Pakistan UAVs News & Discussions

[sparten]

Absolute beauty
It's shame that PAF went for TB2 when we were having such a remarkable program at home.

PAF will Induct Tejas before they accept a UAV from an Army program.

 

[Bilal.]

SHAHPAR 3 per abi @JamD ka analysis nahi aea?
Wo kia hai k S3's specifications are too nice to believe.
But it is based on already matured air frame of Shahpar 2 so I have some hope for its success.

It’s a different airframe and configuration all together.

BUT something going against TB2 being a stopgap is that Baykar is opening offices in Pakistan with the intentions of producing TB2s (or major parts) here. This must be on the promise of more orders from the PAF.

Or it could be due to offset obligations from the already bought ones?

 

[sparten]

Sorry friend, just busy with work. Haven't had a chance to look at things too closely. Also, all we have seen is models, so I don't even know if a prototype has been built or not. And if you say "but they are offering for export", I know many things that haven't completed development being offered for export so that's a very low bar. Basically, they know nobody is seriously going to place an order for 20 Shahpar 3s in 2023. It's just to give a little taste of what we may be developing.

As far as the development of the Shahpar program is concerned, I am very very happy that we are pursuing Shahpar in earnest. As I've said before, the Shahpar series is a mostly local program and the experience that it is bringing to our people is unprecedented. I am glad that some people had the vision to let the program to go from Shahpar 1 to Shahpar 2 - and now presumably to Shahpar 3. This is great news.

Also, a bit of bonus news. Remember how the Burraq (a CH-3) was an almost direct competitor to the Shahpar 1? I've heard that that program was canned. This is good IMHO because that was an organization developing something as a pissing contest causing needless duplication of effort. It's better to let the local design teams develop their skills on the Shahpar program, which now has decades of experience. I won't be surprised that the Shahpar series gets better and better.

Wasn’t Burraq a stop gap and nothing else? We needed a strike UCAV in 2012/3 and Shahpar version 1 wasn’t good enough.

 

[JamD]

Wasn’t Burraq a stop gap and nothing else? We needed a strike UCAV in 2012/3 and Shahpar version 1 wasn’t good enough.

A very likely explanation.

Or it could be due to offset obligations from the already bought ones?

I hope that you are right. I don't know the facts on the ground, I am only guessing.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

It’s a different airframe and configuration all together.

Airframe is same as that of Shahpar 2
Lets have a look:
SHAHPAR 3

Now Shahpar 2:

Wing configuration is different but same air frame design.

B/W what is the range of AL Battar Laser guided bomb? Any idea?

 

[farooqbhai007]

Airframe is same as that of Shahpar 2
Lets have a look:
SHAHPAR 3
View attachment 941957
Now Shahpar 2:
View attachment 941958
Wing configuration is different but same air frame design.

B/W what is the range of AL Battar Laser guided bomb? Any idea?

One on SH3 is LGK50 50kg micro LGB by Qaswa industries.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

One on SH3 is LGK50 50kg micro LGB by Qaswa industries.

Any idea about its range?

 

[Bilal.]

Airframe is same as that of Shahpar 2
Lets have a look:
SHAHPAR 3
View attachment 941957
Now Shahpar 2:
View attachment 941958
Wing configuration is different but same air frame design.

B/W what is the range of AL Battar Laser guided bomb? Any idea?

Brother, the fuselage is probably the same (slight difference in nose though). Airframe would include the entire structure including the wings.

For Al Battar, I would assume 18-20Km launched at altitude. That’s what similar Paveway LGB has.

 

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

 

[SQ8]

I was thinking why AWC went for Twin Boom design configuration in Shahpar 3 instead of traditional UAV designs like that of Shahpar 2. View attachment 941832
(B/W this is the 9th Shahpar of Block 2 series)

Any specific explanation for this?
@farooqbhai007
@JamD
@SQ8

there is nothing traditional about UAVs
@JamD @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can keep me honest

IDS(now GIDS) was started by a US returned aerospace guy and I saw the first Shahpar being built as a teen in the basement of one of the buildings here

Back then IDS was a basement operation and their chief UaV pilot also had a shop of his own in DHA phase 2 ext in Karachi before he left due to disagreements with the owner(basically told the owner that a design will not fly straight, owner disagreed and the design crashed so he blamed the pilot)

So, Shahpar was based upon what this guy had seen with Rutan designs and stable higher speed prop designs and that is where it came in.

There were also traditional high wing tail plane designs and then Satuma a few years later also had compount V biplanes they we’re trying to sell to the Sri Lankans against the LTTE.

So the twin boom isn’t exactly some unique choice but a generally easy to build form using the fiberglass/plywood method generally used for UAVs. It is also stable and easy to scale up because the basic aerodynamics are sound.

 

[sparten]

Are Satuma still around? They made quite a lot of money back in the GWOT days since they and IDS were the only game in town.
Haven’t seen much since then.

 

[JamD]

there is nothing traditional about UAVs
@JamD @Bilal Khan (Quwa) can keep me honest

IDS(now GIDS) was started by a US returned aerospace guy and I saw the first Shahpar being built as a teen in the basement of one of the buildings here
View attachment 942085
Back then IDS was a basement operation and their chief UaV pilot also had a shop of his own in DHA phase 2 ext in Karachi before he left due to disagreements with the owner(basically told the owner that a design will not fly straight, owner disagreed and the design crashed so he blamed the pilot)

So, Shahpar was based upon what this guy had seen with Rutan designs and stable higher speed prop designs and that is where it came in.

There were also traditional high wing tail plane designs and then Satuma a few years later also had compount V biplanes they we’re trying to sell to the Sri Lankans against the LTTE.

So the twin boom isn’t exactly some unique choice but a generally easy to build form using the fiberglass/plywood method generally used for UAVs. It is also stable and easy to scale up because the basic aerodynamics are sound.

So you've told this story several times here and some of the things you say don't mesh with what I think I know. Perhaps we can reach a suitable narrative of what actually happened.

Firstly, I'm 99% sure you're talking about Raja Sabri of ID. Now some facts:
1. Raja Sabri worked for SUPARCO according to himself (https://www.bolnews.com/newspaper/urban-insight/2022/08/in-conversation-with-raja-sabri-khan/ , https://www.neduet.edu.pk/sites/default/files/users/registrar_department/Profiles/RSK PROFILE.pdf ).
2. His Shahpar looking aircraft is still with him and can be seen on his website:

EDIT: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/idae...hB?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
Towards the end of the video you can see an evolution of this very aircraft.


Now what I conclude from the above:
1. You of all people know the amount of compartmentalization that happens in Pakistani idaras. So I find it hard to believe that a system that he developed at SUPARCO ended up at AWC.
2. His aircraft is very obviously just a Rutan EZ. Shahpar has several differences from this aircraft. Also NDC Burraq (CH3) also has the same basic shape. So I really think this is a case of an easy design being used by a lot of people rather than a case of IP theft.

My interpretation of this is that Raja Sabri developed this Rutan EZ AFTER his time at SUPARCO, why else would it be in his offices and on his website? Pretty sure I saw videos of him with that aircraft in his korangi offices.

As far as GIDS is concerned. I am very very sure GIDS is just the marketing front for NESCOM and is NOT any evolution of ID. I can't find the video right now but I am pretty sure Raja Sabri had a major falling out with SUPARCO. I don't see how ID became GIDS. GIDS markets products from NESCOM, AWC, NDC, NRDI, and what not.





Twin Booms @Muhammad Saftain Anjum :
There are likely other reasons but I believe the primary reason is structural. An aircraft gets more efficient (read fly higher and with more payload) as the wingspan gets bigger and bigger. However, making wingspan bigger is limited by how flexible your structural design is. One way to achieve bigger wingspan with the same materials/structural design is to include twin booms. This turns two very long cantilever wings into three slightly smaller wings, only two of which are cantilever.

Some thing to note: Turkey didn't require twin booms for Anka (17.5m) , which basically has the same wingspan as Shahpar 3 (19.5) so that tells you about the maturity of their materials and structural design relative to us. Their 24 m wingspan Aksungur has twin booms.

 

[Bilal.]

Are Satuma still around? They made quite a lot of money back in the GWOT days since they and IDS were the only game in town.
Haven’t seen much since then.

They had a box wing design they were testing back in the days that could do much higher altitudes for it’s size class. Been searching for its picture but it but no luck.

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

There are likely other reasons but I believe the primary reason is structural.

My perspective was that AWC went with Single Engine Twin Boom design so that they can latter scale it up into Twin Engine Twin Boom design for HALE UCAV.
Here is GIDS group 5+ UAV concept:

Since this HALE project is cancelled,and we have seen Wind Tunnel agreements with Turkish Aerospace,i suspect AWC will go for a completely new design (may be a stealth design who know).

 

[Zarvan]

My perspective was that AWC went with Single Engine Twin Boom design so that they can latter scale it up into Twin Engine Twin Boom design for HALE UCAV.
Here is GIDS group 5+ UAV concept:
View attachment 942191
Since this HALE project is cancelled,and we have seen Wind Tunnel agreements with Turkish Aerospace,i suspect AWC will go for a completely new design (may be a stealth design who know).

Cancelled in a sense that I think we would get AKSUNGUR instead.