What's new

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

Temel Kotil;

  • We will solve engine problem and deliver T-129 Atak to Pakistan.
  • In addition to T-129 Atak, We are working to carry out different studies with Pakistan. Not only T-129 Atak but also T-625 utility, T-629 and Atak-2 platforms.
  • We (TAI) are establishing a tech center inside PAC KAMRA.
  • He added We should form more cooperation with Pakistan... Helicopter programs, Tf-X MMU, Hürjet...etc
https://www.savunmasanayist.com/tus...ik-aciklamalar/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Those are all flashy programs for sure, but IMHO, the ones that can be the biggest in scope are the T625 utility and the 10-ton transport helicopter program. Following 2030, a lot of the PA's helicopters are going to look old.

@JamD
 
I suspect ToT would depend on the end-user and the commercial terms.

So, for example, assume the Pakistan Army said it wants 1,000 MRAPs built in Pakistan with local content making up 75%+ of the value, and an ironclad commitment to buy them over 10 years.

In this case, Denel Land Systems or Paramount Group can talk to Pakistani investors to set-up a jointly-owned firm in Pakistan to take lead on the MRAP.

The two sides can survey Pakistan to see how much localization can happen right away. The companies supplying inputs to Toyota, Honda, etc, may make up 25% of the value right away. So, the issue would be the remaining 50% of the value. In some cases, it's out of the OEM's control so to speak because the engine comes from a third-party, like Germany or the UK.

But a 1,000 MRAP requirement may trigger enough interest to invest in manufacturing the engine in Pakistan, and who knows, the 3rd party engine OEM may invest to set it up in Pakistan itself. If not, someone will invest money in setting up capacity -- one way or another, we would manufacture engines and transmissions.

Basically, the key here is to (1) set-up a massive requirement over many years and (2) to invite the private sector to take lead and benefit from the economic benefits. In addition to the work (from Army orders), the private sector will want to own the IP and have the freedom to use it for other purposes (e.g., trucks, exports, etc).

Unfortunately, Pakistan's procurement processes are too rigid and half-hearted. There is no commitment to offsets nor an interest -- much less facility -- to tie-in the private sector. Instead, we're only fattening up HIT, POF, etc.

The issue with fattening up HIT, POF, et. al is that (1) it costs money that comes from the acquisition budget, (2) it costs money to maintain/support, and (3) it's usually not used to capacity. So, we end up spending money on jobs and capacity that we're not using, and this money comes from the defence budget (stated or hidden).

However, what we should be doing is offloading the defence industry capacity (or at least non-critical parts) to the private sector. HIT can focus on MBTs, but all wheeled LAVs, AFVs, MRAPs, etc, can go to the private sector.

These entities will spend on maintaining the capacity, and being profit-driven, they will use that capacity. So, if the domestic orders don't fill that capacity, they'll export (this is, of course, contingent on a proper export policy on the MoD's part). In effect, the private sector is (1) saving GHQ fiscal resources by up-keeping the production capacity and (2) earning Pakistan ForEx via exports.

Ideally, you'd pair the private sector production base with R&D. So, in its tenders the Pak Army can say, "10% of the contract value must go into Pakistani R&D." Going back to the engine example above, the investors could look to developing an engine in Pakistan by investing in R&D. In this case, not only are you on track to an engine, but massive IP generation (there are many parts to an engine), which you can license out for ForEx.

This is all from 1 hypothetical MRAP requirement. It's doable. Unfortunately, the decision makers in the MoD, MoDP, GHQ, etc, all lack the foresight and interest in nation-building to pull this off. As a result, we Pakistanis are routinely taken for a ride by big powers.
Very aptly put Bilal. This is the way to go. If private sector is really allowed to come in there would be exponential growth and cut down of overheads.

For example take the basic twin cabin and build a urban patrol unit out of it. The chassis, gearbox and engine can remain, all he rest can be made over the bare chassis. Huge demand from police and rangers.
 
Very aptly put Bilal. This is the way to go. If private sector is really allowed to come in there would be exponential growth and cut down of overheads.

For example take the basic twin cabin and build a urban patrol unit out of it. The chassis, gearbox and engine can remain, all he rest can be made over the bare chassis. Huge demand from police and rangers.
Yep. There's potential across the board: tracked IFVs, 8x8 AFVs, 4x4 LAVs, tracked SPHs, wheeled SPHs, etc.

In terms of helicopters, I'd consider having PAC and TAI co-invest in setting-up a separate company for producing and maintaining all rotary-wing assets in Pakistan. It can start by supporting a T129 program (if it happens), and in time, grow to take on some workshare in the T625, ATAK-2, 10-ton helicopter, etc.
 
Temel Kotil;

  • We will solve engine problem and deliver T-129 Atak to Pakistan.
  • In addition to T-129 Atak, We are working to carry out different studies with Pakistan. Not only T-129 Atak but also T-625 utility, T-629 and Atak-2 platforms.
  • We (TAI) are establishing a tech center inside PAC KAMRA.
  • He added We should form more cooperation with Pakistan... Helicopter programs, Tf-X MMU, Hürjet...etc
https://www.savunmasanayist.com/tus...ik-aciklamalar/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Wow this is a great news...
.:turkey::cheers::pakistan:
 
Those are all flashy programs for sure, but IMHO, the ones that can be the biggest in scope are the T625 utility and the 10-ton transport helicopter program. Following 2030, a lot of the PA's helicopters are going to look old.

@JamD
Pakistan needs a mi-17 & PUMA replacement and it needs a JV.
The requirement is 200 given size of heli fleet

It will be smart to find a patner
 
Temel Kotil;

  • We will solve engine problem and deliver T-129 Atak to Pakistan.
  • In addition to T-129 Atak, We are working to carry out different studies with Pakistan. Not only T-129 Atak but also T-625 utility, T-629 and Atak-2 platforms.
  • We (TAI) are establishing a tech center inside PAC KAMRA.
  • He added We should form more cooperation with Pakistan... Helicopter programs, Tf-X MMU, Hürjet...etc
https://www.savunmasanayist.com/tus...ik-aciklamalar/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
*will*
 
https://falcons.pk/photo/TAI-T129-ATAK/2923

Photo-2923.jpg
 
Pakistan needs a mi-17 & PUMA replacement and it needs a JV.
The requirement is 200 given size of heli fleet

It will be smart to find a patner
Joining Turkey on their 10-ton transport helicopter may be a wise idea. It seems very similar in concept to the NH-90 -- i.e., twin-engine, aft-ramp, and carry 20+ people. This can be a versatile platform. Yes, it's some years away from materializing, but seriously, is the PA in a hurry? No. We should plan ahead and loop our industry into this 10-ton helicopter; from 2030 to 2050 we can build a fleet of 200+ units, and our industry can drive production.

10-ton-sinifi-genel-maksat-helikopteri-projesi--1.png
 
Joining Turkey on their 10-ton transport helicopter may be a wise idea. It seems very similar in concept to the NH-90 -- i.e., twin-engine, aft-ramp, and carry 20+ people. This can be a versatile platform. Yes, it's some years away from materializing, but seriously, is the PA in a hurry? No. We should plan ahead and loop our industry into this 10-ton helicopter; from 2030 to 2050 we can build a fleet of 200+ units, and our industry can drive production.

10-ton-sinifi-genel-maksat-helikopteri-projesi--1.png
I doubt it PA is probably sleeping and now has a good supplier china..
As a wise general put it "..someone will sell it, we will buy it. Why waste time on developing..."
Ayub khan on nuclear weapons in 1960s from shahab Nama

And we know how that turned out..

What pakistan needs to know that even china can someday turn away..there are no constant friends or foes
 
i said early on instead of gunship we should have signed on to the transport chopper. i had feeling the engine will be blocked. i said it very early, and turns out i was right

the demand is 200+ its an win-win for both turkey and Pakistan. with turkey needing numbers, Pakistan being one of the largest armies in the world is in a unique position to do so..

unfortunately our establishment doesnt really think this way, seems we will get those from china..

jf-17 was an exception it was 1990s when we were desparate..i doubt that line of thinking exists at all
 
i said early on instead of gunship we should have signed on to the transport chopper. i had feeling the engine will be blocked. i said it very early, and turns out i was right

the demand is 200+ its an win-win for both turkey and Pakistan. with turkey needing numbers, Pakistan being one of the largest armies in the world is in a unique position to do so..

unfortunately our establishment doesnt really think this way, seems we will get those from china..

jf-17 was an exception it was 1990s when we were desparate..i doubt that line of thinking exists at all
Yep. Just like in 2016, instead of 8 F-16s we should've asked to use the FMF on 2 C-130Js. Similarly, instead of AH-1Zs the PAA could've asked for S-70s (or just put those funds on C-130J so that the PAF can get 4-6 new aircraft).

Basically, with the US we should avoid asking for weapons that Congress will see as offensive; rather, focus on things that can be used for HADR.
 
i said early on instead of gunship we should have signed on to the transport chopper. i had feeling the engine will be blocked. i said it very early, and turns out i was right

the demand is 200+ its an win-win for both turkey and Pakistan. with turkey needing numbers, Pakistan being one of the largest armies in the world is in a unique position to do so..

unfortunately our establishment doesnt really think this way, seems we will get those from china..

jf-17 was an exception it was 1990s when we were desparate..i doubt that line of thinking exists at all


I think its unfair to blame the engines on us. The engines were blocked as a result of Turkey's deteriorating relations with the USA. The US has not blocked spares or engine sales for our other platforms, i.e ada class.
 
I think its unfair to blame the engines on us. The engines were blocked as a result of Turkey's deteriorating relations with the USA. The US has not blocked spares or engine sales for our other platforms, i.e ada class.
One of the design changes in the MILGEM-J is CODAD (vs. CODAG in Ada), so the PN will likely get MTUs from Germany. However, there are many other platforms in our inventory that US engines, and we haven't had issues sourcing them. The ATAK issue has absolutely more to do with Turkey and US, and we just had the bad luck of ending up in the middle of it.

That said, with each day the LHTEC engine is mattering less. Why? Because with each day the Turks are getting close to completing their own turboshaft. @T-123456 and @cabatli_53 could correct me, but it seems the TS1400 seems right on schedule. It'll be a serviceable engine by 2025, and will available for the T625, T629, and ATAK.

I say we stick the course, but now work with the Turks to actually set-up a co-production plant in Pakistan. We can support them domestically and take up some of the supply chain.
 
Back
Top Bottom