Pakistan Air Force Transport

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

This would make sense, but the mentality in the Pakistani military seems to be against the logical idea of replacing a system with a newer successor and instead favors acquiring and upgrading more of the old stuff.

To be fair, the focus on the old stuff has a lot to do with stretching value out of the sunk support/infrastructure costs for those oldies (esp. C-130).

But you're right.

The old stuff works now, but it's getting harder to support them, and there's no long-term successor for the day when it's simply not possible to support the old stuff.

If anything, if you can affordably keep stretching old stuff, it should be easier to fund an in-house successor. There's less of a rush to replace it, so you can have a slower, longer term R&D process. I like what the PN is doing. It will keep the P-3Cs alive for as long as possible, but it's still working on a next-gen LRMPA program.

The challenge with the Herc is that it's a one-of-a-kind. There's a widespread saying all over the world, "only a Herc can replace a Herc." The PAF knows that any Herc variant can readily work in all of its ops environments (esp. high-altitude, dusty, etc areas).

But I don't think we have to be so fatalistic. If we have a problem, then surely, there's a solution out there somewhere. If the PAF can keep the Hercs alive for 1-2 decades, then it could set-up an in-house/joint-venture for a successor.

Just saying, Ukraine seems to have the inputs to make a serviceable transport aircraft.

1. You could pick-up shelved program -- like An-70 -- and fund a pilot in Ukraine to bring it up to serviceable standard, restore the manufacturing line (in both Ukraine and Pakistan), and other steps over 10-15 years.

2. You could look into an existing program -- like An-178 -- and work with Ukraine to up its payload, operational range, etc. This is almost like a new development program as it may require airframe enlargement, new engines, etc.

3. You could use the existing inputs (e.g., D-27 propfan engine, Antonov's design and engineering expertise for transport aircraft, etc) to get Ukraine to design a new clean-sheet transport aircraft.

Turkey is doing a mix of 1 and 2 with the An-70. So, basically, Turkey's working with Ukraine to co-develop a variant of the An-70 with jet engines (i.e., An-188). However, with a payload of 50 tons, the An-188 will be a large aircraft (Y-20-class).

Pakistan could look at co-funding a transport with a payload of 20 tons (i.e., C-130-class), perhaps with turboprops instead of jet engines (to cover its unique hot-and-high, rugged, etc) needs.

Or take a more conservative route by co-funding a new variant of the An-178, but with the more fuel efficient AI-28 turbofan engines and a slightly enlarged airframe (doable since the An-178 is an enlarged An-158, itself an enlarged An-148). This may not 100% succeed the C-130s, but by taking up most transport duties (i.e., outside rugged areas), may help keep the Hercs flying for longer in specialized roles.

 

[Avicenna]

I hope you all like the non-Jets edit...

Music Credit: @NA71

@Horus @Dubious @araz @airomerix @Arsalan @AZADPAKISTAN2009 @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Dazzler @fatman17 @Foxtrot Alpha @ghazi52 @Hodor @Irfan Baloch @Imran Khan @Knuckles @Socra @waz @Windjammer @dbc @Aamir Hussain @The Eagle
@Ahmet Pasha @Ali_Baba @aliyusuf @Angry Easterling @ARMalik @Ark_Angel @Armchair @Arsalan 345 @assasiner @crankthatskunk @Cookie Monster @Counter-Errorist @Dil Pakistan @Falcon26 @Flight of falcon @FuturePAF @graphican @Ghessan @GriffinsRule @Gryphon @Haris Ali2140 @Haroon Baloch @HRK @Hakikat ve Hikmet @HawkEye27 @I S I @Jinn Baba @Khanivore @khansaheeb @khanasifm @krash @Liquidmetal @loanranger @Mangus Ortus Novem @Maxpane @Mirage Battle Commander @maximuswarrior @Metanoia @Microsoft @mingle @Mrc @notorious_eagle @Pakhtoon yum @PAKISTANFOREVER @PakSword @Path-Finder @PDFChamp @PradoTLC @PWFI @Rafi @Reichsmarschall @Riz @Sabretooth @seven0seven @Shane @Signalian @Starlord @Stealth @StormBreaker @Super Falcon @_Sherdils_ @Syed Hammad Ahmed @TF141 @The Accountant @TheTallGuy @Tank131 @Thorough Pro @TOPGUN @Tps43 @TsAr @undercover JIX @Vortex @War Thunder @ziaulislam @Zulfiqar

Very nice!

 

[Yasser76]

Very nice!

Should of picked up all of the used 16 RAF C-130Js when they put these up for sale, only $3 million each, Bangladesh did this with 4 examples

 

[Avicenna]

Should of picked up all of the used 16 RAF C-130Js when they put these up for sale, only $3 million each, Bangladesh did this with 4 examples

5 actually.

https://www.janes.com/article/90722...-of-five-uk-surplus-c-130j-transport-aircraft

 

[ali_raza]

Should of picked up all of the used 16 RAF C-130Js when they put these up for sale, only $3 million each, Bangladesh did this with 4 examples

bas bad move on our part it would have been grabbed with both hands
ik was good with brits he could easily got em

 

[mingle]

bas bad move on our part it would have been grabbed with both hands
ik was good with brits he could easily got em

Ik can only act if PAF ask him he can do it for sure even still but unless Air Cheif won't ask he will not I have seen his way he listens professionals and act on their advice So Cheif needs to ask him

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

I remember discussing this with you coiple monrhs back. The AN 70 looks like it coulf rival C390. Do you think C390 class could take on role from C130 and render them obsolete over time? 2 turbo fans vs 4 Turboprops. Is there any benefit?

It seems like the An188 is slotted between C17 and C130. But definitely 2x or 1.5x capabilities of C390. I think Turks will definitely apply experience/lessons from A400M.

Turks are opening so many new avenues with JV and local ventures. Pakistan military industrial complexes sitting on their behind. Except maybe PAC with TAI. And POF trying in the form of getting new CNC equipment and making a Pakistani take on the AR10.

To be fair, the focus on the old stuff has a lot to do with stretching value out of the sunk support/infrastructure costs for those oldies (esp. C-130).

But you're right.

The old stuff works now, but it's getting harder to support them, and there's no long-term successor for the day when it's simply not possible to support the old stuff.

If anything, if you can affordably keep stretching old stuff, it should be easier to fund an in-house successor. There's less of a rush to replace it, so you can have a slower, longer term R&D process. I like what the PN is doing. It will keep the P-3Cs alive for as long as possible, but it's still working on a next-gen LRMPA program.

The challenge with the Herc is that it's a one-of-a-kind. There's a widespread saying all over the world, "only a Herc can replace a Herc." The PAF knows that any Herc variant can readily work in all of its ops environments (esp. high-altitude, dusty, etc areas).

But I don't think we have to be so fatalistic. If we have a problem, then surely, there's a solution out there somewhere. If the PAF can keep the Hercs alive for 1-2 decades, then it could set-up an in-house/joint-venture for a successor.

Just saying, Ukraine seems to have the inputs to make a serviceable transport aircraft.

1. You could pick-up shelved program -- like An-70 -- and fund a pilot in Ukraine to bring it up to serviceable standard, restore the manufacturing line (in both Ukraine and Pakistan), and other steps over 10-15 years.

2. You could look into an existing program -- like An-178 -- and work with Ukraine to up its payload, operational range, etc. This is almost like a new development program as it may require airframe enlargement, new engines, etc.

3. You could use the existing inputs (e.g., D-27 propfan engine, Antonov's design and engineering expertise for transport aircraft, etc) to get Ukraine to design a new clean-sheet transport aircraft.

Turkey is doing a mix of 1 and 2 with the An-70. So, basically, Turkey's working with Ukraine to co-develop a variant of the An-70 with jet engines (i.e., An-188). However, with a payload of 50 tons, the An-188 will be a large aircraft (Y-20-class).

Pakistan could look at co-funding a transport with a payload of 20 tons (i.e., C-130-class), perhaps with turboprops instead of jet engines (to cover its unique hot-and-high, rugged, etc) needs.

Or take a more conservative route by co-funding a new variant of the An-178, but with the more fuel efficient AI-28 turbofan engines and a slightly enlarged airframe (doable since the An-178 is an enlarged An-158, itself an enlarged An-148). This may not 100% succeed the C-130s, but by taking up most transport duties (i.e., outside rugged areas), may help keep the Hercs flying for longer in specialized roles.

 

[ali_raza]

Ik can only act if PAF ask him he can do it for sure even still but unless Air Cheif won't ask he will not I have seen his way he listens professionals and act on their advice So Cheif needs to ask him

exactly ik damn cares or knows wht a J variant herc is it was great plane but as always they missed the chance

 

[The Raven]

I would prefer the C390 rather than the AN-70. The commercial engines of the C390 will be far easier to maintain, while the engines of the AN-70 and its contrarotating props had significant issues and would be a maintenance nightmare, with low serviceability rates. Not to mention the fact that two commercial turbofans offer better fuel economy and performance than 4 torboprops. Any attempt at resurrecting the AN-70 programme, especially with a different engine, would be extremely costly, and simply not worth it given the numbers that are likely to be acquired.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I remember discussing this with you coiple monrhs back. The AN 70 looks like it coulf rival C390. Do you think C390 class could take on role from C130 and render them obsolete over time? 2 turbo fans vs 4 Turboprops. Is there any benefit?

It seems like the An188 is slotted between C17 and C130. But definitely 2x or 1.5x capabilities of C390. I think Turks will definitely apply experience/lessons from A400M.

Turks are opening so many new avenues with JV and local ventures. Pakistan military industrial complexes sitting on their behind. Except maybe PAC with TAI. And POF trying in the form of getting new CNC equipment and making a Pakistani take on the AR10.

I would prefer the C390 rather than the AN-70. The commercial engines of the C390 will be far easier to maintain, while the engines of the AN-70 and its contrarotating props had significant issues and would be a maintenance nightmare, with low serviceability rates. Not to mention the fact that two commercial turbofans offer better fuel economy and performance than 4 torboprops. Any attempt at resurrecting the AN-70 programme, especially with a different engine, would be extremely costly, and simply not worth it given the numbers that are likely to be acquired.

I agree with @The Raven. Besides, the An-70 has been rolled into the An-188 anyways, it's unlikely Ukraine has enough bandwidth on that platform to keep the propfan version alive. I believe that if the An-188 succeeds, the PAF can consider it as a heavyweight option to replace the IL-78.

The issue for us is finding a suitable successor to the Herc. I suspect deep down the PAF would love new C-130J-30s or LM-100Js, but its eyes are on used C-130B/Es.

Otherwise, there's one different but great option in the C-390. The upfront cost is decent, and the maintenance/support pretty good. I guess the C-390's main hangup for the PAF is whether it can operate from incomplete runways or deal with debris. The Herc definitely can.

But as I said earlier, the C-390 can probably fly from most areas, so it can handle most duties (and at lower cost thanks to its engines). This could lengthen the lives of the Hercs, and the PAF can also look at small no of new C-130Js down the line if the US agrees to HADR aid or something of that nature.

 

[air marshal]

https://falcons.pk/photo/Lockheed-C-130E-Hercules/2372

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

An178 rivals KC390

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

An178 rivals KC390
View attachment 626345

IIRC not as much payload capacity when measured at various ranges. But the new AI-28 turbofan engine might help fix that. That said, I don't think the An-178 is any more 'safe' than the C390 as it relies on North American suppliers as well. The C390, at least, uses a lot of civilian off the shelf tech (esp engine) and completed its development.

 

[Rank]

My Shots

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Right on. My point is there is variett to be had if the PAF decides to get off their behinds.

IIRC not as much payload capacity when measured at various ranges. But the new AI-28 turbofan engine might help fix that. That said, I don't think the An-178 is any more 'safe' than the C390 as it relies on North American suppliers as well. The C390, at least, uses a lot of civilian off the shelf tech (esp engine) and completed its development.