Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
From what I have read/heard, we will be inducting 5 SAAB 2000s and 5 KJ-2000s evntually. AWACS can be extremely efficient force multipliers, but having two separate sets of AWACS systems will prevent us from using them to their fullest potential.
Therefore to answer some of the questions about their integration. I do not think its a question of if but how . Pakistan will certainly try to indigenously develop a way of ingtegrating the two systems, giving Pakistan supreme coverage and increased capability in warfare.
From what I have read/heard, we will be inducting 5 SAAB 2000s and 5 KJ-2000s evntually. AWACS can be extremely efficient force multipliers, but having two separate sets of AWACS systems will prevent us from using them to their fullest potential.
Therefore to answer some of the questions about their integration. I do not think its a question of if but how . Pakistan will certainly try to indigenously develop a way of ingtegrating the two systems, giving Pakistan supreme coverage and increased capability in warfare.
Possibly, but on the other hand would it not be better to standardize Erieye and a future MPA on the same platform? I remember H Khan on PakDef clearly stating that PN would consider replacing the P-3Cs after 2019...If PN ever go for Erieye, I hope its on the exact same platform as that of the PAF. Commonality of platforms ensures that support and engineering skill sets can be shared across the two sister services to maintain these assets. More platform types mean more headaches with supply chain, engineering skills etc.
Should note that Saab completed its feasibility studies of integrating Erieye to the ATR-series. It's interesting because the ATR-72 ASW/MP is pitched as a new-gen MPA that might interest PN when it plans to phase-out the P-3Cs. I think it would suit anyone in the long-run to maintain strong commonality with their Erieye and MPA...
PICTURE: Saab unveils C-295 Erieye concept
ATR 72 ASW / ATR 72 MP
Unfortunately the Saab-2000 MPA lacks the ASW and AShW capabilities that P-3C, P-8 and ATR-72 ASW/MP have.or we could opt for SAAB-2000 MPA.
Unfortunately the Saab-2000 MPA lacks the ASW and AShW capabilities that P-3C, P-8 and ATR-72 ASW/MP have.
http://www.saabgroup.com/NR/rdonlyr...375614DFECA8/7521/Saab_2000_MPA_Datasheet.pdf
I can judge because the official Saab document clearly shows the reader that the Saab 2000 MPA does not have anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare capabilities. These are not secret abilities that would make one aircraft a decisive choice over another, but simply profiles directed towards potential customers.just how could you judge a system's cabability when its just a concept? all we know that Saab is currently working on MPA, and SIGSTAR that could be of PAF/PN's interests. again, the true capability is still not known and neither will be available online.
I can judge because the official Saab document clearly shows the reader that the Saab 2000 MPA does not have anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare capabilities. These are not secret abilities that would make one aircraft a decisive choice over another, but simply profiles directed towards potential customers.
....so do you see anything about anti-ship (AShW) or anti-submarine (ASW) warfare on the list?
If PN ever go for Erieye, I hope its on the exact same platform as that of the PAF. Commonality of platforms ensures that support and engineering skill sets can be shared across the two sister services to maintain these assets. More platform types mean more headaches with supply chain, engineering skills etc.