Military Watch: Russian Yak-130 deserves the last place in the list of UBS

The air forces of the main countries of the world operate at least one type of training jet aircraft, which ideally should be easy to maintain, cheap to operate and able to give cadets the necessary experience without flying on heavier platforms.

However, as Military Watch points out, new generations of this class of vehicles are becoming more massive and expensive. Now they are increasingly being used not only as training desks, but also used as light fighters or attack aircraft, giving them enhanced combat capabilities. The designated publication tried to evaluate the five leading aircraft of this type.

Brave Eagle

The Brave Eagle being developed in Taiwan has an extremely high combat potential. In this regard, Military Watch suggests that in fact it is a fighter, built under the guise of a training aircraft. It is armed with Ching Kuo's Sky Sword II hypersonic radio-controlled missiles and carries a powerful radar with AFAR on board. Such a machine would be envied not only by UBS, but also by most of the world's fighters.

JL-10

The new iteration of the Chinese aircraft in the face of the L-15 is increasingly blurring the boundaries between fighters and UBS. It reaches Mach 1,4, has a radar with AFAR that detects targets at a distance of over 100 km, and a powerful arsenal of weapons: the PL-5E melee defense and laser-guided UAB, which makes it possible to play the role of a bomber. If, as claimed, it will be equipped with medium-range SD PL-2 and long-range PL-10, then it will stand in one row, if not surpassed, JF-12, F-17 and Gripen.

JL-9

The Chinese car has amazing flight characteristics, gaining up to 1,5 Machs and reaching a height of 16 km. Its arsenal includes short-range missiles PL-8 and PL-9. It features the WP-13F engine, which is highly regarded by the PLA for its reliability and low maintenance requirements. Apparently, for these qualities, he became a training "desk" for future pilots of aircraft based on aircraft carriers.

T-50

The South Korean plane has already shown itself in the fight against militants in the Philippines and Iraq. Thanks to a wide range of ammunition, he is able to work effectively on ground targets, while having American AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles for fighting in the air. Initially, it was assumed that this aircraft will become a fighter, in connection with which it has advanced avionics and the ability to deploy short-range missile defense AGM-65 Maverick and NURS Hydra 70.

Yak-130

The Russian UBS was designed to simulate battles involving 4+ and 5th generation aircraft, and therefore has significant combat potential. At the same time, according to Military Watch, “its flight characteristics leave much to be desired compared to competitors from East Asia”: very low climb speed, mediocre maneuverability, low operational altitude and subsonic speed.

This is partially offset by developed avionics, high-tech equipment and access to a number of modern ammunition. According to the publication, the aircraft can carry a huge payload of 3 tons. But the lack of advanced air-to-air missiles along with the ordinary performance characteristics will not allow the Yak-130 to prove itself in the sky.

However, its viability as an attack aircraft made the Russian military think about developing a version with stronger weapons

- notes Military Watch, considering in the end that the Yak-130 deserves the last place in the list of the five leading combat training aircraft in the world.

Comments

[Vladimir_2U]

Well, still, they hadn’t done one yet, the rest of the irons are one and a half times harder, by eye, and the real one, against their background, the baby Yak-130 is the worst, yeah. Still, the Yak-52 would be scolded that he could not do carpet bombing.

[donavi49]

The T-50 - 13t take-off, the Yak - 10t, the L15 - 10t in the UTS, 12,5 in the UBS with a radar and more.

[missuris]

and Italian where? there are 3 planes in 1 building, and what power will the radar be in such a small plane?

[TermNachTer]

Well, so the Yak - 130, the option of mounting weapons and installing radar is also available. It all depends on the buyer, so far they are buying without all these nishtyakov.

[alexmach]

option for mounting weapons and installing radar

And the radar itself?

[TermNachTer]

Well, so on the Chinese and Korean counterparts, it’s also not super - they put the radar superflight. You can adapt, something not very large and not expensive, from the MiG - 29 for example, or something close. I do not know much about radar, but I think if there is a real order, for real money, they’ll come up quickly.

[PPD]

But he doesn’t know how! Fact.
And it plunges for 500 meters for a long time, and there are not enough ballistic missiles.
But generally written by the authors should be confirmed by tables with comparisons of characteristics.
And not unfounded.

[sick53]

But they don’t know how, the manuals are old, the main thing is to crap!

[orionvitt]

As the hero of Mark Twain (Huckleberry Finn) said, "everyone strives to swear at someone else's beetle, but for me this one is not bad either."

[Passing]

I am also struck by the logic when training aircraft are compared not in training potential, but in combat. Obvious manipulation, substitution of concepts.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Passing by

I am also struck by the logic when training aircraft are compared not in training potential, but in combat.

Because the educational potential of ours is not too comfortable. They write that they are too expensive to operate and difficult for cadets to study. On L-39 sigh, it turns out to replace it with nothing.

The truth is where these respirators used to be - it is not clear. First, the aircraft was launched into a large series, and then they began to complain softly.

[Passing]

These claims seem somewhat far-fetched to me.
Is it expensive compared to what? With the ancient L-39? So this is understandable, for example, the lightweight Zaporozhets, hopelessly outdated in its properties, is more economical in cost and spare parts, and even in fuel consumption than a modern heavy car with a powerful engine, but where to go, there are modern requirements for the properties of the product, their implementation It is expensive, it only remains to put up with this.
Difficult, again in what sense? In the sense compared to the L-39? So maybe it is inevitable and necessary? Firstly, the generation of planes has changed, the control paradigm has changed, they have become statically unstable, so, perhaps, this complicates the piloting, i.e. The Yak-130 is imprisoned for a new generation of aircraft, and the easy-to-pilot L-39 does not allow to convey the control features of a modern fighter. Or, for example (I don’t know for sure), the L-39 is focused on flight training in general, i.e., simplified, take-off-flight-landing, and the Yak-130 is tailored specifically for specific training on combat aircraft, i.e. for maneuvering in extreme modes, etc. As a result, on the Yak-130 we will get an almost ready pilot of a combat fighter, and on the L-39 we will get a workpiece that can be taught and taught on a specific aircraft directly in the unit.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Passing by

Is it expensive compared to what? With the ancient L-39?

Yes! Compared to the ancient L-39, it’s expensive and apiece and very expensive at the price of an hour of operation. And all of his additional opportunities for training cadets are not needed.

And they overdid it with complexity, the pilots swore that in fact there is almost no difference with the same Mig-29 and Su-27 in terms of control severity. And why then teach on the Yak-130 if the main machine of the cadet will still be Su?

That’s why they buy single-engine Chinese UBS in the world, they are more profitable, more cadets fly into school - the quality of pilots is higher. We, by the way, also offered the same CP-10 instead of Yak. For training is much more suitable.

[Passing]

Quote: Saxahorse

the pilots swore that in fact there is almost no difference with the same Mig-29 and Su-27 in terms of control. And why then teach on the Yak-130 if the main machine of the cadet will still be Su?

Probably very likely, the cost of operating the Yak-130 is significantly lower than that of the Mig-29 and Su-27.

Quote: Saxahorse

Compared to the ancient L-39, it’s expensive and apiece and very expensive at the price of an hour of operation. And all of his additional opportunities for training cadets are not needed.

Maybe critics of the Yak-130 evaluate it from their sixth, such as the narrow look of the flight instructor, not realizing that on a global scale there is a sense in the expensive and complex Yak-130?
Let me explain, there are two learning strategies:
1) We quickly learn the basics on a simple training aircraft, cheap in terms of costs, then we finish learning for a long time on expensive military aircraft.
2) We train for a long time on an average cost training aircraft, which is as close as possible to combat aircraft, then we finish learning a little more on expensive military aircraft.
Any strategy can be beneficial, depending on the specific numbers for specific aircraft. But in any case, it is incorrect to evaluate the training aircraft by itself, such as "expensive", "complex", in isolation from its role in the training chain.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Passing by

it is incorrect to evaluate the training aircraft by itself, such as "expensive", "complex", apart from its role in the training chain.

It is "incorrect" to substitute the Combat Trainer for the role of the Trainer Aircraft. They are even named differently. SR-10 is a trainer and is intended for training in piloting, but the Yak-130 is a UBS, i.e. light attack aircraft with some training options.

[smart ass]

in my opinion the most important indicator for ubs is the price and cost of operation

[Zaurbek]

So he was not positioned as BATTLE!

[maidan.izrailovich]

Zaurbek (Zaur)
So he was not positioned as BATTLE!

In the article, his combat capabilities were noted just the same.

Russian UBS was designed to simulate battles involving 4+ and 5th generation aircraft, in connection with which has significant combat potential.

Claims to its flying capabilities. And from here to the opportunity to teach.

... very low climb speed, mediocre maneuverability, low operational altitude and subsonic speed.

All this in comparison with the aircraft of the five in question.
I'm certainly not a pilot. And I'm not going to refute or support the opinion expressed in the article, but purely in numbers the Yak-130 is really inferior in many respects to the aircraft listed.

[Zaurbek]

Initially, there are aircraft of different categories. And the closest L15 ... there are the same turbojet engines, but with an afterburner ... the second Chinese is a modernized MiG21 with the corresponding resource.

[ltc35]

At one time, our cadets of the Barnaul school (now closed) were trained on the MiG-21, and after them were replaced by the L-39. The article did not even consider elks ...

[NEOZ]

Quote: maidan.izrailovich

but purely in numbers, the Yak-130 is really inferior in many respects to the listed aircraft.

Of course inferior! because Yak130 is a training aircraft! training aircraft must be taught to fly pilots, not fight!

[orionvitt]

In the Great Patriotic War, even PO-2, which was not at all combat, but exclusively training, and then adapted for a night bomber. What can I say now.

[alexmach]

Claims to its flying capabilities. And from here to the opportunity to teach.

I don’t think so. All the same, it was made primarily for training and for this flight characteristics should be sufficient.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Zaurbek

So he was not positioned as BATTLE!

But initially it was said that if necessary, then remaking the 130th in combat can be quite easy. As for the article ... an element of information war. Point.

[Zaurbek]

The combat concept is loose ... attack aircraft or fighter? And what will the fighter jets do when meeting a real fighter? And it would be nice to see prices.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Zaurbek

The combat concept is loose ... attack aircraft or fighter?

I will say this, under-attack and under-fighter. It can be used as a combat unit, but in the case when there is nothing more to fight directly. This is, first of all, a training machine, and it was just that which was conceived. For military operations, there are full-fledged fighters and attack aircraft, which were originally developed as combat platforms. Yak-130 is primarily a training platform.

[Zaurbek]

But she is closer to the attack aircraft, and further to the fighters.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Zaurbek

But she is closer to the attack aircraft, and further to the fighters.

Well, the maize also irrigates the fields, but if desired, it can work with an assault platform.

[Zaurbek]

What we have excellent and not cheap examples: Air traktor & Pilatus

[Alex_You]

Two engines on the JL-10 is not too much for a "desk"?

[donavi49]

Well, is Yaku the norm ??? He also has 2 engines if that.

The Chinese necessarily wanted M + - and they do not have the magnificent F-404 like the Taiwanese and Koreans, only what can be bought in Russia or Ukraine. Such power, efficiency and resource are not available. Therefore, I had to take 2 engines and increase the cost of the board. This is the problem. If he had been with 1 engine and there would have been bomvers at 12-13 million prices, he would have sold better already at this stage. Like their real hit, the best-selling Chinese aircraft in the world and one of the most common K8 / UBS in the world of KXNUMX.

Well, again, the Chinese here from the lack of the right engine went for it.

[sivuch]

But can we make a comparison - say, in terms of efficiency in after-throttle modes or thrust-weight ratio? then it will be seen how magnificent he is.

[Zaurbek]

China has an RD93 ....

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Complete nonsense. We are talking about a training aircraft, and the combat performance characteristics are compared. In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for training, what can we say about "half-fighters" from Afar and so on

[Zoldat_A]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

We are talking about a training aircraft, and the combat performance characteristics are compared. In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for training, what can we say about "half-fighters"

Lord! How old I am! I remember how the cadets on the L-29, L-39 got up "on the wing". One of them (I don't remember which one) was called "seagull". Once a familiar Major-summer took him for a ride. Fear has endured - "flying stool" ...

[sivuch]

I would have such friends

[Zaurbek]

Yak is more than a training one, it allows a combat pilot to maintain skills without spending the Su24 / 34/27 resource, etc. and this is other money. And the requirements for all modern TCBs are similar.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Zaurbek

Yak is more than a training one, it allows a combat pilot to maintain skills without spending the Su24 / 34/27 resource, etc. and this is other money.

I talked about this with military pilots. Their opinion is that the Yak-130 is not suitable for maintaining the skills of pilots, it can only occupy a very narrow niche between the "desk", that is, a light training aircraft for the first flights and a full-fledged combat vehicle.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for training, what can we say about "half-fighters" from Afar and so on

The namesake is not expensive ... fighter jets are becoming more and more difficult, respectively, and the nifig training machine should not be a maize. At the same time, it’s technologically advanced enough to emit different planes, which does not add simplicity.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: NEXUS

At the same time, it’s technological enough to emit different planes, which does not add simplicity.

Answered above :)

[mark1]

type of training jets, which ideally should be easy to maintain, cheap to operate and able to give cadets the necessary experience without flying on heavier platforms.

Are the comparisons in these criteria?

[knn54]

The Chinese "10" was created on the basis of the Yak-130.
The author does not take into account the functionality as a TRAINING aircraft. And in terms of price / quality ratio "130" is unmatched. Competitors are twice as expensive.

[Wedmak]

And they did not mention the ability of the Yak-130 to simulate the flight of other vehicles, including heavy ones. What is a more necessary thing in pilot training than AFAR and hypersonic explosive missiles.

[Black_PR]

And who are the judges? Whose mill is the water being poured into? Too many "experts" are divorced, it's time to shoot ...)))

[Pete mitchell]

Quote: Black_PR

Who are the judges?

In the sense of who paid the article - competitors

Quote: Black_PR

Whose mill is the water being poured into?

To the mill of those whom Yak interferes with in the market.
PRshiki they are they to achieve the goal on trample like bulldozers

[Mestny]

Which is yours? Chinese?
Or is it ukroin?

[Vasily Ponomarev]

what is there ...?

[SASHA OLD]

Quote: Vasily Ponomarev

"He is armed with hypersonic radio-controlled missiles Ching Kuo's Sky Sword II" - of course, I still understand that our president, who does not understand anything in the military-industrial complex, was scattering words to the right and left, not understanding what he promises, but that everything was so launched on VO, I did not know

Well, you are somehow smarter than any presidents there!

[Vasily Ponomarev]

at least I won’t promise something at first and then don’t do it myself https://burckina-new.livejournal.com/1991708.html

[SASHA OLD]

Quote: Vasily Ponomarev

at least I won’t promise something at first and then don’t do it myself https://burckina-new.livejournal.com/1991708.html

at that time everything was right, the situation was one. Now another - the need has come to amend what is wrong, or is the world frozen and not changing?
what is the problem?

[Vasily Ponomarev]

that is, what he said in 2015, has the world changed in 2018? Or has the word "never" lost its meaning during this time? https://zen.yandex.ru/media/burckina_new/demotivatory-s-obescaniiami-putina-za-20-let-5e2a828b1ee34f00ae1a5ebd

[Pete mitchell]

Strange list, mildly biased. The Brave Eagle is based on the 4th generation Ching Kou fighter. Advanced JL-10 is the brother of the training L-15, which in its own way licked it is with the Yak-130 / MB-346. JL-9 grew out of MiG-21, oh sorry J-7. The T-50 Golden Eagle is a modification of the A-50, born as a light fighter / striker, with F-16 ears sticking out.
Maybe of course the Yak-130 is inferior in some ways, but the potential laid down has not yet been clearly realized.

[thinker]

Until you look at the source, you won’t figure it out. Article Title -

Evaluation of the world's most capable training aircraft in combat capabilities: from the brave eagle of Taiwan to the Russian Yak-130

[Pete mitchell]

I agree with a colleague

Quote: dzvero

The Yak-130 was designed to "imitate" the piloting of various aircraft in pilot training. Those. 90% "Y" and 10% "B".

None of the configurable control systems classmates. For me, it does Yak a little redundant like TCB, do they use the feature. And turning TCB into UBS is a tribute to modern market trends, you have to sell

[Vadmir]

In this top, there is neither the United States nor Europe, and it is no coincidence that countries that have enough combat aircraft do not buy expensive combat trainers, because they don’t. The training machine should cheaply and safely train the cadet to fly; any other functions are solved by specialized combat aircraft.
A specialist in everything, as you know - not a specialist in anything. The Yak-130 is even complicated and expensive for the training, it was possible and something simpler, but not in the least expensive wunderwaffe, like Korea.

[Cheerock]

That is what the KMP is now buying decommissioned "tigers" all over the world for training pilots.

[Pete mitchell]

Sorry, but with the F-5 a different alignment. They are used for a different level of training.

[Cheerock]

EMNIP "aggressors" in the 90s were transferred to "hornets"

[Pete mitchell]

Grandmas decide everything, as always.

[dzvero]

The EMNIP Yak-130 was designed to "imitate" the piloting of various aircraft in pilot training. Those. 90% "Y" and 10% "B".

PS Oh, I see that the above has already been mentioned.

[Pavel57]

The author modestly kept silent about MB-346.

[Pete mitchell]

Quote: Pavel57

The author modestly kept silent about MB-346.

What coupled with the above classmates indicates that the article is focused on the Asian region - pour water to the mill those whom Yak interferes with in the market

[Amateur]

military watch store

A brand-new American online magazine about military equipment.
And what can he write about Russian equipment? It's not even a Chinese Sokha. This is exclusively a "fan chair"

[Grigory_78]

I would suggest replacing the "fan chair" meme with "toilet fan".

[Amateur]

Replace "fan chair" with "toilet fan".

"fan chair" is for loose stools.

[SASHA OLD]

Quote: Gregory_78

I would suggest replacing the "fan chair" meme with "toilet fan".

calopropeller

[askort154]

The Brave Eagle being developed in Taiwan has an extremely high combat potential. In this regard, Military Watch suggests that in fact it is a fighter, built under the guise of a training aircraft. He is armed hypersonic RC missiles Ching Kuo's Sky Sword II

Since when did the speed of 3,5 M (from the performance characteristics of this rocket) become considered "hypersonic"? This alone speaks about the level of "expert judges" who assigned positions to these UBS

[rotmistr60]

along with with ordinary performance characteristics will not allow the Yak-130 to prove itself in the sky.

Regarding the "ordinariness", they too strained, all the more comparing them with competitors from East Asia, who by aviation standards only "yesterday" learned how to make their own aircraft. The Koreans created a fighter, and ultimately decided to make a UBS out of it. The Chinese also created initially not as a combat training, while ours was immediately created as an UBS, moreover, with the possibility of training piloting on different types of aircraft. Therefore, if we consider it exclusively as a training one, then the Yak-130 is clearly not in fifth place.

[K-50]

Taiwan, which for a time did not show any results in aircraft construction, suddenly came in first place.

[cniza]

Yeah, and with hypersound rockets.

[Sapsan136]

Something is silent about Czech, Italian, American and British training machines ... I don’t think that they are any better ... Because there aren’t such masterpieces as the Hawk-100 or Hawk-200 on the list, there isn’t L- 159 ... and many other machines ... But there are a lot of screams about aircraft that are just being built and it is still not known what will turn out ... All attempts to make a combat aircraft out of a training vehicle are doomed to failure in advance, since it will always yield more expensive specialized, or multi-purpose machines for performance characteristics ...

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Sapsan136

All attempts to make a combat aircraft out of a training vehicle are doomed to failure in advance,

For information. Fighter F-5 grew out of the TCB T-38. And it was replicated in an amount of more than 2000 pieces, was in service in 2 dozen countries. He fought a lot where, by maneuverability, if anything, exceeded the MiG-21.

[Sapsan136]

Nevertheless, the F-5 was an airplane for the poor, without a decent radar, which could be used only in simple weather conditions and it wasn’t necessary to compare it with a modern combat vehicle ... The comparison will not be in favor of the F-5 ...

[Captain Pushkin]

All light fighter aircraft of the 60s had radars, very weak by today's standards, and not all had radars at all. The first modifications of the MiG-21, for example, had only a radio range finder.
And the price of all light fighters on the market did not differ much from $ 1 million in one direction or another. Both for the poor and for the rich.
If you have a different point of view, compare the F-5 with any peer classmate in detail.

[Sapsan136]

Yes, you at least open Wikipedia and read how the F-5 battles ended even against the MiG-21, everything is described in detail there ..

[FomaKinyaev]

The combat training complex includes not only the yak 130, but also the piston yak 152, so the first flight skills will not be available at 130m.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: FomaKinyaev

and also a piston yak 152, so that the first flight skills to get at 130m will not allow.

And that's bad. It is believed that military pilots should be immediately trained in a jet machine. The control skills of piston and jet aircraft are too different.

[Dude]

It is believed that military pilots should be immediately trained in a jet machine.

What little things then - let's just put in military vehicles
In fact, before learning to run, you must first learn to walk.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Dude

In fact, before learning to run, you must first learn to walk.

Well, or someone who wants to learn how to drive a car first to learn how to use a bicycle and water skiing.

[Liam]

Quote: Saxahorse

Quote: Dude

In fact, before learning to run, you must first learn to walk.

Well, or someone who wants to learn how to drive a car first to learn how to use a bicycle and water skiing.

If we play these analogies, then a combat fighter is a Formula 1 car. Before you get on it, you must first learn how to drive ordinary cars

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Liam

.Before you sit on it, you must first learn how to drive ordinary cars

The idea is that the piston and the jet are very different precisely in the control features. And you will immediately have to wean the cadet from the habits acquired on the piston. Well, quite primitive habits, such as which pedal to press to turn, first master the simulators.

[Liam]

And what are the radical differences between takeoff / landing, bend, etc. on the piston and on the jet?

[Saxahorse]

At least there is no fuss with the pitch of the screw :) In general, pilots complain about the great difference in the reaction of the aircraft to traction control.

[Liam]

)))
And what kind of jet aircraft do civilian pilots acquire initial skills? Or do they study on the screw? And what kind of problems does a pilot have when switching from a Boeing or Airbus jet to an ATR propeller and vice versa? Do they need to retrain to become a pilot, or just regular courses, as in any transition from one model to another? Or what kind of "congenital" shortcomings are observed in them?

[Dude]

Quote: Saxahorse

At least there is no fuss with the pitch of the screw :) In general, pilots complain about the great difference in the reaction of the aircraft to traction control.

I don’t understand what is the difficulty with the step? Yes, and the step does not change at all, let's start from
Can an immodest question, are you piloting? Well, there, at least there is PPL, or, purely theorizing?

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Dude

Can an immodest question, are you piloting? Well, there, at least there is PPL, or, purely theorizing?

Neither one nor the other. I just quote the opinion of those who are engaged in flight training at a professional level.

For example, "Flight Crew Training in the US Air Force"

The initial pilot training course is 49 weeks. For this period, 500 hours of theoretical studies are planned, a flight on T-37 and T-38 ~ 179,3 hours (of which 42,7 hours on their own), "flying" on simulators - 72 hours and physical training - 120 hours.

The first stage - four weeks - is dedicated only to ground training
The second stage - initial flight training - lasting 20 weeks is carried out on a training aircraft T-37
The third stage - the main flight training - lasting 24 weeks is carried out on a T-38

Since 1989, the US Air Force CPC began to switch to the concept of specialized two-purpose (two-stage) training in flight schools with a touch on the initial stage on the T-37 training machine (or later on the promising type) for 86 hours, of which 13,7 hours on their own .
.. Students of the FAR category receive 107 h of flight per modernized T-38 aircraft .. TTV students are given 102,5 h of flight on a specialized Beachjet Ch00A aircraft (also called T-1 A), flight and navigation the equipment of which allows you to practice the skills of piloting heavy aircraft KS-10, KS-135, S-5, S-141, S-17.

[Dude]

Quote: Dude
Can an immodest question, are you piloting? Well, there, at least there is PPL, or, purely theorizing?

Neither one nor the other

All clear.

[Saxahorse]

Quote: Dude

All clear.

With you too ..

[Dude]

Quote: Saxahorse

Quote: Dude

In fact, before learning to run, you must first learn to walk.

Well, or someone who wants to learn how to drive a car first to learn how to use a bicycle and water skiing.

Your irony, excuse me, past the checkout
Here a comparison is more appropriate, like: before learning to ride a sport bike, it's nice to sit on a bike at least a couple of times

[fone]

And where is this Yak-152? How much has been done?

[bars1]

What is characteristic, even on Erzatz fighters they already set AFAR, and we still rivet about PFAR! By the way, they plan to install the Bars-130 radar with the same outdated PFAR on the version currently being developed of the Yak-130 with advanced strike capabilities ...

[Winnie76]

Quote: bars1

What is characteristic, even on Erzatz fighters they already set AFAR, and we still rivet about PFAR!

Do it right.

Quote: bars1

install the Bars-130 radar with the same outdated PFAR ...

With what fright PFAR outdated?

[Grigory_78]

Well, because FSE-FSE, well, just "the whole civilized world" is already sticking AFAR wherever it can and where it is not allowed.
However, it turns out that the same Patriot with AFAR is "slightly blind". Well, with whom it does not happen, the main thing is that he has AFAR ...

[alexmach]

By the way, they plan to install the Bars-130 radar with the same outdated PFAR on the version currently being developed of the Yak-130 with advanced strike capabilities ...

Which I think is great news. Enough and PFAR for Erats fighter.

[kupitman]

"The last (or worst) in the top five" - ​​how beautifully wrapped up. Those. it turns out that the plane takes 5th place in the world in terms of its performance characteristics among the UBS, is that correct?

[iouris]

Quote: "... low operating height" End of quotation.
Have you read? Now forget it.

[cniza]

It is armed with Ching Kuo's Sky Sword II hypersonic radio-controlled missiles and carries a powerful radar with AFAR on board.

Am I missing something, do they have hypersonic missiles?

[Ros 56]

Clowns by golly, they have a rooster consciousness, crowed, and there at least do not dawn.

[voyaka uh]

J-10 is based on the Israeli Lavi, which did not go into production. Lavi was roughly equivalent to the F-16 first releases.

[nduchvve]

Quote: voyaka uh

J-10 is based on the Israeli Lavi, which did not go into production. Lavi was roughly equivalent to the F-16 first releases.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hongdu_L-15
Adopted by the Chinese Air Force in 2013 under the designation JL-10

[lopuhan2006]

In fact, there are several tasks for the TCB: 1. Feel the sky (Yak-52 and other propellers) 2. Feel the jet plane and speed (L-39, etc.) 3. Learn how to fly fighters (Yak-130, Su-27UB and so on. .) I.e. for TCB, his ability in peaceful life is determined by these characteristics, not what kind of attack aircraft or fighter he is. But for smaller countries, the factor of universality enters those attractiveness for export. And this is another category.

[SkyMaXX]

Well, apparently they know better

[Reserve buildbat]

And who can explain why celery like planes the opportunity to jump out for a while on supersonic?

[Captain Pushkin]

Arguably, hardly anyone.

[nduchvve]

Quote: stock buildbat

And who can explain why celery like planes the opportunity to jump out for a while on supersonic?

Theoretical: to teach maneuvering at supersonic speed.
Practically: Firstly, if supersonic maneuvering is the ultimate load and very much depends on the airplane's extreme characteristics (maneuvering can differ greatly on training and combat aircraft), it is difficult to say which is more profitable - immediately learn on combat or first on training, and then retrain on the battlefield.
Secondly, it is necessary for those who are building not so much a training aircraft as a combat aircraft, for which the training role will be secondary.

Accordingly, in the case of the Taiwanese Brave Eagle, this is a prerequisite for a full-fledged combat fighter, for which the training role will be of secondary importance (for territorial defense from China they need every unit, and they cannot afford the luxury of training aircraft).
In the case of the Chinese JL-10 - the above dilemma (with training and retraining).

[nduchvve]

Military Watch assumes that in fact it is a fighter, built under the guise of a training aircraft

Is logical. They could call it training, in order not to annoy China at first by ordering a bunch of fighters. The training component, this is most likely only additional software. At their side is China, which can attack at any time. Nuclear warheads will not be hit; if anything - they need Taiwan clean. Those. 100% conventional warfare. In these conditions, the student, not the student - from the ship to the ball, immediately into battle. This means that the training aircraft cannot be training, it must be immediately completely combat (well, or change the mode at the touch of a button). All flight and combat characteristics were probably maximized in return for the minimum fuel supply, as this fighter will fly only over the island. The platform is for defense only. Taiwan is unlikely to ever want to invade mainland; at least not to feed mainland Chinese, Taiwan lives better. But China, on the contrary, has long been waving to establish its own rules in Taiwan.

[looker-on]

The Yak-130 is essentially an analogue of the M-346 (Italy). The plane is cool! And UB and light attack aircraft. According to Wiki, the cost of $ 7 million for the Air Force, which is essentially a penny, if you look at the cost of analogues. I suppose that in the event of a global conflict, it will automatically become an attack aircraft.

[Ax Matt]

Some kind of nonsense. "Eagle" this - immediately visible to the naked eye - a reworking of the Italian "Alpha Jet" bearded design. And why is it that he is armed with a "hypersonic missile" ?! No one has, but Taiwan has. Here it is, it turns out ... And then, why did the UBS suddenly need to suddenly become a full-fledged fighter? Isn't the whole point of UBS, that it is simple and cheap to manufacture, less technological and diverse? What are the guys proud of? The fact that they are trying to close the holes in the lack of full-fledged fighters, putting in their place ersatz substitutes? The whole point of the Yak, as a UBS, is that it is programmed under the training conditions of different flight modes and programs, up to bombers. And on occasion it will act as a light attack aircraft. And so, of course, you can slap all kinds of AFAR in Chinese on the old MIG-29 and -21 and call them full-fledged UBS. Only what's the use of this? After all, it is better for them to fly because of this, therefore, they will not teach young pilots to fly.

[SVD68]

What can I say? We will look forward to an article in Military Watch about the fighting qualities of rifles under rimfire cartridges.

[Viktor Sergeev]

I thought that the training aircraft should be evaluated by the way it is suitable for training pilots, but it turns out that it is necessary to evaluate the ability to act as a fighter.
That way, IL2 can be considered the worst 2MV fighter, well, after Po2 of course.

[Andrey.AN]

For those who want to fly on combat aircraft manufactured by the Russian Federation, the Yak-130 is the first on the list.

[Jarserge]

That is why I treat American estimates with great bias and suspicion. Especially in light of the recent state of the design and operation of aircraft

[lvov_aleksey]

this, as always, must be cursed, and let the opponents prove it. And while we sell our !!!

[Old major]

Just to blur something ...
Let's start with the fact that the T-5 "Brave Eagle" trainer has never taken off before. That is, absolutely. Nobody knows how he will fly. But, just in case, they praised and put in first place. What is the first place is not clear.
Let me explain. What is the main function of a combat trainer aircraft? Is this a transitional type, on which cadets are trained, give the cadet a touch and basic skills before being transplanted to the main combat type? Or is it still considered as a vehicle for combat work (say, as a light front-line fighter)? If this is a "desk for cadets" - why overload the vehicle with various combat loads? Will he go into real constant battles? Well, then let's compare this "Brave Eagle" and the Su-35 - there are no indulgences in battle. Or let's compare it with at least the MiG-29UBT.
Now, Jl-10, this is the same Yak-130, one to one. It’s just that the Chinese have chosen the path of modernization through increasing their combat capabilities (for the sake of incomprehensibility, this machine will not become a full-fledged fighter anyway), perhaps the Chinese decided that they needed a light front-line fighter-bomber.
The JL-9 is the same MiG-21UB, with the same R-25-300. If we talk about comparisons with two-seat modifications of combat aircraft, then what does this have to do with the Yak-130, which was originally made exactly as a "desk", as an aircraft for initial flight training, but with expanded TRAINING capabilities for combat use.
The South Korean T-50 "Golden Eagle" is also an aircraft made, among other things, to replace the fleet of South Korean F-5s, that is, it was originally planned as UB - "spark".

[Yellow bubble]

I can lie too.

[Alexander Orlov_2]

I laughed ... The Chinese JL-10 is a plane with our turbojet engines (and on it the same 2 turbojet engines as on the Yak-130) and it is a partial copy of the Yak-130. In its development participated KB them. Yakovleva. Simply put, this is a variant of the Yak-130 for China. But the Yak-130 is in last place =) And I didn’t find any reliable information about the aircraft being developed by Taiwan, just rumors.
So think, is this not the competence of journalists or just Russophobia?

[Servisinzhener]

I, as a sofa aviation lover, have questions. The author of this rating is a pilot? Did this author fly on any of these aircraft, at least as a passenger? And does the training aircraft need to surpass everyone and everything in its characteristics?