Concept Design of a CAS Aircraft For The Needs Of Pakistan Military

[Argus Panoptes]

Pakistan Air Force is well equipped to handle the task at hand.

We just need the POLITICAL WILL and KAHONES.

How much are we losing Financially because of this low intensity insurgency.

We need to put it to rest ASAP.

I can agree with all that Sir.

The only question was that whether the addition of lighter, lower cost aircraft and munitions would help our operations in FATA as the OP suggested.

 

[Alpha1]

It's operational cost is just a fraction of what F-16 eats up

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

At almost 22 million $ a pop is it worth it?

 

[Alpha1]

At almost 22 million $ a pop is it worth it?

It's price is 9-14 million.
Roundabout 500$ per hour operational cost.

 

[Armstrong]

What are you shooting tangents for? Your last statement was in lieu of how the US provided support to which you referred to Vietnam as an example;about which you were informed that it is clearly not so.
Currently our support sorties are based on a mix of guided and unguided munitions. for eg. when it comes to hitting a Bunker or cave there is usage of GBU-10 systems(which cost $35000 a pop).. or when there is a need to high a ridgeline they use unguided munitions. Even with our limited resources we know what targets need what.

We've been doing this for a while now & it maybe so that we'd continue doing this for the foreseeable future, why then have we not explored the possibility of developing an in-house version of a laser guided bomb ? Perhaps a watered down version of the GBU-10, if we're not technologically up to the mark yet, were it to be developed by us would probably cost us a lot less than $35,000 a piece.

FYI, the now phased out A-5s were achieving a CEP of 10m during night attacks in 2007-8.

Is that a good enough CEP ?

 

[Pakistanisage]

I can agree with all that Sir.

The only question was that whether the addition of lighter, lower cost aircraft and munitions would help our operations in FATA as the OP suggested.

The simple answer is no it is too vulnerable and not enough fire power.

This aircraft was designed for surveillance and light attack primarily against drug smugglers and has a two seat version used for training missions.

TTP is an enemy where we need to go Hi Tech because they are low tech.

Like I mentioned earlier that by just using our P-3 Orions we had a devastating effect on TTP.

This is the main reason why they attacked Mehran Naval Base and destroyed those
P-3's because they suffered huge losses by those P-3's.

Our Military is stupid as it always wants to go in those areas on jeeps and make our Jawans vulnerable.

The Americans are smart about this. They always attack by air to completely annihilate the enemy and after they have destroyed the enemy from the air with minimal losses of their own and then they send in their ground troops for MOP UP OPERATIONS.

 

[SQ8]

Is that a good enough CEP ?

With unguided bombs and rockets it is.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

It's price is 9-14 million.
Roundabout 500$ per hour operational cost.

USA bought 20 for 427 million for afghanistan:


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...=boP5o_Hz5sGB9vb2sYwHJg&bvm=bv.50500085,d.dmg

 

[Tacticool]

Heck In 2007 we even used our P3 Orions to pound Taliban from high altitude.

Can you please give details about that operation
. In what configuration p3s were used? and how was the experience? did they acheived the goals?

 

[Pakistanisage]

It's price is 9-14 million.
Roundabout 500$ per hour operational cost.

Sir , Let us assume that on the average this plane costs us 12 Million USD and we buy 20 of these Turboprops for a Total of $ 240, 000,000. These are aircrafts we could only use in Fata.

I would rather put this 240 Million USD in JF-17 program to buy some more and use the funds to buy some decent avionics and sensors for the JF-17 Block 2 aircrafts.

That would strengthen our Thunder Program rather than supporting a Brazilian program which won't give us Aircrafts not a fifth as good as our own product.

JF-17 can be used for both INTERNAL as well as EXTERNAL Threats as opposed to this aircraft that can be used in limited way only.

 

[Pakistanisage]

Can you please give details about that operation.

In what configuration p3s were used? and how was the experience? did they acheived the goals?

In 2007, the P3C aircraft were used by the Navy to conduct signal intelligence missions, airborne and bombing operations in a Swat offensive and the final operations in North. The precision and strategic bombings were carried out by the P3C aircraft as well as conducting intelligence management on Taliban and al-Qaeda operatives in 2007.

On 22 May 2011, two out of the four Pakistani P-3C aircraft were destroyed in an attack on PNS Mehran Base while parked on the hardstand, during an attack at the Mehran Pakistani Naval Air Base in Karachi.[26] The Pakistani fleet had been readily used in overland counter-insurgency operations. In June 2011, the U.S. agreed to replace the destroyed aircraft with two new ones, with delivery to follow later. In February 2012, the U.S. delivered two additional P-3C Orion aircraft to the Pakistan Navy.

 

[HAIDER]

See the magic of C130

 

[Manticore]

@Alpha1


thread is already running

 

[Manticore]

The Super Tucano
The Pucara
The OV-10
Pilatus PC-21
KAI KT-1
AT-6B Texan
A-37B Dragonfly
Boeing's OV-10X Super Bronco
Air Tractor AT-802U

 

[Ra'ad]

Hi. I think for CAS and air to ground operations a country like pakistan should develop its own custom solutions since our requirements are unique. There are two possible CAS scenarios, one for the very well equipped indian army which includes SAMs and massive armour divisions into the equation, second for insurgents on the afghan border.

Many solutions have been discussed in the thread, some including stand-off weapons, and others like low cost fighter bombers like K-8 and Mushaq. In my opinion, pakistan should develop a comprehensive CAS program over the next few years to cater for both types of requirements. The program may include all 3 components discussed above: UCAVs, Low cost indigenous CAS aircrafts like K8 and Mushaq, and AC-130 type capability.

The combination of these 3 CAS elements can cater for our needs for both types of scenarios:
1) UCAVs: primarily useful against insurgents, these can help bring down the cost for a large number of sorties. Using regular aircrafts will in my opinion only be waste of their flying hours on something they shouldn't. Plus these can be operated by airforce and army personnel, greatly enhancing army's own air support wing which only includes cobras yet.

2) Low-cost fighter bombers: working along UCAVs against insurgents, these can be used for stand-off support while UCAVs fly right over the battlefield.

3) AC-130 type aircrafts: this one is the custom solution i was referring to. Using a military multirole/cargo aircraft like C-130, CN-225, or Y-9, and converting them into CAS aircraft like an AC-130, we can use it t support operations against insurgents with an aircraft that can loiter over the battlefield during the ground operation, thus providing constant support.

If the aircrafts have a modular configuration, they can be reconfigured for other roles like for example a hypothetical flying rocket artillery platform (i have a few designs in mind too ) to help provide concentrated artillery support in an area where much of our ground based artillery has been taken out. These can also help stop rapidly advancing massive armoured divisions by raining rocket artillery on the armour. Now considering that the rockets are launched from air instead of ground, their range will be greatly increased. In other words, smaller rockets fired from air can achieve the same range as of those fired from ground, allowing a large number of smaller rockets to be accommodated. And one such aircraft may have the firepower of 4-5 regular MLRS trucks. These aircrafts can also be equipped with a large number of stand-off bombs (H2, H4) for use against advancing armour.