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.

Photos used:
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir_2U 27 January 2020 09: 25 New
    • 64
    • 17
    +47
    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.
    1. donavi49 27 January 2020 09: 42 New
      • 31
      • 2
      +29
      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.
      1. missuris 27 January 2020 20: 19 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        and Italian where? there are 3 planes in 1 building, and what power will the radar be in such a small plane?
      2. TermNachTer 27 January 2020 20: 30 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        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.
        1. alexmach 28 January 2020 00: 34 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          option for mounting weapons and installing radar

          And the radar itself?
          1. TermNachTer 28 January 2020 01: 15 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            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.
    2. PPD
      PPD 27 January 2020 13: 10 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      But he doesn’t know how! Fact. wassat
      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.
      1. sergand53 27 January 2020 22: 27 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        But they don’t know how, the manuals are old, the main thing is to crap!
    3. orionvitt 27 January 2020 19: 17 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      As the hero of Mark Twain (Huckleberry Finn) said, "everyone strives to scold someone else’s bug, but for me this one is not bad either." lol
    4. Passing 27 January 2020 21: 04 New
      • 17
      • 1
      +16
      I am also struck by the logic when training aircraft are compared not in training potential, but in combat. Obvious manipulation, substitution of concepts.
      1. Saxahorse 27 January 2020 23: 49 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        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.
        1. Passing 28 January 2020 00: 56 New
          • 11
          • 1
          +10
          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.
          1. Saxahorse 29 January 2020 00: 21 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            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.

            1. Passing 30 January 2020 01: 21 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              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, evaluating a training aircraft on its own, such as "expensive", "complex", in isolation from its role in the training chain, is incorrect.
              1. Saxahorse 31 January 2020 00: 44 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Passing by
                evaluating a training aircraft per se, such as "expensive", "complex", in isolation from its role in the training chain, is incorrect.

                “Incorrectly” is to substitute the Training Combat Aircraft for the role of Training Training Aircraft. They are even called differently. SR-10 is a UTS and is intended for pilot training, but the Yak-130 is UBS, i.e. light attack aircraft with some training opportunities.
    5. smart ass 28 January 2020 16: 40 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      in my opinion the most important indicator for ubs is the price and cost of operation
  2. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 09: 27 New
    • 22
    • 7
    +15
    So he was not positioned as BATTLE!
    1. maidan.izrailovich 27 January 2020 10: 32 New
      • 15
      • 5
      +10
      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.
      1. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 10: 51 New
        • 11
        • 3
        +8
        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.
        1. ltc35 27 January 2020 18: 23 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          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 ...
      2. NEOZ 27 January 2020 11: 37 New
        • 13
        • 4
        +9
        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!
        1. orionvitt 27 January 2020 19: 23 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          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.
      3. alexmach 28 January 2020 00: 44 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        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.
    2. NEXUS 27 January 2020 11: 25 New
      • 13
      • 3
      +10
      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.
      1. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 11: 28 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        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.
        1. NEXUS 27 January 2020 11: 33 New
          • 19
          • 1
          +18
          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.
          1. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 11: 52 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            But she is closer to the attack aircraft, and further to the fighters.
            1. NEXUS 27 January 2020 11: 54 New
              • 7
              • 1
              +6
              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. fellow
              1. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 12: 07 New
                • 6
                • 0
                +6
                What we have beautiful and not cheap examples: Air traktor & Pilatus
  3. Alex_You 27 January 2020 09: 32 New
    • 6
    • 11
    -5
    Two engines on the JL-10 is not too much as for the "desk"?
    1. donavi49 27 January 2020 09: 41 New
      • 17
      • 1
      +16
      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.
      1. sivuch 27 January 2020 10: 37 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        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.
      2. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 10: 52 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        China has an RD93 ....
  4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 January 2020 09: 34 New
    • 49
    • 2
    +47
    Stupidity is complete. We are talking about a training aircraft, and military performance characteristics are compared. In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for the training, what can we say about the "semi-fighters" with Afar and so on
    1. Zoldat_A 27 January 2020 10: 24 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      We are talking about a training aircraft, and military performance characteristics are compared. In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for the training, what can I say about the "fighter"

      Lord How old I am! I remember how the cadets on the L-29, L-39 "got on the wing". One of them (I don’t remember which one) was called a “seagull”. Once the acquaintance major-flyer took a ride. Fear has suffered - "flying stool" ... wink
      1. sivuch 27 January 2020 11: 50 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        I would have such friends winked
    2. Zaurbek 27 January 2020 10: 54 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      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.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 January 2020 16: 03 New
        • 11
        • 0
        +11
        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 occupy only a very narrow niche between the "desk", that is, a light training aircraft for the first flights and a full-fledged combat vehicle.
    3. NEXUS 27 January 2020 11: 30 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      In fact, even the Yak130 is expensive for the training, what can we say about the “semi-fighters” with 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.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 January 2020 16: 04 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: NEXUS
        At the same time, it’s technological enough to emit different planes, which does not add simplicity.

        Answered above :) hi
  5. mark1 27 January 2020 09: 36 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    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?
  6. knn54 27 January 2020 09: 37 New
    • 9
    • 3
    +6
    The Chinese "10" was created on the basis of the Yak-130.
    The author does not take into account the functionality of both TRAINING aircraft. And in terms of price / quality ratio "130" there are no equal. Competitors are twice as expensive.
  7. Wedmak 27 January 2020 09: 39 New
    • 19
    • 2
    +17
    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.
  8. Black_PR 27 January 2020 09: 42 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    Who are the judges? Whose mill is the water being poured into? Too many "experts" divorced, it's time to shoot ...)))
    1. Pete mitchell 27 January 2020 10: 54 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      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 lol they to achieve the goal on trample like bulldozers
  9. The comment was deleted.
    1. Mestny 27 January 2020 15: 53 New
      • 6
      • 5
      +1
      Which is yours? Chinese?
      Or is it ukroin?
      1. Vasily Ponomarev 27 January 2020 16: 02 New
        • 3
        • 6
        -3
        what is there ...?
    2. SASHA OLD 28 January 2020 07: 45 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
      “He is armed with Ching Kuo's Sky Sword II hypersonic radio-controlled missiles” - of course, I also understand that our president, who does not understand anything in the military-industrial complex, will scatter words to the right and left, not understanding what he promises, but that’s what’s been launched at VO, I didn’t know

      Well, you are somehow smarter than any presidents there! wassat
      1. Vasily Ponomarev 28 January 2020 08: 32 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        at least I won’t promise something at first and then don’t do it myself https://burckina-new.livejournal.com/1991708.html
        1. SASHA OLD 28 January 2020 08: 37 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          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?
          1. Vasily Ponomarev 28 January 2020 08: 44 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            that is, what did he say in 2015, has the world changed in 2018? or during this time the word "never" has already lost its meaning? https://zen.yandex.ru/media/burckina_new/demotivatory-s-obescaniiami-putina-za-20-let-5e2a828b1ee34f00ae1a5ebd
  10. Pete mitchell 27 January 2020 09: 47 New
    • 15
    • 1
    +14
    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.
    1. thinker 27 January 2020 10: 14 New
      • 12
      • 0
      +12
      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
      1. Pete mitchell 27 January 2020 10: 23 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        I agree with a colleague
        Quote: dzvero
        The Yak-130 was designed to "simulate" the piloting of various aircraft in the training of pilots. Those. 90% "U" 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
  11. Vadmir 27 January 2020 09: 49 New
    • 9
    • 3
    +6
    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.
    1. Cheerock 27 January 2020 12: 04 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      That is why the ILC is now buying up decommissioned “tigers” around the world to train pilots.
      1. Pete mitchell 27 January 2020 14: 20 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Sorry, but with the F-5 a different alignment. They are used for a different level of training.
        1. Cheerock 29 January 2020 11: 38 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          EMNIP "aggressors" back in the 90s transferred to the "Hornets" hi
          1. Pete mitchell 29 January 2020 11: 52 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Grandmas decide everything, as always.
  12. dzvero 27 January 2020 09: 50 New
    • 10
    • 1
    +9
    EMNIP Yak-130 was designed to "imitate" the piloting of various aircraft in the training of pilots. Those. 90% "U" and 10% "B".

    PS Oh, I see that the above has already been mentioned.
  13. Pavel57 27 January 2020 09: 52 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    The author modestly kept silent about MB-346.
    1. Pete mitchell 27 January 2020 10: 27 New
      • 12
      • 1
      +11
      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
  14. Amateur 27 January 2020 09: 54 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    militarywatchmagazine

    A brand-new American online magazine about military equipment.
    And what can he write about Russian technology? This is not even a Chinese Soha. It is exclusively a "fan heater"
    1. Grigory_78 28 January 2020 01: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I would suggest replacing the “fan heater” meme with a “toilet fan”.
      1. Amateur 28 January 2020 05: 36 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        replace the "fan heater" with the "toilet fan".

        "fan stool" is for loose stool.
      2. SASHA OLD 28 January 2020 07: 48 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Gregory_78
        I would suggest replacing the “fan heater” meme with a “toilet fan”.

        calopropeller
  15. askort154 27 January 2020 10: 07 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    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, the speed of 3,5 M (from the performance characteristics of this rocket) has become considered "hypersonic"? Only this alone speaks of the level of “expert judges” who appropriated places for these tongue
  16. rotmistr60 27 January 2020 10: 08 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    along with with ordinary performance characteristics will not allow the Yak-130 to prove itself in the sky.
    Regarding the "mediocrity" they were too tightened up even more so when comparing with competitors from East Asia who, by aviation standards, only "yesterday" learned to make their own aircraft. The Koreans created the fighter, but decided to eventually make UBS out of it. The Chinese, too, did not initially create as a combat training, while ours was immediately created as a UBS, moreover, with the possibility of pilot training on different types of aircraft. Therefore, if we consider it exclusively as a training, then the Yak-130 is clearly not in fifth place.
  17. K-50 27 January 2020 10: 22 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Taiwan, which for a time did not show any results in aircraft construction, suddenly came in first place. lol
    1. cniza 27 January 2020 12: 29 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Yeah, and with hypersound rockets. belay
  18. Sapsan136 27 January 2020 10: 30 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    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 ...
    1. Captain Pushkin 27 January 2020 20: 30 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      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.
      1. Sapsan136 28 January 2020 11: 07 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        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 ...
        1. Captain Pushkin 30 January 2020 20: 35 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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.
          1. Sapsan136 30 January 2020 22: 17 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            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 ..
  19. FomaKinyaev 27 January 2020 10: 37 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    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.
    1. Saxahorse 29 January 2020 00: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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.
      1. Dude 29 January 2020 01: 05 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        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 wassat
        In fact, before learning to run, you must first learn to walk.
        1. Saxahorse 29 January 2020 23: 34 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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. laughing
          1. Liam 29 January 2020 23: 52 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            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. laughing

            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
            1. Saxahorse 29 January 2020 23: 55 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              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.
              1. Liam 30 January 2020 00: 06 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                And what are the radical differences between takeoff / landing, bend, etc. on the piston and on the jet?
                1. Saxahorse 30 January 2020 00: 21 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  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.
                  1. Liam 30 January 2020 00: 28 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    )))
                    And the pilots of civilian aircraft on which jets acquire their initial skills? Or do they learn to screw? And what kind of problems do the pilots face when switching from jet Boeing or Airbus to screw ATR and vice versa? Do they need to re-retrain as a pilot or just regular courses, as with any transition from one model to another? Or what kind of "congenital" deficiencies are observed in them?
                  2. Dude 30 January 2020 08: 50 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    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 wink
                    Can an immodest question, are you piloting? Well, there, at least there is PPL, or, purely theorizing?
                    1. Saxahorse 31 January 2020 00: 40 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      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, "Training of the flight personnel 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.
                      1. Dude 1 February 2020 12: 38 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        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. wink
                      2. Saxahorse 1 February 2020 21: 01 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Dude
                        All clear.

                        With you too .. laughing
        2. Dude 30 January 2020 08: 53 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          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. laughing

          Your irony, excuse me, past the checkout stop
          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 wink
  • bars1 27 January 2020 11: 06 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5
    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 ...
    1. Winnie76 27 January 2020 18: 28 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      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?
      1. Grigory_78 28 January 2020 01: 30 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Well, because fse-fse, well, just "the whole civilized world" already sticks AFAR where it is possible and where it is not possible.
        True, it turns out that the same Patriot with AFAR is "slightly blind." Well, who doesn’t happen to him, the main thing is that he has an AFAR ...
    2. alexmach 28 January 2020 01: 14 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      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 27 January 2020 11: 44 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    "Last (or worst) in the top five" - ​​how beautifully wrapped. Those. it turns out the plane takes 5th place in the world in terms of its performance characteristics among UBS, is everything right?
  • iouris 27 January 2020 11: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: "... low operating height" End of quote.
    Have you read? Now forget it.
  • cniza 27 January 2020 12: 27 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    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 27 January 2020 13: 08 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Clowns by golly, they have a rooster consciousness, crowed, and there at least do not dawn.
  • voyaka uh 27 January 2020 13: 36 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    J-10 is based on the Israeli Lavi, which did not go into production. Lavi was roughly equivalent to the F-16 first releases.
    1. nduchvve 27 January 2020 20: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      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 27 January 2020 14: 19 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    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 27 January 2020 18: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well, apparently they know better fool
  • Reserve buildbat 27 January 2020 19: 53 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    And who can explain why celery like planes the opportunity to jump out for a while on supersonic?
    1. Captain Pushkin 27 January 2020 20: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Arguably, hardly anyone.
    2. nduchvve 27 January 2020 21: 04 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      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 27 January 2020 20: 26 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    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 27 January 2020 22: 37 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    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 27 January 2020 23: 35 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Some kind of bullshit, Cheslov. This “Eagle” - this is immediately evident without an armed eye - is a reworking of the Italian “Alpha Jet” bearded development. And with what joys is he armed with a “hypersonic missile” ?! No one has, but Taiwan has. Here it is, it turns out ... Yes, and then, why did this UBS suddenly become necessary to suddenly become a full 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 up holes in the lack of full-fledged fighters, putting in their place ersatz substitutes? All the salt of Yak, like UBS, consists in the fact that it is programmed under the training conditions of different flight modes and programs, up to bombers. And on occasion it will play the role of a light attack aircraft. And so, of course, you can slap all kinds of AFARs in Chinese on old twinks-29 and -21 and call them full-fledged UBS. Just the point of this? After all, it’s better they will not fly from this, therefore they will not teach young pilots to fly.
  • SVD68 28 January 2020 07: 25 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    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 28 January 2020 08: 23 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    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 28 January 2020 12: 11 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    For those who want to fly on combat aircraft manufactured by the Russian Federation, the Yak-130 is the first on the list.
  • Jarserge 28 January 2020 16: 17 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    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 29 January 2020 01: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    this, as always, must be cursed, and let the opponents prove it. And while we sell our !!!
  • Old major 29 January 2020 13: 17 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Just to blur something ...
    To begin with, the T-5 UTS “Brave Eagle” has never once risen into the air. That is completely. How he will fly, while no one knows. But, just in case, praised and put in first place. What is the first place is not clear.
    I will explain. What is the main function of a combat training aircraft? This is a transitional type, on which cadets are trained, give the cadet a plaque and basic skills before being transferred to the main combat type? Or is it still considered as a machine for combat work (for example, as a light front-line fighter)? If this is a "desk for cadets" - why overload the car with a different combat load? Will he go into real constant battles? Well, then let's compare this “Brave Eagle” and the Su-35 - there are no concessions 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.
    JL-9 is the same MiG-21UB, with the same R-25-300. If we talk about comparisons with two-seat versions of combat aircraft, what does it have to do with the Yak-130, which was originally made exactly as a school desk, as the plane of initial flight training, but with advanced training opportunities for combat use.
    The South Korean T-50 Golden Eagle is also a plane made, inter alia, to replace the South Korean F-5 fleet, that is, it was originally planned as a UB - Spark.
  • Yellow bubble 29 January 2020 14: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I can lie too.
  • Alexander Orlov_2 30 January 2020 08: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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 3 March 2020 16: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    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?