Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions
- Thread starter Interceptor
- Start date
TsAr
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,474
- Reaction score
- 0
Do you have an idea how long the border is and how many posts are spread out. You are comparing a country with a defense budget of approximately $700 billion with a budget of $8.8 billion.
Many a times US land forces were left stranded with no air cover, drone is not a magical dragon that will appear all of a sudden and start attacking, this is reality not GOT
Riz
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 9,162
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Dont tell me about the length of border here, we all know 95% fence on the pak afghan sborder is completed , only 5% is the most sensitive part where our guys are working on fence , Two times TTP carried out attacks on that 5% area , if you are failed to provide air cover to that small area then my advice is right , bajwa apny baity ki shadi par uday phir kom k paisy zaya kar raha ha yeh
It was you who was willing to convey my message to bajwa
TsAr
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,474
- Reaction score
- 0
Now pak people can hire these drone for marriage ceremonies , terrorists par to use karna nhi inho na
Sir G, yes still drones are an essential part of the marriage ceremonies but not limited to. Now they are practically applied in Pakistan for the following fields apart from military usage:
Agriculture:
Vegetation growth in farms to apply fertilizers for cost-cutting
Surveillance on large farms to monitor laborers and cattle herds
Effective pesticide spray and cost-cutting
Advertising and Tourism:
Producing eye-catching clips for a documentary on tourism and wildlife
Aiding in advertising by limiting the time and usage of equipment like cranes and scissor lifts
Some companies also doing R&D for food delivery to increase business potential in a cost-effective way
Riz
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 9,162
- Reaction score
- -6
- Country
- Location
Yes we should use them for agriculture instead of wasting them standing on military bases
Roger boss
Could we find any person on PDF, who could seriously elaborate, on why our units posted on posts in far-flung areas failed to deploy some cheap small drones? For reconnaissance the area for safety. They are cheap and do not need some very costly and special training equipment?
For example:
Because they're not equipped with them, its that simple. The SSG operates Mavic Pro 2 Enterprise, so do many other forces- theyre not cheap to be fair, but theyre very capable little things. They have a built in thermal imager, camera capable of zoom and also a reasonable range- depending on the environment and EMI, ive been a long time user of DJI solutions and even down to the entry/intermediate consumer stuff, very capable little drones, ive had ranges of over 15km in a dense city, limited only by LoS and EMI, im sure in areas such as BLN where there is little to no EMI, these things will be at home. Its a matter of providing them with the equipment, but as i said, its not cheap.
Thanks for sharing your first-hand and personal valuable knowledge.
Actually here I am considering the price as compared to the large military drones.
Definitely, as you explained about capabilities, it will value much for an individual in reference to finance.
They're very different in how they operate, but yeah, theyre nice little machines, used by militaries all over the world, they can be very useful for spotting those targets, especially since they do have a thermal camera. Infact, me and some friends would go boar hunting in Kashmir with ours, we would use the thermal camera to spot the targets and then set up a shot
Raja Porus
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2020
- Messages
- 1,557
- Reaction score
- 17
- Country
- Location
Taken out before they could do anything considerable...
This conflict has turned out to be anticlimactic for UCAVs especially after the Azer-Armenia conflict. That's why I always said that we should get over this drone fetish.
No weapon system alone can be the solution of every problem.
TsAr
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,474
- Reaction score
- 0
they are flop because of Ukraine's incompetency, there is no match between Russia and Ukraine. Any weapon system has its pro and cons and its has to be used and deployed in the most efficient way for it to perform well.
JamD
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,238
- Reaction score
- 94
- Country
- Location
Something possibly interesting.
Looking at Shahpar-2 and TB-2, it is easy to see that these are UCAVs in the same class. However, the way they are supposed to "close the kill chain" is quite different and makes for an interesting case study in my opinion.
Shahpar-II
Shahpar-II carries Burq/AR-1, which is a 45 kg missile that is supposed to reach out to 8-10 km. The Shahpar-II carries two of these.
Interestingly, for the photoshoot and brochure the Shahpar-II is equipped with Zumr-1 not Zumr-2.
The Zumr-1 has a laser range finder but no laser designator. However, in the video where Shahpar-II launches Burqs we can see that Shahpar-II is actually equipped with a Zumr-II:
You can tell Zumr-1 and 2 apart by noting Zumr-2's larger size and blockier appearance. The Zumr-II does have a laser designator that can laze targets up to 20 km away
So the way these are probably meant to be used is that a Shahpar-II lazes its own targets and fires 2 missiles max at 10 km at it.
TB2
Now the primary weapon of the TB2 is the MAM-L, which is a 22kg glide munition. Since the MAM-L weighs half as much as a Burq, the TB-2 can carry FOUR MAM-L's:
The fascinating thing is that the max range on the MAM-L is given as 15 km.
This is probably achieved by flying the TB2 really high.
The TB2 also carries a designator that can look out to 25 km
So the way the TB2s are probably used is that one TB2 has the mission of flying far away and designate targets (and record video for propaganda purposes). As far as I can tell most videos of TB2 strikes seem to show missiles that come from directions different from the video recording pointing to the fact that a different TB2 is probably launching the weapons. Now the other TB2 flies as high and fast as possible and launches its MAM-L's. The MAM-L's rely on the TB-2s energy (speed and altitude) to achieve their max range. If push comes to shove the TB-2 tasked with designating targets could also carry 4 MAM-Ls.
Comparison
So with very similar aircraft, the Shahpar-II and TB2 complete their mission very differently. The Shahpar-II carries two heavy missiles that use their rocket's energy to get to target. The Shahpar-II seems to have an engagement range smaller than that of TB2 by 5-7 km - this distance can mean the difference between survival and destruction. The TB2 uses the energy provided by the TB2 aircraft to get presumably double the amount of explosives (4 MAM-L's vs 2 Burq) to a target further away. It would appear that the TB2 way to do the mission is more efficient because it appears to give a longer range. This also explains Bayraktar's quest to fly the TB2 higher and higher (27k feet according to a Turkish member here). The TB2 and MAM-L are systems designed and optimized for each other. It is fascinating to try to understand design choices.
I am hopeful that our systems will get to this level of polish too.
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @kursed this post may answer some of the questions that you guys have asked over time.
Looking at Shahpar-2 and TB-2, it is easy to see that these are UCAVs in the same class. However, the way they are supposed to "close the kill chain" is quite different and makes for an interesting case study in my opinion.
Shahpar-II
Shahpar-II carries Burq/AR-1, which is a 45 kg missile that is supposed to reach out to 8-10 km. The Shahpar-II carries two of these.
Interestingly, for the photoshoot and brochure the Shahpar-II is equipped with Zumr-1 not Zumr-2.
The Zumr-1 has a laser range finder but no laser designator. However, in the video where Shahpar-II launches Burqs we can see that Shahpar-II is actually equipped with a Zumr-II:
You can tell Zumr-1 and 2 apart by noting Zumr-2's larger size and blockier appearance. The Zumr-II does have a laser designator that can laze targets up to 20 km away
So the way these are probably meant to be used is that a Shahpar-II lazes its own targets and fires 2 missiles max at 10 km at it.
TB2
Now the primary weapon of the TB2 is the MAM-L, which is a 22kg glide munition. Since the MAM-L weighs half as much as a Burq, the TB-2 can carry FOUR MAM-L's:
The fascinating thing is that the max range on the MAM-L is given as 15 km.
This is probably achieved by flying the TB2 really high.
The TB2 also carries a designator that can look out to 25 km
So the way the TB2s are probably used is that one TB2 has the mission of flying far away and designate targets (and record video for propaganda purposes). As far as I can tell most videos of TB2 strikes seem to show missiles that come from directions different from the video recording pointing to the fact that a different TB2 is probably launching the weapons. Now the other TB2 flies as high and fast as possible and launches its MAM-L's. The MAM-L's rely on the TB-2s energy (speed and altitude) to achieve their max range. If push comes to shove the TB-2 tasked with designating targets could also carry 4 MAM-Ls.
Comparison
So with very similar aircraft, the Shahpar-II and TB2 complete their mission very differently. The Shahpar-II carries two heavy missiles that use their rocket's energy to get to target. The Shahpar-II seems to have an engagement range smaller than that of TB2 by 5-7 km - this distance can mean the difference between survival and destruction. The TB2 uses the energy provided by the TB2 aircraft to get presumably double the amount of explosives (4 MAM-L's vs 2 Burq) to a target further away. It would appear that the TB2 way to do the mission is more efficient because it appears to give a longer range. This also explains Bayraktar's quest to fly the TB2 higher and higher (27k feet according to a Turkish member here). The TB2 and MAM-L are systems designed and optimized for each other. It is fascinating to try to understand design choices.
I am hopeful that our systems will get to this level of polish too.
@Bilal Khan (Quwa) @kursed this post may answer some of the questions that you guys have asked over time.
Last edited:
There are some other points to correct in your post, however, this one took my attention the most:
The company is called Baykar Tech, not Bayraktar. That's the name of their series of drones, e.g. Bayraktar TB-2 or Bayraktar Akıncı.
I get why it might be confusing given how similar the names are to foreign people, but it's just the serial name of their drones.
IMO, Baykar has a serious name branding issue right there.
Similar threads
