28 replies to this topic

[Magnus]

https://twitter.com/warnesyworld

[blueazure]

what happened to the TIGER evaluation ?

[shabi1]

The T129 has been in evaluation by Pakistan for quit some time now, but it was a hot topic before the revelation of the WZ-10 & WZ-19

[Dizasta]

T-129 Magusta is an over-priced helicopter gunship, typical of European craftsmanship. I would rather that Pakistan goes for the Chinese WZ-10 Helicopter Gunships and perhaps replace the AH-1W Cobras, with a cheaper Western (Non-American) option like the South African Rooivalk.

[SUPARCO]

Salaam,

Pakistan should in my weak opinion only stick to Chinese hardware.  Transfer of Technology and local production are always the two biggest bonuses for purchase of heavy military hardware from China.

If Chinese-manufactured military hardware is good enough for China, then it's definitely good enough for Pakistan.

Pakistan has shaken off the secondhand/new, cheap/expensive tank acquisition from abroad with local Al-Khalid production, secondhand/new, cheap/expensive combat aircraft acquisitions with the local JF-17 Thunder production and sanction-prone Ballistic Missile acquisitions with the local production of Hatf series of Ballistic Missiles.

Today, Pakistani Armed Forces don't have these 3 headaches anymore.

The same should happen with helicopters and missile boats in my opinion.  This can only happen if people are determined and committed enough in Pakistan for it to happen Insha'Allah.

Salaam

[kooldawghd2]

I think that this is a good thing for Pakistan. Not only will the Turks also be willing to transfer technology, at the same time we will be getting access to NATO level tech. The Chinese option can also be considered mainly for financial reasons as I feel that the Chinese will be more willing to subsidize the sale of the helo to us.

[GreenBeret]

blueazure, on 28 June 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

what happened to the TIGER evaluation ?

too costly

[adil]

Most likely PAA will follow the same Hi-Low mix strategy that the PAF used (F-16/FC-20 and JF17) and that PA used (T-80UD and Al-Khalid/Al-Zarrar), which is to buy a few relatively expensive, but advanced platforms that will be complimented by a capable but relatively cheaper platform to make up for numbers.
I think I would be reasonable in proposing, that PAA could acquire a few T-129s that can be complimented by a larger number of WZ-19.  I don't think PAA will buy the WZ-10 since that will be more expensive.
In addition, given that Pakistan has always enjoyed a good relationship with both Italy and Turkey, the T129 would be a logical choice for an advanced NATO standard attack helicopter.
I dont see Pakistan sticking with Chinese only that would be very unwise.  The days of purchasing equipment from the West is not over, nor should be.

[platinum786]

Frankly i think this kind of thing we should be developing ourselves. The Iranians are copying old Cobra's it might not be much but they must have learnt from the process. Even Poland has it's own helicopter.http://en.wikipedia....PZL_W-3_Sokół

work began on this process producing soviet helicopters in 1951. http://en.wikipedia....ki/PZL-Świdnik  60 years on look where they are, they are exporting their product around the world.

Brazil has its own CAS aircraft (amongst others). http://en.wikipedia...._EMB_312_Tucano It was produced by a Brazillian company setup in the 40's. Today they are the worlds 3rd largest aircraft manufacturer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer

We have to start at some point to fufill our own needs. I proposed this on PDF in 2003. http://forum.pakista...=1

if we started work then, today we might have had our own version of an A-10 to be used against TTP etc.

[Dizasta]

In terms of which gunship Pakistan Army chooses, I think it should be WZ-10s. But the choice would become irrelevant, if the helicopter gunships aren't procured in sufficient numbers.

[GreenBeret]

adil, on 07 July 2012 - 03:34 PM, said:

Most likely PAA will follow the same Hi-Low mix strategy that the PAF used (F-16/FC-20 and JF17) and that PA used (T-80UD and Al-Khalid/Al-Zarrar), which is to buy a few relatively expensive, but advanced platforms that will be complimented by a capable but relatively cheaper platform to make up for numbers.
I think I would be reasonable in proposing, that PAA could acquire a few T-129s that can be complimented by a larger number of WZ-19.  I don't think PAA will buy the WZ-10 since that will be more expensive.
In addition, given that Pakistan has always enjoyed a good relationship with both Italy and Turkey, the T129 would be a logical choice for an advanced NATO standard attack helicopter.
I dont see Pakistan sticking with Chinese only that would be very unwise.  The days of purchasing equipment from the West is not over, nor should be.

WZ-10, Rooivalk and T-129 all carry better weapons , avionics, counter measures than the AH-1F in PA use.

in case of tiger also, cost was the major factor, so it wasnt selected after trials. and in case of T-129, it may be the same nemesis.

anyways, having 2-3 squadrons of WZ-10 is always better than having 1 western attack chopper squadron be it T-129 or Tiger

[sobank]

frankly, gunships are luxury weapons. We cannt afford to have them. And if we can afford them, we cannt use them. Lets grow some brain cells here, shell we?

- First identify your enemy capability
- secondly, identify your capability

Do the two of above things and you will get the reality. Pak V India is no US vs iraq or US vs vietnam. if the full war breaks, these choppers will fall from sky like flies. Have you guys not learn anything from afghanistan. Topping that, we have no air superiority to begin with.

But if we do stick with expensive toys like these, congratulation - you guys just provided enemy sam some good target practicing.

So what should we do...........simple.............have no choppers but if you really need them, have cheaper choppers.

[Caesar]

So why can't UAV not be used in large numbers? They are cheaper alternative and much more effective against terrorists.

[platinum786]

sobank, on 08 July 2012 - 12:06 AM, said:

frankly, gunships are luxury weapons. We cannt afford to have them. And if we can afford them, we cannt use them. Lets grow some brain cells here, shell we?

- First identify your enemy capability
- secondly, identify your capability

Do the two of above things and you will get the reality. Pak V India is no US vs iraq or US vs vietnam. if the full war breaks, these choppers will fall from sky like flies. Have you guys not learn anything from afghanistan. Topping that, we have no air superiority to begin with.

But if we do stick with expensive toys like these, congratulation - you guys just provided enemy sam some good target practicing.

So what should we do...........simple.............have no choppers but if you really need them, have cheaper choppers.

I disagree. Pak-Bhangee conflict is not the only one we will have to fight, this TTP sh1t will run on for years. Also even within the context of a Pakistan-India conflict, attack helicopters have a role to play. A part of the cold start doctrine is to march in and take swathes of Pakistani territory. Assuming it was successful, they won't have air cover over all of that, all of the time. They especially won't have low level radar coverage in our territory. Heck weeks into a war there will be parts of their territory we may be in and may have knocked out radar or low level radar.

That is not to say that they wont be vulnerable to SAM's but they can still provide an integrated role within specific battlefield scenarios.

I have to agree with ceasar also, armed drones could also provide similar capability, but the thing with drones is, you can't get 2-4 hellfire missiles on a drone, or a rocket pod or machine guns for anti personnel use. Actually you could, but we haven't developed them yet.

[GreenBeret]

sobank, on 08 July 2012 - 12:06 AM, said:

frankly, gunships are luxury weapons. We cannt afford to have them. And if we can afford them, we cannt use them. Lets grow some brain cells here, shell we?

- First identify your enemy capability
- secondly, identify your capability

Do the two of above things and you will get the reality. Pak V India is no US vs iraq or US vs vietnam. if the full war breaks, these choppers will fall from sky like flies. Have you guys not learn anything from afghanistan. Topping that, we have no air superiority to begin with.

But if we do stick with expensive toys like these, congratulation - you guys just provided enemy sam some good target practicing.

So what should we do...........simple.............have no choppers but if you really need them, have cheaper choppers.

they can be switched from one sector to another sector easily in case of multiple armor thrusts over a long range of 100's of kms.

cheaper ones will fall cheaply to mobile sam's also accompanied by enemy armor considering cheaper ones lack a missile of hellfire category and none or obsolete counter measures

[waz]

Gunships are essential for us, especially since we are in the midst of fighting an insurgency that has been going on for the best part of a decade. The current fleet of Cobras is under massive strain.

[sobank]

Lots of support for gunship and yet none of you can provide a single example where they were used effectively used against capable army.

I give you one example though............... stinger and russia.
And that was 30 years ago. You think sams are gone stupid over 25 years?

Now lets talk realistic here and not some video game or book war things...........
1st reality, not every weapon is basic requirement of war when you cant field even a good gun for your soldiers.

Lets see what are we dealing with here.
1- infantry that has shoulder mounted sams.
2- Almost all of indian mbt has sam capability
3- Assuming the full cold attack will not be accompanied (correct that  led by) air force is childish. (hell i think the whole idea of cold attack is childish how the hell they are planning ot mobilize the whole army without Pakistan noticing).
4- how you are planning to use them?
- on low altitude, you will be facing tanks and shoulder mounted sams cause you gonna have to go close.
- on high altitude, you will be facing tanks and shoulder mounted and enemy airforce.

you dont bring weapon that you think can kick enemy a$$. you bring the weapon that you can use to kick the enemy a$$ safely. I can guarantee you that you mount the software and anti tank missiles from AK tank on any stupid chopper and it will do the job of cobra. And again, if you think differently, provide me example.

Here is my solution over trainer jets, load them with anti tank missiles and send them to the fight. they will do the job much more accurately, safely, and faster.

P.S. chopper didnt work against terrorist. drones did. Cause they were so high that terrorist couldnt "see" them in time. but remember, you are not going against terrorists. you are going against well trained and equiped army.

Also by some miracle if indians get into the border without us knowing, your best bet against tanks are shoulder mounted anti tank, and rpgs to stop them and not choppers.

[blueazure]

agreed, against a proper, well trained and equipped military, the gunship freedom of action is much reduced ( serbia for eg in 99 had such well trained air defence crews that US dared not move in AH 64s _)

but, as GB said, gunships do offer flexibilty of movement keeping up with enemy  armor pincers

__________________________

Green

PA's fixed defences are enough to halt any armor pincers by india ,  there are literally hundreds of ATGM posts / pillboxes saturated with Baktar shikans to blunt any indian incursions ,  this is minus the 2200 + armored force ( T 80s , AKs , even T 59s have the L 56 105mm gun that is pretty potent against bulk indian T 72s )  . isnt it so ?

[Panzer-kiel]

blueazure, on 12 July 2012 - 02:30 AM, said:

Green

PA's fixed defences are enough to halt any armor pincers by india ,  there are literally hundreds of ATGM posts / pillboxes saturated with Baktar shikans to blunt any indian incursions ,  this is minus the 2200 + armored force ( T 80s , AKs , even T 59s have the L 56 105mm gun that is pretty potent against bulk indian T 72s )  . isnt it so ?

u may like to add miles and miles of anti-tank ditches to these items, they are also well placed....like this one, bunkers every 100 m........... 29° 6'12.61"N  72° 5'22.54"E

[blueazure]

Panzer-kiel, on 13 July 2012 - 05:28 AM, said:

u may like to add miles and miles of anti-tank ditches to these items, they are also well placed....like this one, bunkers every 100 m........... 29° 6'12.61"N  72° 5'22.54"E

panzer, if im not mistaken, both india and Pakistan have HEAVILY mined and have almost THREE layers of defensive lines in the most critical areas .of their borders , this is not counting arty and rear units ( with armor ) that will smash any incursion

after DMZ ( N/S korea ) , the pak - india border mush be the most heavily manned

[Panzer-kiel]

blueazure, on 13 July 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

panzer, if im not mistaken, both india and Pakistan have HEAVILY mined and have almost THREE layers of defensive lines in the most critical areas .of their borders , this is not counting arty and rear units ( with armor ) that will smash any incursion

after DMZ ( N/S korea ) , the pak - india border mush be the most heavily manned

yeah, generally it is like that, no doubt, layers of minefields and multiple DCBs (Ditch cum Bunds) pose a direct threat to any attacker, these things are made to stop an attack dead in its tracks and then the stranded force can be decimated by pre-registered artillery strikes....!

[rungroot]

Panzer-kiel, on 13 July 2012 - 05:41 AM, said:

yeah, generally it is like that, no doubt, layers of minefields and multiple DCBs (Ditch cum Bunds) pose a direct threat to any attacker, these things are made to stop an attack dead in its tracks and then the stranded force can be decimated by pre-registered artillery strikes....!

What's the possibly of doing something like that along our shores so that an amphibious assault can be blunted and decimated in the same fashion?  I am very seriously  concerned about an amphibious assault from american and nato carrier task forces that mushy sold his soul to.

[Panzer-kiel]

rungroot, on 13 July 2012 - 10:10 PM, said:

What's the possibly of doing something like that along our shores so that an amphibious assault can be blunted and decimated in the same fashion?  I am very seriously  concerned about an amphibious assault from american and nato carrier task forces that mushy sold his soul to.

.....just like the Atlantic Wall, we will need ALOT of mines, concrete for gun emplacements, all kinds of obstacles, plus alot of manpower to man the beaches....or if u want to hav the beaches thinly held, then we need strong reserves to counter the main enemy landing once it has been identified, the second option wud also required dedicated AD support, because enemy air power would be such that it will interdict with our force movement towards the beaches.....

[rungroot]

Panzer-kiel, on 13 July 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

.....just like the Atlantic Wall, we will need ALOT of mines, concrete for gun emplacements, all kinds of obstacles, plus alot of manpower to man the beaches....or if u want to hav the beaches thinly held, then we need strong reserves to counter the main enemy landing once it has been identified, the second option wud also required dedicated AD support, because enemy air power would be such that it will interdict with our force movement towards the beaches.....

I'm the cautiously aggressive type, so my choice would be to do all of the above.

[Panzer-kiel]

rungroot, on 14 July 2012 - 01:44 AM, said:

I'm the cautiously aggressive type, so my choice would be to do all of the above.

Sir, it always comes to the resources, and manpower and quality of leadership.....the ingredients to do anything in this world, if u have these things, u can wish anything.....and i believe we  have them all in abundance, the point is to use them in a positive and constructive manner!

[Miroslav]

sobank, on 08 July 2012 - 12:06 AM, said:

frankly, gunships are luxury weapons. We cannt afford to have them. And if we can afford them, we cannt use them. Lets grow some brain cells here, shell we?

- First identify your enemy capability
- secondly, identify your capability

Do the two of above things and you will get the reality. Pak V India is no US vs iraq or US vs vietnam. if the full war breaks, these choppers will fall from sky like flies. Have you guys not learn anything from afghanistan. Topping that, we have no air superiority to begin with.

But if we do stick with expensive toys like these, congratulation - you guys just provided enemy sam some good target practicing.

So what should we do...........simple.............have no choppers but if you really need them, have cheaper choppers.

What Indians really missed in Kargil was Gunships. We had HIND's but they were not capable to fight in those heights. Hence Mi-17's with rocket pods did the job. Hence the birth of LCH.

Miro

[akthus]

Pakistan has the potential to produce anything. The first priority is to be self sufficient. That is what China did.
It does not matter if it does not match the latest standards or tech but it would be manufactured in Pakistan.

If need be we should bring in investors from other friendly countries and pool resources. There must be many other countries out there who similarly have a need for advanced technology weapons but can not afford what is out there in the marketplace or are not allowed it.

Multiple projects can be initiated which will lead to jobs and investment in the future of Pakistan.

This thinking needs to come from the Politicians and not the army for it be meaningful.

[tank131]

I think ppl need to remember when calling the T-129 a western gunship with western strings that the the T-129 is the turkish varient of the A129 mangusta but Turkey retains ALL intellectual property and can sell it to whomever they choose except UK (for some reason). That means that it may be slightly more expensive than the Wz-10 but will be a NATO caliber gunship with all the tech western companies can provide.  I think that this should be the gunship for PAA and that they should invest for ToT and home manufacturing for 50 of these. The PAA should also look at getting around 50-100 WZ-19 for a low end solution to fill gaps and these can slowly phase out the Ah-1 cobras.

[Felicius]

rungroot, on 14 July 2012 - 01:44 AM, said:

I'm the cautiously aggressive type, so my choice would be to do all of the above.

And the merchant navy, cargo ships, recreational fishing sports, fishing trawlers, who will tell them where not to maneuver?