Potential turbo-prop for PAF - Calidus B-250

[GriffinsRule]

No there isnt. A dedicated light attack aircraft isn’t doing anything in peacetime. It may have some utility in a war against India but otherwise it can’t run the routine intercepts that other fighters run.
It cannot be used to train pilots and it cannot be used as the base personal transportation.
It cant do anything other than just haul weapons onto a target area and utilize them against a lightly armed enemy.

Does it make sense in a counter insurgency game and otherwise?
Yes, it is a very cost effective option for airforces with greater procurement budgets who are looking to avoid higher expenses with faster and more complex platforms and can afford to do one time purchases of such platforms.

But since the PAF has a VERY limited procurement budget that is already squeezed between more pertinent India specific upgrades, it makes zero sense for Pakistan to invest in these.

A dual role aircraft such as the Caravan or C-295 may look more expensive to operate but it offers greater flexibility of usage besides dropping munitions.
It can also transport troops from a remote location to another, it can run communication flights,it can act as a forward command station just as the Brite star C-130s do but at less cost and so on.
That gives a PAF commander lots of flexibility to carry out other tasks instead of just having one role available which is to expend munitions.

I feel like we are talking about different aircraft =). Why would any CAS aircraft be running intercept missions? You don't expect that from A-10 or Su-25 so why is this an argument against a turboprop?

Given that these aircraft can carry a similar air to ground weapons load as those of fighter jets including LGB and AGM-65s, and operate at night, I think they can be very effective against even armor formations, when utilized properly. I don't expect IA formations to have air cover 24/7.

 

[SQ8]

I feel like we are talking about different aircraft =). Why would any CAS aircraft be running intercept missions? You don't expect that from A-10 or Su-25 so why is this an argument against a turboprop?

Given that these aircraft can carry a similar air to ground weapons load as those of fighter jets including LGB and AGM-65s, and operate at night, I think they can be very effective against even armor formations, when utilized properly. I don't expect IA formations to have air cover 24/7.

A-10s and Su-25s have completely different performance levels.

We aren’t talking about different things but you are ignoring the elephant in the room that is PAF’s procurement and operational budget versus all else.
Why do you need an additional platform that offers a lower capability and survivability than anything else the PAF can get and its only duplicating roles already served by other jets?
The only motivation was the insurgency and the need for a lower cost CAS platform to support the troops but since the operations are now shifting from capture, control and hold to search and eliminate within civillian population, there is no room for that role.

Why do you think the Textron Scorpian is still waiting on sales? Some Arab country with bigger pockets may get it but as such our budget and future budgetary and threat perception leave no room for such specific aircraft.

 

[CriticalThought]

Not every platform can be utilized for every role ... Caravans can be used in SIGNIT and ISR roles but not effectively for CAS, where they might have to fly in fast and low. And its a fallacy to say that PAF only has to defend against India as we certainly have a menace to deal with in Afghanistan now, and in the foreseeable future. And Pakistan has combated insurgencies in Balochis
tan before too. It would be a folly to think similar threats won't rear their heads again in the future.

As for the limited budget and not piling on equipment, how does buying three different types of attack helicopters, each in token amounts, line up with that notion? Besides these CAS planes are not a huge strain on the budget in the long term.




@CriticalThought Do you see Pakistan army using unarmed helicopters or heck Mushshaks in any role in a war against India? Every platform has a role to play and yes if we have turboprops that can attack with precision guided weapons, you can be sure they would be used.

1/2. Extremely small and cheap drones are only used for surveillance, have limited range and are endurance, and provide troops with critical SA in their small area of operation.

3. MALE and HALE drones are also very expensive ... and still will not be able to carry 4 LGB and still have the range and flexibility of operations. Can you land those expensive drones in a small FOB or a small landing strip with minimal infrastructure?

Again, every platform has its own utility, and if you guys just don't want to see that in planes like the Tucano or B-250 you are entitled to that. I still have not heard of a single good argument for not having a platform in PA and/or PAF to fill such a role so I think they would be an excellent addition in our order of battle.

CAS using light aircraft is obsolete in S. Asia. Against India and Iran it is obvious. As far as Afghanistan is concerned, you won't be fighting against the Afghan army, you will be fighting the United States. That leaves the border areas, and it is much better to have drones performing surveillance and attack in that rugged terrain 24x7 than light aircraft. As a matter of fact, our soldiers patrolling on foot along the LoC should also be reinforced with drones. The world is moving towards them, notwithstanding the huge success of A-10 against Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Producing cheap drones indigenously with ever enhancing payload, range, and endurance is where money should be spent. Cue Project Azm.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Similar to this is what @Oscar is talking about, when not roasting arse, it can be used for other purposes.

Isn't there a disconnect in your argument here? You state light attack aircraft are cost prohibitive and then go on to propose using a C-235/295 for this role, which we don't have and will be a lot more expensive not just to buy but also operate?



Araz, here is what I don't agree with you ...
A. They have extreme utility in our current threat environment.
B. Goes with A
C. Not sure what you mean by limited prospects? If you are talking about B-250, then fine, lets buy Super Tucanos instead.
D. How is a turboprop manpower intensive again? We seem to be able to operate hundred of 60s era airplanes with turbojets just fine.
E. I would even argue these airplanes are much more safe then any fighter in PAF inventory bar the newer F-16s and JF-17s. And these are equipped with MB ejection seats btw.
F. Then buy one that is already developed and sold to a number of countries. Reason I posted about B-250 is as UAE has been funding its development (potential for partnership) and as there is always politics involved in arms acquisition (maybe quid-pro-quo). But the platform doesn't take away from the functionality here.
G. Again, can just buy ones already operating in this role around the world.
H. Not as costly as Mi-35s (these aircraft costs between $9-13M) and require very little infrastructure for operations.
I. Perhaps, but I have difference in opinion from you here.
J. One squadron at a minimum (since some of you keep bring up costs here). How many Mi-35s did we buy again btw?

 

[GriffinsRule]

Similar to this is what @Oscar is talking about, when not roasting arse, it can be used for other purposes.

We have been operating C-130s and CN-235 for quite some time. How come this conversion hasnt been on the cards given that AC-130s have been flying in some form since the 70s too?

EDIT: I found the answer to my own question ... its because no other AF in the world has been flying one besides the USAF, however many air arms do fly light CAS planes. Maybe there is a reason for that.

 

[Falcon26]

We have been operating C-130s and CN-235 for quite some time. How come this conversion hasnt been on the cards given that AC-130s have been flying in some form since the 70s too?

EDIT: I found the answer to my own question ... its because no other AF in the world has been flying one besides the USAF, however many air arms do fly light CAS planes. Maybe there is a reason for that.

Jordan has converted some CN-235s into gunship role. Other options are also available in the market. Acquisition of this platform will provide Pakistan Army powerful air cover & decimate the enemy and relieve pressure from helicopters.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Jordan has converted some CN-235s into gunship role. Other options are also available in the market. Acquisition of this platform will provide Pakistan Army powerful air cover & decimate the enemy and relieve pressure from helicopters.

Good point. Looks like they had hired an American firm ATK for the conversion of two CN-235 and were happy enough with their performance that they converted an additional two CN-295s to use against ISIS

 

[muhammadali233]

Another potenial contender

 

[-------]

I've read some of the comments on this thread, most of you are reluctant to seeing turbo-prop COIN aircraft. The thing is, UAV are slow reaction observe and hit targets of opportunity. In fight against Terrorism, an F-16 is called to drop bombs. Why use highly expensive machine when you can call a Turbo-Prop aircraft that can do the same duty and drop some heavy ordance! Turkey is developing Hurkus-A,B,C and if coast guard requests such an aircraft a D version.

Turbo-Props are perfect for low-intesity warfare. The Americans are also looking into purchasing Turbo-Prop COIN aircrafts.. So the requirement is there.

Hurkus-A passed all certifications, available to purchase by Civilians

Hurkus-B Basic trainer for military, will enter service this year.

Hurkus-C COIN Aircrat in development, will enter service later this year or early next year

 

[araz]

A-10s and Su-25s have completely different performance levels.

We aren’t talking about different things but you are ignoring the elephant in the room that is PAF’s procurement and operational budget versus all else.
Why do you need an additional platform that offers a lower capability and survivability than anything else the PAF can get and its only duplicating roles already served by other jets?
The only motivation was the insurgency and the need for a lower cost CAS platform to support the troops but since the operations are now shifting from capture, control and hold to search and eliminate within civillian population, there is no room for that role.

Why do you think the Textron Scorpian is still waiting on sales? Some Arab country with bigger pockets may get it but as such our budget and future budgetary and threat perception leave no room for such specific aircraft.

Tussi tay badshah ho je.You took the words out of my mouth. What Allamo Bhopali and I are saying is that the Pak govtt and its forces do not have the luxury and currently the need to choose specific platforms for specific roles.
The notion of developing such a platform in house is therefore debatable if not outrightly ridiculous. If such a need arises then:
A. The UCAVs can do the job
B. We may need to procure the said platform from outside.
Even in case of B we need a platform which does not become a tarmac queen but can be put to other uses as well.
A

 

[GriffinsRule]

So I think basically the PAF's budget is the deciding factor in procuring these. Perhaps PA should then take a few of these in their corps to operate along with their Mushaks and Cobras.

Financial constraints don't take away from the utility of having a CAS oriented turboprop in the fleet. And if you think they would be hanger queens, just goes to show your lack of understanding or imagination

 

[blinder]

Currently, most countries that are looking for a sturdy CAS/COIN aircraft end up buying the EMB-314 Super Tucano. Mostly to replace their A-37, OV-10 and such aircraft.

The Super Tucano was used to great effect in Colombia, it won the contest against US T-6C several times (despite court cases in the USA of the US manufacturer) and is supplied to Afghanistan and Lebanon too (through US-based Sierra Nevada company).

All the other aircraft are merely trainers with bomb racks, not purpose built light attack aircraft. I am afraid that also applies to Hurkus which looks like it is largely based on the KT-1. That Korean trainer was built after having a very very close look at the Pilatus PC-9.

But still, all of these have no armour plating at the cockpit, no search light, no big gun in the wing root, no long loiter time. At this point in time, all those features are only on the Super Tucano. Correct me if I am wrong?

 

[GriffinsRule]

Currently, most countries that are looking for a sturdy CAS/COIN aircraft end up buying the EMB-314 Super Tucano. Mostly to replace their A-37, OV-10 and such aircraft.

The Super Tucano was used to great effect in Colombia, it won the contest against US T-6C several times (despite court cases in the USA of the US manufacturer) and is supplied to Afghanistan and Lebanon too (through US-based Sierra Nevada company).

All the other aircraft are merely trainers with bomb racks, not purpose built light attack aircraft. I am afraid that also applies to Hurkus which looks like it is largely based on the KT-1. That Korean trainer was built after having a very very close look at the Pilatus PC-9.

But still, all of these have no armour plating at the cockpit, no search light, no big gun in the wing root, no long loiter time. At this point in time, all those features are only on the Super Tucano. Correct me if I am wrong?

I believe the Super Tucano also evolved from a trainer, the original Tucano. However it has been the most successful in the CAS/COIN arena. The latest aircraft by the same designer, B-250, is actually not a trainer and has been purposefully built for the mission. I don't know the nuances of the differences between these competing aircraft though. The AT-6 by Beachcraft is based on the PC-9 as well.

 

[TOPGUN]

I agree, as per coin ops I do not think the US will sell us AC-130's gunships ( Spooky ) however, Pakistan can do what Jordan did to its CN-235's even a few will make a hell of a difference.

 

[GriffinsRule]

I agree, as per coin ops I do not think the US will sell us AC-130's gunships ( Spooky ) however, Pakistan can do what Jordan did to its CN-235's even a few will make a hell of a difference.

The Jordanian conversion was also done by an American firm so would have similar constraints as AC-130s