Pakistan Army's T-129 ATAK Helicopter Deal | Updates & Discussions.

[帅的一匹]

That is my guess may be you are right but what I have heard is they were returned but after few months Z-10 was back. Even I am confused if T-129 is coming and order already placed what is the point of having Z-10 being tested. It could be for China also. May China wants its helicopter to pass the tests in worst conditions and we offer those conditions. From most hot temperature on face of the earth to an enemy which often needs gift from these helicopters. If they pass our tests it could help them sell to other countries if not Pakistan

I think Z10 went back to home. The deal is dead as of now.

 

[ziaulislam]

Pakistan's defense minister Rana Tanvir Hussain said , Pakistan's planning to buy 4 Milgem Corvette and 30 Atak Helicopter, also Turkey evaluate to purchase of JF-17 fighter jets, that AA review. So behind closed doors very serious collaborations could be on desk.

https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/pa...helikopteri-ve-gemisi-almayi-planliyor/979523

why would turkey buy thunders, absolutely no need

unless turkey wants a heavily modified thunder with its own avionics radar and weapons to replace its f-5s yeah it would make some sense but why not simply build more f-16s than

so it makes no sense

 

[-------]

why would turkey buy thunders, absolutely no need

unless turkey wants a heavily modified thunder with its own avionics radar and weapons to replace its f-5s yeah it would make some sense but why not simply build more f-16s than

so it makes no sense

I think it makes more sense that Turkey's TX project replaces T38 Talons and F-5/2000.

But, sometimes a political message is required. Pak/Chin JF-17 would be perfect for that.

 

[HAIDER]

I think it makes more sense that Turkey's TX project replaces T38 Talons and F-5/2000.

View attachment 477697

But, sometimes a political message is required. Pak/Chin JF-17 would be perfect for that.

Very hot design for both training and COIN operations . Russian Yak series ...

 

[Path-Finder]

Pakistan's defense minister Rana Tanvir Hussain said , Pakistan's planning to buy 4 Milgem Corvette and 30 Atak Helicopter, also Turkey evaluate to purchase of JF-17 fighter jets, that AA review. So behind closed doors very serious collaborations could be on desk.

https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/pa...helikopteri-ve-gemisi-almayi-planliyor/979523

What will Turkey do with JF-17? Turkey is the largest operators of F16's outside the US!

Someone claimed they didn't leave in first place. WZ-15? are you sure? they just went to China, changed the engine and came back flying like nothing happened? I don't think you understand how change of engines work. It's not some Pakistani Mistry (mechanic) who just changes a car engine overnight.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Few weeks old pic of T129 in Pakistan. View attachment 477610

Are you sure sir?

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

Few weeks old pic of T129 in Pakistan. View attachment 477610

Its no Apache but still a beast...

 

[-------]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1005398134703509504

 

[Reichsmarschall]

how good is this copter compared to Apaches?

 

[Armchair]

Turkey could buy JF-17s as a way to diversify their fleet, that is completely dependent on NATO. The very low cost and maintenance friendly is ideal for operations in Syria, where NATO can easily warn the PKK when F-16s are in the air.

A country needs to plan for all eventualities, and Turkish F-16s are unable to lock-on to NATO warplanes. Turkey also has an opportunity to put all its electronics, weapons and gears it has developed in-house on a platform like the JFT.

As a stop-gap LIFT, they could also use the JF-17B. With an equal number of JFT single and dual seaters, they would have an ideal mix for strike missions into Syria and Iraq, as well as an aircraft that its traditional adversaries like Greece knows nothing about.

 

[OguzSenturk]

Turkish F-16s are unable to lock-on to NATO warplanes

That is a fake news. Turkish F-16 can even lock-on another Turkish F-16 if the pilot wants. There is no technicial problem to do that.

Btw Turkish F-16s locked-on Greek F-16s hundreds of times during dog-fights above Aegean sea.

 

[Ali_Baba]

A country needs to plan for all eventualities, and Turkish F-16s are unable to lock-on to NATO warplanes. Turkey also has an opportunity to put all its electronics, weapons and gears it has developed in-house on a platform like the JFT.

That would be an interesting option for PAF, ie a pure turkish "semi-western" avionics suite(to essentially replace the original option of a French one that PAF was originally interested in) with integration of western systems including the possible Meteor and existing PAF weapon systems. ie, bring capabilities to PAF that are not currently available and offer potential export opportunities for countries who want easier integration into their armed forces.

 

[Armchair]

Aselsan AESA radar, EW pod, targeting pod, avionics suite...

The Iraqis found out how their US ally slipped them printers that gave away vital information during war. TAF found out from a crashed plane "bugs" planted by their "ally". What makes anyone believe that there are no bugs hiding in the million or so code on an F-16? Bugs today are so tiny they are impossible to comb out from something as complex and large as an aircraft. We can agree to disagree but I do believe that F-16s will be compromised in some way or another.

Even if they are not. Even then, its not wise for Turkey to put all its eggs on the NATO basket anymore, given that NATO is today the biggest financier and trainer of terrorism against Turkey.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Aselsan AESA radar, EW pod, targeting pod, avionics suite...

The Iraqis found out how their US ally slipped them printers that gave away vital information during war. TAF found out from a crashed plane "bugs" planted by their "ally". What makes anyone believe that there are no bugs hiding in the million or so code on an F-16? Bugs today are so tiny they are impossible to comb out from something as complex and large as an aircraft. We can agree to disagree but I do believe that F-16s will be compromised in some way or another.

Even if they are not. Even then, its not wise for Turkey to put all its eggs on the NATO basket anymore, given that NATO is today the biggest financier and trainer of terrorism against Turkey.

While the diversification argument can be made for countries including Turkey, you lose any any credibility when posting made up facts, such as unable to target other NATO aircraft or somehow TuAF would be able to operate JF-17s over Syria without the others knowing and tracking their exact whereabouts. TuAF for all we know already might inform both the Russians and Americans of any operation beforehand.

As for the bugs in American equipment that seem to bug us so much, it doesnt seem like is has bothered TuAF (and any other AF for that matter) too much concern that would have kept them from flying those planes and even buying new upcoming ones (with even more bugs!).

 

[Armchair]

While the diversification argument can be made for countries including Turkey, you lose any any credibility when posting made up facts, such as unable to target other NATO aircraft or somehow TuAF would be able to operate JF-17s over Syria without the others knowing and tracking their exact whereabouts. TuAF for all we know already might inform both the Russians and Americans of any operation beforehand.

As for the bugs in American equipment that seem to bug us so much, it doesnt seem like is has bothered TuAF (and any other AF for that matter) too much concern that would have kept them from flying those planes and even buying new upcoming ones (with even more bugs!).

How do you know what bothers TuAF or not? Do they wear their hearts on their sleeve and declare all their secret vulnerabilities? You sir, destroy your own credibility by making such broad brush, know-it-all statements.

Its my opinion that if the US wishes, TuAF won't be able to utilize their F-16s to target NATO warplanes. You can claim it is wrong, and if you can prove it, I'll accept. But if you can't, then sorry, that's just what I think.

Now, you've sadly gotten to the point of making up fake scarecrows and beating them up. Drowning men clutch at straws it seems. I never claimed "somehow TuAF would be able to operate JF-17s over Syria without the others knowing and tracking their exact whereabouts". What does that bit of writing even mean? What JF-17s do not have is a NATO supply chain requirement. Nor does it have those specific vulnerability to bugs and other backdoor issues.

Does that help you understand? Do you need further explanations of my statements? What are you trying to do really, spoil another thread? If you have some personal issue with me, do save the rest of the forum.