36 replies to this topic

[Saqr]

The P-3 Orion aircraft are vital assets for the Pakistan Navy's Aviation corps, but they're ageing and will eventually need to be replaced.

 

Given Pakistan's financial troubles, what are the Navy's options?

 

The PN did buy 2 ATR-72 MPs and it's likely we'll see additional units based on this platform, possibly Saab-2000 as well.

 

On the other hand Boeing is beginning to actively market its Bombardier 605-based Maritime Surveillance Aircraft (MSA) to 20-30 countries, among them, current P-3 operators. The Boeing MSA is being marketed as an affordable alternative to the P-8 Poseidon, and while it is not armed, Boeing did confirm that it'll develop an armed variant should the customer ask for it. In other words, the Boeing MSA could be a 'P-8 Lite' for countries unable to afford the P-8.

 

With the Boeing MSA's expected unit price to sit at $55-60mn, it's possible that it'll find its way onto PN's consideration list. I'd be interested into seeing whether the PN would simply acquire a relatively large number of such aircraft (e.g. 12-15) in order to replace the P-3s.

 

Outside the realm of existing options, I'd recommend Pakistan building ties with Brazil and linking up with Embraer to develop a fully capable maritime patrol and combat aircraft based on the Embraer E2. In my opinion, E2 based MPA/MSA could be a solid competitor against the P-8. 

Edited by Saqr, 11 April 2014 - 02:21 AM.

[cheif No 1]

What does Chinese make and use for their Maritime Security & surveillance?? 

[Saqr]

Y-8 Maritime Patrol.

Edited by Saqr, 11 April 2014 - 01:51 PM.

[shabi1]

No need to replace the Orion's yet. Might be an old platform but they're heavily upgraded for additional airframe life.

 

Future options could be the new Orion inspired Y-8 version or ATR-72 MP but its not a big priority. PN should concentrate on other assets right now. 

[Metanoia]

Our P-3's are due to go through further upgrades. 

[Felicius]

China had provided equipment which we installed on the old PIA Fokkers. Platforms can be any. It's the weapons deployment feature on that platform that we need plus the equipment inside. We have sufficient surveillance aircraft, the need is the complete package similar to the US Navy's B-737 P-8A.

We do not want any surveillance platform, we need one that can also deploy weapons.

 

 

Our P-3's are due to go through further upgrades. 

 

 

 

They are like the Mirages for us, we don't have a replacement.

Edited by Felicius, 12 April 2014 - 11:17 AM.

[Felicius]

Atlantique: http://www.aviation-...ATLANTIQUE2.htm

 

 

P-3 Orion:

 

 

P-8 Poseidon:

[Felicius]

[Felicius]

Kawasaki P-1 / XP-1

 

General characteristics

• Crew: Flight: 2 Mission: 11
• Length: 38.0 m (124 ft 8 in)
• Wingspan: 35.4 m (114 ft 8 in)
• Height: 12.1 m (39 ft 4 in)
• Max. takeoff weight: 79,700 kg (176,000 lb)
• Powerplant: 4 × IHI Corporation XF7-10 turbofan, 13,500 lbs (60 kN) each

Performance

• Maximum speed: 996 km/h (538 knots, 619 mph)
• Cruise speed: 833 km/h (450 knots, 516 mph)
• Range: 8,000 km (4,320 nm, 4,970 mi)
• Service ceiling: 44,200 ft (13,520 m)

Armament

• Bombs: 20,000+ lb (9,000+ kg)
• Missiles: AGM-84 Harpoon, ASM-1C, AGM-65 Maverick
• Sonobuoys: 30+ Pre-loaded, 70+ Deployable from inside
• Other: MK-46 and Type 97 and new(G-RX5) torpedoes, mines, depth charges

Avionics

• Radar: Toshiba, Active Electronically Scanned Array radar system
• Sonar: NEC, multi-static sound navigation system sound
• Anti-submarine systems:SHINKO ELECTRIC CO.LTD., Advanced combat direction system
• Other: Mitsubishi, Electronic countermeasures (CMD, RWR, MWS, ESM)

[Saqr]

It'd be interesting to see if we could strengthen our ties with Brazil and work with Embraer on an armed MPA solution using one of their E-class civilian airliners.

[Felicius]

If we can improvise/add hardpoints on JF-17 to accommodate the Exocets, then why can't we add hardpoints on to our Saab and Chinese surveillance aircraft?

[Saqr]

Our ATR-72 MPAs should also be capable of using AShM, they're capable of using 4 hardpoints. I'm guessing the future of PN's MPA requirements will be met by ATR-72s.

[Felicius]

Regular used ATR-72-500s or MPs? I don't see any hardpoints on them.

 

[Felicius]

Turkish ATR-72 ASW

[Felicius]

[Felicius]

P-8 hardpoints

 

[Felicius]

Saqr, for hard points we need the ATR-72-600 series, we have the 500s. No hard points, just patrolling and surveillance. Turkey had to do their own improvisation on the 600s. It'll be viable for us to do the same on our Saab 2000s. The ones with hardpoints are P-3, P-8, CN-235, and EMB-145.

 

https://www.thalesgr...et-turkish-navy

 

http://www.naval-tec...atrol-aircraft/

[Saqr]

Sure but I'm assuming the necessary infrastructure and logistics between the 500 and 600 are close, so the ATR-72-600 will likely be the next standard MPA for PN. That said, a mix of ATR-72-600 and CN-235 is another option.

[Felicius]

We have been using our P-3 Orion's on TTP for precision bombing, plus the cameras on them are amazing. We do not have better ASW than them at the moment. US has provided 2 more for the ones we lost at PNS Mehran. We have 5 Saab's and should do the experiments on them, stay with that platform for both PN and PAF; unless we are planning to add more ATRs, as PIA won't have issues procuring parts for their ATRs.

[Felicius]

Now I feel cheated - http://www.ainonline...line-dubai-2011

 

Saab 2000AEW&C

 

Although outwardly it looks the same, the Erieye mission system of the Saab 2000 being proposed to the UAE AFAD is much more capable than that installed in the current 340AEWs. Through development for customers such as the Pakistan air force, which is exhibiting a Saab 2000 at the show, the Erieye radar has been improved significantly. Among the key features of the latest radar is an impressive maritime capability, which allows surface targets as small as jet-skis to be detected.

 

[Saqr]

What's the update on the PAF's damaged/destroyed Erieye AEW&C? PAF reportedly sent in a repair order to Saab for $170mn... I hope we can restore the Erieye fleet to its original 4, perhaps add another 2-4 down the line after a decade or something.

Edited by Saqr, 23 April 2014 - 08:58 PM.

[Dizasta]

Surely if the newer version is much more capable, then existing customers ought to be offered the upgrade?

[Felicius]

We had 5 Saabs, one for training. 3 Erieye planes were on the ground, 1 was destroyed and 2 others were very badly damaged. The equipment from the damaged ones was moved to the training one, and we were going for a replacement for 1. I don't know if we received it yet. I may be mixing the numbers up with the P-3's, but I do know we lost a C-130 as well which was not reported.

 

The new Erieys may not be the Saab 2000, but 340 (or 2000). $170 Mil means 1 plane and 1 equipment, I doubt we could afford 2 more.

 

Currently we have 5 AWACS altogether, counting the ones from China and Saabs.

 

What we need is platforms that can deploy weapons like the P-3, or minimum ASW. We have many Patrolling aircrafts already; F-27 and B-707s included.

Edited by Felicius, 24 April 2014 - 10:25 AM.

[Saqr]

There aren't a lot of details, but it's possible that the $170mn bill could be for repairing the very badly damaged Erieye systems. I am hoping that this is the case, it would suck (incredibly) if the PAF was permanently reduced to just one Erieye system.

[Felicius]

Back in the days, we got a really great deal on the Saab 2000s; they alone cost us about $28 Mils each. Hence, we took them for the full package deal, otherwise we were going for the Erieye on the Embraers or the ATRs, both costing us in the range of $90 mils (only the aircraft). I doubt Saab will give us that introductory price again. $170 mils today means 1 aircraft and 1 Erieye.

[Saqr]

I don't know, it could be the repair bill for the damaged units. Saab didn't mention any specific number of aircraft, just a servicing and maintenance package for an existing client.

[shabi1]

Since Pakistan has better options for Chinese anti ship missiles I would favor the new Y-8FQ (Y-9 standard), seems heavily inspired by the Orion, even has an internal weapons bay. Commonality with the Karakorum AWACs would result in easier maintenance.

 

At the moment PNs priority should be induction of more submarines and replace the Type-21 Frigates. The P-3 Orions are still pretty good and with upgrades can last us for a while now.

 

[Felicius]

The American equipment is far far superior. Although Erieye may be boasting now 'surface targets as small as jet-skis to be detected' - it was just for that reason we have been using our P-3s against the TTP; they are great for ground and border patrol as well, not just marine security.

 

The Y-8 works for China as their danger lies in the sea and air, whereas we have to be vigilant on our borders more than anything, hence, our decision to go with Erieye.

[Dizasta]

I concur, the Y-9 ASW/ASuW aircraft is the best replacement for Pakistan Navy's P-3 Orions. 

[Felicius]

Our needs were different, we needed an early warning platform that would warn us of Taliban and Indian ground movements; hence, the Erieye.

[shabi1]

The discussion is for an MPA with anti ship capability. Y-8 FQ is the best option. Although exact specs are not revealed it has been rumored to have FLIR, ELINT and side mounted SAR options. It would be able to perform well against conventional sea and Taliban intelligence gathering roles.

 

For surveillance/ warfare against Taliban UAVs or SAR equipped patrol aircraft are best suited. But if Pakistan really wants to have a long term anti Taliban capability it needs to consider having 2-3 Y-8 Gunship variants like the C-130 Spectre or a larger fleet of modern Gunship helicopters with surveillance capability. A Y-8 Gunship will have a larger loiter time, cheaper to fly and engaging Taliban with guns would be cheaper than engaging with missiles and rockets via Gunship helicopters.

 

We need to have a separate topic for Y-8 Gunships. The variant exists but information on it is really hard to find. They are useless against India but very effective for our militant problem which is more important + plus they will free up the gunship helicopters and artillery assets for deployment on eastern front.

[Felicius]

The discussion is for an MPA with anti ship capability.

 

They are useless against India 

 

 

 

The discussion is replacement of P-3 Orions.

Replacement should be aligned to our future needs, not buy for the sake of buying, like we do at a dollar store. We have a dozen MPA's already in the shape of F-27, ATR, and B-707s. We fly 2-3 at a time, even if we had other platforms there wouldn't be more than 3 up in the sky at any given time, whether we had 5 or 50 of those.

 

Taliban is short-term, our procurement needs were focused more towards Indian ground movements, that is why we preferred the Erieye to begin with. 

 

I wouldn't say that the Y-8 are useless, they could certainly catch large scale build-up. Perhaps in the future the Chinese could improvise the Y-8 for our requirements, it's all in the equipment.

[shabi1]

The P-3 Orion is a MPA/ASW aircraft operated by the Navy, Erieye is an AWACs it can't attack ships or submarines, both are totally different type of aircrafts. You can't replace the P-3 Orion with Erieye because both dont do the same thing. Pakistan has the Karakorum and Erieye AWACs to track Indian movements. For ELINT (electronic intelligence gathering) besides P-3 Pakistan has AWACs, Hawker Beechcraft King Air 350 (Recon patrol with SAR radar), Falcon-20s (Electronic warfare recently upgraded from France) and the recently acquired Hawker 850XPs (ELINT version).

 

In terms of weapons capable MPA/ASW PN there are only 4 alternatives.

 

ATR MPA (will be relient on US tech Harpoons etc)

Y-8 FQ

P-8 Poseiden (US wont sell it because of India plus its overkill for our needs)

Saab 2000 MPA (production line is closed)

 

 

As for Taliban, whether we like it or not its a long term problem. Will take at least a decade or more. The bitter pill is complexity of the talks prove its not going to be solved without flexing some military muscle for the savages to back down.

[Felicius]

We are not looking for a squadron or 50 jets, we are looking to replace 2-3 P-3s; hence we should go for the best out there, that is available to us. If we can procure the P-8 then great, if not then we should go for EMB or the ATRs.

[Krad]

P-8 is out of the question. I can guarantee you that.

 

EMB and ATR are good options.

[Saqr]

I think we will end up with ATR-72s. Granted the ones we have now lack the capacity to take on hardpoints, but the core infrastructure between the -500s and -600s is probably the same in a lot of areas. As for arming them with AShM, who said that Harpoons are the only option? At some point we will need to assume some ownership and figure out how to get C-802s onto them.

[Felicius]

We improvised toss bombing nukes on our F-16s, we improvised the Exocets on our JF-17s. We have even improvised the Harpoon itself http://www.nytimes.c...ssile.html?_r=0