Pakistan considers Chinese attack helicopters on back of stalled AH-1Z, T129 deal

[Signalian]

I heard somewhere that Pakistan has already integrated link 16 and 17 via AWACS. Direct sharing is not possible so data is transferred to AWACS by both data link and then it is transmitted to others

I heard it too however such interface brings issues of Latency (delay), can increase bit error rate (BER - losses in packet transfer) as well as throughput issues (size of transfer of data in real time may not have same capacity in all devices). Thus, a need for a Common Data Link.

 

[Yasser76]

While you are looking at the platform from a mechanical point of view, i am shedding light on the electronics and communication part of the platform. Chinese may have done well in the field of electronics but that can also assist PAA in procuring chinese equipment and installing it on any helicopter platform that Pakistani military wants, not just the platform (helicopter) itself.

I won't go into definition of Data Link, however its used for information sharing and is able to transfer large amount (bandwidth and throughput) of real time mission critical data such as videos and other statistics. All the functionalities for an ISR like SAR, X Band radar, E/O devices etc that i mentioned in Post # 92 will require Data Link.

At some stage, PA, PAF and PN might need a Common Data Link (CDL) otherwise a common interface for Link-16 and Link-17 to exchange information in real time. From an Army aviation point of view, Pakistan flies Chinese, European, Russian and American helicopters. The Data Link is not integrated on many machines that PAA flies. As an example consider Link-16 which can be utilised on American and European Helicopters. A-129 is able to utilise Link-16, so there are chances that T-129 will easily be able to integrate it, depending upon politics and further technology. However, would PAA choose to integrate Pakistan's own Link-17 on T-129 over Link16 ?

Next, does the mission capability of Mi-35 require a Data Link for carrying out sensitive operations be it Anti-terrorism or conventional ? If yes then, is Mi-35 also a candidate for integration of Data Link, say Link-17 ?
Similar case for Z-9EC operating for PN as well as the Westland Sea Kings. While ATR-72, P3-C, F-27 and Sea Kings maybe able to share information through Link-16, the Z-9EC again stands out.

UAV and UCAV are able to transfer and receive huge chunks of information through Data Link. They may have other ways of secure communication too for telemetry controls, which may not require a data link as not much bandwidth and through put is required for just controlling a UAV.

PAF's F-16, Erieye, C-130 etc can be data linked with PAA Gunships (e.g. T-129/AH-1Z) and ISR platforms (A bell series utility chopper) and all these can be data linked to PN Aerial Platforms like P3-C or Sea Kings. This is network centric warfare.

We cannot put a common link on US kit. It is Link 16 or nothing

 

[Michael Corleone]

Good for our evaluation if Pakistan Army gets Z-10s.
We have a major requirement for attack helicopters.
It is likely that BA will go ahead with an Apache deal but we are unlikely to get them in large numbers due to costs.

A cheaper option is required to complement/substitute Apaches.

@Bilal9 @Michael Corleone @The Ronin

I agree with what @Bilal Khan (Quwa) said, unfortunately I’m sure bd will do things that’s counterintuitive

 

[araz]

US sales of arms has depended entirely or almost entirely on US subsidizing them from FMS funds (Benazir deal of 89 being the only known exception that I know of).This more than anything else has been the reason for us getting US weapons in spite of the known hardships of embargoes. We winge a lot but don't realize that till the early 2000s we did not have a supplier of quality armaments barring the US and French. As India is fast learning French products are very expensive and their maintenance hard due to cash outlays. So cost wise it becomes a prohibitive venture.
The Chinese have not been in the market with high quality weapons till a decade ago. Chinese weapons were archaic and lacked quality. As Chinese have started advancing we have gradually transferred our attention towards them. Please understand that even now in various projects the Chinese lag behind the best(Z10 ME has only arrived in Pakistan recently and JFT still has EU components where the Chinese have not come upto their standards). So going for USA in spite of the attendant dangers was a calculated risk that one took.
Take the example of the AHIZ. What is the issue currently holding supplies? PAA made an order on the understanding that a measure of the funds will come out of FMS. This was not approved by the Congress and you have been asked to pay the full price. So if you want the stuff pay the price for it and get it. Similar is the case of the F16s. you are being required to pay the full price and collect the items and Pakistani establishment does not want to do that.
If we cannot pay the price we will not have the toys.
The Turkish deal was indeed a problem but I am sure Turkey had assured PAA that Engines would not be a problem. However the Turkish have failed to understand that this one blockage will affect their exports for years to come. I wish our Turk brothers the best of luck in their engine manufacturing endeavors which has been a long time coming.
A

 

[Destranator]

US sales of arms has depended entirely or almost entirely on US subsidizing them from FMS funds (Benazir deal of 89 being the only known exception that I know of).This more than anything else has been the reason for us getting US weapons in spite of the known hardships of embargoes. We winge a lot but don't realize that till the early 2000s we did not have a supplier of quality armaments barring the US and French. As India is fast learning French products are very expensive and their maintenance hard due to cash outlays. So cost wise it becomes a prohibitive venture.
The Chinese have not been in the market with high quality weapons till a decade ago. Chinese weapons were archaic and lacked quality. As Chinese have started advancing we have gradually transferred our attention towards them. Please understand that even now in various projects the Chinese lag behind the best(Z10 ME has only arrived in Pakistan recently and JFT still has EU components where the Chinese have not come upto their standards). So going for USA in spite of the attendant dangers was a calculated risk that one took.
Take the example of the AHIZ. What is the issue currently holding supplies? PAA made an order on the understanding that a measure of the funds will come out of FMS. This was not approved by the Congress and you have been asked to pay the full price. So if you want the stuff pay the price for it and get it. Similar is the case of the F16s. you are being required to pay the full price and collect the items and Pakistani establishment does not want to do that.
If we cannot pay the price we will not have the toys.
The Turkish deal was indeed a problem but I am sure Turkey had assured PAA that Engines would not be a problem. However the Turkish have failed to understand that this one blockage will affect their exports for years to come. I wish our Turk brothers the best of luck in their engine manufacturing endeavors which has been a long time coming.
A

A very objective and informative post devoid of emotions. Thanks.
The above is very relevant to Bangladesh Armed Forces as well.
I do hope the Turks keep excelling in design and manufacture of NATO standard products.

 

[Scorpiooo]

Any update as last rumored trial are in process for Z10ME

 

[farooqbhai007]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1387426087588741122

 

[Tornado23]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1387426087588741122

I want to ask who are making these fan made patches...

 

[Wolf]

Pakistan may explore possibilities of incorporating Russian or Chinese engine in its customized version of Turkish Atak helicopters.

Alternatively, Chinese Z-10 with some Turkish ATAK features.

 

[Rank]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1387426087588741122

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) Remember what I told you?
Pakistani establishment pissed off on this. There was a lot of ambiguity in the T129 deal. Turkish side never conveyed everything accurately intentionally. Perhaps, they knew the end results. But how long they will survive like this? So, here is the outcome. Our side wasn't happy with the performance of Z10 either. Z10 miserably failed in many conditions during local trials but we don’t have any option but to go for. Anyway, poor decision, poor strategy, and poor planning (as usual) on our side. Everything is messed up after waiting for 5 years. It could have been better if we approach Russians particularly in this. They have good attack helis after the U.S.

It happens when you don't initiate in-house R&D and start manufacturing critical weapon systems yourself on time instead of relying on others and here we were relying on a very immature industry when it comes to weapons. Turkey isn't a big supplier nor they have any experience of selling on a larger scale. They don't understand the importance, criticality, and situation of other countries. Pakistan is a very serious buyer of military equipment. We have serious enemies on both sides. On the other hand, Pakistani mil has serious level of budget constraints. Turkey doesn't realize this. We can't play ping pong like this. They might have experience of such non-sense but we won't tolerate such a non-serious attitude. You have to be fair and clear about what you're making and what you're getting from a third-party supplier when it comes to selling.

Take as an example, since day one, we haven't face any single issue regarding RD-93. That was the Chinese responsibility to make/break a deal with Russians in order to get RD-93 seamlessly without any hurdles. We are working with the Chinese on this and they're responsible for EVERY SINGLE from equipment to avionics. What happens btw Russia and China have nothing to do with us. That is the right way of dealing. What happened btw Turkey and the US, technically nothing to do with us.

First, Turkey should have learn the mechanics of the weapon business. You can’t play black/white games. They must ensure everything before making a deal or pitching whatever they have to the international customers.

Friendship etc has nothing to do with this. It’s a serious business!

 

[aziqbal]

Z10 failed miserably during the high altitude tests

we should not compromise quality

we should hold out for T129 whats few more years where we have waited 3 decades maybe even 4

 

[Rank]

Z10 failed miserably during the high altitude tests

we should not compromise quality

we should hold out for T129 whats few more years where we have waited 3 decades maybe even 4

"Z10 has ZERO quality from tech to built" (2017) quoting someone's remarks who knows how to operate and has a great understanding of these machines.

 

[SQ8]

Z10 failed miserably during the high altitude tests

we should not compromise quality

we should hold out for T129 whats few more years where we have waited 3 decades maybe even 4

Unfortunately , if the T-90’s roll from the east then Z-10s are going to have more of an impact than 1970s cobras armed with SALCOS missiles.
If anything, they can stall the desert front quite a bit.

"Z10 has ZERO quality from tech to built" (2017) quoting someone's remarks who knows how to operate and has a great understanding of these machines.

Pakistan has managed this ZERO quality with some hard work - unfortunately they are saddled with this quite often. Interestingly, it is Pakistan who usually provides the feedback that goes into improving quality for this manufacturing country but that is kept by them for domestic consumption while still sending us a little less quality.

 

[truthfollower]

"Z10 has ZERO quality from tech to built" (2017) quoting someone's remarks who knows how to operate and has a great understanding of these machines.

then why we are not going for z1 viper from USA? ready and store in hangers

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

then why we are not going for z1 viper from USA? ready and store in hangers

There is disagreement on the mode of payment. We want US to pay the manufacturer from the CSF and FMF while they want us to pay ourselves.