Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

[sancho]

Yeah, a lot of sources say its AESA, but there isn't any confirmed official source.

The pictures of the platform which came to Pakistan and the pictures of the latest model of ZDK-03 pasted previous page says something else.

Keep the difference in mind! The KJ 2000 does not have a rotodome, but 3 radar arrays in a triangle form if I'm not wrong. That's why that system should be an AESA radar, but the system that came to Pakistan had a rotodome as you pointed out and as LT.PRATEEK said, both makes no sense.

So the question is, will PAF get the fixed dome of the KJ 2000, or not and personally I would want to know if the KJ 2000 dome fits on Y-8, because it must be pretty heavy and looks bigger.
Btw, the aircraft that cam to Pakistan is a Y-8, the model instead is a Y-9 if I'm not wrong, so might show a future AWACS model that could be possible for PAF too.

 

[MJaa]

For the new guys who have no idea what you are talking about.

Go behind few pages and read the Ex-CAS interview, in which he clearly said it would having a dish mounted radar. Its not balance beam.

How many times the model pictures and interview of Ex-CAS has to be posted to confirm it.

If Pakistan had wanted Balance Beam version, then why the dish mounted prototype had come to Chaklala AB and was tested by PAF guys.

With all due respect Sir,
Information i provided comes from the interview given by the Ex-Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed (March 18, 2006 – March 18, 2009) to the AFM's editor Alan Warnes published in AirForces Monthly September 2008 under the name of PERFECTING THE PAF



if you dont believe me Look it up in Sept 2008 issue of air force monthly


In the Sept 2008 issue of AFM the then PAF Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed's interview clearly states that the Y-8F-600 airframe, designated as the ZDK-03, will have the "blade on top, not a rotating dome".

Ok Y-8 with rotating dome did came to Pakistan and we have seen few pictures of that, it came to Pakistan for evaluation like most of the other stuff that defense companies send but that doesn't mean it was selected.

It has been said that PAF was not happy with the platform and wanted improvements

Have anybody seen pictures of any improved version of Y-8 with rotating dome since?

On the other hand KJ-200 have moved from old Y-8 to Y-8 F600

anyways i will leave my argument for now and wait till end of this year when ZDK03 comes to Pakistan

 

[TaimiKhan]

Keep the difference in mind! The KJ 2000 does not have a rotodome, but 3 radar arrays in a triangle form if I'm not wrong. That's why that system should be an AESA radar, but the system that came to Pakistan had a rotodome as you pointed out and as LT.PRATEEK said, both makes no sense.

So the question is, will PAF get the fixed dome of the KJ 2000, or not and personally I would want to know if the KJ 2000 dome fits on Y-8, because it must be pretty heavy and looks bigger.
Btw, the aircraft that cam to Pakistan is a Y-8, the model instead is a Y-9 if I'm not wrong, so might show a future AWACS model that could be possible for PAF too.

Well Y-9 for the time being has been suspended or stopped and efforts were made to make the Y-8F600.

Chinese KJ-200 is based on the Y-8F600 models, and most probably PAF will be getting the Y-8F600. Y-8F600 has very much reached some of the specifications required for the Y-9. Engines changes, propellers changed and full glass cockpit and crew reduced.

And if PAF gets an AESA based AEW&C like the dish mounted on the KJ-2000, well its not like both would have the safe size, the PAF Y-8 can have a smaller sized radar panels, just like the size which we have seen on the current Y-8 with dish mounted radar. So with a smaller sized radar panels it will be lighter and Y-8 would be able to take it.

 

[TaimiKhan]

With all due respect Sir,
Information i provided comes from the interview given by the Ex-Chief of Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed (March 18, 2006 – March 18, 2009) to the AFM's editor Alan Warnes published in AirForces Monthly September 2008 under the name of PERFECTING THE PAF



if you dont believe me Look it up in Sept 2008 issue of air force monthly


In the Sept 2008 issue of AFM the then PAF Chief Marshal Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed's interview clearly states that the Y-8F-600 airframe, designated as the ZDK-03, will have the "blade on top, not a rotating dome".

Ok Y-8 with rotating dome did came to Pakistan and we have seen few pictures of that, it came to Pakistan for evaluation like most of the other stuff that defense companies send but that doesn't mean it was selected.

It has been said that PAF was not happy with the platform and wanted improvements

Have anybody seen pictures of any improved version of Y-8 with rotating dome since?

On the other hand KJ-200 have moved from old Y-8 to Y-8 F600

anyways i will leave my argument for now and wait till end of this year when ZDK03 comes to Pakistan

Well, i am providing 2 links of the Ex-ACM's interview which you have quoted, all three says says it will have rotating dish rather then a balance beam. If i am reading it the opposite, plz let me know.

"Aircraft models is ZDK-03, at the top of a rotating disk rather than the balance beam."

Pakistani Defence Forum > Acm's Latest Interview Lots Of Interesting Stuff


"Aircraft models is ZDK-03, at the top of a rotating disk rather than the balance beam."

PAF Falcons Forums • View topic - ACM Interview: PAF will purchase FC-20 by end of this year


Can you plz quote your links where it says it will be balance beam as what i quoted are the interview text of the interview the Ex-ACM had given.

 

[MJaa]

Well, i am providing 2 links of the Ex-ACM's interview which you have quoted, all three says says it will have rotating dish rather then a balance beam. If i am reading it the opposite, plz let me know.

"Aircraft models is ZDK-03, at the top of a rotating disk rather than the balance beam."

Pakistani Defence Forum > Acm's Latest Interview Lots Of Interesting Stuff


"Aircraft models is ZDK-03, at the top of a rotating disk rather than the balance beam."

PAF Falcons Forums • View topic - ACM Interview: PAF will purchase FC-20 by end of this year


Can you plz quote your links where it says it will be balance beam as what i quoted are the interview text of the interview the Ex-ACM had given.

Friend these are the links of Forums, Please see the AFM issue itself and issue would be resolved

 

[TaimiKhan]

Friend these are the links of Forums, Please see the AFM issue itself and issue would be resolved

I don't have the subscription to get AFM, plus its very interesting that all sources are reporting the same thing, while you are saying this.

Amazingly in last 2 years since its printing, no one on these forums have corrected this mistake or pointed out.

Why don't you post the original magazine interview directly here, lets see what it has.

 

[MJaa]

I don't have the subscription to get AFM, plus its very interesting that all sources are reporting the same thing, while you are saying this.

Amazingly in last 2 years since its printing, no one on these forums have corrected this mistake or pointed out.

Why don't you post the original magazine interview directly here, lets see what it has.

Ok sir it wont matter any more
here is pic and details from new AFM issue, so i do have to with you that it will be Y-8 F-600 AEW&C with top of a rotating disk

 

[fatman17]

DATE:07/05/10

SOURCE:Flight International

Pakistan to get Chinese AEW&C aircraft this year

By Leithen Francis

Pakistan has received its second Erieye radar-equipped Saab 2000, and will also accept its first Shaanxi ZDK-03 airborne early warning and control system aircraft before year-end.

Islamabad has four ZDK-03s on order, with deliveries due to start later this year, say air force sources. The type is a new variant of the Shaanxi Y8 AEW&C aircraft designed specifically for Pakistan.

The Chinese aircraft is powered by four turboprop engines and has a greater range than offered by the Saab Microwave Systems Erieye, the sources say.

The air force recently received its second Saab 2000 surveillance aircraft, and anticipates that it will receive its remaining two in the second and third quarters of this year.

Islamabad signed a mid-2006 contract for Erieye radar-equipped Saab 2000s

Pakistan's move to source AEW&C aircraft from both China and the West is indicative of its strategy to refrain from being overly reliant on any one ally. The USA imposed military sanctions against Pakistan from 1990 to 2005 in response to its testing nuclear weapons.

The air force's current fleet includes Lockheed Martin F-16s, Dassault Mirage III and 5 fighters, Chengdu F-7s and JF-17s; a new type developed jointly by China and Pakistan.

In terms of military transports, Pakistan flies Lockheed C-130s, but also operates Ilyushin Il-78 tankers.

 

[SQ8]

One really confusing decision made by the PAF which is not having a datalink compatible with every system. Sounds downright idiotic to separate western and Chinese systems from each other. So to ensure an Awac datalink to a Jf-17 there must be a Chinese Awac airborne. The Swedish system cant tell the thunder jack electronically about the situation in the sky unless it uses a radio. So wherever you have a Chinese system you have a Chinese Awac. Then if there is a F-16 airborne it needs the erieye to support it. It can fly around with 3 Y8's but cant see what they are seeing..Stupid idea just to protect sensitives. The only possible reason sensitivities will be compromised is if you have observers from the countries on board the aircraft trying to figure out what the other's product can see or not see. Isn't the PAF supposed to fly these planes?. Or will be be having swedes and Chinese sitting as class monitors looking out for it.
Datalinks need a compatible protocol and a secure radio. If you know what format the data the Swedish system generates and you know what format the Chinese system can generate, then you can design a SOC to read and convert data in real time. Heck I'll do it for a fee. And there wont be any security compromised since the systems will rest on the aircraft.
The Idea of having these systems "talk" via controllers and ground links is stupid as well, is the ground station protected by some shield? Cant it be hit?
even if there are 50 different ground stations all over the country cant they be taken out eventually?
If the swedes are so worried about the Chinese find out out secrets of the Erieye heck why don't we just separate the bases. And post guards. But compromising on your situational awareness just to appease some technological secrets for other countries. Stupid.

 

[Mani2020]

One really confusing decision made by the PAF which is not having a datalink compatible with every system. Sounds downright idiotic to separate western and Chinese systems from each other. So to ensure an Awac datalink to a Jf-17 there must be a Chinese Awac airborne. The Swedish system cant tell the thunder jack electronically about the situation in the sky unless it uses a radio. So wherever you have a Chinese system you have a Chinese Awac. Then if there is a F-16 airborne it needs the erieye to support it. It can fly around with 3 Y8's but cant see what they are seeing..Stupid idea just to protect sensitives. The only possible reason sensitivities will be compromised is if you have observers from the countries on board the aircraft trying to figure out what the other's product can see or not see. Isn't the PAF supposed to fly these planes?. Or will be be having swedes and Chinese sitting as class monitors looking out for it.
Datalinks need a compatible protocol and a secure radio. If you know what format the data the Swedish system generates and you know what format the Chinese system can generate, then you can design a SOC to read and convert data in real time. Heck I'll do it for a fee. And there wont be any security compromised since the systems will rest on the aircraft.
The Idea of having these systems "talk" via controllers and ground links is stupid as well, is the ground station protected by some shield? Cant it be hit?
even if there are 50 different ground stations all over the country cant they be taken out eventually?
If the swedes are so worried about the Chinese find out out secrets of the Erieye heck why don't we just separate the bases. And post guards. But compromising on your situational awareness just to appease some technological secrets for other countries. Stupid.

Sir PAF jf-17 and f-16 both use NATO standard data linking "Link -16" it means both can be data linked with Erieye and Chinese AWAC (as zdk-03 customized for PAF will surely have link-16 data linking ability as jf-17 have) so there is no problem of LINKING any of these aircrafts with either chinese or sweedish AWACS

The article of AFM mentions that only Erieye and chinese AWACS will not be data linked with each other but surely they both will be data linked with any type of aircrafts in LIKE JF-17,F-16 AND FC-20 and ground radars

 

[SQ8]

The article also mentions "the chinese awacs talks to the chinese aircraft, the erieye will talk to the western aircraft". I don't see any other meaning other than each system to its own bloc.

 

[Sapper]

The article also mentions "the chinese awacs talks to the chinese aircraft, the erieye will talk to the western aircraft". I don't see any other meaning other than each system to its own bloc.

Dear Santro,

You are correct ... PAF has inducted two different AEW&C systems, but in both of them, you'll find out that there is emphasis on "AEW" and not "C". PAF does not hold a deep strike doctrine, rather than strong defensive and swift/decisive low penetration strike capability. All of the Aircraft currently in inventory, and planned for future have max strike ranges of less than 500~800km, indicating that PAF plans to use them within confines of Pakistani territory and if necessary, strike close to border, but not very far, but with tremendous impunity.

Keeping this doctrine in mind, it seems logical that you control ("C") your aircraft from hardened command center and relay information through numerous and seemingly invisible communication outposts. Hardened bunkers are much difficult to destroy, when they are situated deep inside the border, protected with SAM and CAP cover. On the other hand, AEW&C systems are very high value soft targets, that could eventually fall prey to well placed medium and long range AAMs launched from a handful of kamikaze pilots.

PAF will operate both AEW&C and link fighters to ground controllers on defensive missions. On the other hand, when required to strike inside enemy territory, controllers present on AEW&C will communicate directly to supported fighters, who will fly only with supported AEW&C for offensive missions.

Regards,
Sapper

 

[Dazzler]

The only scenario is that both AWACS will not be entirely integrated with one another to keep the Westerners quiet for an obvious reason as Swedish had concerns from Chinese too. PAF is not dumb as to induct two systems that are unable to provide info and guidance to its aircraft when they need it most. But information between both systems will not be completely integrated. This does not mean that ZDK cannot guide f-16s or Erieye cant do the same for Thunders or FC-20s.

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

We all know that this decision of going with the chinese awacs was shoved down the throat of PAF by Gen. Musharraf.

The PAF retiring chief was so classless and crass in personality that the moment he retired, he started bashing Musharraf about it.

Musharraf made a very wise decision---he knew that the momentum was starting to go against pakistan---awacs was a neccessity---a mega force multiplier---for this time and act---he indeed had the vision to do what he did.

If it was left to PAF--we had a good chance of being scr-ewed one more time.

Lots of people are talking about mil standard datalinks----it all looks good on paper---the litmus test comes to light when the both of them actually talk to each other without remorse.

Western and eastern systems have a tendency of not understanding each other---if they work together---it is good for pakistan---but if they don't---it is not much of a loss---. If you look at the number of awacs and the viccinity of operational dimensions---it doesnot matter much.

Even if pak had 4 awacs---it would be like 500% increase in capabilities.

Gentlemen and some of you ladies----just look at the percentage of operational and tactical improvement by the induction of one system---multiply it by two systems and you have like a 1000% more enhancement.

Also it creates headache for the enemy---.

 

[SQ8]

Unfortunately, what still escapes me that even if the PAF is a defensive force, its ability to defend itself lies in putting enough pressure on the opposition to keep it from mounting any meaningful offensive.
But my actual issue with the data link is the inherent ability an Awacs gives to a linked aircraft to see out of its own radar range. If the new chief is so emphatic about network centric warfare then the first example would be the Jtids system introduced in the USAF and truly the first example of a network centric solution.
If a defending pilot flying a thunder knew from his display that 150 km out there is a MKI flight coming in from the northwest and a mirage flight returning from a strike from the southwest in a battle space full of combatants, it would really make his job easier of managing target selection and what his tasking is to handle. But if he can only do this if there is a chinese awac in the sky then its downright ridiculous.There are interviews of many F-15 pilots stating that since the introduction of Jtids their effectiveness and that of the E-3 has increased tenfold. My emphasis is not with the Erieye and Y-8 talking to each other, but to the jets. And if the GCI is meant to control the whole setup, then why mention datalinks for the fighters at all??
If the Erieye is just an AEW which by all its brochures and profile states that its an AEW&C(the first Swedish system was, it was just a an eye in the sky linked to GCI).
Datalinks especially amongst differing systems are an uphill task to design, I know it all too well.