Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions

[Sparten]

Lol PAA is operating WL2s so that theory goes out of the window

And PAA has no such aversion. Lol back at you and your reading comprehension. Its pretty much a PAF thing. (See refusal to induct ANZA ADS, I am sure they had a litiany of excuses).

PAA and PA AD were some of the earliest adopters of UAV concept in Pakistan, and they have alwasy had onnovative ideas, hell suicide drones in a Pakistani context are something SAAD (School of Army Air Defence) came up with when the realise that the traget drones they maufactured from Khi based contractors coudl be used offensivley.

 

[MirageV3ff]

And PAA has no such aversion. Lol back at you and your reading comprehension. Its pretty much a PAF thing. (See refusal to induct ANZA ADS, I am sure they had a litiany of excuses).

PAA and PA AD were some of the earliest adopters of UAV concept in Pakistan, and they have alwasy had onnovative ideas, hell suicide drones in a Pakistani context are something SAAD (School of Army Air Defence) came up with when the realise that the traget drones they maufactured from Khi based contractors coudl be used offensivley.

Wasn't aware of this.
Since we are discussing this, wouldn't it be better for PAA to operate these drones?

 

[Quwa]

A drone made by a contractor whose primary customer is the PA. I think lots of people don't realise the institutional aversion the PAF has to buying kit from PA suppliers. Hence why PAD wenyt for Falco ToT in the late 2000's rather than work with SAUTAMA, ID and others since they thought those were Army contractors
Thank God the PAF already had an ALCM program on, but the Army really wanted them to look into carrying an air launched version of the Babar CM (F16 and JF17 centerline could carry it) which would have provided some very long range strike capability, but no.
They have also show nom interest in making an ALBM from the smaller BM, Abdali would give us something akin to Kinzhal and again the Jeff's and now J10 could carry it, but no thought to it.

I could be wrong here, but Shahpar-series was developed by AWC, which mostly supplies to the PAF (e.g., Taimoor, Ra'ad, AZB, etc). I think the actual 'beefing' here is between NESCOM (which owns AWC) and the PAF's push to support NASTP.

 

[JamD]

A drone made by a contractor whose primary customer is the PA. I think lots of people don't realise the institutional aversion the PAF has to buying kit from PA suppliers. Hence why PAD wenyt for Falco ToT in the late 2000's rather than work with SAUTAMA, ID and others since they thought those were Army contractors
Thank God the PAF already had an ALCM program on, but the Army really wanted them to look into carrying an air launched version of the Babar CM (F16 and JF17 centerline could carry it) which would have provided some very long range strike capability, but no.
They have also show nom interest in making an ALBM from the smaller BM, Abdali would give us something akin to Kinzhal and again the Jeff's and now J10 could carry it, but no thought to it.

I could be wrong here, but Shahpar-series was developed by AWC, which mostly supplies to the PAF (e.g., Taimoor, Ra'ad, AZB, etc). I think the actual 'beefing' here is between NESCOM (which owns AWC) and the PAF's push to support NASTP.

I'm speculating here but PAF used to own AWC, which was taken away and put under NESCOM, and I've long speculated NASTP is an attempt at AWC 2.0. So maybe PAF hates AWC because it is now NESCOM lol.

 

[Quwa]

NESCOM vs NASTP

 

[Jango]

A drone made by a contractor whose primary customer is the PA. I think lots of people don't realise the institutional aversion the PAF has to buying kit from PA suppliers. Hence why PAD wenyt for Falco ToT in the late 2000's rather than work with SAUTAMA, ID and others since they thought those were Army contractors
Thank God the PAF already had an ALCM program on, but the Army really wanted them to look into carrying an air launched version of the Babar CM (F16 and JF17 centerline could carry it) which would have provided some very long range strike capability, but no.
They have also show nom interest in making an ALBM from the smaller BM, Abdali would give us something akin to Kinzhal and again the Jeff's and now J10 could carry it, but no thought to it.

Why the aversion?

 

[Sparten]

I could be wrong here, but Shahpar-series was developed by AWC, which mostly supplies to the PAF (e.g., Taimoor, Ra'ad, AZB, etc). I think the actual 'beefing' here is between NESCOM (which owns AWC) and the PAF's push to support NASTP.

Correct. And it was commissioned by the PAA, after a GSR issued by the Army. PA never has had an issue with going to and repurposing PAF contracts and their kit.

I believe the OG Shahpar was from a proposal given to PAF around the time of Falco but rejected in favour of Falco.

 

[Sparten]

Wasn't aware of this.
Since we are discussing this, wouldn't it be better for PAA to operate these drones?

Frankly in my opinion all system with range beyond 300 or maybe 500 km should be PAF
operated. Long range strategic strikes by definition should be PAF, and PN in support with sea based variant.
ASFC, in the nuclear role should have been part of PAF, and the new rocket force ditto. At least with the former it’s under direct SPD control.

What ya think @Quwa @JamD

I suspect @Panzerkiel will have a different view.

 

[That_Guy]

The logic behind uav usage isnt airframe loss, its to prevent crew loss.

That's kinda my point, but cost/benefit is also a big factor.

5m/aircraft is also what BD paid for its F-7's. Does this mean you can throw these at whatever then?

Not the point I was making.

On the flip side, if those tens of millions of dollar aircraft are more survivable, the value proposition changes- why spend 5m on a 'disposable' aircraft when for double, or triple i can send in something that will for sure make it out

Pilot loss is far more devastating than system loss.

You're kinda proving my point here.

 

[That_Guy]

How can you assert that its more sophisticated though?

PAF Akinci's are equipped with EO/IR systems, no radars etc, same situation with PAF's WL2's.

Both use turbines (id probably even argue that the WL-2s CPFH may even be more depending on the kinda turbine used!), the only reason the akinci is able to outperform them is because it has a second engine. This doesnt mean the WL2s are not sophisticated, expensive or would sting to lose.

Publicly available information suggests that the Akinci has a far wider range of sensors and packages than the export WL-2 that Pakistan has. And correct me if I'm wrong, but Akinci is a HALE, and WL-2 is A MALE drone, which does suggest a better survivability and sensor packages.

 

[That_Guy]

the reason why the TB2 has a 'low' price tag is because its about as barebones and fundamental as a drone gets. It carries nothing special, its a very barebones kinda drone, equivalent to strapping a tdl and a couple of missiles to SMK, it forms effectively the lowes tier of ops, which is why u only see it used against insurgents. Its probably also the cheapest to operate of any drone thanks to its simplicity- however, if it was due to be attritable, the Ukrainians would have carried on using them, not stopping the use once they started to get lost.

The Ukrainians are still using them. They literally just used tb2s to destroy Russian fast attack crafts recently, as well as targets in Kherson and Crimea.

Also, your comment proves that it is very attritable.

 

[That_Guy]

Actually, TB2 is a pretty overpriced drone. It is WORTH maybe half a million. However, procurement price is not what we are discussing are we? So let's not distract ourselves.


Ok fair. But you're not really saying anything specific, just sweeping generalized statements. Here are specifics
Akinci: Two turboprops, tonnes of computers and spares, imported from Turkey
WL2: One turboprop, tonnes of computers and spares, imported from China
CH4: One aviation grade piston engine, tonnes of computers and spares, imported from China
TB2: One aviation grade piston engine, tonnes of computers and spares, imported from Turkey

Let's not dilly dally, I was commenting on your statement that drones are cheaper to maintain than fighters. I said it was unfair to compare them to fighters. And most of the MALE drones in Pakistan's service aren't cheaper to maintain than small to medium sized-aircraft anyway due to them being:
a. serious aircraft with all of the parts of a traditional aircraft, like engines, maybe hydrualics, oil systems, landing gears
b. special equipment like turrets, computers, and datalink systems not need for manned systems, which add maintenance cost and complexity, especially since they rely entirely on imported parts.


What? I'm sorry but at this point you're just doing whataboutism that isn't even correct. Please read above what I wrote above when I meant serious aircraft. Please don't insult my and the reader's intelligence.




This is all scary accurate.

Basically whenever NESCOM sees a private company making something nice, they come in and say "now we will make it inefficiently", then shut that company's business down. SATUMA is a perfect example of this. They used to sell so many systems to the Army. Now they have no customer because the PA would rather buy from China, Turkey, and sometimes NESCOM. In a way it is kind of sad, had NESCOM let SATUMA work PA would've had a nicer local option. But like you said, NESCOM went nope, now I do it poorly with more kickbacks for everyone lol.

Okay, I give up. Chrome has crash 3 times, and I've lost my comment all three times.

 

[Fatman17]

 

[RajaBaja]

View attachment 141820

2010s era specs, still not in mass production in 2025, yet a "game changer"?

That's precisely why I am saying for a while now, that getting 10 UCAV's from Turkey, 48 Wingloongs from China, building Shahpar 2 and 3 is creating a mixture we don't need.

We should innovate internally, that's absolutely needed. So Shahpar and other drones that are local, must produce newer models, tech, etc. We should for now, put them into tier II.

However for our tier I and combat needs, work with the Chinese. Acquire one of the 5th gen stealth UCAV model recently showed (or a customized one for Pakistan), and buy initially to fill the numbers, while reconfigure JF-17 manufacturing line, get our people trained and build manned and unmanned versions of the same UCAV locally.

Since the Chinese industry is now moving to the 5th gen platforms also, we can easily get numbers when required as our own assembly line with not go beyond 26-40 units per year. This one solution can help us with our UCAV needs as well as a manned 5th gen stealth single engine platform to compliment the few J-35 we will get. This setup will easily move to 6th gen when time comes, and our industry base will be established at 5th gen level. China will not support the JF-17 and J-10C after 2028. This strategy can make us go independent as well as stay connected with the Chinese for newer weapons integration.

 

[Asfandyar Bhittani]

48 Wingloongs from China,

I agree with your broader point but I doubt we have anything close to this many WL2s. I posted this earlier but nobody answered, so I will ask again, what is the highest serial number WL2 photographed in Pakistan?

I fear we do NOT have any drone that we can call the backbone of our fleet

However for our tier I and combat needs, work with the Chinese. Acquire one of the 5th gen stealth UCAV model recently showed (or a customized one for Pakistan), and buy initially to fill the numbers, while reconfigure JF-17 manufacturing line, get our people trained and build manned and unmanned versions of the same UCAV locally.

Now as for CCA (Collaborative Combat aircraft) drones are concerned, the road block here will be Pakistan's own doctrine and not just switching productions from Jeff to one of CCA.

The lack lf mass production and adoption of UCAVs against militants and their networks in Afghanistan was mainly the lack of doctrinal change. Pakistan still prefers sending poorly trained and armed paramilitary to clear a mountain cave then sending an Akinci or TB2.

So the question is, is PAF willing to tinker with their doctrine by adopting the CCA? It not, how is the production line going to kick off if the main customer isn't interested?

There are LOT of unknowns.