Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions

[syed_yusuf]

FWIW as far as NASTP is concerned, Baykar will get its pick of real-estate and wayward technical staff. A really cheap point of entry as far as offset investments go I'm sure. If the PAF keeps ordering a lot from Baykar, then I can see the company setting up a more permanent shop (e.g., local production, local R&D, etc) in Pakistan.

IMO, the issue with the PAF's SOEs (e.g., NASTP) is that they lack real policy and managerial direction. Bringing Baykar into the mix can at least provide some competent leadership and, in turn, steer worthwhile programs leveraging the technical prowess (or lack thereof) in those entities.

I think the KaGeM V3 is a good example. It's not as complex as the KEMANKEŞ (e.g., fixed wings instead of retractable wings, no EO/IR seeker, etc.), so there's a chance Baykar developed it using NASTP's capacity and experience (which isn't as developed as AWC, for example).

IMO, it'd be good news if this was the case as it means NASTP could be getting good projects within its means while, at the same time, an opportunity to gradually develop. We could potentially see Baykar develop a UAV at NASTP.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1714872539883987354

is this air launched? with huge wings not sure it can .... how is it deployed, is it in the same class as Raad ALCM?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

is this air launched? with huge wings not sure it can .... how is it deployed, is it in the same class as Raad ALCM?

It's not as big as the Ra'ad/Taimoor, I don't think...

 

[JamD]

FWIW as far as NASTP is concerned, Baykar will get its pick of real-estate and wayward technical staff. A really cheap point of entry as far as offset investments go I'm sure. If the PAF keeps ordering a lot from Baykar, then I can see the company setting up a more permanent shop (e.g., local production, local R&D, etc) in Pakistan.

IMO, the issue with the PAF's SOEs (e.g., NASTP) is that they lack real policy and managerial direction. Bringing Baykar into the mix can at least provide some competent leadership and, in turn, steer worthwhile programs leveraging the technical prowess (or lack thereof) in those entities.

I think the KaGeM V3 is a good example. It's not as complex as the KEMANKEŞ (e.g., fixed wings instead of retractable wings, no EO/IR seeker, etc.), so there's a chance Baykar developed it using NASTP's capacity and experience (which isn't as developed as AWC, for example).

IMO, it'd be good news if this was the case as it means NASTP could be getting good projects within its means while, at the same time, an opportunity to gradually develop. We could potentially see Baykar develop a UAV at NASTP.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1714872539883987354

Production is primarily what they are setting up shop for now these days.

Let's hope the PAF doesn't scare them away. For now they are playing extremely nice but one-off exceptions don't usually have long lifespan as sound policy. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,.
PAF Akinci -B Raider HALE UAV in Close Air Support Armed Configuration was in full action, teaming up with Manned Assets during Exercise Indus Shield 2023.

 

[ghazi52]

.,.,
PAF Base Murid is now the Unmanned Power House of the region, boasting combo of various MALE HALE UAVs.

 

[Windjammer]

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

Any idea what happened to ID's HAPS program?

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) Sir do you know it's current status.
Program is still running or abandoned?
Indians are doing a lot of work in this field

 

[Signalian]

One has to seriously analyze what TB-2 brings to the table and its effectiveness in conventional (against India) and non-conventional (against Afghanistan and COIN inside Pakistan) warfare. There is no viable solution for Mirage squadrons through UCAVs.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

One has to seriously analyze what TB-2 brings to the table and its effectiveness in conventional (against India) and non-conventional (against Afghanistan and COIN inside Pakistan) warfare. There is no viable solution for Mirage squadrons through UCAVs.

The Bayraktar TB2 deal is definitely sus, to say the least. Granted, the Shahpar-series isn't as good, but the gap isn't substantial enough to justify ignoring it for a foreign option. I believe the gap could've been closed with some additional funding to NESCOM (for improving the design, raising capacity for higher quality materials, etc.) than spending foreign currency on the TB2.

However, I think there's a more fundamental question -- did the PAF really need a <1,000 kg (MTOW) UAV at all? For the PAF, I figured the baseline would've been a design with a MTOW of 3,000 kg to 6,000 kg. Such a UAV would have the range and payload to support widespread ELINT/SIGINT coverage and, where required, help deploy SOWs from well within our borders.

For COIN/CT operations, I figured the PA was more than well-equipped to handle such operations via the Shahpar-2 (or even Shahpar-3) plus their CAS assets (e.g., a new attack helicopter, eventually). For heavier munition deployment (e.g, IREK-fitted MK-83s), the JF-17 Block-I should suffice.

 

[GriffinsRule]

The Bayraktar TB2 deal is definitely sus, to say the least. Granted, the Shahpar-series isn't as good, but the gap isn't substantial enough to justify ignoring it for a foreign option. I believe the gap could've been closed with some additional funding to NESCOM (for improving the design, raising capacity for higher quality materials, etc.) than spending foreign currency on the TB2.

However, I think there's a more fundamental question -- did the PAF really need a <1,000 kg (MTOW) UAV at all? For the PAF, I figured the baseline would've been a design with a MTOW of 3,000 kg to 6,000 kg. Such a UAV would have the range and payload to support widespread ELINT/SIGINT coverage and, where required, help deploy SOWs from well within our borders.

For COIN/CT operations, I figured the PA was more than well-equipped to handle such operations via the Shahpar-2 (or even Shahpar-3) plus their CAS assets (e.g., a new attack helicopter, eventually). For heavier munition deployment (e.g, IREK-fitted MK-83s), the JF-17 Block-I should suffice.

Just think of the kickbacks and money to be made though. Greenbacks is the military's khudda and akhirat after all.

 

[EternalMortal]

The Bayraktar TB2 deal is definitely sus, to say the least. Granted, the Shahpar-series isn't as good, but the gap isn't substantial enough to justify ignoring it for a foreign option. I believe the gap could've been closed with some additional funding to NESCOM (for improving the design, raising capacity for higher quality materials, etc.) than spending foreign currency on the TB2.

However, I think there's a more fundamental question -- did the PAF really need a <1,000 kg (MTOW) UAV at all? For the PAF, I figured the baseline would've been a design with a MTOW of 3,000 kg to 6,000 kg. Such a UAV would have the range and payload to support widespread ELINT/SIGINT coverage and, where required, help deploy SOWs from well within our borders.

For COIN/CT operations, I figured the PA was more than well-equipped to handle such operations via the Shahpar-2 (or even Shahpar-3) plus their CAS assets (e.g., a new attack helicopter, eventually). For heavier munition deployment (e.g, IREK-fitted MK-83s), the JF-17 Block-I should suffice.

IMO there could be multiple reasons all of which are ordinary.

1) PAF could have simply been offered a very good deal & with ToT they could improve shahpar faster as well. Plus we'd get the micromunitions that come along with it as well.

2) It's tied to another deal/agreement.

3) Desire for deeper integration with turkish military & defense firms.

4) Improving our own industry. Clearly, whatever we've done so far has not been cutting it.

Operationally, you could debate whether it's needed but Shahpar-2 wasn't that great & considering we're always low on funds, is it even worth putting in the R&D just to reinvent the wheel? Especially since the Turks have been quite willing to invest in our defense industry & sign manufacturing deals.

Shahpar-3 didn't come out of nowhere. The knowhow we've gotten from the Turks is the reason why we're talking about it in the 1st place. Let's not forget our other MALE program had failed. And now we're going for an even more ambitious uav soon after acquisitions from Turkey.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

IMO there could be multiple reasons all of which are ordinary.

1) PAF could have simply been offered a very good deal & with ToT they could improve shahpar faster as well. Plus we'd get the micromunitions that come along with it as well.

2) It's tied to another deal/agreement.

3) Desire for deeper integration with turkish military & defense firms.

4) Improving our own industry. Clearly, whatever we've done so far has not been cutting it.

Operationally, you could debate whether it's needed but Shahpar-2 wasn't that great & considering we're always low on funds, is it even worth putting in the R&D just to reinvent the wheel? Especially since the Turks have been quite willing to invest in our defense industry & sign manufacturing deals.

Shahpar-3 didn't come out of nowhere. The knowhow we've gotten from the Turks is the reason why we're talking about it in the 1st place. Let's not forget our other MALE program had failed. And now we're going for an even more ambitious uav soon after acquisitions from Turkey.

That'd make sense if there was actually horizontal collaboration between PAF/NASTP and NESCOM in the first place. According to the people who've worked with Pakistan's SOEs (e.g., @JamD @SQ8) this isn't the case. So, we don't know if the Baykar partnership is feeding into Shahpar (likely not IMHO).

However, I do think we could potentially see an original NASTP MALE UAV later down the line based on Baykar's activities in Pakistan. For example, they're working on an original ALCM in the form of the KAGEM V3. So, there may be other projects coming down the pipe.

 

[Bilal.]

However, I do think we could potentially see an original NASTP MALE UAV later down the line based on Baykar's activities in Pakistan.

That’s already done (seemingly independently) although the specs are a bit underwhelming but let’s hope they refine it to carry more payload and increase the endurance and altitude. This could develop into our Anka.

 

[EternalMortal]

That'd make sense if there was actually horizontal collaboration between PAF/NASTP and NESCOM in the first place. According to the people who've worked with Pakistan's SOEs (e.g., @JamD @SQ8) this isn't the case. So, we don't know if the Baykar partnership is feeding into Shahpar (likely not IMHO).

However, I do think we could potentially see an original NASTP MALE UAV later down the line based on Baykar's activities in Pakistan. For example, they're working on an original ALCM in the form of the KAGEM V3. So, there may be other projects coming down the pipe.

1) PAF could have simply been offered a very good deal

Plus we'd get the micromunitions that come along with it as well.

2) It's tied to another deal/agreement.

Shahpar-2 wasn't that great & considering we're always low on funds, is it even worth putting in the R&D just to reinvent the wheel? Especially since the Turks have been quite willing to invest in our defense industry & sign manufacturing deals.

Shahpar-3 is more than likely a result of the anka deal.