PAF revamped Air Defense Alert System

[Ali_Baba]

As predicted a smaller range version the "FAAZ-1" also exists which appears to have been tested and later shelved in favor of PL-15 & FAAZ-2 combo
View attachment 931558

FAAZ-I if it worked - would have been useful against drones, and other low intensity aerial targets. It would have presented an opportunity to fine tune core algorithms, and processes and increase the changes that FAAZ-2 would be successful etc.

 

[farooqbhai007]

FAAZ-I if it worked - would have been useful against drones, and other low intensity aerial targets. It would have presented an opportunity to fine tune core algorithms, and processes and increase the changes that FAAZ-2 would be successful etc.

BVR against drone is money drain especially for a country like pakistan.

 

[Bilal.]

The speed is very odd. Most similar missile are like Mach 4-5.

 

[Ali_Baba]

BVR against drone is money drain especially for a country like pakistan.

Which is why a home grown BVR missile would be better for Pakistan than to fire at a target, rather than an expensive oversea missile like an AMRAAM or, SD10/PL-15 ...

 

[Abid123]

Which is why a home grown BVR missile would be better for Pakistan than to fire at a target, rather than an expensive oversea missile like an AMRAAM or, SD10/PL-15 ...

Home grown BVR missile to target a drone should not cost more than 500,000 USD.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Home grown BVR missile to target a drone should not cost more than 500,000 USD.

Agree - ideally even less !

 

[arslank03]

Wow!!!! I’m blown away!!! Hope they put AESA seeker in it.


Two versions?

no, multimode seeker, like davids sling or mica ng

The speed is very odd. Most similar missile are like Mach 4-5.

my theory is motor is probably optimised for a slow sustained burn to get that long range as opposed to max ke over a shorter distance

 

[Corax]

As predicted a smaller range version the "FAAZ-1" also exists which appears to have been tested and later shelved in favor of PL-15 & FAAZ-2 combo
View attachment 931558

This makes no sense. What does "compatibility with PL-15 & Meteor" have to do with anything? Are they saying it wasn't up to spec to compete with those two? The paper specs look competitive, if true.

If they adopt the low drag profile elongated fins along the fuselage, similar to the SAM version, the range can be extended, along with a booster motor/dual pulse combo. So plenty of room for upgrade potential and further variants, including ARM, air to ground, maybe even AShM version.

 

[farooqbhai007]

This makes no sense. What does "compatibility with PL-15 & Meteor" have to do with anything? Are they saying it wasn't up to spec to compete with those two? The paper specs look competitive, if true. But there's a whiff of BS about this.

Read it again. He is talking about FAAZ-1 AAM the predecessor to FAAZ-2. Gids revealed specs of FAAZ-2.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

This makes no sense. What does "compatibility with PL-15 & Meteor" have to do with anything? Are they saying it wasn't up to spec to compete with those two? The paper specs look competitive, if true.

If they adopt the low drag profile elongated fins along the fuselage, similar to the SAM version, the range can be extended, along with a booster motor/dual pulse combo. So plenty of room for upgrade potential and further variants, including ARM, air to ground, maybe even AShM version.

Assuming there's no embellishment, I think what they meant was that FAAZ-1 didn't meet the PAF's standards and, in turn, AWC (?) was tasked to continue developing upon what they had. There's no guarantee that even FAAZ-2 is serviceable, but what matters is the progress up to that point and a willingness to keep building on it until you get a successful outcome.

If this context is accurate, then this is exactly how indigenous development should go. Basically, you will not get a serviceable product on the first go. Just as India's DRDO often experiences, the first product could really suck, but you had succeeded in creating your own rocket tech, airframe tech, seeker tech, test facilities and so on. That basis involved the creation of valuable IP, highly skilled staff, and functional prototypes. So, what matters now is to keep investing in that until you get the desired outcome.

 

[sparten]

Assuming there's no embellishment, I think what they meant was that FAAZ-1 didn't meet the PAF's standards and, in turn, AWC (?) was tasked to continue developing upon what they had. There's no guarantee that even FAAZ-2 is serviceable, but what matters is the progress up to that point and a willingness to keep building on it until you get a successful outcome.

I suspect its very near entering testing, if not already so, if its been revealed. As for the FAAZ I v II, it might well b e due to the dual seeker.

BVR against drone is money drain especially for a country like pakistan.

I thought PA AD plans for drones were using a combination of RADAR guided rapid fire guns and repurposed MANPADs for more dangerous targets?

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[Readerdefence]

Hi
most of the Pakistani defence equipments once been
revealed are already in the system or about to enter
after getting all cleared from the concerned deptt
that’s usually the case with tanks , missiles or fighter jets
as Pakistan is not a big country like india with lots of foreign reserves so mostly whatever been prepared or made will be revealed once already in the system or about
to be in the system
thank you

 

[musaji]

So SD10A or PL12 repainted or locally assembled?

 

[SQ8]

Assuming there's no embellishment, I think what they meant was that FAAZ-1 didn't meet the PAF's standards and, in turn, AWC (?) was tasked to continue developing upon what they had. There's no guarantee that even FAAZ-2 is serviceable, but what matters is the progress up to that point and a willingness to keep building on it until you get a successful outcome.

If this context is accurate, then this is exactly how indigenous development should go. Basically, you will not get a serviceable product on the first go. Just as India's DRDO often experiences, the first product could really suck, but you had succeeded in creating your own rocket tech, airframe tech, seeker tech, test facilities and so on. That basis involved the creation of valuable IP, highly skilled staff, and functional prototypes. So, what matters now is to keep investing in that until you get the desired outcome.

Now - not a political statement but for that model to be successful you need the talent to want to stay in PK.

DRDO has had ALL the incentives along with generally open access to tech..

AWC has seen its ground shrink more and more