Z-10 ME/P deliveries Updates

[Quwa]

IMO...mirroring the USMC's approach with the AH-1Z and UH-1Y (with 85%+ parts commonality) would likely suit the PAA the most. Having attack and utility/transport platforms with the same engines, transmission, rotors, and other dynamic parts would enable it to field a large number of helicopters as it'll benefit from a single logistics/maintenance overhead.

Granted, the PA has been putting money towards armor and artillery, so it may have had to steer resources away from aviation. However, it's still odd that there has been absolutely no net-new aviation procurement for nearly a decade (aside from the dropped AH-1Z and T129 orders). It makes me wonder if the PA is genuinely rethinking how it approaches aviation.

It's possible that the PAA could be looking at the common platform approach, especially as more options of that nature emerge, e.g., Z-20/Z-21, T925/T929, or AW249/AH249.

 

[AJKashmir1]

@Quwa How do we fund all of this stuff? Like PAF modernisation etc? Aren't we close to bankruptcy?

 

[arslank01]

@Quwa How do we fund all of this stuff? Like PAF modernisation etc? Aren't we close to bankruptcy?

loansssssssssssss

 

[AJKashmir1]

loansssssssssssss

And how do we plan to pay them back?

 

[Quwa]

@Quwa How do we fund all of this stuff? Like PAF modernisation etc? Aren't we close to bankruptcy?

Part of me hopes that the military leadership perceives foreign powers as a threat to its interests (of ruling Pakistan). Hence, they're using some of their shady revenue sources to foot the bill for these arms. I'm not saying this is happening, but given the state of Pakistan's wider economy, I really can't see any other way.

 

[AJKashmir1]

Part of me hopes that the military leadership perceives foreign powers as a threat to its interests (of ruling Pakistan). Hence, they're using some of their shady revenue sources to foot the bill for these arms. I'm not saying this is happening, but given the state of Pakistan's wider economy, I really can't see any other way.

That is also what I had in mind

 

[Harbyharb]

One of the aspects of the previous Singapore showcase that is rarely touched on is that the premier guided weapon has changed from AKD-9/10 which was usually the case in previous showcases to CM-502KG, different from other Hellfire-esque semi-active radio command+infrared ATGMs in its more versatile guidance modes and emphasis on NLOS capability.

This means, that not only does the Z-10ME have outstanding traditional sensors for its awareness such as FLIR and millimeter wave radar, but it also sports advanced datalink and networking capabilities to cooperate with other air and ground systems. This, as well as other improvements in "soft power", is what makes the Z-10ME, in my opinion, the superior option compared to its previous competitors after years of iterative improvements.

 

[Sparten]

@Quwa How do we fund all of this stuff? Like PAF modernisation etc? Aren't we close to bankruptcy?

Part of me hopes that the military leadership perceives foreign powers as a threat to its interests (of ruling Pakistan). Hence, they're using some of their shady revenue sources to foot the bill for these arms. I'm not saying this is happening, but given the state of Pakistan's wider economy, I really can't see any other way.

A significant amount of PAF modernisation and other purchases, are either domestically sourced or in non USD payments. Since, to be clear we aren't bankrupt or near bankrupy, our problem is that we have a US dollar reserve issue, which is a bad thing since thats the worlds reserve currency and that reduces our ability to buy stuff *generally*, military purchases are, for the reasons stated above to an extent inured from the present crises.
The Chinese have an interest in supporting us, so the financing is likely to be as generous as they can make it and there is almost certainly significant offset with the Turks, as in ToT of **our** high end technologies, in the guided missile sphere and possibly in then newer composite armour.

 

[Lion]

Part of me hopes that the military leadership perceives foreign powers as a threat to its interests (of ruling Pakistan). Hence, they're using some of their shady revenue sources to foot the bill for these arms. I'm not saying this is happening, but given the state of Pakistan's wider economy, I really can't see any other way.

let’s put it this way, the military doesn’t need to be using the funds it gains from its corporate and economic activities to buy weapons directly, for those funds to be helping in the purchases of these weapons. If those funds pay for some other thing the military needs money for, whether it’s related to actual defense activities or not, it frees up money the military might have used from its actually assigned budget.

Secondly, having all this advanced weaponry, other than being for the obvious reason of “foreign powers being a threat”, is itself often an economic activity that benefits the military or the people responsible for acquisitions in other ways. Think of the amount of jobs and vendors and production lines the military generates for itself every time it’s able to locally produce a major defense purchase under ToT, or whenever it’s able to add to the capabilities of the PAC to maintain an aircraft locally, because 90% of Pakistans locally made/maintained weaponry is from an organization that’s federal government or military owned. The funny thing is, even if all of this stuff came from the private sector, they’d just start paying the military to keep doing the same, America comes to mind.
And that’s apart from the kickbacks and bonuses and quite frankly the corruption that’s often involved in the purchase of weaponry.

The bottom line is, there’s definitely more sources of money involved, but one should keep in mind that major military acquisitions happen over a span over several years, and the budget for the military is allotted every single year, so the disparity between the weapon purchases and the cost isn’t as major as it might seem at first glance.

 

[ziaulislam]

Since the thread is delivery updates, how many have been delivered

 

[Oscar]

Since the thread is delivery updates, how many have been delivered

Aboth 15+25 more - Sheikh Chilli-ly speaking

 

[Quwa]

Aboth 15+25 more - Sheikh Chilli-ly speaking

Worth remembering that the Turks offered the T129 with a credit line. Shelving the T129 meant that the credit line went untapped. It could be that the PAA is waiting for an opportunity to access that resource again (e.g., via an ITAR-free T129).

 

[Oscar]

Worth remembering that the Turks offered the T129 with a credit line. Shelving the T129 meant that the credit line went untapped. It could be that the PAA is waiting for an opportunity to access that resource again (e.g., via an ITAR-free T129).

Or the bigger helo?
I feel like both due to funds, some dithering or rather changing priorities for leadership along with changing dynamics the PA is in a wait and watch situation.

The massacres of choppers in Ukraine and the otherwise cost effective nature of UCAVs and FPVs may have them rethinking the investment.

 

[Quwa]

Or the bigger helo?
I feel like both due to funds, some dithering or rather changing priorities for leadership along with changing dynamics the PA is in a wait and watch situation.

The massacres of choppers in Ukraine and the otherwise cost effective nature of UCAVs and FPVs may have them rethinking the investment.

Yes, I think the PAA may prefer a larger design, not just in response to Ukraine, but that the standard was the AH-1Z.

I know an engineer at Bell, and he was saying that the PAA gave top marks to the Viper's performance in hot temperatures, deserts, and high altitudes. Moreover, Bell was also confident of a cross-sell opportunity in the UH-1Y (85% commonality with the AH-1Z) and Bell-412M (building on the Bell-412EP).

IMO, something like the Z-21, T929, or AH249 would not only provide the extra armor protection and payload, but some additional versatility. You can carry more EW/ECM equipment, possibly small cruise missiles, a greater sensor load (mmW), etc.

For anything smaller (5-7-ton-range), one's likely better off investing in a rotary UCAV that can be cheaper to build and easier to replace at scale.

 

[Bilal]

Or the bigger helo?
I feel like both due to funds, some dithering or rather changing priorities for leadership along with changing dynamics the PA is in a wait and watch situation.

The massacres of choppers in Ukraine and the otherwise cost effective nature of UCAVs and FPVs may have them rethinking the investment.

Those are offensive ops though. For defensive operations it may work very well. Specially, with NLOS missiles.