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

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

What Pakistan needs is a mmW guided Fire and Forget system for aircraft much like the Brimstone. That capability will greately increase our CAS capability which right now is ancient in modern terms.

A 4 ship package of JF-17s armed with an asymmetric combination of LD-10, SD-10 and racks of brimstone class weapon can lay waste to an entire armoured column and its AD assets while still pushing away their air cover.

These are not expensive capabilities as such but require a bit of astute program management along with smarter fund allocation..

There are analogous attempts (of a Brimstone-like AGM) by China. E.g. the YJ-9E AGM has an active radar-homing (ARH) seeker and 15 km of range. Total weight is 105 kg. Granted, it's not as light as the Brimstone, but it's a good start and could enable the JF-17 to deploy two from each hardpoint.

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-iii.html

In fact, we have the makings of a pretty good conventional/armoured column support fighter in the JF-17. Sure, no where near A-10 level, but we can inch it to being something as lethal as India's Jaguar DARIN III with the right subsystems and weapons.

Moreover, the short-range and endurance means nothing due to the short proximity of our main armoured combat theatres. The JF-17s can launch and recover from an array of major and makeshift airstrips, maybe a moving force that rotates between several between sorties.

 

[SQ8]

There are analogous attempts (of a Brimstone-like AGM) by China. E.g. the YJ-9E AGM has an active radar-homing (ARH) seeker and 15 km of range. Total weight is 105 kg. Granted, it's not as light as the Brimstone, but it's a good start and could enable the JF-17 to deploy two from each hardpoint.

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/missiles-iii.html

In fact, we have the makings of a pretty good conventional/armoured column support fighter in the JF-17. Sure, no where near A-10 level, but we can inch it to being something as lethal as India's Jaguar DARIN III with the right subsystems and weapons.

Moreover, the short-range and endurance means nothing due to the short proximity of our main armoured combat theatres. The JF-17s can launch and recover from an array of major and makeshift airstrips, maybe a moving force that rotates between several between sorties.

ATAK-2’s acting as recon and designators for these fixed wing CAS strikes and handing off targets to them and artillery batteries how the Comanche was planned to be like.. would be an excellent force multiplier.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

ATAK-2’s acting as recon and designators for these fixed wing CAS strikes and handing off targets to them and artillery batteries how the Comanche was planned to be like.. would be an excellent force multiplier.

This could be feasible as means of building conventional deterrence capability within current means.

E.g. it's contingent on a few things, but if the PAF can be convinced to push the JF-17 fleet to 200 - i.e. add a Block-IV - and swap the Block-Is out of air defence duties.

Re-configure the Block-I into a CAS asset by swapping the KLJ-7 with the air-cooled AVIC AESA radar (which I think is supposed to be an easy fit by omitting the liquid cooling gear). Equip it with HMD/S. Configure it with the YJ-9E, a Chinese analogue to the SDB and, ideally, CBU-105 analogue. The latter might need more specialized knowledge, I think South Africa is arguably best positioned.

Basically, 50 CAS fighters with good A2A capabilities, incl. a jam-resistant AESA radar to ensure use of the YJ-9E and BVRAAM (to chase Jaguars). Combine this with our own IBG-like forces with hard-kill APS-equipped MBTs (e.g. al-Khalid II?), 8x8 AFVs with ATGM, SHORAD and 105 mm guns, wheeled 155 mm SPH and MLRS with AESA WTRs networked to the JF-17 Block-1mod and ATAK-1/ATAK-2.

In Kashmir and the Northern Areas, omit the armour and replace with air assault forces and 4x4-based rapid deployment and dismountable forces.

We might not be able to scale this to every force, but enough of a force could at least give us a decent shot at stopping an Indian IBG. Granted, we can't escalate the matter further (i.e. can't do 1965-like moves), but it'll at least give us foreign relations ammunition to point to an enemy aggression that we openly foiled.

 

[SQ8]

This could be feasible as means of building conventional deterrence capability within current means.

E.g. it's contingent on a few things, but if the PAF can be convinced to push the JF-17 fleet to 200 - i.e. add a Block-IV - and swap the Block-Is out of air defence duties.

Re-configure the Block-I into a CAS asset by swapping the KLJ-7 with the air-cooled AVIC AESA radar (which I think is supposed to be an easy fit by omitting the liquid cooling gear). Equip it with HMD/S. Configure it with the YJ-9E, a Chinese analogue to the SDB and, ideally, CBU-105 analogue. The latter might need more specialized knowledge, I think South Africa is arguably best positioned.

Basically, 50 CAS fighters with good A2A capabilities, incl. a jam-resistant AESA radar to ensure use of the YJ-9E and BVRAAM (to chase Jaguars). Combine this with our own IBG-like forces with hard-kill APS-equipped MBTs (e.g. al-Khalid II?), 8x8 AFVs with ATGM, SHORAD and 105 mm guns, wheeled 155 mm SPH and MLRS with AESA WTRs networked to the JF-17 Block-1mod and ATAK-1/ATAK-2.

In Kashmir and the Northern Areas, omit the armour and replace with air assault forces and 4x4-based rapid deployment and dismountable forces.

We might not be able to scale this to every force, but enough of a force could at least give us a decent shot at stopping an Indian IBG. Granted, we can't escalate the matter further (i.e. can't do 1965-like moves), but it'll at least give us foreign relations ammunition to point to an enemy aggression that we openly foiled.

Before we go too much off topic, lets close that idea with this.
Something like this specifically.
Asymmetric load-outs give the JF-17 an edge in flexibility without working up too much on the effects of imbalance.
A CAS configuration like you mentioned could take a SD-10 on one wing(represented by grey ring) and a LD-10(represented by yellow) that allows it to tackle any LOMADS embedded within an armored column.
The YJ-9E represented by the SDB stand in here lets you take out 6 potential tanks and destroy/suppress their AD escort in the process. Note that the centerline fuel tank still accords it the standard range to provide enough loiter/flexibilty on the

An even more ambitious battlefield SEAD escort could develop from this with both LD-10 and YJ-9E's along with an ECM pod represented by a stand in Sorbitsya.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Before we go too much off topic, lets close that idea with this.
Something like this specifically.
Asymmetric load-outs give the JF-17 an edge in flexibility without working up too much on the effects of imbalance.
A CAS configuration like you mentioned could take a SD-10 on one wing(represented by grey ring) and a LD-10(represented by yellow) that allows it to tackle any LOMADS embedded within an armored column.
The YJ-9E represented by the SDB stand in here lets you take out 6 potential tanks and destroy/suppress their AD escort in the process. Note that the centerline fuel tank still accords it the standard range to provide enough loiter/flexibilty on the
View attachment 485997

An even more ambitious battlefield SEAD escort could develop from this with both LD-10 and YJ-9E's along with an ECM pod represented by a stand in Sorbitsya.
View attachment 485998

This is excellent. I noticed - no EO/IR-based munitions (e.g. LGB, SALH, etc). This is the correct configuration because the Block-I only has 7 hardpoints for use and a LGB or SALH AGM offers limited additional utility over ARH-based AGMs.

It'd be interesting if we could toss in an IIR-tipped PGB or IIR-based AGM, the latter can be leveraged from the ATAK-1 as well (returning to topic).

 

[CriticalThought]

This could be feasible as means of building conventional deterrence capability within current means.

E.g. it's contingent on a few things, but if the PAF can be convinced to push the JF-17 fleet to 200 - i.e. add a Block-IV - and swap the Block-Is out of air defence duties.

Re-configure the Block-I into a CAS asset by swapping the KLJ-7 with the air-cooled AVIC AESA radar (which I think is supposed to be an easy fit by omitting the liquid cooling gear). Equip it with HMD/S. Configure it with the YJ-9E, a Chinese analogue to the SDB and, ideally, CBU-105 analogue. The latter might need more specialized knowledge, I think South Africa is arguably best positioned.

Basically, 50 CAS fighters with good A2A capabilities, incl. a jam-resistant AESA radar to ensure use of the YJ-9E and BVRAAM (to chase Jaguars). Combine this with our own IBG-like forces with hard-kill APS-equipped MBTs (e.g. al-Khalid II?), 8x8 AFVs with ATGM, SHORAD and 105 mm guns, wheeled 155 mm SPH and MLRS with AESA WTRs networked to the JF-17 Block-1mod and ATAK-1/ATAK-2.

In Kashmir and the Northern Areas, omit the armour and replace with air assault forces and 4x4-based rapid deployment and dismountable forces.

We might not be able to scale this to every force, but enough of a force could at least give us a decent shot at stopping an Indian IBG. Granted, we can't escalate the matter further (i.e. can't do 1965-like moves), but it'll at least give us foreign relations ammunition to point to an enemy aggression that we openly foiled.

Takeout the Thunder and replace with HALE drone of your choice. Manned aircraft are a luxury that should be used for air superiority. If such superiority requires bombing an air base, or taking out a SAM accompanying armor, so be it. But CAS should NOT be the air force's job. Another necessary role is deep surgical strikes behind enemy lines against strategic targets. I consider this to be the correct utilization of air force.

HALE drones should be able to take off from hastily made runways, can be commanded by field commanders, and if programmed for autonomous operation, can prove to be a force multiplier through sheer numbers. Hand in hand comes the requirement of mobile SAMs and MANPADs, giving the army considerable control over their own air safety.

 

[-------]

I hope they buy some JF-17s in lieu of the T-129s. quid pro quo. Why not F-16s? - Turkey cannot actually produce F-16s, it needs most critical parts from the US including Knocked down kits. Also, has had issues with bugs and back door security concerns.

I'm sure JF-17 is a good aircraft, but Turkey is invested in her own indigenous projects.

Hurjet

 

[khanasifm]

The big question what is the offset for this acquisition ??

 

[Armchair]

Before we go too much off topic, lets close that idea with this.
Something like this specifically.
Asymmetric load-outs give the JF-17 an edge in flexibility without working up too much on the effects of imbalance.
A CAS configuration like you mentioned could take a SD-10 on one wing(represented by grey ring) and a LD-10(represented by yellow) that allows it to tackle any LOMADS embedded within an armored column.
The YJ-9E represented by the SDB stand in here lets you take out 6 potential tanks and destroy/suppress their AD escort in the process. Note that the centerline fuel tank still accords it the standard range to provide enough loiter/flexibilty on the
View attachment 485997

An even more ambitious battlefield SEAD escort could develop from this with both LD-10 and YJ-9E's along with an ECM pod represented by a stand in Sorbitsya.
View attachment 485998

Interesting and I love your out-of-the-box thinking.

However, here is an alternative -
JF-17 for SEAD and air cover
A BAe SABA type local design for CAS fixed wing
T-129 / Z-18 / UAV / A light observerational helicopter for targeting

The BAe SABA type design, downsized with a 1200 hp HS-5 rotary engine (China or Ukrainian / Polish equivalent) would cost, with a targeting package like the Aselpod would cost about 4 millions USD to 7 million USD.

That's a CAS aircraft that is reasonably armored with precision strike capability at 4 to 7 million USD.

You could build 100 locally and you'd never need to worry about CAS again and JF-17s, F-16s and other such aircraft can focus on the high end of the battle and provide air cover and SEAD / DEAD.

Granted, such an aircraft will go at about 400 km / hour, slower than a fighter jet, but speed is not critical in CAS, particularly at the short ranges it will take place in the India-Pakistan theater.

Build 100 of these and you have a massive capability upgrade from a systems point of view, at a cost of 500 million USD, that too mainly in local currency.
Picture worth a thousand words:

 

[HRK]

ATAK-2’s acting as recon and designators for these fixed wing CAS strikes and handing off targets to them and artillery batteries

don't you think drones specially with VTOL capability should be more suitable in this role ...??

 

[Signalian]

In the absence of Mmw Radar, the T-129 could be able to fire AGM 114R if AH-1Z deal comes aboard. 1000 Missiles for only 12-15 choppers doesn't make sense.

 

[SQ8]

Interesting and I love your out-of-the-box thinking.

However, here is an alternative -
JF-17 for SEAD and air cover
A BAe SABA type local design for CAS fixed wing
T-129 / Z-18 / UAV / A light observerational helicopter for targeting

The BAe SABA type design, downsized with a 1200 hp HS-5 rotary engine (China or Ukrainian / Polish equivalent) would cost, with a targeting package like the Aselpod would cost about 4 millions USD to 7 million USD.

That's a CAS aircraft that is reasonably armored with precision strike capability at 4 to 7 million USD.

You could build 100 locally and you'd never need to worry about CAS again and JF-17s, F-16s and other such aircraft can focus on the high end of the battle and provide air cover and SEAD / DEAD.

Granted, such an aircraft will go at about 400 km / hour, slower than a fighter jet, but speed is not critical in CAS, particularly at the short ranges it will take place in the India-Pakistan theater.

Build 100 of these and you have a massive capability upgrade from a systems point of view, at a cost of 500 million USD, that too mainly in local currency.
Picture worth a thousand words:

Low and Slow are no longer survivable in the modern CAS environment barring counter insurgency.
CAS is a tough job anyway, you are sending an multi million dollar machine made of aluminium to destroy rolling Armour blocks that cost 1/10 of the aircraft and have guns and SAMs protecting them throughout.

The A-10 and Frogfoot were designed with the idea of going low to avoid MR SAM systems and using the various hilly terrain to avoid being picked up by low level air defense including dense AAA and Small arms fire. The area was still to be somewhat sanitized by a SEAD or prior escort. Even with the heavy SEAD in GW1, A-10s got hit ad only survived due to their tough design. The idea of the attack chopper hiding in the hills was well suited to Germany but in the Thar desert the only place to hide are either random mountains or maybe a dune.. and even in that dune you will end up ingesting sand. Still, helicopters can go extremely low or run away but their operational radius is limited to the FLOT.

Pakistan does not have 1/10th of the SEAD resources poured into GW-1, our environment is going to be heavily contested in the air and with LOMADS and SHORADS that are much more lethal than what was ever envisaged for the cold war. In such an environment you are not looking to give aircraft more passes into a dangerous zone. THe idea is to come in fast and keep as far as possible from a hostile airspace while causing maximum destruction.
For that the JF-17 is just perfect if such a configuration arises. An aircraft like you suggested will be chewed out by the current ADGE capabilities of Indian IBGs and regular formations.

For counter insurgency such aircraft are ideal as counter insurgency is a slow and gradual process, unlike the tempo of conventional war. Longer loiter times and slow speed allow for more detailed sweeps of a contested area in an insurgency..Finally, our airforce is an extremely poorly budgeted airforce for its size and cannot afford the luxury that India has of maintaining multiple diverse types with their own logistics and associated headaches.

 

[Armchair]

Low and Slow are no longer survivable in the modern CAS environment barring counter insurgency.
CAS is a tough job anyway, you are sending an multi million dollar machine made of aluminium to destroy rolling Armour blocks that cost 1/10 of the aircraft and have guns and SAMs protecting them throughout.

The A-10 and Frogfoot were designed with the idea of going low to avoid MR SAM systems and using the various hilly terrain to avoid being picked up by low level air defense including dense AAA and Small arms fire. The area was still to be somewhat sanitized by a SEAD or prior escort. Even with the heavy SEAD in GW1, A-10s got hit ad only survived due to their tough design. The idea of the attack chopper hiding in the hills was well suited to Germany but in the Thar desert the only place to hide are either random mountains or maybe a dune.. and even in that dune you will end up ingesting sand. Still, helicopters can go extremely low or run away but their operational radius is limited to the FLOT.

Pakistan does not have 1/10th of the SEAD resources poured into GW-1, our environment is going to be heavily contested in the air and with LOMADS and SHORADS that are much more lethal than what was ever envisaged for the cold war. In such an environment you are not looking to give aircraft more passes into a dangerous zone. THe idea is to come in fast and keep as far as possible from a hostile airspace while causing maximum destruction.
For that the JF-17 is just perfect if such a configuration arises. An aircraft like you suggested will be chewed out by the current ADGE capabilities of Indian IBGs and regular formations.

For counter insurgency such aircraft are ideal as counter insurgency is a slow and gradual process, unlike the tempo of conventional war. Longer loiter times and slow speed allow for more detailed sweeps of a contested area in an insurgency..Finally, our airforce is an extremely poorly budgeted airforce for its size and cannot afford the luxury that India has of maintaining multiple diverse types with their own logistics and associated headaches.

Down low, an A-10 would do about 500 km per hour max. The SABA design would do 400. Marginally less.
Cost - $5 to $7 million, armed with standoff precision weapons. Meaning, they will fly low, at speed, pop up at a distance, deliver munitions, and then scoot.

This is the SOP for low level CAS.

An A-10 doesn't even have the needed avionics for low level nap of the earth flight. This aircraft would.

Even the JF-17 doesn't have true nap of the earth capability. Down low, in military power, a JF-17 would do about 700 km / hour.

Cost of an enemy tank - $2 to $3 million. Cost of a SABA - $5 to $7 million. A single pass would pay for it in equivalence.

Since the budget for the SABA and its basing and training will come from the Army, just like the AH-1s and T-129s, PAF would be able to focus its resources on air combat and SEAD / DEAD.

This isn't an Air Tractor flying at 5000 feet at 200 km / hour. Its a dedicated CAS platform with armor, flying at 400 km / hour on the deck with an automated nap of the earth flight capability. It pops up - knocks out enemy armor - artillery - infantry - and scoots, often before the enemy has even seen it - as its munitions are standoff.

The SABA was designed to survive the European theater against Russian invasion. Its designed for the role that's needed exactly.

CPFH would be tiny - somewhere in the sub 1000 range. The design is inherently survivable with the wings positioned to protect the engines and critical areas armored.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I'm sure JF-17 is a good aircraft, but Turkey is invested in her own indigenous projects.

Hurjet
View attachment 486016

IMO the best way to offset the T129 is to buy parts and maybe some subassemblies from Pakistan. This will help lower the ATAK's cost while also let Turkish Aerospace devote more internal resources to the Hurjet, ATAK 2, T625, etc.

Down low, an A-10 would do about 500 km per hour max. The SABA design would do 400. Marginally less.
Cost - $5 to $7 million, armed with standoff precision weapons. Meaning, they will fly low, at speed, pop up at a distance, deliver munitions, and then scoot.

This is the SOP for low level CAS.

An A-10 doesn't even have the needed avionics for low level nap of the earth flight. This aircraft would.

Even the JF-17 doesn't have true nap of the earth capability. Down low, in military power, a JF-17 would do about 700 km / hour.

Cost of an enemy tank - $2 to $3 million. Cost of a SABA - $5 to $7 million. A single pass would pay for it in equivalence.

Since the budget for the SABA and its basing and training will come from the Army, just like the AH-1s and T-129s, PAF would be able to focus its resources on air combat and SEAD / DEAD.

This isn't an Air Tractor flying at 5000 feet at 200 km / hour. Its a dedicated CAS platform with armor, flying at 400 km / hour on the deck with an automated nap of the earth flight capability. It pops up - knocks out enemy armor - artillery - infantry - and scoots, often before the enemy has even seen it - as its munitions are standoff.

The SABA was designed to survive the European theater against Russian invasion. Its designed for the role that's needed exactly.

CPFH would be tiny - somewhere in the sub 1000 range. The design is inherently survivable with the wings positioned to protect the engines and critical areas armored.

Isn't Stavatti trying to make a similar plane right now - i.e. Machete? IIRC the goal is to produce them in Serbia.

 

[Armchair]

IMO the best way to offset the T129 is to buy parts and maybe some subassemblies from Pakistan. This will help lower the ATAK's cost while also let Turkish Aerospace devote more internal resources to the Hurjet, ATAK 2, T625, etc.

Isn't Stavatti trying to make a similar plane right now - i.e. Machete? IIRC the goal is to produce them in Serbia.

Yes it is but my solution is better : )