Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions

[Bratva]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) what the crap is going on? Everyone wants their own complete line of UAVs.
AWC: Shahpar and Shahpar-II
NESCOM: Burraq and (now) Anka
PAC: Falco and unnamed MALE
Meanwhile PAF PN PA: CH-4 and WL-2
Either this is some 3 dimensional chess, or everyone's doing their own thing with no regard to the other.

like cmon dude every drone is in a different class , Shahpar 2 is ISR light MALE UAV , ANKA / PAC UAV is bigger than that but lightly armed and both for PAF , CH4 is for PAA as attack drone , and WL-2 is for PAF as attack drone. Falco , burraq & Shahpar 1 are not comparable at all....

We also have WL-1s as PAF has a testing/training squadron i believe with atleast 2 x WL-1s that was operational in 2016-18 , then re-appeared in 2021. Both WL-1s are visible on sat imagery in 2021 at Mianwali.
PN has also likely acquired a MALE UAV , though not sure if its CH4 or CH5 but what ever it is, its operational already based on what ive seen.

PAC's MALE UAV is called as TD-1 and its unconfirmed call sign is Karrar UAV.

After reading Anadolu Agency, I think this agreement between TAI and NESCOM is to collaborate on the Anka for the sake of the UAV. The two organizations will develop the Anka further and market it to other countries.

It sounds like NESCOM is entering the Anka's overall supply chain, i.e., TAI is outsourcing work to Pakistan. I suspect this may be part of the offsets agreed to under the T129 and MILGEM deals. Basically, future Anka buyers will see that a % of their parts will come from NESCOM.

That said, in 2018, the PN spoke to TAI about the Anka-S. So, NESCOM could market the Anka-S to the PN, while PAC pitches its MALE UAV.

İnsansız hava aracı Anka, Pakistan iş birliğiyle güçlendirilecek

Türk Havacılık ve Uzay Sanayii (TUSAŞ) ile Pakistan’ın Milli Mühendislik ve Bilim Komisyonu (NESCOM), insansız hava araçlarına (İHA) yönelik iş birliği yapacak. - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

Waste of resources for one, and everyone wants to appear as bringing a solution to the table. Where they cannot make one, they are buying them.

The next obvious question people will ask about it's capability.
So, You should keep a lid.

So TD = Technology Demonstrator .... ???

 

[farooqbhai007]

The next obvious question people will ask about it's capability.
So, You should keep a lid.

According to @PSFAERO from one of his Twitter tweets , The TD-1 ( 2 prototypes ) has slightly better perfomance characteristics than the Anka S.
Also 4 CH4s are operational so far. Every thing is available in open source.

… not to forget Wing Loong II! Even if I still wait for a confirmation aka an image.

given the WL1 Test & Training Squadron was reactivated in 2021 , we could see the arrival of WL2 soon

 

[farooqbhai007]

 

[TsAr]

Small question, will NESCOM being under US sanctions hamper their commercial activities? (International market).

Turkey along with some Middle-East countries are interested in joint ventures with Nescom

 

[Great Janjua]

View attachment 772114

Basically an Anka with less service ceiling

According to @PSFAERO from one of his Twitter tweets , The TD-1 ( 2 prototypes ) has slightly better perfomance characteristics than the Anka S.
Also 4 CH4s are operational so far. Every thing is available in open source.

given the WL1 Test & Training Squadron was reactivated in 2021 , we could see the arrival of WL2 soon

Best bet is since we now basically own Anka how about start negotiating for Anka 2.It could meet all our requirements and much more whilst being highly compatible with Anka 1

 

[farooqbhai007]

Basically an Anka with less service ceiling

Much faster and longer endurance than anka with a better engine than Anka ( TD-1 max speed is 160knots while Anka S max speed is 117 Knots ).

 

[JamD]

View attachment 772114

No SATCOM?

 

[Great Janjua]

Much faster and longer endurance than anka with a better engine than Anka ( TD-1 max speed is 160knots while Anka S max speed is 117 Knots ).

First of all speed does not matter in a already universal slowing moving medium altitude UAV, Rather the payload capacity, altitude and like you said endurance/Combat Range play a key role,Also it's modularity like can it be configured to different mission types in short span of time.From looking at this brochure we can tell that PAC UAV and it's payload capacity is the same,Whilst boasting a bigger engine 200hp versus a 170hp on Anka S. From this we can probably assume it's basically an Anka S but a bit longer in length since that too is different.

It's really not ground breaking from a project that took bloody ages and that from foreign assistance.

 

[Philip the Arab]

Besides MAM, the UAE produces a similar system of Denel origin although the chance that is used on a Pak UAV is almost impossible.

 

[Moon]

Besides MAM, the UAE produces a similar system of Denel origin although the chance that is used on a Pak UAV is almost impossible.

Desert Sting? Very potent weapon, but too expensive. To make these effective in counterterrorism we need something cost effective, otherwise we'll go bankrupt lobbing munitions worth more than cars at $10 tents.

View attachment 772114

So it carries 770lb of fuel? (1980+770+770 = 3520).

Seeing it'll carry 770lb payload which includes an EO/IR turret plus armament it has 770lbs left for fuel.

Now I don't want to be sound pessimistic, but a 200hp engine, with 770lb of fuel is not going to last very long (considering the leading engine in 200hp-215hp category (Lycoming IO-390) burns fuel at around 13 GPH at around 75% power and 10 GPH at around 55% power) and a gallon of fuel weighs around 6lbs so if my math is right, at an average of 55% power during a mission, it has somewhere around 12 hours of mission endurance (that includes the whole take off and landing). Which isn't really that great if you compare it with other drones, but hey if we're building them here, and building them cheap, it's better than nothing.
BTW a Predator manages manages 24 hours off 870lbs of fuel with a smaller, more efficient Rotax 914 engine (albeit in a different configuration).

This is just my deduction from bits of information I found over the net, and based almost entirely on assumptions.

 

[JamD]

r) and a gallon of fuel weighs around 6lbs so if my math is right, at an average of 55% power during a mission, it has somewhere around 12 hours of mission endurance (that includes the whole take off and landing). Which isn't really that great if you compare it with other drone

I did a similar calculation and arrive at similar numbers as you. I guess I was more generous and I concede that your numbers are probably more realistic.

I would like to see some specs issued by PAC, since these seem like design specifications/goals and not the actual specifications, but let's take these at face value.

Firstly, the height has to be a typo. 3ft makes no sense. We saw the prototype and we are 200% sure it wasn't that small.

The engine. Interesting how it has exactly the same bhp as the Lycoming engine on the Mushaak. Makes sense to have a common engine.

Some rough math:
MTOW = 3520 lb
Armament = 771 lb
Empty = 1980 lb

Fuel(?) = 3520-771-1980 = 769 lb
Fuel Fraction (?) = 769/(3520-771) = 0.28 (for comparison MQ-1 has a fuel fraction of 0.45 or something, which points to lightweight structure)

Fuel Volume(?) = 490 L
Lycoming Endurance = 30-34 L / hr
Endurance of UAV = 14.4 - 16 hr

Decent, but not crazy. Endurance would be very similar to Shahpar II. Payload much bigger.

The thing is this is acceptable as a first step since:
1. Probably the first time that we have designed and constructed a large aircraft structure. So I am sure there's a LOT of room for improvement there.
2. We are using a rather old, COTS engine, since we really don't make engines.
I think this is reasonable for us. Sure it's no Predator but it's a poor man's predator.

 

[Philip the Arab]

Desert Sting? Very potent weapon, but too expensive. To make these effective in counterterrorism we need something cost effective, otherwise we'll go bankrupt lobbing munitions worth more than cars at $10 tents

There should also be the concept of dropping standoff weapons from that MALE UAVs, the Turks have something called the Kuzgun and UAE is developing something Nasef with 120km range, 100kg weight and 50kg warhead.

 

[Moon]

I did a similar calculation and arrive at similar numbers as you. I guess I was more generous and I concede that your numbers are probably more realistic.





The thing is this is acceptable as a first step since:
1. Probably the first time that we have designed and constructed a large aircraft structure. So I am sure there's a LOT of room for improvement there.
2. We are using a rather old, COTS engine, since we really don't make engines.
I think this is reasonable for us. Sure it's no Predator but it's a poor man's predator.

Maybe in later variants we'll be using more composites to keep the weight down. But tbh I'm not aware of the capabilities Kamra has for making composites or large composite parts.

Mind you, an ANKA has a 30 hour endurance with a 770lb payload, so there's definitely room for improvement.

 

[Riz]

 

[Tipu7]

View attachment 772293

View attachment 772114

LoL, specifications are already here ...