What's new

L-UMTAS ordered for Pakistan's ATAK helicopters

.
  • Baktar-Shikan numbers have significantly increased.
  • OMTAS, if inducted, will augment strength of PA anti-tank forces by offering fire-and-forget / top attack capability. It is not intended as a Baktar-Shikan replacement.
real question will be ToT, co production, JVs

turkey is gold mine for pakistan with respect to ToT and co production..if both countries combine their market they can make things viable

anti tank weapons, subs, helios, SAMs, electronics, Radars..should go in JVs..

how much china will give pakistan ToT ? probably not much

though china will provide any weapon for licence production and even cheaper and with credit but if we want our defence industry to be viable than JV/co production is the answer
 
.
The Baktar-Shikan has been in PA service for decades, thousands acquired, but IICS still only assembles the missile. No local production.

Same will be the case with OMTAS, if inducted. There will be no 'ToT' or local production for the seeker, the tandem warhead and other core components.

Aselsan radios are assembled in Pakistan, but the Pakistani officials have trumpeted 'ToT' all along.

If Pakistan wants local production, it must invest in development of such systems. There is no such thing as 'ToT'.
 
. . .
CIRIT 2.75"

Diameter 2.75” (70 mm)
Length 1900 mm
Weight 15 kg (without Canister)
Range 1.5 km (Min.) – 8 km (Max.)
Warhead Multi Purpose Warhead


  • Anti Armor
  • Anti Personnel
  • Incendiary
High Explosive Warhead

Guidance Mid course Guidance with MEMS-IMU Terminal Guidance with Semi-Active Laser Seeker
Propulsion Min. Smoke Composite Solid Propellant
Platforms All Platforms with MIL-STD-1760 Interface
Target Types Light Armored/Unarmored Vehicles Infantry, Light Bunkers
Laser Designation Compatible with STANAG 3733
 
.
The Baktar-Shikan has been in PA service for decades, thousands acquired, but IICS still only assembles the missile. No local production.

Same will be the case with OMTAS, if inducted. There will be no 'ToT' or local production for the seeker, the tandem warhead and other core components.

Aselsan radios are assembled in Pakistan, but the Pakistani officials have trumpeted 'ToT' all along.

If Pakistan wants local production, it must invest in development of such systems. There is no such thing as 'ToT'.
ToT will happen if you have the ability to absorb it, but there is a thing called ToT
also TOT will be much expensive to produce than assembling/off the shelf

but this has to be done
 
. . . .
If Pakistan wants local production, it must invest in development of such systems. There is no such thing as 'ToT'.

I think Joint development programs can provide more technology and learning activities compared to tech transfer deals for a specific areas. When engineers met some difficulties in joint developments, They can find opportunity to jointly research their previous studies based on feedbacks and re-corrections can also be applied jointly. In this aspect, If we receive IIR seeker technology for example, This section of missile houses many different elements from different responsibilities of R&D and production departments staying hundreds of km away from eachother from opto-mechanic(HassasOptic-Sivas/MacunköyAnkara) to electronic(Macunköy-Ankara), image processor hardware/software(Macunköy), lens(Hassasoptic), uncooled infrared detector (Akyurt). The test application of a seeker head require other type of technology as well. In that condition, I want to see the name of two states in same strategic programs to handle the difficulties side by side to gain benefits together. Europe does it this way while offering ToT others to get the winner in tenders. We would not see a serious capability improvement with known ToT deals, If Knowledge is not shared among partners to build more effective solutions without any restriction with joint design development programs...

DGuHB2uW0AQ25tN.jpg
 
Last edited:
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom