Pakistan finalized Z-10ME Helicopters deal with China : Journalist Sumaira Khan

[dBSPL]

Turkey is right now totally depending on the Ukraine Motor Sich company deal. If Turkey wins a 50 percent share then it will be a massive win. But still, I doubt the US will let Ukraine sell helicopter engines to Turkey for Pak T129. Motor Sich already supplying engines to Turkish new UAV programs. The Chinese company is also after this Ukrainians for 4.5 billion dollar lawsuit for breach of the deal of Motor Sich takeover.

So far, 72 ATAK T129s have been delivered(2 of them to Philippines). The localization rate of these helicopters is around 65% as of now. Although all export and marketing rights of the program belong to Turkey, it is basically a forked project based on the Italian Mangusta A-129 model.

Turkey's current indigenous engine projects are more related to national aviation programs. Likewise, Ukrainian turboshaft engines, for example, are also planned for ATAK-II.

As the mid-term solution/plan B is more about the concept that introduced with the code name T-626. However, unlike its first launch, that project is gradually evolving towards an unmanned and electric air attack vehicle project by TAI.

Partnerships in the UAV field, on the other hand, mostly run jointly. While the production of UAVs on a strategic scale such as AKINCI will begin in Ukraine, some specific engines will be developed within the body of JV, which was formed with Ivchenko-Progress in Turkey.

In the new formation called Black Sea Shield, Baykar Makina has a 51% stake and Ivchenko-Progress a 49% stake. We will see in the near future whether this investments will successfully diversify the resources of the Turkish defense industry projects.

On the other hand, TEI, the largest aviation engine manufacturing and engineering company in Turkey, has started deliveries in many projects independently of this process and is nearing the end for others. There are many other Turkish companies working in this field, both on the basis of end products and subsystems, and I don't feel the need to go into very detailed content that is not the subject of this thread. MotorSich is choosed as one of the alternative suppliers for some projects in Turkey. Not planned as the only supplier.

 

[MMM-E]

Turkey is right now totally depending on the Ukraine Motor Sich company deal. If Turkey wins a 50 percent share then it will be a massive win. But still, I doubt the US will let Ukraine sell helicopter engines to Turkey for Pak T129. Motor Sich already supplying engines to Turkish new UAV programs. The Chinese company is also after this Ukrainians for 4.5 billion dollar lawsuit for breach of the deal of Motor Sich takeover.

USA is nothing to do with Ukraine Motor Sich company

Ukraine and Turkey developed a joint venture for the production of Engines
already in 2019 the Black Sea Shield company was created to produce Engines for AKINCI UCAVs in Turkey
( Ukraine’s UkrSpetsExport 49% and Turkey's BAYKAR 51% )

The issue of exports has been studied by Turkey and Ukraine
Turkey will be in charge of continuing its commercial commitments with its current customers, such as Azerbaijan

For the moment, there is no mention of any particular restrictions concerning export zones



btw there will be another variant of the AKINCI UCAV with Turkish TEI PD-222 Engine
and Turkey has developed PD-170 Engine to power ANKA-S and AKSUNGUR UCAVs
Turkey develops Engines to power AKINCI UCAVs and other platforms


I am saying again
UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters to destroy Tanks , Howitzers , MLRS , Air Defense Systems , other UCAVs , Attack Helicopters

Indian Army can not match with AKINCI UCAVs
even TB-2 UCAVs destroyed 759 Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,Military Vehicles ,Air Defense Systems , etc in Syria , Libya and Karabakh

 

[syed_yusuf]

If a radar can track a fighter why can't the sane radar track and engage UCAV specially big UCAV?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

If a radar can track a fighter why can't the sane radar track and engage UCAV specially big UCAV?

I could be wrong, but size isn't the only thing that matters on radar.

The design/shape of the aircraft and its materials impact its RCS too. UCAVs aren't just smaller than manned aircraft (in 99% of cases), but they use composite materials which can absorb radar signals. In fact, even a 'big' UCAV could have surfaces designed to reduce radar reflectivity.

 

[Deino]

....
I am saying again
UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters to destroy Tanks , Howitzers , MLRS , Air Defense Systems , other UCAVs , Attack Helicopters
....

But isn't this contradicting reality? On the one side you claim "UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters to destroy Tanks ..." while at the same time all armies are still developing and fielding attack helicopters for that role, your own so much praised Turkish Army itself has more attack helicopter projects in the making than any other country and UAVs are not used yet for that role?

So in essence you want the PA to go a way, the Turkish Army itself does not go?

 

[dBSPL]

There are 70 T129 and 10 AH-1W armored reconnaissance and attack helicopters in the TAF and Gendarmerie inventory. The Super Cobras will be handed over to the navy in this year as a stop-gap solution for the LHD. There are many (+30) modernized AH-1Fs in the Reserve (and possibly still for training purposes). However, it is seen that the entire production planning of 115 units envisaged under the Atak T129 will be used, and therefore it seems that all Cobra helicopters will now be completely removed from the inventory near and will be razors. The ATAK-I T129 program will be followed by the ATAK-II program, and if the TSK shows interest, there is also the T-629 solution. In short, attack helicopter programs continue at full speed in Turkey, and it is an extremely unnecessary discussion to associate this issue with tactical UAVs.

 

[MMM-E]

it is an extremely unnecessary discussion to associate this issue with tactical UAVs.

not TB-2 Tactical UCAV but AKINCI heavy strike UCAV


An 20 AKINCI UCAV battalion can carry 320 MIZRAK anti Tank missiles, each capable of destroying a Tank


Turkish AKINCI UCAV vs Indian AH-64 APACHE Attack Helicopter

AKINCI UCAV

Payload : 1350 kg
Max speed : 360 km/h
Combat Range : 2.000+ km
Endurance : 24 hours
Service ceiling : 40.000 feet

-- AESA Radar
-- SATCOM
-- Electronic Data Gathering ( ELINT / COMINT )
-- 6 multi-core Artificial Intelligence Computers


-- 250 km KUZGUN joint strike Missile with IIR seeker to hit moving targets
-- 150 km TRLG-230 laser guided supersonic Missile to hit moving targets
-- 8 km MIZRAK anti Tank Missile with top attack capability
-- 30 km MAM-T laser guided Bomb
-- 25 km BOZDOGAN air to air Missile
-- 65 km GOKDOGAN air to air Missile


AH-64D/E APACHE

Max speed : 293 km/h
Combat Range : 480 km
Endurance : 4 hours
Service ceiling : 20.000 feet

AN/APG-78 Longbow fire-control Radar

-- APKWS 70 mm Rockets
-- 8 km HELLFIRE air to surface Missile
-- 8 km AIM-92 Stinger air to air Missile


AKINCI UCAVs can hit even AH-64 Attack Helicopters ......

and to buy 5 AKINCI UCAVs in price of 1 AH-64 or T-129 Attack Helicopter

 

[dBSPL]

Akıncı class strategic attack UCAVs and T129 type armored reco/attack helicopters are completely different concepts. You are comparing apples and oranges. AKINCI is not an attack system developed for close air support at low altitudes.

An example that you can compare with the T129 is the T629 concept, which is the unmanned attack helicopter that TAI is working on.

 

[MMM-E]

I am not compare anything


I am saying that UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters to destroy Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,Military Vehicles ,Air Defense Systems , etc

to pay $50 million for an Attack Hellicopter is so pathetic

Turkish or Azerbaijan or Libyan Armies did not use Attack Helicopters
but TB-2 , ANKA-S UCAVs destroyed 759 Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,Military Vehicles ,Air Defense Systems , etc in Syria , Libya and Karabakh

AKINCI is not an attack system developed for close air support at low altitudes.

you are right when to fight against terrorists

but to destroy Tanks ? never

in a conflict , so easy to hit Attack Helicopters

and better to buy 5 AKINCI UCAVs in price of 1 AH-64 or T-129 Attack Helicopter to destroy Tanks,Howitzers,etc

AKINCI UCAV can do everything including reco/attack missions
( AESA Radar , E/O System , Datalink , and Missiles/laser guided Bombs )

 

[JawadKKhan]

I am not saying that Attack Helicopters are useless but UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters


Turkish or Azerbaijan - Libyan Armies did not use Attack Helicopters
but TB-2 , ANKA-S UCAVs destroyed 759 Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,Military Vehicles ,Air Defense Systems , etc in Syria , Libya and Karabakh



We prefer UCAVs to destroy enemy Tanks , Howitzers , MLRS , Air Defense Systems , other UCAVs , Attack Helicopters

1-- even MANPADS can hit Attack Helicopters , but Turkish AKINCI UCAV can flight at 40.000 feet altitude as an Aircraft ( 2 times higher altitude than American APACHE Attack Helicopter )

2-- also AKINCI UCAV can stay in the Air for 24 hours , but Attack Helicopters only 3 or 4 hours

3-- also AKINCI UCAV can attack on enemy targets from 8-30-50-150-250 km away , while Indian AH-64 Attack Hellicopters can attack on enemy targets from 8 km away

4-- also AKINCI UCAVs can hit Indian AH-64 Apache Helicopters ( thanks to AESA Radar and 25-65 km BOZDOGAN - GOKDOGAN air to air Missiles )

5-- also about price
5 AKINCI UCAVs = 1 AH-64 Apache or T-129

6 -- also not putting the Pilots at risk in conflict zone


Turkish Army has UCAVs + Attack Hellicopters ( to fight against terrorism + conventional conflict )

Turkey’s extensive deployment of Armed Drones in its fight against Syrian Regime Forces in Idlib/Syria has put forward a "new military doctrine" in the world


not Attack Helicopters but UCAVs changed the game in Syria , Libya and Karabakh

Gunship helicopters have their own capability which cannot be totally replaced by UCAVs as of yet. One of the main features of gunship heli is heavy machine gun mounted on it. It can be effectively used against troops, hunt down enemy units which are otherwise too expensive to take out using missiles such as troops, jeeps, trucks, lightly armoured vehicles etc. The drone on the other hand can fire 2 or 4 missiles and then its out of weaponary. So in complete battle situation, you simply cannot replace gunship heli.

For-example see below video:, A drone in this situation could not have possibly hunt down everyone and cost effectively.

However, yes future belongs to UCAVs / unmanned vehicles, more type of UCAVs will be built, giving capabilities to achieve maximum without risking crew lives. But as of now, gunships do possess their unique benefits.

 

[luciferdd]

New diffractive HMDS for Z-10,it's smaller,lighter but better than the old one.

 

[dBSPL]

to pay $50 million for an Attack Hellicopter is so pathetic

You compared completely different systems with mission profiles, flight altitude and maneuver profiles, and even the types of ammunition they will carry, then you saying that this is not a comparison. Anyway, I don't have any effort to change anyone's mind, but it is just as absurd to discuss all this in a completely unrelated topic.

You should forward your opinion to the SSB as soon as possible. Because they will receive at least 30 more T129s and at least 50 ATAK-II purchases are planned. They will spend billions of dollars on system development, production and maintenance for these pathetic systems.

 

[Deino]

I am not saying that Attack Helicopters are useless but UCAVs are more effective than Attack Helicopters


Turkish or Azerbaijan - Libyan Armies did not use Attack Helicopters
but TB-2 , ANKA-S UCAVs destroyed 759 Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,Military Vehicles ,Air Defense Systems , etc in Syria , Libya and Karabakh



We prefer UCAVs to destroy enemy Tanks , Howitzers , MLRS , Air Defense Systems , other UCAVs , Attack Helicopters

1-- even MANPADS can hit Attack Helicopters , but Turkish AKINCI UCAV can flight at 40.000 feet altitude as an Aircraft ( 2 times higher altitude than American APACHE Attack Helicopter )

2-- also AKINCI UCAV can stay in the Air for 24 hours , but Attack Helicopters only 3 or 4 hours

3-- also AKINCI UCAV can attack on enemy targets from 8-30-50-150-250 km away , while Indian AH-64 Attack Hellicopters can attack on enemy targets from 8 km away

4-- also AKINCI UCAVs can hit Indian AH-64 Apache Helicopters ( thanks to AESA Radar and 25-65 km BOZDOGAN - GOKDOGAN air to air Missiles )

5-- also about price
5 AKINCI UCAVs = 1 AH-64 Apache or T-129

6 -- also not putting the Pilots at risk in conflict zone


Turkish Army has UCAVs + Attack Hellicopters ( to fight against terrorism + conventional conflict )

Turkey’s extensive deployment of Armed Drones in its fight against Syrian Regime Forces in Idlib/Syria has put forward a "new military doctrine" in the world


not Attack Helicopters but UCAVs changed the game in Syria , Libya and Karabakh

Can you please stop spamming this thread too with your off-topic propaganda!

This thread is related to the Pakistan Army's purchase of Z-10ME helicopters and not again with how super-duper Turkish drones are. This is off-topic and irrelevant.

@The Eagle

 

[iLION12345_1]

Taliban is not Army but armed group

even only one MANPADS = no Attack Helicopter
Russians lost over 300 Helicopters in Afghanistan

Indian Army easly can hunt Attack Helicopters with mobile SAM Systems and MANPADS


but AKINCI UCAV has great strike capability to hunt enemy Tanks,Howitzers,MLRS,etc

16 x 8 km MIZRAK anti Tank Missiles
16 x 15 km MAM-L laser guided smart munitions
8 x MAM-T laser guided smart munitions to destroy Tanks from 30 km away
4 x 150 km TRLG-230 laser guided supersonic Missiles to destroy even Air Defense Systems
6 x 250 km KUZGUN-TJ joint strike Missiles with IIR seeker to destroy even Air Defense Systems

also 25-65 km BOZDOGAN-GOKDOGAN air to air Missiles to hit other UCAVs and Attack Helicopters


-- MANPADS can hit Attack Helicopters , but Turkish AKINCI UCAV can flight at 40.000 feet altitude as an Aircraft ( 2 times higher altitude than American APACHE Attack Helicopter )
-- AKINCI UCAV can stay in the Air for 24 hours , but Attack Helicopters only 3 or 4 hours
-- AKINCI UCAV can attack on enemy targets from 8-30-50-150-250 km away , while Indian AH-64 Attack Hellicopters can attack on enemy targets from 8 km away
-- also not putting the Pilots at risk in conflict zone





Turkish Army needs also Attack Helicopters to fight PKK Terrorists


but its so pathetic to pay billion Dollars to buy Attack Helicopters to hunt enemy Tanks
Attack Helicopters are so easy target and have limited fire power and endurance

I am talking about fighting against Indian Army , not against terrorism
and AKINCI UCAVs can be more effective than Z-10ME Attack Helicopters to hunt Indian Army Tanks,Howitzers,IFVs,MLRS,Mobile AD Systems,etc

I’m not going to read what you typed. But even without doing so I can very easily and confidently tell you that UCAVS cannot completely replace gunship helicopters nor is one better than the other. Drones are just as vulnerable as helicopters, just to different threats (literally any sort of jet). Drones cannot hover in one place over armored columns to provide constant anti-infantry cover fire with machine guns while also having great AT capability. Drones (especially larger ones) cannot take off or land anywhere for rearmament and refueling or for forward operations, they always need some sort of airstrip, which means they’ll need to travel to and from said airstrip. The drones cannot be helped by SHORADs either, which can target low flying helicopters and CAS jets to protect the gunships but cannot target high flying jets.

Yes drones can do some roles as good or better than gunships, but they have their issues along with their strengths as well, they’re not the clear winner. I’d still pick a proper gunship to support an armored assault over a UCAV. The examples you give are rather irrelevant because all of that drone usage was in countries with limited to no air forces to threaten those drones, in a Pak-Ind scenario, unless the airspace is absolutely clear, those drones will be free targets for basically any fighter jet. Unless we also give them fighter support, which then makes them inconvenient.

 

[MMM-E]

Yes drones can do some roles as good or better than gunships, but they have their issues along with their strengths as well, they’re not the clear winner. I’d still pick a proper gunship to support an armored assault over a UCAV. The examples you give are rather irrelevant because all of that drone usage was in countries with limited to no air forces to threaten those drones, in a Pak-Ind scenario, unless the airspace is absolutely clear, those drones will be free targets for basically any fighter jet. Unless we also give them fighter support, which then makes them inconvenient.

even MANPADS can destroy Attack Helicopters
and still you are talking about Fighter Jets
then Fighter Jets also easly can hunt Attack Helicopters in a Pak-Ind scenario

AKINCI UCAV is another level to destroy enemy Tanks,Howitzers,IFVs,MLRS from 30-50 km away
thanks to MAM-T laser guided smart munition ( almost 100 kg )

also 40 km KUZGUN-KY is coming to carry by UCAVs

also 50 km ASELSAN small Bomb with IIR seeker to hit even moving Tanks ( 100 kg )

if needed even from 150-200 km away ....

Attack Helicopters can not do it ... armed with only 8 km Missiles as like American HELLFIRE ( excluding İsraeli SPIKE-NLOS )
RIP all Helicopter Pilots in a Pak-Ind scenario

even AKINCI UCAV with AESA Radar
25-65 km BOZDOGAN-GOKDOGAN air to air Missiles to hit other UCAVs and Attack Helicopters