is also an other problem with JF-17 production rate, moreover over the years this fighter would develop into a medium weight fighter aircraft and it will not remain a light fighter. The T-50 would remain a light trainer which can perform the same role as a light fighter using the same weapons that F-16's carry.

Would it be possible for JF-17 to carry the same weapons as F-16's?
 
.
It does fit some roles but not training. JL-9 though fits the role but it is under development. Guizhou JL-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is also an other problem with JF-17 production rate, moreover over the years this fighter would develop into a medium weight fighter aircraft and it will not remain a light fighter. The T-50 would remain a light trainer which can perform the same role as a light fighter using the same weapons that F-16's carry.

Would it be possible for JF-17 to carry the same weapons as F-16's?
Can T-50 carry BVR ?
 
. . . .
It does fit some roles but not training. JL-9 though fits the role but it is under development. Guizhou JL-9 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is also an other problem with JF-17 production rate, moreover over the years this fighter would develop into a medium weight fighter aircraft and it will not remain a light fighter. The T-50 would remain a light trainer which can perform the same role as a light fighter using the same weapons that F-16's carry.

Would it be possible for JF-17 to carry the same weapons as F-16's?
sorry but perhaps you missed the first few posts where i mentioned the TWIN SEAT JF-17 that can/should be developed and addressed different benefits that i can perceive in my mind. So that JF-17 that we were discussing did fit the trainer role. It is not the basic JF-17 that we see today that i was referring to.

So, why T-50?
The only valid reason that comes to my mind is that T-50 as LIFT will be comparatively cheaper to operate. Also the production rate of JF-17 and PAF's requirement for this platform as an advanced multi role fighter may have also played some part. However as mentioned in many posts earlier, i strongly suggest that PAF must got for a twin seater, LIFT version of JF-17 as that will yield benefits on multiple levels (all discussed in previous posts)
 
. .
It is a good option if some how Pakistan is interested on KFX in the future.
 
.
This will be quite stupid frankly!!
What are we thinking that makes us plan induct a NEW South Korean trainer for the air force that will be mainly equipped with CHINESE fighter in the first place. Secondly it will be much more sensible to make a few twin seater JF-17, a few can equipped for dedicated CAS duties while others as LIFT. Rather then inducting yet another plane in small numbers.

JF-17 twin seater wont only offer platform similarity as trainer but will also give a dedicated Ground Support version also will help increase the numbers to be build for PAF and thus help keep the production line running for longer time and so bringing down the RnD costs that we have invested already. Also this will give a twin seat version for export export market. Win Win..
After all your full of logic comment, if the PAF is still going for it ...be sure that they have seen something in the T-50 on which they want to lay their hands or else a huge kick-back is on the plate !
 
.
After all your full of logic comment, if the PAF is still going for it ...be sure that they have seen something in the T-50 on which they want to lay their hands or else a huge kick-back is on the plate !
:lol:
Wasn't this the point??? we trying to justify this as some logical move or figuring out if it is a stinky deal :)

anyways, let us see what happens. (i do not think anything will ;))
 
.
T-50 purchase seems to be realizing soon, as Jang news quotes from American intelligence news
T-50 News.gif
 
.
T-50 purchase seems to be realizing soon, as Jang news quotes from American intelligence newsView attachment 216630
Pakistan has shown interest in numerous of different equipments i the Past like L139 aircrafts, Rafale, EU 2000, Tiger copter from France, U214 etc...but non of them materialized ......the 1 might find old treads about it as well...showing interrest is different then actually initiate to buy it..
 
.
Pakistan has shown interest in numerous of different equipments i the Past like L139 aircrafts, Rafale, EU 2000, Tiger copter from France, U214 etc...but non of them materialized ......the 1 might find old treads about it as well...showing interrest is different then actually initiate to buy it..
Well you are correct that Pakistan has shown interest on numerous equipment some for there requirements and some for others.

The U-214 were not bought because of monitory issues after the devastating earth quake. These might one day be park of the PN if Pakistan wishes to renegotiate.

EU-2000 = Eurofighter Typhoon was evaluated but did not found to be as advance then the F-16's block 52's and it was not a mature platform too at that time.

Rafale was also evaluated and it was found that Mirage 2000-9 were at par at that time and they were also mature but the only issue was Pakistan was under sanctions.
 
.
Well you are correct that Pakistan has shown interest on numerous equipment some for there requirements and some for others.

The U-214 were not bought because of monitory issues after the devastating earth quake. These might one day be park of the PN if Pakistan wishes to renegotiate.

EU-2000 = Eurofighter Typhoon was evaluated but did not found to be as advance then the F-16's block 52's and it was not a mature platform too at that time.

Rafale was also evaluated and it was found that Mirage 2000-9 were at par at that time and they were also mature but the only issue was Pakistan was under sanctions.
What ever the reasons were but my point is that showing interest does not mean that we are actually buying them..
 
.
Back
Top Bottom