What's new

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

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.
Definitely, we could try to pressure the US into releasing the Zulu's and engines by making the argument that these are vital to effective COIN ops etc. Dunno why nothing has been tried


On the note of the TS-1400. While yes, it is on schedule, its kinda a pain in the backside since itll need to be re evaluated, itll probably be costlier, less support/less of a supply chain than the LHTEC ones etc
 
Last edited:
.
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.
no, they would have been blocked regardless, it has nothing to do with turkey-usa relationships
 
.
Definitely, we could try to pressure the US into releasing the Zulu's and engines by making the argument that these are vital to effective COIN ops etc. Dunno why nothing has been tried


On the note of the TS-1400. While yes, it is on schedule, its kinda a pain in the backside since itll need to be re evaluated, itll probably be costlier, less support/less of a supply chain than the LHTEC ones etc
That won't work, US would rather have us buy their attack helicopters instead.
 
.
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.

Agreed; sub-systems that will be enablers to modern methods of carrying out operations; shorten the OODA loop. Perhaps, technologies that would enable ground troops to better communicate and conduct ISR with each other and send fire data, as well as transport systems like the C-130J and MAT-V, and transport helicopters for commando units.
 
.
Agreed; sub-systems that will be enablers to modern methods of carrying out operations; shorten the OODA loop. Perhaps, technologies that would enable ground troops to better communicate and conduct ISR with each other and send fire data, as well as transport systems like the C-130J and MAT-V, and transport helicopters for commando units.
Yep. Raytheon SAR/GMTI, new Harris SDRs, DPV/FAVs and the 'little things' that really set US SOF ops apart from all others should be on our list. In most cases, I expect these things might not even pass by DSCA due to them being small contracts and/or obscure.
 
.
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.
this should be the official bible for our defence production / procurement program.
I suspect there are redundant elements within POF and HIT built overtime which create massive overheads private sector partnership of qualified and vetted organisations can benefit in the long run.
 
.
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


Atak-2 and 10t utility helicopters (sister copters by using same engine/transmission) will be built on two version. Naval variants (Atak-2N example) will be delivered for Navy’s LHD platforms.


upload_2020-8-10_2-36-11.jpeg
 
.
Yep. Raytheon SAR/GMTI, new Harris SDRs, DPV/FAVs and the 'little things' that really set US SOF ops apart from all others should be on our list. In most cases, I expect these things might not even pass by DSCA due to them being small contracts and/or obscure.
What about small upgrades to the F-16s. The radar maybe sensitive technology, but a modern towed decoy or the Legion IRST pod, as well as smaller software/hardware upgrades like AutoGCAS to allow the F-16 to be able to carry out map of the earth strikes.

The Legion Pod would be a considerable upgrade; especially if it can detect the enemy fighters in the IR spectrum, at ranges, comparable to being detected by the modern SABR radar. Couple it with a Turkish or domestic equivalent to the Meteor and we reach parity at minimal cost and fuss from congressional approval. The experience can go into the JF-17 and project AZM, as well as missile development (perhaps a seeker that has a primary IR seeker, because it has a datalink to the launching aircraft, and then a active radar seeker embedded in the airframe in a certain way).

I know i’ve posted this a few times in other threads but it really illustrates the point
Page 7 where the modern IRST pod is nearly as good as the APG-80
https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2019/53/matecconf_easn2019_04001.pdf
 
Last edited:
.
The Legion Pod would be a considerable upgrade; especially if it can detect the enemy fighters in the IR spectrum, at ranges, comparable to being detected by the modern SABR radar. Couple it with a Turkish or domestic equivalent to the Meteor and we reach parity at minimal cost and fuss from congressional approva
You would need US approval for these upgrades to F-16.
 
.
You would need US approval for these upgrades to F-16.

They maybe get less fuss from congress. They can be chalked up as preventing friendly fire or firing upon a civilian airliner as in the Spice Jet incident.
 
. . . . .
Hi sometimes I feel like eventually army will get Z10 with whatever upgrades been done to them
ATAK might be coming but not before Z10 as some of the Z10s recent videos of landing on their naval ships might come across to use them on 54p as well for naval role
As Chinese are already ahead in running against Turks in engine developments they will take lesser time to develop a more powerful engine even if later on army has to use them in Z10
Thank you
 
.
Back
Top Bottom