What's new

Pakistan Army's T-129 ATAK Helicopter Deal | Updates & Discussions.

It's an innovative idea and seems plausible. But I guess PAF will not let it happen. After all, fixed wing airborne killing stuff is PAF department and PAF will tend to keep UCAV squadrons within its ranks instead of letting army to raise its own.
Well navy operate drones too by is own
 
In Mi-28,- you, me and Tipu7 can also go for a ride - what i mean to say is it has 3 x passenger carrying capability.
So who among us is taking a ride in here?
images (7).jpeg


The real challenge is securing the critical tech from Safran and Airbus. The good thing is that the tech in question not cutting edge (and the French are working on way more high end stuff with the Chinese now, so fear of Chinese access is a non-issue too).

So, there's scope for getting it (e.g. license prod in Pakistan), provided we push for it. I don't know if that idea crossed our leadership's table, but if the thought process stops at "there's only 1 squadron in SA" or "it isn't economical" while pouring $300 m a year on an import (and more if we factor in the
I don't think our Military brass thinks that way. Or possibly there are factors which are not in our consideration. Afterall Chinese have pushed their Z10 numerous times and they will not let Pakistan to experiment around when they got their own product ready which is in mass production and is evolving rapidly. Perhaps that's why Rooivalk has not been evaluated even in trials, and area of interest has included only Z10, T129, AH1Z & Mi28. Surprisingly, despite of sharing numerous overlapping attributes, Pakistan-South Africa defense cooperation is very limited. We should have considered their aircraft's upgrades, artillery, MRAPs & even gunships & air defense, but we haven't. Which indicates that may be other reasons which are not in our knowledge.

Well navy operate drones too by is own
Navy don't operate Combat drones armed with Anti-Ship Missiles.
And Maritime domain is different than that of ground forces.
 
Pakistan does operate Russian engines in rotary and fixed wing. Reputation aside, Russian heli engines have been in industry for a long time. Tusas E I (TEI) is making a turbo shaft for the first time, tested in 2019 and that on a utility helicopter. the requirement for a gunship might be stringent than that of a UH. The French option did not cross my mind, Rooivalk uses French engine.


The process which starts from the engine right through to shutting it off again is known as a cycle, and over the engine’s lifetime there are only a finite number of cycles before something cracks or breaks. The conventional methodology for measuring this lifespan and one that’s used by many engine manufacturers is known as the TAC (Total Accumulated Cycles). One TAC is the equivalent of one cycle of an engine (exactly: one excursion from engine start, passing intermediate power rating and back to engine stop). The average lifespan of the TS1400 is expected to be at least 2,500 cycles, while the target for the service life is 5,000 cycles (TAC). After 2,500 or 5,000 cycles the TS1400 will require a general overhaul.

Source: Defenceturkey
 
The process which starts from the engine right through to shutting it off again is known as a cycle, and over the engine’s lifetime there are only a finite number of cycles before something cracks or breaks. The conventional methodology for measuring this lifespan and one that’s used by many engine manufacturers is known as the TAC (Total Accumulated Cycles). One TAC is the equivalent of one cycle of an engine (exactly: one excursion from engine start, passing intermediate power rating and back to engine stop). The average lifespan of the TS1400 is expected to be at least 2,500 cycles, while the target for the service life is 5,000 cycles (TAC). After 2,500 or 5,000 cycles the TS1400 will require a general overhaul.

Source: Defenceturkey
salam to my all brothers, my question is we evaluated this we evaluated that but the point is what we get...Time is too short.
 
France
Turbomecca Arriel 1D1: 3600 TAC
Safran M88-4E: 4000 TAC

US
F100PW229:4300 TAC
F110GE129E: 6000 TAC
F35 engine (F135): 9400 TAC

Russia
Al-222-25 Russian YAK engine: 600 oberhaul-1200h full lifespan, later upgraded to 1200 to 3000h.
Al-31F Russian Su-30/35engine: 1000h for overhaul and 3000h for full lifespan.

US is leading in engine tech! If we manage to improce the TAC figures up to 5000h, It will be a super achievement.

salam to my all brothers, my question is we evaluated this we evaluated that but the point is what we get...Time is too short.

Time is our biggest enemy brother. We are suffering from same condition.
 
Last edited:
France
Turbomecca Arriel 1D1: 3600 TAC
Safran M88-4E: 4000 TAC

US
F100PW229:4300 TAC
F110GE129E: 6000 TAC
F35 engine (F135): 9400 TAC

Russia
Al-222-25 Russian YAK engine: 600 oberhaul-1200h full lifespan, later upgraded to 1200 to 3000h.
Al-31F Russian Su-30/35engine: 1000h for overhaul and 3000h for full lifespan.

US is leading in engine tech! If we manage to improce the TAC figures up to 5000h, It will be a super achievement.



Time is our biggest enemy brother. We are suffering from same condition.
Indeed my brother,All things belong to Allah almighty...
 
I'd say the Rooivalk Mk2 is worth considering.

1. The "export failure" point is a non-factor for us since the goal is to get a platform that works well and isn't subject to sanctions. And when countries not named Pakistan have way more options to explore (esp Apache), an alternative heavyweight attack heli like Rooivalk is redundant. It was borne of a sanctioned country with no other option, and that's the thought process we should have.

2. The Rooivalk Mk2's critical components of issue are its engine, transmission, etc. And they come from France via Airbus Helicopter, and are further based on the proven Makila engine and Puma helicopter.

It isn't exactly like the JF-17 (a design that was on paper until the PAF signed on). The Rooivalk is more of taking a project that exists and works, and reviving it with an upgrade.

It isn't a new development program as the new Mk2 uses the same airframe, engine and dynamic parts (so new R&D there). Rather, it's integrating new subsystems, avionics and weapons, all of which are available COTS (with some Pakistani suppliers too).

The real challenge is securing the critical tech from Safran and Airbus. The good thing is that the tech in question not cutting edge (and the French are working on way more high end stuff with the Chinese now, so fear of Chinese access is a non-issue too).

So, there's scope for getting it (e.g. license prod in Pakistan), provided we push for it. I don't know if that idea crossed our leadership's table, but if the thought process stops at "there's only 1 squadron in SA" or "it isn't economical" while pouring $300 m a year on an import (and more if we factor in the CSF/FMF for the AH-1Z), then I doubt it.

It's for situations like this a real equivalent to the Indian CAG to document the selection process and make it available to outside experts is key, for accountability and exploring all options very thoroughly.

@Ahmet Pasha @denel
I concur with this analysis. This is a known quantity and quality; there are core technologies which will be also transferred in multiple areas; it is pretty open source platform with a lot of flexibility built in deliberately.
 
So who among us is taking a ride in here? View attachment 604097


I don't think our Military brass thinks that way. Or possibly there are factors which are not in our consideration. Afterall Chinese have pushed their Z10 numerous times and they will not let Pakistan to experiment around when they got their own product ready which is in mass production and is evolving rapidly. Perhaps that's why Rooivalk has not been evaluated even in trials, and area of interest has included only Z10, T129, AH1Z & Mi28. Surprisingly, despite of sharing numerous overlapping attributes, Pakistan-South Africa defense cooperation is very limited. We should have considered their aircraft's upgrades, artillery, MRAPs & even gunships & air defense, but we haven't. Which indicates that may be other reasons which are not in our knowledge.


Navy don't operate Combat drones armed with Anti-Ship Missiles.
And Maritime domain is different than that of ground forces.
It's because true defence industry development is only now taking form at the planning stage.

Until now, the 'defence industry's' job was to keep the armed forces moving during war, and to replenish stocks of essentials after the war. HIT, KSEW, PAC, POF, etc all served a specific and defined role in that regard because our spares always limited us to 2-3 weeks of war.

However, only now are we thinking about securing the whole platform on a turnkey basis, and right now it's limited to just PAF (AZM) and to a lesser extent the PN (which wants to own its own designs, but still source inputs abroad -- easier to do in the naval space).

The Army seems to be OK with the options it has available, which is why it isn't pushing for JVs or genuine industrial development.
 
I think Polish engine which is license from France along with another French engine were shortlisted as replacement but I am not sure one year is enough to test it plus not sure French permission is required ??


T129 ATAK which is based on Agusta A129 Mangusta can be equipped with original Rolls-Royce Gem 2-1004D engines which are powering on Agusta A129 Mangusta but this engine is grossly under powered and has limited capabilities at all operational environments; i.e., hot, cold, high-altitude, and maritime. TAI officials believe it may take up to 5 years for the company to complete the delivery of the T129 ATAK to Pakistan due to lack of clearance for an export license for LHTEC T800-4A turboshaft engines.

According to Turkish officials, France and Poland have emerged as other alternatives vendors who could be approached by Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) for the supply of engines which can be equipped on T129
 
It's because true defence industry development is only now taking form at the planning stage.

Until now, the 'defence industry's' job was to keep the armed forces moving during war, and to replenish stocks of essentials after the war. HIT, KSEW, PAC, POF, etc all served a specific and defined role in that regard because our spares always limited us to 2-3 weeks of war.

However, only now are we thinking about securing the whole platform on a turnkey basis, and right now it's limited to just PAF (AZM) and to a lesser extent the PN (which wants to own its own designs, but still source inputs abroad -- easier to do in the naval space).

The Army seems to be OK with the options it has available, which is why it isn't pushing for JVs or genuine industrial development.

Actually, converting HIT from a state owned factory to a limited liability company through legislation is a major step in that direction.
 
Actually, converting HIT from a state owned factory to a limited liability company through legislation is a major step in that direction.
Yep, but right now the 'business' element is open to civilian or dual-purpose vehicles, but it could expand for sure.
 
By 2024 Pakistan Army will have inducted the Chinese Z10P a customised attack helicopter designed exclusively for our use with hot-high engine. Turkey ATAK deal will soon only be a historical fact.

Yep, but right now the 'business' element is open to civilian or dual-purpose vehicles, but it could expand for sure.

Say what you may or do what they may. As long as such state organs are run by serving Generals, their ‘business’ culture will not change.
 
By 2024 Pakistan Army will have inducted the Chinese Z10P a customised attack helicopter designed exclusively for our use with hot-high engine. Turkey ATAK deal will soon only be a historical fact.



Say what you may or do what they may. As long as such state organs are run by serving Generals, their ‘business’ culture will not change.

Oh I really, really hope so! Going the Turkey route for an attack helicopter was tempting to say the least. However, it is fraught with trouble from the get go. Turkey was and forever will be heavily dependent on Europe and America. As such, Pakistan should have not ever selected the Turkish Attack Helicopter.

China has been Pakistan's most trusted and reliable ally. There is so much that Pakistan can accomplish with China, if only they would take the initiative. Be it the J-10Cs fighter-jet, Z-10Es helicopter gunship, Type-052s destroyer or the S-20 submarine. Pakistan has an ally, from it can buy these incredible military hardware, customizable and sanction free. We don't need to become enslaved to American hegemony, as Turkey has found for itself recently. Even being a full NATO member for decades, didn't help it from being battered by American sanctions. And the refusal of Honeywell/Rolls-Royce engine is yet another reward for Turkey, being a NATO member.

People don't understand, Zionists rule, own and control America, Britain, France, Netherlands, Australia, Canada and Germany. There isn't any reward for being loyal to NATO, or America. You as a country are only useful to them, so long as they have achieved their objectives through you. When you're no longer of use to them, they slit your throat, like they did with Saddam/Iraq, Qaddafi/Libya, Assad/Syria, Mubarak/Egypt and so on!
 
Back
Top Bottom