Pakistan making armed drones but lacks key technology; China offers help

[Armstrong]

UAV isn't really the big problem. They are being used in FATA in ops by the troops. But a UCAV, the combat missile firing thing, is a different beast. I don't think any private company at present has the capability to make a UCAV or contribute significantly to it, in the firing systems.

I wasn't thinking along the lines of significant contribution but more on the lines of producing what can be produced in Pakistan, contribute what can be contributed but much more so or rather primarily so 'providing the finances/the liquidity for the a Sino-Pak UCAV project to go ahead ! We're cash strapped right now...so what do we do ? We bring in the local firms, however technologically immature they maybe, to provide some of the finances whilst the rest is provided by AWC & the Chinese ! This would not only ensure that our local industry would have gone through a learning curve of sorts but also that we would have divided the cost of the program that Pakistan was supposed to bear between the AWC & one or two firms !

I'm asking if this has been considered & rejected as unfeasible or that it wasn't considered to begin with ?

 

[Jango]

I wasn't thinking along the lines of significant contribution but more on the lines of producing what can be produced in Pakistan, contribute what can be contributed but much more so or rather primarily so 'providing the finances/the liquidity for the a Sino-Pak UCAV project to go ahead ! We're cash strapped right now...so what do we do ? We bring in the local firms, however technologically immature they maybe, to provide some of the finances whilst the rest is provided by AWC & the Chinese ! This would not only ensure that our local industry would have gone through a learning curve of sorts but also that we would have divided the cost of the program that Pakistan was supposed to bear between the AWC & one or two firms !

I'm asking if this has been considered & rejected as unfeasible or that it wasn't considered to begin with ?

Your idea is a good one, and one worth pondering upon.

As for the second part, I have absolutely no idea. Although a couple of small companies were closely looking into the situation and making control systems sometime back, don't know about the situation now.

I don't think this idea would be a big hit with the top brass, they are pretty close minded on this IMO.

And for the finances, let me make one thing clear to you through the words of a very senior officer, 'we don't have a shortage of money, when we really need it, we get it'. Now restrictions are there, but when the military needs to desperately build a UCAV, it will get the wad of cash!

The real question IMO is that is PA/PAF really looking towards a UCAV at this time seriously? My hunch would be no.

 

[XYON]

Your idea is a good one, and one worth pondering upon.

As for the second part, I have absolutely no idea. Although a couple of small companies were closely looking into the situation and making control systems sometime back, don't know about the situation now.

I don't think this idea would be a big hit with the top brass, they are pretty close minded on this IMO.

And for the finances, let me make one thing clear to you through the words of a very senior officer, 'we don't have a shortage of money, when we really need it, we get it'. Now restrictions are there, but when the military needs to desperately build a UCAV, it will get the wad of cash!

The real question IMO is that is PA/PAF really looking towards a UCAV at this time seriously? My hunch would be no.

Well the armed forces have a policy of NO-COST, NO-OBLIGATION BASIS development and test and trials for any such equipment. This means that ALL the required cost for development, fielding and testing of a UCAV has to borne by the manufacturer (local or foreign). Therefore, no local manufacturer will ever be that stupid to invest his own money just to please a few Generals (or not). Army/Airforce themselves have in-house expertise for UAV's coupled with other elements required to develop a successful UCAV, they would also not face any problems getting internal funding. But with the results that PAC, AWC, GIDS etc have shown ZERO RESULTS on coming up with a UCAV, betting on a local private manufacturer to do the same in 'national' interest will indeed be the height of sheer business stupidity!

 

[SEAL]

We will get UCAV when WOT will be over lol a good UAV/UCAV is need of all three armed forces so whats the issue why don't they join hands and funds for a single project which benefit all three forces. Airforce went for Falco and Army got Luna wuna and now Navy also spent 30-40million$ on Luna.

 

[Jango]

, they would also not face any problems getting internal funding. But with the results that PAC, AWC, GIDS etc have shown ZERO RESULTS on coming up with a UCAV, betting on a local private manufacturer to do the same in 'national' interest will indeed be the height of sheer business stupidity!

These lines sum up my point!

 

[SEAL]

Well the armed forces have a policy of NO-COST, NO-OBLIGATION BASIS development and test and trials for any such equipment. This means that ALL the required cost for development, fielding and testing of a UCAV has to borne by the manufacturer (local or foreign). Therefore, no local manufacturer will ever be that stupid to invest his own money just to please a few Generals (or not). Army/Airforce themselves have in-house expertise for UAV's coupled with other elements required to develop a successful UCAV, they would also not face any problems getting internal funding. But with the results that PAC, AWC, GIDS etc have shown ZERO RESULTS on coming up with a UCAV, betting on a local private manufacturer to do the same in 'national' interest will indeed be the height of sheer business stupidity!

Sorry offtopic can you provide some information regarding G3S and G3M rifle in this thread.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...stan-international-defence-nov-7-11-a-46.html

 

[XYON]

We will get UCAV when WOT will be over lol a good UAV/UCAV is need of all three armed forces so whats the issue why don't they join hands and funds for a single project which benefit all three forces. Airforce went for Falco and Army got Luna wuna and now Navy also spent 30-40million$ on Luna.

Here is some news for you ......... Navy also does not have any money ............. so Luna Contract is now stuck big time and may drag on for 2-3 years resulting in either Navy cancelling the contract (not opening the LC) or EMT raising its initial prices to compensate for yearly inflation & getting the boot from the Navy citing contractual default!!

 

[farhan_9909]

shahpar Indeed looks bigger than the older junk uqab

from the past 5 years our budget is almost struck at 6 billions.

They do increase the defence budget by 10% but currency also devalue every single year

we cant expect much share for R&D unless our defence budget reaches 10billions or more and that is Possible within few years if economy grow at 6% for few years

 

[XYON]

Unless our armed forces understand the clear difference between ''investing vs. spending'' such high end projects will continue to be a colossal drain on the economy.When you invest, you get what you want at a lower cost, when you spend you get what is available at a higher cost. Investment is always done in the private sector companies encouraging them to come forth and deliver in return also revamping & regulating the national economy. Spending is done in state behemoths such as HIT, PAC, AWC, GIDS etc without any input to the economy. Unfortunately our Generals, Air Marshals and Admirals do not have the vision or the sense to differentiate between the two concepts above! So our armed forces will continue to suffer like a duffer for good time to come!

 

[qasimali]

we are already working on UCAV and we will get it soon.
NESCOM Burraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[mitth]

thank you china......

 

[TOPGUN]

What happend doc ? u alright or you injected your self with something called stupid ... get a grip man grow up.

 

[beijingwalker]

Pakistan working with China to develop drones: reports
Updated 20 December 2012, 14:22 AEST

Despite public opposition to US drone strikes, the Pakistan government is said to be moving towards its own development of the weapons.
Pakistan working with China to develop drones: reports (Credit: ABC)

Pakistan is now reportedly working with China after failing to convince Washington to share its armed drone technology

Correspondent: Kanaha Sabapathy

Speakers: Dr Ashok Behuria, Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis, India; Talat Masood, Pakistan security analyst; Sultan Ali, Group Captain, Pakistan Air force
Pakistan working with China to develop drones: reports | Connect Asia | ABC Radio Australia

 

[Vassnti]

The Pakistani government denounces the CIA strikes as a violation of the country’s sovereignty, though senior civilian and military leaders are known to have supported at least some of the attacks in the past. Pakistani officials also call the strikes unproductive, saying they kill many civilians and fuel anger that helps militants recruit additional fighters — allegations denied by the U.S.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...chnology-china-offers-help.html#ixzz2FdRwsiNz

So a drone with weapons with a CEP of this

is a bad thing that only hits civilians

While a drone with weapons that have a CEP like this

IS a good thing ?

 

[A1Kaid]

I don't think even China is as advance in terms of drones.

It's true even China doesn't have UCAV's. From what I understand Pakistan's UCAV program is totally domestic no outside help.