Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

News and Updates from #IDEAS2018 Ukraine gave an order of 6 current UAV Shahpar but Pakistan airforce refused because Pakistan is giving priority to full-fill local needs.

If true that'd be a nasty blonder, especially as Ukraine ordered UAVs from Turkey's Bayraktar.

 

[HRK]

News and Updates from #IDEAS2018 Ukraine gave an order of 6 current UAV Shahpar but Pakistan airforce refused because Pakistan is giving priority to full-fill local needs.

seems fake news ....

we are marketing this UAV I think from the very first IDEAS Exhibition and here we supposedly get an order by a friendly country but we refuse to sale ..... this does not make sense

 

[GriffinsRule]

seems fake news ....

we are marketing this UAV I think from the very first IDEAS Exhibition and here we supposedly get an order by a friendly country but we refuse to sale ..... this does not make sense

Yeah that assertion, if true, would imply that Pakistan's production is sooo slow that it can not even meet the local needs of its forces in a timely manner.

 

[silent hawk]

seems fake news ....

we are marketing this UAV I think from the very first IDEAS Exhibition and here we supposedly get an order by a friendly country but we refuse to sale ..... this does not make sense

With all due respect Sir things do not need to make sense.
Only a reason is required and that has been given " fulfilling local requirement"
We have Shahpar and Buraq and we are still developing a third bird.
In a country that is begging both inside and outside how senseless is that

 

[HRK]

Only a reason is required and that has been given " fulfilling local requirement"

and this reason seems logical ....???
keep in mind
- the system in question is not a NEW system but a system which is operation at least from +10 years
- and IF we can not even fulfil local needs then what was the purpose to market this system in almost every IDEAS exhibition and in some other foreign exhibitions as well .... ???

 

[silent hawk]

and this reason seems logical ....???
keep in mind
- the system in question is not a NEW system but a system which is operation at least from +10 years
- and IF we can not even fulfil local needs then what was the purpose to market this system in almost every IDEAS exhibition and in some other foreign exhibitions as well .... ???

I never said that it is logical I just said it is a reason.
I do not make the decisions in PAF. From what I have heard whenever the Air Staff takes a decision that seems illogical. People accept it by saying that they must have a reason.

BTW I agree with you they should have sold if they got a chance.

 

[Trailer23]

Not to take anything away from Pakistan and its abilities, but UAV's haven't exactly been our strong points.

I don't honestly know if Ukraine actually made an offer to buy any of our UAV's, but what I did find interesting is that a nation that has Antonov which has nearly 7 decades of experience, would turn to Pakistan. Seems far-fetched.

We ourselves are looking to China for the Wing Loong II.

 

[JamD]

and this reason seems logical ....???
keep in mind
- the system in question is not a NEW system but a system which is operation at least from +10 years
- and IF we can not even fulfil local needs then what was the purpose to market this system in almost every IDEAS exhibition and in some other foreign exhibitions as well .... ???

The reason given is absolutely untrue. As you pointed out the Shahpar has been in production for a long time. There's even a really old picture which shows (I think) 12-14 Shahpars in once picture.

That being said I have been told that there are some "technical issues" with the bird. This is all I was told. Since production is ongoing I suspect these are flight-software issues, which can be fixed for the entire fleet once they are solved. I am guessing we do not want to export a buggy product before we've ironed out all the kinks. The "local requirement" could be a face-saving bahana if I had to guess. Further credence to there being issues is lent by the fact that GIDS presented the Burraq as its main attraction this time around.

 

[HRK]

There's even a really old picture which shows (I think) 12-14 Shahpars in once picture.

that was a picture of BURRAQ UCAV

BTW I agree with you they should have sold if they got a chance.

I was not debating for the sales it was the news/rumour which seem illogical therefore difficult for me to accept.

 

[silent hawk]

that was a picture of BURRAQ UCAV
View attachment 524452

I was not debating for the sales it was the news/rumour which seem illogical therefore difficult for me to accept.

Why has PAF not done illogical things before?

 

[JamD]

that was a picture of BURRAQ UCAV
View attachment 524452

Aaa you're right. Thanks for the correction! I was misremembering.

 

[Dazzler]

 

[vizier]

I wanted to share my ideas about next genration uavs and possible ucav air to air warfare scenarios. Instead of creating a separate thread I decided to share it here as a discussion topic for future contribution.

Currently ucavs are used almost extensively for air to ground roles and a2a is a researched topic with prototypes. A live exception is during gulf war there are some videos of usa predator uav launching stinger against mig25 but uav later shot down. The trend is going towards installing jet engines to current a2g uavs, make them stealthier but still in a defensive situation against other planes. Another approach is currently designed 6th gen. planes by making the pilotless version of the piloted design. The first one is an a2g role and the latter is a multirole design.

I think just for interceptor role uav concept can be diversified to include rocket-ramjet powered systems with certain cost-practicality advantages over the above popular concepts that everyone with the budget will aim to copy from usa.
Just an example of a sam system from the 50s is the bomarc sam that was aimed against possible soviet bombers
from extremely long ranges like 650kms(200km more than S400, somewhat same as S500).
missile flies at about 20km max altitude

View attachment 507341

Practicality: The solution should be non reliant on static-vulnurable airbases. Jumpjet engine would be both costly and its high thrust to weight ratio to lift the plane upwards can be a tradeoff by its high IR signature in close ranges. Actually a solution was found in ww2 which is to use landing skids instead of landing gears and launch the planes by dolly. Yes at that time dolly would jump back and could hit the plane back during takeoff but we are not in 40s and circuitry can time the release and make calculations pretty well. In ww2 me163 interceptor had the landing skid solution with most axis airbases destroyed and had limited success but considering the overwhelming allied airforce and limited production at late years of war we cant say it is unsuccessful in my opinion. Yes the popular argument is the plane becomes vulnurable after it lands but It is not in the gun era but cruise missile era. If the airbase is visible from public websites like gearth and dozens of missiles could be launched at the same target then an undisclosed flattened grass location close to enemy is less vulnurable than the airbase mentioned even if it is protected by latest sams.

Cost: The engine has no moving parts. It relies on speed. Rocket engine needs to be installed on the plane for takeoff until ramjet takes over but the example given above is 50s tech and could still go about 600km range. A simple design with fuselage and delta wings and ramjets with rocket take off it wont be costing much.

The new sensors like infrared focal plane array and a2a engagement systems, internal bays for ir guided short-medium range missiles is a must but to reduce costs bvr and radar engagement can be added in later versions if the uav is stealthy or fast enough to get close enough against other planes. For example Jjust a ground VHF radar needs to find the quadrant that F35 is flying in and guide the uav to those location for wvr engagement by the uav controlled from ground if not autonomous.

Another further option is I think rocket assisted takeoff under wings can be used and the space for the rocket engine now empty can be filled with ramjet fuel to increase effective range of the uav.

Effectiveness: There are some tradeoffs but advantages as well and in my opinion advantages can overcome the tradeoffs.

- It wont be maneuvrable and cant make dogfight as fighter planes do. This can be compensated with off boresight engagement sensor and lock on after launch ir guided a2a missiles.

- It was a mach 3 missile. Hitting it with a2a missiles would be difficult but possible especially with newer ramjet powered a2a missiles so I think this tradeoff can be compensated by improving the airframe making it more stealthy even if it reduces its speed. The engine has no moving parts so you dont need a supercomputer to design the inlets to hide the engine fans. if it flies at about 20-25km altitude and ramjet engine is carried above the wings it can be hidden from the radars of the enemy planes flying below. A body with a diamond cross section and V tail is a common knowledge to reduce the signature.

I just made a sketch with openvsp modifying the x15 rocket plane adding ramjets and V tail and modifying its body a bit to show what I mean as below. You can think of canopy as Ir sensor.

View attachment 507342

View attachment 507343

As a summary popular designs are ok for usa as they have the budget and the tech but for us alternatives need to be researched since we dont have the budget to copy everything they do and we are generally at the the threat of being at the recieving end of their bombers these days. The urgent demand is an effictive interceptor role over others since we are currently on the defensive and I think rocket-ramjet based designs would have advantages in this role.

Another landing skid approach to remove the need for static visible airstrips is I think th Fod blocker inlets that many Russia n aircraft currently employs for rough terrain. Since engine breathes from the holes above while taking off and landing there wont be any debris problem.

In cold war some aircraft designs as below used the approach with a dolly take off-skid landing but later given up as sams developed.

http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v1/v1n1/baroudr.htm

Mig 29s and Sukhois have the fod blocker inlets but still they have the landing gear needing airstrips instead of landing skids which if installed in future would give the option to land on almost any flattened area.

This can be used for both future non airstrip dependant jet aircraft and jet engine powered drone designs.

However I dont have much hope for us muslim countries unless we give up emotionalism-waiting from outside to happen type of mentality observing like toy soldiers and reacting angrily when we dont like what we observe. We should be much more creative at generating solutions as they are creating problems and make much better plans than our opponents not considering ourselves good enough and waiting from outside things will be given to us by something or someone not much different than childrens santa claus.

 

[Windjammer]

PAC & AWC Stall at the Saudi Air Show.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Bro do we have these uav's for special forces??

PAC & AWC Stall at the Saudi Air Show.