Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

[Scorpiooo]

Are you even aware of the differences between Erieye and ZDK-03? In terms of range and reliability?

@Blacklight Cleanly he dont. Its simple comparing old mehran with new civic

I dont have a lead, just a logical assumption really. Realistically, we either have Europe or Turkey for our new EW platforms(when we need them). I am unsure about the offerings from Europe since i cant recall anything off the top of my head. However, Turkey is in a position to develop the Havasoj and export it reasonably freely creating an opportunity for Pakistan to be able to purchase a next gen EW platform. We are building our infrastructure around Turkish communications/ew systems, logically it makes sense to go for the Havasoj next.


As of now i think 3 DA20 are sufficient since we arent really using them for anything besides high risk operations, of course, we could always do with more but it should be sufficient for now

Agree totally that we need increase number , but my point is 3 will nit be enough after 27 feb incident, we D20 played vital role in it, unfortunately enemy agian in mood of misadventure, in case of multiple misadventure at same time we need them or what is any of it damaged (we cant forget karachi base attach on saabs)

 

[Bossman]

Does anyone know whether such a statement was realeased by SAAB regarding the 3 Erieye radars we bought in 2016 or 2017???

Yes

 

[Akh1112]

in my opinion we dont need more Western AWACS we need more Chinese

4 x KJ-500 AWACS to add to the current ZDK-03 fleet of 4 to give 8

8 x Erieye should cover the rest we need 16 x AWACS to provide 24/7 coverage for each sector North, South, East and West

4 aircraft in each sector with 1 in the air, 1 ready to take off when one lands, one in overhaul and one in shake down mode after flight

this will ensure all 4 corners of Pakistan are protected

You are aware that a fleet size of 11 is sufficent for 24/7 coverage of the airspace.

 

[Scorpiooo]

You are aware that a fleet size of 11 is sufficent for 24/7 coverage of the airspace.

Sir as pee rough calculation with these new inductions considering 2 to 3 , adding 6 pervious will take total to 8 to 9 saab 2000 with awacs remaining will be vip and training role .
@Akh1112. i am right or missing something here ?

 

[aziqbal]

it amazes me how many Pakistanis still in 2020 have this gareeb and lachar mentality

Yes lets buy Western equipment our masters will not be happy typical victim mentality

for 76 x F16s we have 7-8 Erieye and yet we are close to over 120 x JF17 but still we want more Erieye and not Chinese AWACS like KJ-500 which btw is more advanced than the ZDK-03 we have

and then we have more silly comments saying we cant afford 4 extra AWACS when we already 11 operational just gets worse

has anyone here even actually seen a AWACS in their life other than on Youtube? you do realise range is not the only factor we dont need range our strategic depth is next to zero we cant hide in our airspace

Chinese AWACS comes with the unknown factor, ones that outweighs the benefits of a better AWACS from the West like anti-jamming, tracking and offensive capabilities

but yet time and time again Pakistanis always look up and West for hand outs, just because its Western means its great and unbeatable, this is what we call gareeb and lachar mentality and too many fan boys love thinking like this

Can you tell me how PAF managed to scramble vipers to intercept F22?

pardon me can you repeat this? when you make ridiculous unsubstantiated reports this like you are giving fanboys on this forum a chance to jump up and down and I ask you to refrain from making bombastic silly claims like this without providing any evidence as some of us here are well known to know our stuff and not so gullible

 

[araz]

oh please I asked you for your source for your ridiculous claims and you derailed the thread to avoid getting caught out, oh I heard, oh I seen oh I read somewhere

now that you have been cut down to size next time think before you post I will be watching you

Gentlemen.
I am only intervening as anyone who makes peace between two brotyers enters Jannah. So for the sake of the Ramadan that has just gone by please do not continue down this line. You are both senior and respected posters. If there is no resolution please agree to disagree and move on. To be fair if @Blacklight is a professional he will not be able to provide you a reference. By the same token he should perhaps not make too many claims to rock the boat too much. It becomes really difficult if you make claims which cannot be backed up for people to not question the veracity of your claims.
Anyways please lets continue on civilly. I think with respect to the topic of ZDK03 there were reports of some difficulties in the upgrade process to KLJ500. So this maybe PAF's way of confirming those rumours. With the work carried out on th Erieyes the cost per unit has gone down significantly which might make it a much more attractive option.
A

 

[Zarvan]

Ref: Item in bold.

Anything I have said so far, has already been said on this forum by other more honorable members. It is not breaking news.

On the ZDK-03's - prior to their system upgrades, of which the radar was not included, it was no where near the Legacy Erieye. Even after the upgrade, It cannot match Erieye, in either range, or reliability. But to win useless online accolades, some people keep firing arrows in the air. It is bound to hit somewhere.

You on the other hand, I must thank for your initiative. May Allah reward you for your efforts.

Btw when I got the notification that you had tagged me, I thought today I will get the coveted red star

Best Regards!

At least for some people's understanding please tell them that there is no such thing as 100 % stealth or undetectable. People here have some hilarious notions about stealth thing.

 

[Bilal.]

At least for some people's understanding please tell them that there is no such thing as 100 % stealth or undetectable. People here have some hilarious notions about stealth thing.

That’s why they are called LO or VLO(Low or Very Low they are not NO(Non Observable - Just coined that up). They are optimized on certain angles and frequency range.

 

[Blacklight]

At least for some people's understand please tell them that there is no such thing as 100 % stealth or undetectable. People here have some hilarious notions about stealth thing.

First lets establish something, Stealth aircraft are not Jinn. They have a radar / IR signature, although one that is minuscule, and normal radars would detect them too late, if at all.

PAF Air Defence Directorate's, recent induction of the Chinese JY-27A is not its first attempt into the realm of stealth a/c tracking. VERA and then VERA NG have been there for a decade plus.

These stealth tracking systems work by being cued by the likes of TPS-77. Data from multiple units is assimilated, in real time, and range, altitude, heading of an a/c is produced. This can further be updated to QRA a/c's via radio or data links.

PAF is one of the few services in the world to posses this capability.

Once a QRA a/c has a stealth a/c in sight, its best bet to engage it, would be an IR based A2A missile. It's another issue, that severe political repercussions would follow.

Note: QRA = Quick Reaction Alert, this is not the terminology PAF uses, but RAF does, and unfortunately for me it is engraved in my head.

 

[airomerix]

it amazes me how many Pakistanis still in 2020 have this gareeb and lachar mentality

I'd like to pitch in with my limited knowledge here.

Yes lets buy Western equipment our masters will not be happy typical victim mentality

For better or for worse, western technology as we put it has been preferred due to factors such as better safety standards, better metallurgy, greater maturity due to learnings incorporated from military operations/exercises from the past 50 years.

In 1988, we were denied E-3A and offered E-2C instead. We rejected it because E-2C's performance in mountainous terrain was not what we had envisioned (referring to radar performance). Hence this speaks volumes about Pakistan's 'pick and choose' mindset as compared to what you're quoting.

for 76 x F16s we have 7-8 Erieye and yet we are close to over 120 x JF17 but still we want more Erieye and not Chinese AWACS like KJ-500 which btw is more advanced than the ZDK-03 we have

It does not work this way. The acquisition of Erieye makes more sense due to fleet commonality and better overall capability. I will talk about capability in the later portion.

and then we have more silly comments saying we cant afford 4 extra AWACS when we already 11 operational just gets worse

AWACS is an expensive platform. But it better be worth it once acquired. It should serve the purpose. This is what matters.

has anyone here even actually seen a AWACS in their life other than on Youtube? you do realise range is not the only factor we dont need range our strategic depth is next to zero we cant hide in our airspace

It does not matter.

Chinese AWACS comes with the unknown factor, ones that outweighs the benefits of a better AWACS from the West like anti-jamming, tracking and offensive capabilities

I wish this was true.

but yet time and time again Pakistanis always look up and West for hand outs, just because its Western means its great and unbeatable, this is what we call gareeb and lachar mentality and too many fan boys love thinking like this

pardon me can you repeat this? when you make ridiculous unsubstantiated reports this like you are giving fanboys on this forum a chance to jump up and down and I ask you to refrain from making bombastic silly claims like this without providing any evidence as some of us here are well known to know our stuff and not so gullible

Please refer below.


My Assessment of ZDK 03 vis a vis SAAB 2000


System Capability

ZDK-03 radar covers a full 360 degrees in azimuth and we can't know if it is AESA or not (this is not public information). Erieye on the other hand has a smaller dual side fixed planer array antenna which covers a maximum of 120 degrees on each side (azimuth mode). It is an 'advanced' AESA with pulse doppler multi-mode capability.

One of the primary reasons why Erieye was based at Kamra was due to its powerful data/sig processing capability over land and mountainous terrain as compared to ZDK-03. Technically speaking, radar clutter signals reflected over land are stronger (also means more complex) as compared to clutter signals from the sea. Hence, the AWACS radar's which possess powerful signal processing and better clutter handling capability is based on land. Mountainous terrain, the complex net of ground based radars and their noise, birds, vehicles, smaller drone traffic, varying weather conditions all contribute to the increased complexity of the radars scanning airspace over land, while the sea clutter can be handled by the weaker radars such as ZDK 03 in this case.

I will not be commenting on the radar ranges since it is sensitive information and cannot be discussed.

Carrier Capability

SAAB 2000 is a twin engine turboprop that is very efficient in fuel consumption and long term performance from a sustainment standpoint. Y-8, however not only has 4 engines, it is also not a very stable aircraft to fly and lacks a digital glass cockpit. Turn rates and climb rates of Y-8 are also sub par as compared to SAAB 2000. Naturally, due to 2 additional engines, Y-8 has greater ferry range/combat radius but once we break it down to cost per NM, SAAB 2000 comes out on top.

Implications in Indo-Pak Scenario.

Pakistan shares a wide variety of land based terrain with India and lacks the strategic depth. Which means, a side looking Erieye traveling from North to South makes more sense compared to 360 looking ZDK-03 given the technological advantages of the former system. Furthermore, ZDK-03 does its job reasonably well supporting the Naval fleet, Naval air arm, and PAF squadrons in the south. However, any day, if you ask a JF-17 pilot to pick and choose between Erieye and ZDK 03 as their battle manager, Erieye will always come on top.

And they are not fanboys.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I'd like to pitch in with my limited knowledge here.



For better or for worse, western technology as we put it has been preferred due to factors such as better safety standards, better metallurgy, greater maturity due to learnings incorporated from military operations/exercises from the past 50 years.

In 1988, we were denied E-3A and offered E-2C instead. We rejected it because E-2C's performance in mountainous terrain (referring to radar performance). Hence this speaks volumes about Pakistan's 'pick and choose' mindset as compared to what you're quoting.




It does not work this way. The acquisition of Erieye makes more sense due to fleet commonality and better overall capability. I will talk about capability in the later portion.



AWACS is an expensive platform. But it better be worth it once acquired. It should serve the purpose. This is what matters.



It does not matter.



I wish this was true.



Please refer below.


My Assessment of ZDK 03 vis a vis SAAB 2000


System Capability

ZDK-03 radar covers a full 360 degrees in azimuth and we can't know if it is AESA or not (this is not public information). Erieye on the other hand has a smaller dual side fixed planer array antenna which covers a maximum of 120 degrees on each side (azimuth mode). It is an 'advanced' AESA with pulse doppler multi-mode capability.

One of the primary reasons why Erieye was based at Kamra was due to its powerful data/sig processing capability over land and mountainous terrain as compared to ZDK-03. Technically speaking, radar clutter signals reflected over land are stronger (also means more complex) as compared to clutter signals from the sea. Hence, the AWACS radar's which possess powerful signal processing and better clutter handling capability is based on land. Mountainous terrain, the complex net of ground based radars and their noise, birds, vehicles, smaller drone traffic, varying weather conditions all contribute to the increased complexity of the radars scanning airspace over land, while the sea clutter can be handled by the weaker radars such as ZDK 03 in this case.

I will not be commenting on the radar ranges since it is sensitive information and cannot be discussed.

Carrier Capability

SAAB 2000 is a twin engine turboprop that is very efficient in fuel consumption and long term performance from a sustainment standpoint. Y-8, however not only has 4 engines, it is also not a very stable aircraft to fly and lacks a digital glass cockpit. Turn rates and climb rates of Y-8 are also sub par as compared to SAAB 2000. Naturally, due to 2 additional engines, Y-8 has greater ferry range/combat radius but once we break it down to cost per NM, SAAB 2000 comes out on top.

Implications in Indo-Pak Scenario.

Pakistan shares a wide variety of land based terrain with India and lacks the strategic depth. Which means, a side looking Erieye traveling from North to South makes more sense compared to 360 looking ZDK-03 given the technological advantages of the former system. Furthermore, ZDK-03 does its job reasonably well supporting the Naval fleet, Naval air arm, and PAF squadrons in the south. However, any day, if you ask a JF-17 pilot to pick and choose between Erieye and ZDK 03 as their battle manager, Erieye will always come on top.

And they are not fanboys.

IMO the Erieye has as much to do with the PAF bringing the cost of adding new units to a reasonably low point -- $80-90 m per system. Sure, it isn't the latest technology, but it's still high-quality and proven, so acquiring it at such a low price point doesn't come along everyday.

Financially speaking, it's the same story with seeking used C-130s and both new and used F-16s. You basically have a purpose-built support infrastructure for both, and know exactly what to expect and how to deploy. Thus, the cost and risk of adding more of either is the least.

 

[airomerix]

IMO the Erieye has as much to do with the PAF bringing the cost of adding new units to a reasonably low point -- $80-90 m per system. Sure, it isn't the latest technology, but it's still high-quality and proven, so acquiring it at such a low price point doesn't come along everyday.

Financially speaking, it's the same story with seeking used C-130s and both new and used F-16s. You basically have a purpose-built support infrastructure for both, and know exactly what to expect and how to deploy. Thus, the cost and risk of adding more of either is the least.

From a financial standpoint, acquiring Chinese systems has always been easier. We have a kind of relationship with Chinese that they will not bother giving us a credit line to buy, operate, and sustain any major system. So immediate financial considerations were not a major concern. In fact, on the contrary, we had to give our arm and leg to get a major part of the money upfront for Swedes and then place orders for Erieye's. Also, Swedes are touchy about FATF, terror financing allegation and political strings/diplomatic repercussions. It has always been harder to get SAAB 2000's both diplomatically and financially.

 

[Scorpiooo]

Just adding here with my little knowledge (not information) bcuz alot actual expert are here providing us valuable knowledge everyday.

About stealth aircraft misconception
First please clear sealth dont mean invisible plane, its just a aircraft with low RCS means low tracking on radars.

About Sealth Aircraft and Programs
Sharing after study of few case studies of these project in person (available on net) most of these program archived output but unable to gain actual desired Outcome, so the public claim of ther RCS and actual is quite different , specially in different environments , that way still keep testing them in different regions. To find there effectiveness not improvements

Evidence is that look around the world.
Usa stop production of F22 dacade ago, F35 they more interested in selling to others then local inductions now , look at latest order of F15 instead of F35
China, only inducted few J20 , not willing to induct FC31 , no body actual knows there sealth power .
Russia, still suffering with Su 57 badly .

Reaming world , like Uk, france. Sweden, other European partners skipped 5th generation program at all moved to 6th generation programs, bcause thay know thay will never able achive desired sealth, instead wasting thay starting working on 6th generation directly,
Same goes for usa, china and russia thay now actively working on there own 6th generation programs
Thay have Start focusing on other main components of 6th generation aircraft which will be actual future air warfares, along limited stealth posible.

 

[Blacklight]

I'd like to pitch in with my limited knowledge here.



For better or for worse, western technology as we put it has been preferred due to factors such as better safety standards, better metallurgy, greater maturity due to learnings incorporated from military operations/exercises from the past 50 years.

In 1988, we were denied E-3A and offered E-2C instead. We rejected it because E-2C's performance in mountainous terrain was not what we had envisioned (referring to radar performance). Hence this speaks volumes about Pakistan's 'pick and choose' mindset as compared to what you're quoting.




It does not work this way. The acquisition of Erieye makes more sense due to fleet commonality and better overall capability. I will talk about capability in the later portion.



AWACS is an expensive platform. But it better be worth it once acquired. It should serve the purpose. This is what matters.



It does not matter.



I wish this was true.



Please refer below.


My Assessment of ZDK 03 vis a vis SAAB 2000


System Capability

ZDK-03 radar covers a full 360 degrees in azimuth and we can't know if it is AESA or not (this is not public information). Erieye on the other hand has a smaller dual side fixed planer array antenna which covers a maximum of 120 degrees on each side (azimuth mode). It is an 'advanced' AESA with pulse doppler multi-mode capability.

One of the primary reasons why Erieye was based at Kamra was due to its powerful data/sig processing capability over land and mountainous terrain as compared to ZDK-03. Technically speaking, radar clutter signals reflected over land are stronger (also means more complex) as compared to clutter signals from the sea. Hence, the AWACS radar's which possess powerful signal processing and better clutter handling capability is based on land. Mountainous terrain, the complex net of ground based radars and their noise, birds, vehicles, smaller drone traffic, varying weather conditions all contribute to the increased complexity of the radars scanning airspace over land, while the sea clutter can be handled by the weaker radars such as ZDK 03 in this case.

I will not be commenting on the radar ranges since it is sensitive information and cannot be discussed.

Carrier Capability

SAAB 2000 is a twin engine turboprop that is very efficient in fuel consumption and long term performance from a sustainment standpoint. Y-8, however not only has 4 engines, it is also not a very stable aircraft to fly and lacks a digital glass cockpit. Turn rates and climb rates of Y-8 are also sub par as compared to SAAB 2000. Naturally, due to 2 additional engines, Y-8 has greater ferry range/combat radius but once we break it down to cost per NM, SAAB 2000 comes out on top.

Implications in Indo-Pak Scenario.

Pakistan shares a wide variety of land based terrain with India and lacks the strategic depth. Which means, a side looking Erieye traveling from North to South makes more sense compared to 360 looking ZDK-03 given the technological advantages of the former system. Furthermore, ZDK-03 does its job reasonably well supporting the Naval fleet, Naval air arm, and PAF squadrons in the south. However, any day, if you ask a JF-17 pilot to pick and choose between Erieye and ZDK 03 as their battle manager, Erieye will always come on top.

And they are not fanboys.

My Assessment of ZDK 03 vis a vis SAAB 2000
System Capability
ZDK-03 radar covers a full 360 degrees in azimuth and we can't know if it is AESA or not (this is not public information). Erieye on the other hand has a smaller dual side fixed planer array antenna which covers a maximum of 120 degrees on each side (azimuth mode). It is an 'advanced' AESA with pulse doppler multi-mode capability.
.

Agree on all points except the above in red. Please note:

Saab 2000 AEW&C prepares for duty
by David Donald
- July 3, 2008

Coverage has been increased to two 150-degree sectors (from 120-degrees, still with a 1-degree beamwidth), with range out to the horizon (typically 199 to 217 miles).

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2008-07-03/saab-2000-aewc-prepares-duty

 

[Apex]

Wait till the 30th of this month there's something coming.