What's new

Pakistan-Turkey 4 Milgem Ada Class Corvettes Contract - Construction started

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,704
72
21,828
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
You know, the tri services rarely bother with supply-spare chain commonality. Each branch think it knows the best, and it will acquire its own solution, no matter how much out of box.

We should start advocating for AW-159. Afterall, several times our advocacy on this forum has been realized by the navy. 😂
In the case of the AW159 and T129, the issue was less of inter-services commonality and more of taking advantage of PAC's CTS800 MRO. But as I suggested above, even with no PAA T129s, the PN will still look at the AW159.

The one dark horse would be the AW149.

The PN prefers a 9-10-ton helicopter. So a navalized AW149 could be a bet.

Since this will be a new configuration, the PN could also ask Leonardo to add some PN-specific customizations (e.g. making them compatible with Turkey's AShMs and torpedoes, instead of only MBDA/Leonardo ones). The OEM could be open to sharing the NRE cost since they can offer the platform to other customers.

Going with the AW149 would also eliminate the need for the AW101. The AW149 can work as the principal anti-ship, anti-sub, CSAR, and marines support helicopter. IMHO 18 AW149s for $50-60 m each could also be an option.
 

Falcon26

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 24, 2015
2,186
4
5,870
Country
United States
Location
United States
In the case of the AW159 and T129, the issue was less of inter-services commonality and more of taking advantage of PAC's CTS800 MRO. But as I suggested above, even with no PAA T129s, the PN will still look at the AW159.

The one dark horse would be the AW149.

The PN prefers a 9-10-ton helicopter. So a navalized AW149 could be a bet.

Since this will be a new configuration, the PN could also ask Leonardo to add some PN-specific customizations (e.g. making them compatible with Turkey's AShMs and torpedoes, instead of only MBDA/Leonardo ones). The OEM could be open to sharing the NRE cost since they can offer the platform to other customers.

Going with the AW149 would also eliminate the need for the AW101. The AW149 can work as the principal anti-ship, anti-sub, CSAR, and marines support helicopter. IMHO 18 AW149s for $50-60 m each could also be an option.
As others have mentioned, it never made sense to me why Pakistan hasn’t taken a commonality approach among the tri-service in its helicopter procurement. Like Turkey, Pakistan could have manufactured these helicopters domestically and used them for both military and civilian applications. The cost of the TAI/AgustaWestland T129 ATAK initial deal to transfer the technology rights to Turkey cost $1.2 billion. There’s no question that Pakistan could have obtained a similar deal from Italy.

Yet again, Pakistan has opted for the more expensive and inefficient option of off-shelf procurement rather than making a cost effective and smart decision anchored on a long-term vision.
 

RadarGudumluMuhimmat

FULL MEMBER
Mar 21, 2019
720
1
975
Country
Turkey
Location
Turkey
As others have mentioned, it never made sense to me why Pakistan hasn’t taken a commonality approach among the tri-service in its helicopter procurement. Like Turkey, Pakistan could have manufactured these helicopters domestically and used them for both military and civilian applications. The cost of the TAI/AgustaWestland T129 ATAK initial deal to transfer the technology rights to Turkey cost $1.2 billion. There’s no question that Pakistan could have obtained a similar deal from Italy.

Yet again, Pakistan has opted for the more expensive and inefficient option of off-shelf procurement rather than making a cost effective and smart decision anchored on a long-term vision.

TAI had already produced and delivered over 300 AW hulls to Italy, likewise since they already had all their avionics in place, they went this route. Of course, you can manufacture any helicopter domestically, it can be any western or eastern manufacturer, but it's a mystery how much it will help you when you get everything out of the way.
 

Falcon26

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 24, 2015
2,186
4
5,870
Country
United States
Location
United States
TAI had already produced and delivered over 300 AW hulls to Italy, likewise since they already had all their avionics in place, they went this route. Of course, you can manufacture any helicopter domestically, it can be any western or eastern manufacturer, but it's a mystery how much it will help you when you get everything out of the way.
The purpose of the post wasn’t to compare Turkey and Pakistan per say, but rather to shed light on the differences between procurement philosophy of the countries.

Obviously, Turkey had certain inherent advantages viz a viz Pakistan, but nothing insurmountable had Pakistan adopted a forward-looking mindset rather than the present-constrained approach that has come to define its procurement philosophy.

But then the entire Pakistan economy is a consumption based, rather than production, so there might be deeply engrained societal underpinnings that inform the procurement philosophy of Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,704
72
21,828
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
As others have mentioned, it never made sense to me why Pakistan hasn’t taken a commonality approach among the tri-service in its helicopter procurement. Like Turkey, Pakistan could have manufactured these helicopters domestically and used them for both military and civilian applications. The cost of the TAI/AgustaWestland T129 ATAK initial deal to transfer the technology rights to Turkey cost $1.2 billion. There’s no question that Pakistan could have obtained a similar deal from Italy.

Yet again, Pakistan has opted for the more expensive and inefficient option of off-shelf procurement rather than making a cost effective and smart decision anchored on a long-term vision.
It likely stems from a lack of trust in the political leadership (very much earned) and an unwillingness to concede authority to one Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), which is understandable.

Ideally, the PM/President and CDS would formulate a defence strategy for the next 5-10 years. In that strategy, they will add goals like commonality, local manufacturing, R&D, etc.

To ensure accountability, we would also have a CAG-like office to make sure both the defence strategy is tenable and that we are implementing it according to plan and within budget. And if parts of the plan are at risk of going off the rails or changing, the CAG would investigate why and find people to blame.

If we get Pakistan's governing in order, then I think the rest -- i.e., commonality, industry-first approach, etc -- will follow.
 

Tipu7

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Aug 8, 2014
5,059
92
13,347
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
In the case of the AW159 and T129, the issue was less of inter-services commonality and more of taking advantage of PAC's CTS800 MRO. But as I suggested above, even with no PAA T129s, the PN will still look at the AW159.

The one dark horse would be the AW149.

The PN prefers a 9-10-ton helicopter. So a navalized AW149 could be a bet.

Since this will be a new configuration, the PN could also ask Leonardo to add some PN-specific customizations (e.g. making them compatible with Turkey's AShMs and torpedoes, instead of only MBDA/Leonardo ones). The OEM could be open to sharing the NRE cost since they can offer the platform to other customers.

Going with the AW149 would also eliminate the need for the AW101. The AW149 can work as the principal anti-ship, anti-sub, CSAR, and marines support helicopter. IMHO 18 AW149s for $50-60 m each could also be an option.
But AW-149 is roughly 50% smaller than AW-101. With increment in size of Marines, special forces and development of infrastructure at three different locations, Navy needs a robust troop/cargo rotary wing carrier fleet. This is where AW-101 steps in as direct replacement of Sea Kings. AW-149 is bit small for this role.

As far as ASW from a Western platform like Milgem is concerned, AW-159 is there to play its role. In the presence of AW-159 as dedicated ASW helicopter, I (IMO) will give no credible consideration to attempting a blend of two different requirements into one platform. It will increase overall cost and will cause timeline delays.

I assume, PN is for time being looking for 4 squadrons of helicopter which will eventually expand to 6. 2X Z-9C/D, 1X AW-101 and 1X AW159 can be the right combination. In future, more squadrons of existing platform could be raised depending upon requirements.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,704
72
21,828
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
But AW-149 is roughly 50% smaller than AW-101. With increment in size of Marines, special forces and development of infrastructure at three different locations, Navy needs a robust troop/cargo rotary wing carrier fleet. This is where AW-101 steps in as direct replacement of Sea Kings. AW-149 is bit small for this role.

As far as ASW from a Western platform like Milgem is concerned, AW-159 is there to play its role. In the presence of AW-159 as dedicated ASW helicopter, I (IMO) will give no credible consideration to attempting a blend of two different requirements into one platform. It will increase overall cost and will cause timeline delays.

I assume, PN is for time being looking for 4 squadrons of helicopter which will eventually expand to 6. 2X Z-9C/D, 1X AW-101 and 1X AW159 can be the right combination. In future, more squadrons of existing platform could be raised depending upon requirements.
The individual Sea King can carry more troops, but the troop-capable Sea King force in PN is very small.

The alternate approach is to have more helicopters available -- albeit with a medium-lift (12-16 troop) -- capacity on hand. The operating cost of the AW149 is also lower thanks to heavier COTS use. In the long-term, it's easier to add more of this type than specialized platforms like AW101 and AW159. Granted, the ASW/AShW variant of AW149 isn't going to carry troops; but the two variants would still be identical from a maintenance and support standpoint.

Besides, the risk of the AW101 and AW159 is actually long-term operating cost, it will be higher than the AW149 (the latter was designed to be low-cost upfront and through-life). Finally, having more helicopters on hand helps offset for downtime and non-availability rates. The PN is (or at least was) thinking along the Sea Hawk and Black Hawk lines.
 
Last edited:

Scorpiooo

FULL MEMBER
Apr 22, 2020
954
0
919
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
But AW-149 is roughly 50% smaller than AW-101. With increment in size of Marines, special forces and development of infrastructure at three different locations, Navy needs a robust troop/cargo rotary wing carrier fleet. This is where AW-101 steps in as direct replacement of Sea Kings. AW-149 is bit small for this role.

As far as ASW from a Western platform like Milgem is concerned, AW-159 is there to play its role. In the presence of AW-159 as dedicated ASW helicopter, I (IMO) will give no credible consideration to attempting a blend of two different requirements into one platform. It will increase overall cost and will cause timeline delays.

I assume, PN is for time being looking for 4 squadrons of helicopter which will eventually expand to 6. 2X Z-9C/D, 1X AW-101 and 1X AW159 can be the right combination. In future, more squadrons of existing platform could be raised depending upon requirements.
What is sqr size for PN?
 

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
15,476
10
14,904
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
As others have mentioned, it never made sense to me why Pakistan hasn’t taken a commonality approach among the tri-service in its helicopter procurement. Like Turkey, Pakistan could have manufactured these helicopters domestically and used them for both military and civilian applications. The cost of the TAI/AgustaWestland T129 ATAK initial deal to transfer the technology rights to Turkey cost $1.2 billion. There’s no question that Pakistan could have obtained a similar deal from Italy.

Yet again, Pakistan has opted for the more expensive and inefficient option of off-shelf procurement rather than making a cost effective and smart decision anchored on a long-term vision.
This is true everywhere
One of the reason is small incremental spending rather then 1 time deal

Look at our tanks..and so many other equipment
 

khanasifm

SENIOR MEMBER
Apr 16, 2008
6,549
6
5,072
If the PAA had received their T129s, I think the PN would've acquired the AW159 -- the two platforms use the same engine. However, that aside, I think the AW159 has a solid shot. The unit cost is around $50 m all-in, and the PN could probably source a credit line from the UK and Italy.

IMHO, the PN will work to get 12 AW159s (for the MILGEM corvettes and Jinnah-class frigates) and 6 AW101s through this decade.
As-159 is basically British Aws heli ie Lynx modified version that pn was trying to get rid of [emoji6]
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom