Reports confirm the use of the L-39 by private military companies for training and armed missions. Analysis of the reasons and issues involved.
Summary
Designed in the 1970s in Czechoslovakia, the L-39 Albatros was widely exported as a training and light support aircraft. Its low purchase and maintenance costs, simplicity, and availability on the civilian market have led some private military companies (PMCs) to take an interest in it. Open sources mention limited but real uses of the L-39 by non-state armed groups or under government contract, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. These aircraft are most often used for advanced pilot training or reconnaissance and close support missions, rarely on the front line against modern air forces. Their use raises questions of control, legality, and strategy, as it reflects both the search for low-cost solutions and the erosion of state monopolies on the use of armed aircraft.
The unique profile of the L-39
The L-39 Albatros, developed by Aero Vodochody, is a two-seat advanced training and light support jet capable of carrying approximately 1,200 kg of external loads. More than 2,800 units have been produced since 1969 and exported to some 30 countries.
Its main advantages are its low purchase price—often less than €1.5 million for a used aircraft—and operating costs that are much lower than those of a modern fighter jet, around €2,000 to €3,000 per flight hour, compared to more than €15,000 for a 4th generation fighter.
It is easy to maintain, with parts available on the civilian market, and many decommissioned aircraft were sold to private operators after the end of the Cold War. This accessibility has made it a popular choice for civil aviation specializing in leisure flights, but also for certain private military entities seeking inexpensive air support.
The interest of private military companies
PMCs, often employed by governments or armed groups, generally lack sophisticated air assets. Access to modern combat aircraft is constrained by embargoes, cost, or the complexity of logistical support.
The L-39 is therefore a compromise. It can provide advanced training for pilots destined for other aircraft or provide basic air support against irregular forces. Its ability to fire unguided rockets, light bombs, or machine gun pods is sufficient in contexts where the enemy does not have modern anti-aircraft defenses.
In several African conflicts since the 1990s, including in Chad and Sudan, L-39s have been observed under the control of government forces supported by private contractors. Security experts also cite cases where private contracts have allowed locally stored aircraft to be returned to service for limited support operations.
Documented but marginal uses
The use of L-39s by non-state actors has remained limited and often temporary. For example, there are reports of a small number of L-39s being used by contractors linked to local authorities in Libya since 2019, mainly for strike missions against militia positions.
In sub-Saharan Africa, aircraft delivered to national forces have sometimes been maintained or operated by privately contracted crews due to a lack of qualified military pilots. This occurred in Mozambique in the 2000s and in Sudan in the early 2010s.
In these cases, the L-39s never represented a decisive strategic asset but were used to compensate for temporary shortcomings in training or light air support. Their presence mainly reflects the ability of private actors to exploit low-cost equipment and adapt it to irregular warfare contexts.
The question of financing and clients
Private military companies rarely purchase the aircraft themselves. Generally, funding comes from the governments that employ them or from actors supporting a local faction.
The cost of acquiring an L-39 remains low, but operationalization requires funds for maintenance, spare parts, and armament. In several scenarios, states in financial difficulty prefer to subcontract the return to service of aircraft in their inventory to a PMC.
This approach avoids long-term structural expenditure, but increases dependence on external actors and raises issues of legal liability in the event of incidents. It also illustrates how ex-military aircraft can be reintroduced into local conflicts outside the strict control of state forces.
Other aircraft used by private operators
The L-39 is not the only type of aircraft of interest to PMCs. Aircraft such as the BAC Strikemaster, the L-29 Delfin, and armed turboprops such as the AT-802U and the Super Tucano have also found their place in contract missions.
These aircraft share similar characteristics: low cost, ease of maintenance, availability on the civilian or military second-hand market, and sufficient performance for missions against poorly equipped adversaries.
However, none of them can compete with modern fighters. Their use remains confined to theaters where air superiority is not challenged by advanced anti-aircraft systems. This highlights the essentially asymmetric nature of their use: they are suitable for irregular warfare or limited interventions.
Operational limitations and strategic risks
While the L-39 can provide cost-effective air support, it remains vulnerable to modern air defense systems. Its weak armor, outdated avionics, and lack of advanced self-protection capabilities limit its missions to permissive environments.
Furthermore, the availability of suitable ammunition is often a problem: Soviet and Czech stocks are becoming scarce and require costly and sometimes opaque supply chains.
The use of jet aircraft by PMCs also raises questions of international law: control of the use of force, risks of escalation in the event of losses, and traceability of chains of command. These issues prompt most states to strictly regulate these private actors’ access to armed aircraft.
The place of the L-39 in local conflict strategy
The use of the L-39 often reflects a state’s inability to maintain a modern combat air force. In environments where the adversary is poorly equipped, having an aircraft capable of close air support, reconnaissance, and visual deterrence is already an advantage.
For private military companies, it is more a tool of support and influence than a decisive weapon. It can help give a local actor temporary superiority, reinforce a government’s credibility in the face of insurgents, or fill a tactical void while a national air force is reorganized.
However, its use remains a symptom of structural fragility: the absence of a fully functional state air force.
A symbol of the spread of armed aircraft
The case of the L-39 illustrates more broadly the normalization of access to military aircraft on the global market. The end of the Cold War left stocks of inexpensive and easily resalable aircraft.
The presence of armed training jets in the hands of private actors demonstrates the porosity between military and civil aviation and highlights the difficulties of international regulation.
In the long term, this reality calls into question the ability of states to maintain a monopoly on the use of air power and to prevent the escalation of local conflicts through the arrival of air assets which, even if modest, can change the balance of power on the ground.
Live a unique fighter jet experience