What's new

PAKISTAN NAVY Invites Bids for Fixed Wing and VTOL UAV

Enough Said! :cheers:

Oh, that's the easy way out. Nice attempt at distraction from the fact that you didn't know (and didn't bother to consider) the information about this large program.

As is indicated by several source, the need to economize to continue spending in Vietnam was as much a factor as the actual drone program characteristics. And, further, why don't you look in that PDF to see the considerable difference in success in US and Japanese service: there is a great discussion of the factors explaining that difference, which is eminently relevant to the U(C)AV operators of today and tomorrow.

Short version; the US treated their as cheap expendable unit (which was logical, considering it was initially in designed to drop a nuclear depth charge, the explosion of which it wouldn't survive), to be operated by rotating non-specialist personnel, while the Japanese treated theirs as primary ASW tools, took care of them and assigned permanent, specially trained operators. With predictable results in terms of different rates of operational losses.

Talk more when you're done being obnoxious.
 
.
No It has not! They have only tested it so far from their K130 Corvettes!

"In the summer of 2008 the S-100 successfully completed a three-week series of test flights from a German Navy K130 corvette as well as with a German Army reconnaissance unit. Insiders say that it is common knowledge that the S-100 has been accepted by both arms of the German military and is currently being integrated into their systems. It has also been demonstrated to Spain, Pakistan, India and is currently under test in France and the U.S."
Schiebel Showing Off Camcopter UAV | AVIATION WEEK


"The German Navy has ordered a first batch of 6 modified Camcopter S-100 with improved sensors for the use on the Braunschweig class corvettes. Also the German Army plans to purchase the Camcopter S-100 for land-based missions"
Camcopter S-100 UAV - Air Force Technology
http://www.marineforum.info/HEFT_5-2009/Camcopter/camcopter.html

More being planned. The total number of Camcopters ordered to date by various customers is 200
 
.
Oh, that's the easy way out. Nice attempt at distraction from the fact that you didn't know (and didn't bother to consider) the information about this large program.

As is indicated by several source, the need to economize to continue spending in Vietnam was as much a factor as the actual drone program characteristics. And, further, why don't you look in that PDF to see the considerable difference in success in US and Japanese service: there is a great discussion of the factors explaining that difference, which is eminently relevant to the U(C)AV operators of today and tomorrow.

Short version; the US treated their as cheap expendable unit (which was logical, considering it was initially in designed to drop a nuclear depth charge, the explosion of which it wouldn't survive), to be operated by rotating non-specialist personnel, while the Japanese treated theirs as primary ASW tools, took care of them and assigned permanent, specially trained operators. With predictable results in terms of different rates of operational losses.

Talk more when you're done being obnoxious.

Thanks for your 'expert' opinion here!

If this platform was so successful as you have put it, why was it scrapped by the USN? Surely its been a long time since Vietnam and all!! Having 700 odd birds does not mean that the VTOL platform was a success, it simply means that some supplier was able to convince some idiot General at the time that he needed this crap!! If I get into numerous VTOL platforms that have been tested by the US militaries in the past, this forum would not have the space.

US is still dabbling with FireScout and the Boeing VTOL platforms that were initially rejected by the users!! The VTOL UAV platform is still 'experimental' in maritime environment and otherwise!! So unless a major war-fighting military in the world is using the VTOL as an in-service platform, all that remains is essentially marketing pitch by the global sellers of such technology!

So park your freaking patronizing white boy cause it ain't worth crap here!!
 
.
"In the summer of 2008 the S-100 successfully completed a three-week series of test flights from a German Navy K130 corvette as well as with a German Army reconnaissance unit. Insiders say that it is common knowledge that the S-100 has been accepted by both arms of the German military and is currently being integrated into their systems. It has also been demonstrated to Spain, Pakistan, India and is currently under test in France and the U.S."
Schiebel Showing Off Camcopter UAV | AVIATION WEEK

"The German Navy has ordered a first batch of 6 modified Camcopter S-100 with improved sensors for the use on the Braunschweig class corvettes. Also the German Army plans to purchase the Camcopter S-100 for land-based missions"
Camcopter S-100 UAV - Air Force Technology
http://www.marineforum.info/HEFT_5-2009/Camcopter/camcopter.html

More being planned. The total number of Camcopters ordered to date by various customers is 200

Great everything has been 'ordered' and 'planned'!! Nothing actually 'executed' yet!! Please wake me up when the German Army actually starts using the S-100!!

Right!!! Such 'NEWS' are the bread and butter implants (dime a dozen) for such manufacturers!! Thanks for sharing though, seems like you are doing a good job for your employer here!! :wave:

And the S-100 UAV's used by UAE are primarily a 'mess' project in itself whereas it was created primarily to please a few 'friends'!! :pop:
 
Last edited:
.
he lost nothing - the GoP did not allocate the funds as it did not have them

This is an important thing, and I would like the member to think about this.

Why did the navy ask for these machines ?
and not just Navy, which institution / department is responsible for making the requirements ?

if one can understand / answer the above two questions,

One will also understand the nature of these contracts, and why they are inherently prone to corruption.
:pakistan:
 
.
Great everything has been 'ordered' and 'planned'!! Nothing actually 'executed' yet!! Please wake me up when the German Army actually starts using the S-100!!

Right!!! Such 'NEWS' are the bread and butter implants (dime a dozen) for such manufacturers!! Thanks for sharing though, seems like you are doing a good job for your employer here!! :wave:

And the S-100 UAV's used by UAE are primarily a 'mess' project in itself whereas it was created primarily to please a few 'friends'!! :pop:

The difference between the German Navy "having conducted flight trials", "having ordered" and "having received" camcopters will not be lost on the readers. The first of six systems ordered by the German navy for three of its Braunschweig class corvettes is due for delivery in 2013.
http://www.esdpa-org.eu/newsletter/Lettre-APESD-09.pdf (page 6)
http://www.schiebel.net/pdf/2009-08-12%20globaldefence-net.pdf (page 5)
 
Last edited:
.
Thanks for your 'expert' opinion here!

If this platform was so successful as you have put it, why was it scrapped by the USN? Surely its been a long time since Vietnam and all!! Having 700 odd birds does not mean that the VTOL platform was a success, it simply means that some supplier was able to convince some idiot General at the time that he needed this crap!! If I get into numerous VTOL platforms that have been tested by the US militaries in the past, this forum would not have the space.

US is still dabbling with FireScout and the Boeing VTOL platforms that were initially rejected by the users!! The VTOL UAV platform is still 'experimental' in maritime environment and otherwise!! So unless a major war-fighting military in the world is using the VTOL as an in-service platform, all that remains is essentially marketing pitch by the global sellers of such technology!

So park your freaking patronizing white boy cause it ain't worth crap here!!

Didn't know Navies were run by generals....

RQ-8A

As the US Navy was withdrawing its RQ-2 Pioneers from service, it began to seek a second generation UAV. The Navy requirement specified a vertical takeoff & landing (VTOL) aircraft ...

There were three finalists in the competition, which was designated "VTOL-UAV" or "VTUAV". Bell, Sikorsky, and a collaboration of Teledyne Ryan and Schweizer Aircraft submitted designs. The Ryan-Schweizer UAV was selected as the winner in the spring of 2000.

MQ-8B

Although progress on the project had been regarded as satisfactory, the Navy decided the Fire Scout didn't meet their needs after all, and cut funding for production in December 2001. However, the development program continued, and Northrop Grumman pitched a range of improved configurations to anyone who was interested. As it turned out, the U.S. Army was very interested, awarding a contract for seven improved "RQ-8B" evaluation machines in late 2003. In 2006, it was redesignated "MQ-8B".

The Army interest revived Navy interest in the program, with the Navy ordering eight Sea Scout MQ-8B derivatives for evaluation. In January 2010, the Army terminated its involvement with the Fire Scout contending that the Shadow UAV could meet the Army's needs
Northrop Grumman MQ-8 Fire Scout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the DASH QH-50: if it was experimental would the USN have modified 240 U.S. Navy destroyers and operated this drone from these ships for 10 years (and the JMSDF for 18)? And given the number produced and the aforementioned record of use, is it not possible (perhaps even plausible) that budget cuts associated with the Vietnam War effort forced the cessation of DASH in favor of the Army’s costs of maintaining a 1 million man presence in Vietnam, rather than 'technical problems'? Just look at what the hard time the US military has today maintaining its military combat presence in foreign countries.

PS: who says I'm white and if I were, what does it have to do with any of the above? Poor form.
 
Last edited:
. .
Zhuhai10: PICTURES: China reveals armed UAV designs

Zhuhai10: PICTURES: China reveals armed UAV designs

Interesting Developments in China vis-a-vis fixed wing and VTOL UAV's!! Good option for the PN to consider as Chinese equipment these days is being under suppliers credit with payments spread over 20 years!!
 
.
defence.professionals | defpro.com

Boeing to Provide A160T Hummingbird VTOL Unmanned Aircraft for US Marine Corps

ST. LOUIS | Boeing [NYSE: BA] today announced that U.S. Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) has awarded the company a $29.9 million contract for Cargo Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Services to support the U.S. Marine Corps. Boeing will provide two A160T Hummingbird unmanned vehicles, three ground control stations, spares, training and support.

The A160T aircraft designated for the contract are near completion on the Boeing production line that started up in March at the company's Mesa, Ariz., facility.

This government-owned, contractor-operated contract is the first for Hummingbirds from the company-funded production line. It calls for a period of predeployment operations at a military facility in the continental United States, followed by options for a six-month deployment to support Operation Enduring Freedom.

"We look forward to working with NAVAIR and the Marines to provide this important capability to warfighters on the front lines," said Vic Sweberg, Unmanned Airborne Systems director for Boeing. "The A160T has proven its ability to autonomously deliver cargo to forward operating bases in austere conditions in a demonstration setting, and we are confident in its ability to do the same in battlefield conditions."

This past March, under contract from the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, Boeing demonstrated the A160T's ability to deliver at least 2,500 pounds of cargo from one simulated forward-operating base to another base 75 nautical miles away in less than the required six hours. The simulated mission delivered 1,250-pound sling loads over two 150-nautical-mile round trips, with the A160T operating autonomously on a pre-programmed mission.
 
.
VTOL's have a serious drawback. They have too many moving parts in-flight therefore very high chances of breakdowns in a tough environment

This remark made me wonder: if this is true, then why do services and navies in particular use (shipborn) helicopters at all?
 
.
Schiebel had offered the above (around 3 years ago) equipment as a package (with 10 air vehicles & 4 GCS) to PN for a total cost of EUR11.5 million! In this package only the Air Vehicle cost is EUR400,000 each.

(to calculate latest prices, please add approx 5% inflation rate for every year until 2010!)

By comparison:

In 2009, Raytheon was awarded a $151 million contract by the U.S. Navy's NATO SeaSparrow program office to produce 186 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles, with an option for $210.3 million to produce an additional 255 missiles. The agreement will also provide NSPO consortium member navies with spare parts and missile containers.

This translates to a cost per ESSM missile of just over $810,000-$830,000 including containers and spare parts
Source: Raytheon Signs $151 Million Evolved SeaSparrow Missile Contract

Unit cost for RGM-84 Harpoon (block II) is $1,200,000.
Source: The US Navy -- Fact File

Estimated unit cost for a mk54 ASW torpedo is around $1 million each.
Source: Team Torpedo: Raytheon Partners to Support MK48 and MK54 Requirements

If you purchase a single ship with 2x twin launchers for Harpoon and 2x triple torpedo tubes for lightweight ASW torpedoes, then you are likely to also purchase a minimum of 4-8 Harpoon missiles and 6-12 such torpedoes to arm it i.e. expend between $10.5M and $21M on just these munitions. You may also buy an inert training round for each type of munition for training purposes. Further, every so often (say 2x per decade for each munition type) you have a live-firing exercise in which munitions are expended, which then needs to be replaced. So you might spend something like $17.5-28.2M on just these 2 types of munitions over the course 10 years.

Against that backdrop, suppose you use a camcopter from this ship and loose one every year for 10 years. At the quoted pricelevel that would add up to a total cost of $4M. That is 12.5-18.5% of the combined total expenditure on these 2 types of munitions plus camcopters over 10 years. Factor in the use of a SAM like ESSM on this ship and that proportion goes down.

Is 1 camcopters per ship per year a reasonable or unreasonable rate of attrition? Consider the US QH-50 DASH (Drone Anti-Submarine Helicopter) program discussed elswhere in this thread: 755 drones produced in the period 1962-1969. Fleet operational appearance in November of 1962. DASH operations ceased fleet wide on November 30, 1970 after the U.S. government had invested over $275 million dollars on the aircraft side of that Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) program (in all about $350,000 per drone). Remaining drones still are used today outside navy service. Japans continued to use its drones through 1977. In all some 240 ships were equipped for DASH, which suggest 3-4 drones were built per ship fitted for it over the 7 year operational lifetime of the USN program (i.e. 4-6 over 10 years).

According to the US General Accounting Office (GAO), DASH losses in USN service were due to:
80% of all losses of QH-50 vehicles were due to either ship based or airborne electronic system failures
10% were due to Controller-Pilot-Error
5% were due to enemy action over Vietnam
5% were due to airframe/engine failure.

The Japanse managed a significantly lower attrition rate than the USN through different operational practices, including better maintenance and permanent assignment of specially trained operating personnel. This not withstanding the fact that the drone itself had been designed as one-shot weapon system (delivery of a nuclear depth charge) i.e. intended to be expendible and therefor constructed relatively cheap, with little systemic redundancy.
 
Last edited:
.
This article establishes the direction in which the US Army and US Navy are currently going into regarding the usage of VTOL UAV's. Some conclusions. They are in agreement to use larger platform with greater payload carrying capacities & still the said VTOL technology is in test/ trials phase.

USMC splits unmanned cargo resupply contract

Rivals Lockheed Martin and Boeing will both provide unmanned cargo resupply services to the US Marine Corps under a split $75 million fixed-price contract award, the Pentagon announced on 2 December.

Under the deal, Lockheed, together with manufacturer Kaman Aerospace, will get $45.8 million to operate the K-Max unmanned helicopter, while Boeing will receive $29.2 million to use its A160T Hummingbird to deliver cargo to Marines in Afghanistan.

The systems will be government-owned and contractor-operated, says the US Navy, which handles USMC contracts. Both contracts include development of two air vehicles, three remote ground control stations and a Quick Reaction Assessment (QRA). Each contract also includes a separate fixed-price option for a six-month deployment.

“By evaluating two different systems, we have the ability to accelerate development of technology and use it immediately to support the warfighter while maintaining competition,” says said Rear Adm. Bill Shannon, programme executive officer for unmanned aviation and strike weapons.

The Navy plans to conduct the QRA next summer to prove the systems’ ability to sustain cargo-carrying capability in an operational environment. Immediately following a successful QRA, one contractor's in-country service option will be exercised and their system will deploy to Afghanistan.

“While we only plan on deploying one system after a successful QRA, we will explore options for using the second system for future operational missions and/or science and technology development, should it also meet performance requirements,” says Capt. Tim Dunigan, programme manger for navy and Marine Corps multi-mission tactical unmanned air systems.

Both competitors have already completed one round of flight demonstrations for the Pentagon, the Kaman/Lockheed under a contract awarded in August 2009 and Boeing in March 2010.

“The K-MAX unmanned aircraft system was specifically designed for the battlefield cargo resupply mission,” says Lockheed. The unmanned helicopter boasts a four-hook cargo carousel, which the company says makes K-MAX “capable of delivering more cargo to more locations in one flight than any other unmanned rotorcraft”. K-Max can carry 2721.6kg (6,000lbs) of cargo at sea level and more than 1,814.3kg (4,000lbs) at 10,000ft.

“The A160T has proven its ability to autonomously deliver cargo to forward operating bases in austere conditions in a demonstration setting, and we are confident in its ability to do the same in battlefield conditions,” says Vic Sweberg, Boeing’s Unmanned Airborne Systems director.

Boeing has two Hummingbirds currently in production in Mesa, Arizona that will go to the Marines, the company says.

Two recent crashes – one a US Army Aviation Applied Technology Directorate-owned A160T on a California flightline on 28 July and the other in Belize on 4 September during US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) testing – are still under investigation.

The Hummingbird, designated the YMQ-18A by the Pentagon, with its patented adjustable rotor speed technology, holds the record for endurance in its class, at 18.7h.
 
.
Interestingly, both these started from a proven manned helicopter design, minimizing platform risks, allowing developmental attention to focus on controlling unmanned, even autonomous flight.
 
.
Following are bidding for the PN VTOL UAV Tender

a. Camcopter S-100 (from Schiebel of Austria)

b. APID 55 (from Cybaero of Sweden)

c. NEO S-300 (from Swiss UAV)

d. Skeldar (from SAAB Aerospace)

e. Museco (from EMT of Germany)

NONE of these platforms is currently in service with ANY Navy around the world & almost all are currently experimental. Hope NHQ wises up soon enough to realize that now is not the time to invest in VTOL UAV's. Rather, concentrate on fixed wings made locally like the UQAB UAV purchased last year & establish & develop the in-house capability to first operate locally made technology before looking outside.
 
Last edited:
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom