Featured Pakistan's Shahpar II UAV Unveiled

[CriticalThought]

@JamD is right, the Turks (or for that matter Ukraine, South Africa, etc) aren't going to give IP to a potential commercial competitor. I think our best approach is to give up on the commercial side entirely and instead argue our national security imperative. In other words, we give up on exports, but we get all of the technology.

OTOH, we could join Turkish UAV programs as a whole (or Turks join Pakistani ones), and then we basically end up marketing and exporting the same design with workshare, revenue-share, etc. Basically, we end up with consortium situations (which the Turks seem to prefer).

I think, ultimately, the Turks would prefer shared equity consortiums since it distributes risk, investment, and benefits. But I am OK with surrendering some workshare and export benefits for the sake of preserving our national security (by ensuring we get the sensitive IP so that our armed forces can move forward).

In such scenarios, you negotiate a percentage to be paid as royalty to OEM whenever any exports are made. Pakistan is depriving sales of Russian jets by introducing a very potent alternative, yet they keep selling us RD-93s.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

In such scenarios, you negotiate a percentage to be paid as royalty to OEM whenever any exports are made. Pakistan is depriving sales of Russian jets by introducing a very potent alternative, yet they keep selling us RD-93s.

Yep. In fact, we might have squandered a chance to pull a few concessions from Russia amidst CAATSA. Russia clearly isn't doing as well as it could selling complete systems, but with a little finesse, they could still do well in engines.

E.g., we establish a joint-venture with UEC (Klimov) to manufacture the RD-93MA in Pakistan, and then re-export that engine (with UEC sharing work and profit) through JF-17s and (let's throw it out there as a possibility) AZM.

Once again, I think our concern is to simply have the means within Pakistan -- we can negotiate who legally owns and profits from it.

Russia may not want to part with RD-93MA's IP, but it can shift UEC's output to a different location if it means securing new engine sales for like 250 twin-engine fighters and 100+ single-engine UCAVs (plus MRO).

You could do this across helicopter engines and support, surface-to-air missiles (SAM), and so on. We literally have a corridor into Russia via Central Asia (so the US can't stop it physically).

In theory, the Russians can even hide this activity from the US by basically relabeling the entire scheme as a 'Made in Pakistan' venture (and remit the profits back to Russia using 'methods').

It might be worth it for us to give a look if they throw us into the FATF blacklist (aka then who gives a crap?)

 

[Imran Khan]

according to your views what is a 2021 era drone then , pls delight me

although these drones are also going to be older sooner and stealth will took place of them but still they have some juice left in them

here are future drones

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

TEI CEO Temel Kotil said that they want the engines of an Asian with high technology country (I think it is China or Korea) but they are still thinking of giving it because they fear it will be copied.

So you think too optimistically brothers. It would be great if you could even supply a specially developed engine for UAVs that delivers more power than its Indian counterpart at high altitude.

Will we be able to see the TEI-PD170 engine used in ANKA in UAV systems developed by other countries?
26:06 - 28:12

Black Sea Shield Company, 51% of which belongs to Turks and 49% to Ukrainians, was established in the past years. This company will produce the AL-25 turbofan engines for UAVs in Turkey together with technology transfer and IP rights will belong to the Turkish-based company. Turks do not give ship and uav technologies for free. You will soon remember how generous the Turks were to our Pakistani brothers when Roketsan introduced a solid rocket engine with an average diameter of 1.5 meters.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

TEI CEO Temel Kotil said that they want the engines of an Asian with high technology country (I think it is China or Korea) but they are still thinking of giving it because they fear it will be copied.

So you think too optimistically brothers. It would be great if you could even supply a specially developed engine for UAVs that delivers more power than its Indian counterpart at high altitude.

Will we be able to see the TEI-PD170 engine used in ANKA in UAV systems developed by other countries?
26:06 - 28:12

Black Sea Shield Company, 51% of which belongs to Turks and 49% to Ukrainians, was established in the past years. This company will produce the AL-25 turbofan engines for UAVs in Turkey together with technology transfer and IP rights will belong to the Turkish-based company. Turks do not give ship and uav technologies for free. You will soon remember how generous the Turks were to our Pakistani brothers when Roketsan introduced a solid rocket engine with an average diameter of 1.5 meters.

The Turks are/were indeed open, I wish we Pakistanis could've done better on the R&D side so that we could offer to Turkey as well. We Pakistanis messed up by not taking domestic development as seriously as Turkey (even though a 15-year old me was calling for it on this very forum 15 years ago).

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

The Turks are/were indeed open, I wish we Pakistanis could've done better on the R&D side so that we could offer to Turkey as well. We Pakistanis messed up by not taking domestic development as seriously as Turkey (even though a 15-year old me was calling for it on this very forum 15 years ago).

I don't know how things work in Pakistan, whichever team is doing the maintenance of the JF 17's engines should be incorporated and, at least, manufacturing should be given importance, even if R&D is not available. Nobody thinks, but manufacturing engineering and manufacturing standards are just as important as design. It would be nice if you could speak Turkish, and the video talks about the establishment story of TEI and why GE has shares in the company. In fact, this is an indication of why Turkish F16s have GE engines rather than PW.

 

[CriticalThought]

Yep. In fact, we might have squandered a chance to pull a few concessions from Russia amidst CAATSA. Russia clearly isn't doing as well as it could selling complete systems, but with a little finesse, they could still do well in engines.

E.g., we establish a joint-venture with UEC (Klimov) to manufacture the RD-93MA in Pakistan, and then re-export that engine (with UEC sharing work and profit) through JF-17s and (let's throw it out there as a possibility) AZM.

Once again, I think our concern is to simply have the means within Pakistan -- we can negotiate who legally owns and profits from it.

Russia may not want to part with RD-93MA's IP, but it can shift UEC's output to a different location if it means securing new engine sales for like 250 twin-engine fighters and 100+ single-engine UCAVs (plus MRO).

You could do this across helicopter engines and support, surface-to-air missiles (SAM), and so on. We literally have a corridor into Russia via Central Asia (so the US can't stop it physically).

In theory, the Russians can even hide this activity from the US by basically relabeling the entire scheme as a 'Made in Pakistan' venture (and remit the profits back to Russia using 'methods').

It might be worth it for us to give a look if they throw us into the FATF blacklist (aka then who gives a crap?)

Believe me, with enough money they will even share the IP. It's all about money, but we are talking multiple billions of dollars of money.

We should do all of what you have suggested regardless of the black list. We are effectively re-exporting the RD-93 today, and performing MRO on it. There is no reason why a factory couldn't be setup. The real thing we lack is the metals and manufacturing expertise in single crystal blade technology. It would be expensive bringing the raw material from Russia. Also, given PAC's history, if we do go down this route, I have a strong suspicion they will get Safran involved somehow for test rigs etc. I believe it was Safran who provided expertise in hot area harnesses which allowed us to improve the MTBF on RD-93.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Should add a Air to Ground Missile on it in case it spots any suspicious BLA on ground

14 hours endurance is fantastic

Tea is fantastic

 

[vizier]

Should add a Air to Ground Missile on it in case it spots any suspicious BLA on ground

14 hours endurance is fantastic

Tea is fantastic

Without pods and small size and its high loiter time it can be used to detect India S400 locations.

You can install radio locator sensors on it. Since S400 radars are powerful you can detect them from more than 100kms which is more than S__ sam series detection range of small uavs (Karabagh war). It can be used as bait as well with a smaller cost to detect enemy ads. Then take the data and get a more clear satellite picture of S400 installations of India close to border. After that short range ballistic missiles, or a cruise missile salvo can finish the job.


For these types of drones I think the rotor at the back can be modified. It can be made from hardened glass. Glass has limited radar transparency. That would reduce radar reflection considerably in my opinion. I think it is achievable as we are not talking about a jet engine here but a slower rotor propeller. The vertical stabilizers at the wings can be slanted inwards as well as a further rcs reduction measure.

Additionally front landing gear can be made retractable like Turkish TB2. For back landing gears and debris blocker on the wheels again hardened glass can be used to reduce reflection if it cannot be made retractable.

 

[KaiserX]

I would love to see Pakistan work on a UCAV version built upon the JF17B3. We could use the RD-93MA engine, as well as the avionics such as the KLJ-7A. A great amount of weight reduction can be achieved simply by removing the cockpit portion. The aircraft can be redesigned to be more stealthy as well.

I dont think such a project would be that difficult for Pakistan per say. We already manufacter the JF-17 inhouse and have been making UAVs for decades. We just need to sycronize both achievments and see where we can take from both and create a single project out of it.

Such a UCAV can be datalinked with manned JF-17s and become a major force multiplier. These aircrafts can also be specialized in specific roles ie jamming UCAVs, Ground strike UCAVs, and air superiority UCAVs... All manned thousands of miles away giving more confidence to carrying out daring missions.

It may be very far sighted but then again Pakistan IS one of the few nations that has long range ballistic missiles yet has not modified them to carry satellites into space

 

[vizier]

I think a flying wing propeller drone can also be designed and would do most of the job as well. Since it will be relatively lightweight and smaller-slower than a jet engine drone it will be more stable and much easier to control. Simple gain scheduling linearisation based approach would do the job (80s stealth used linearisation based control) you wont need supercomputer stuff like in jet engine stealth drones. It can also have similar range if it uses satcom and can be used to detect ships, ads etc. and can have limited attack potential if there are bomb bays.

There wont be a huge inlet at the front to hide the jet engine. Hardened glass propeller will not contribute much to overall rcs.

 

[PanzerKiel]

I think a flying wing propeller drone can also be designed and would do most of the job as well. Since it will be relatively lightweight and smaller-slower than a jet engine drone it will be more stable and much easier to control. Simple gain scheduling linearisation based approach would do the job (80s stealth used linearisation based control) you wont need supercomputer stuff like in jet engine stealth drones. It can also have similar range if it uses satcom and can be used to detect ships, ads etc. and can have limited attack potential if there are bomb bays.

There wont be a huge inlet at the front to hide the jet engine. Hardened glass propeller will not contribute much to overall rcs.


View attachment 724403

One such thing is already in the pipeline. I participated in its trials couple of months back.

 

[vizier]

One such thing is already in the pipeline. I participated in its trials couple of months back.

That is very good news. Since potential enemies are also developing anti satellite systems in order to protect your satcom you can use pseudo satellites as communications relay if satellite communication is not available as a backup

High-altitude platform station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Same hardened glass approach can be used on high alt airplane propellers. Geostationary balloons are also hard to target from long ranges air to air as well since apart from higher altitudes the balloon is also transparent and the communications device can be designed to have a low rcs, aerodynamic-control issues would be much lower it just will need small stabiliser propellers to maintain its position. It needs to be made larger for higher payloads though the plane might have a payload advantage in that regard. Launching the balloon from ground at dense atmosphere and wind could have problems as well. I think I have read somewhere before launching balloon sats from an airplane at higher parts of atmosphere. I think a rocket can be used as well that carries it to the higher parts of atmosphere slowing down there.

 

[War Thunder]

The Shahpar series of UAVs is designed to be unarmed, and purely for surveillance. People are free to correct me if I'm wrong.

The Buraq UCAV is the only locally made armed drone, of course with heavy Chinese technical input.

this looks more like an easy to convert into a suicide drone given the maneuverability elements on it.

 

[Goritoes]

Oh, so these are the things which have been flying over me recently.... please don't ask me where, in what mode....

Part of hate you when you talk like that hahah