Potential turbo-prop for PAF - Calidus B-250

[Raider 21]

Not in favor of this. If you want to use a plane with light attack capabilities then drones are without doubt the future. It keeps your pilots safe while also giving a cheaper more robust C4ISR capability.

This is not the first such plane UAE has invested in. They have also bought AT-802's. The reason they are buying these planes is because of the war they are waging in Libya. They give these planes to mercenaries who then perform air strike missions over Libya.

They are cheap, don't need a command and control infrastructure like drones, and don't require a lot of training either. Pakistan should invest the same money in drone technology.

Used to be the case.....and Pakistani pilots gladly went in as mercenaries in the past. Now it is all Emirati pilots.....they even have started to train PAF squadrons on exercises (at Al Dhafra AB) to help them integrate better with NATO counterparts (some interaction helps in picking up knowledge rather than no interaction at all).

 

[SipahSalar]

Used to be the case.....and Pakistani pilots gladly went in as mercenaries in the past. Now it is all Emirati pilots.....they even have started to train PAF squadrons on exercises (at Al Dhafra AB) to help them integrate better with NATO counterparts (some interaction helps in picking up knowledge rather than no interaction at all).

It is still the case. UAE is hiring western private military contractors to fly these planes.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Looks like the USAF has taken out the Textron's Scorpion jet out of contention for the next round of evaluations for their light-attack CAS aircraft requirement. It would now be down to the turboprops, Beechcraft AT-6 and A-29 Super Tucano.

 

[Armchair]

Isn't there a disconnect in your argument here? You state light attack aircraft are cost prohibitive and then go on to propose using a C-235/295 for this role, which we don't have and will be a lot more expensive not just to buy but also operate?



Araz, here is what I don't agree with you ...
A. They have extreme utility in our current threat environment.
B. Goes with A
C. Not sure what you mean by limited prospects? If you are talking about B-250, then fine, lets buy Super Tucanos instead.
D. How is a turboprop manpower intensive again? We seem to be able to operate hundred of 60s era airplanes with turbojets just fine.
E. I would even argue these airplanes are much more safe then any fighter in PAF inventory bar the newer F-16s and JF-17s. And these are equipped with MB ejection seats btw.
F. Then buy one that is already developed and sold to a number of countries. Reason I posted about B-250 is as UAE has been funding its development (potential for partnership) and as there is always politics involved in arms acquisition (maybe quid-pro-quo). But the platform doesn't take away from the functionality here.
G. Again, can just buy ones already operating in this role around the world.
H. Not as costly as Mi-35s (these aircraft costs between $9-13M) and require very little infrastructure for operations.
I. Perhaps, but I have difference in opinion from you here.
J. One squadron at a minimum (since some of you keep bring up costs here). How many Mi-35s did we buy again btw?

Absolutely brilliant post and idea. Something that has made sense to me for a long time.

1. The utility of such a CAS platform would be that, in a war with India, even with heavy losses, it would have a decisive impact on the front. Large and concentrated formations of forces would be decimated. Remember 71 when PAF was willing to sacrifice its expensive and hard to replace jets to help the ground forces? You simply don't need that - you use a dedicated CAS aircraft instead.

2. Army budget vs air force budget is the issue. If we think of it in terms of reducing PAF focus on air defense, the logical answer is the CAS aircraft is a no-go. If we think of getting 10 tucano type aircraft (perhaps a Chinese eq), instead of x number of new tanks, the value proposition is very attractive. Far more effective at thwarting an armored thrust and utilizable at multiple fronts at short notice.

3. Recon role during peacetime. Maritime role. Anti-UAV role (which seems to keep crossing the border). Why is peacetime even an issue? An F-7PG is excellent for intercepts during peace time, so why is the F-16 needed? Equipment is bought for war time requirements.

4. Use in low intensity conflicts would be immensely useful. And these kind of conflicts wouldn't stop anytime soon given geopolitics.

5. Tucanos in exchange for JF-17s - an offer Brazil would be hard-pressed to refuse given their dire need of fighters.

6. The main thing about an AC-295 or similar is they have great loiter time and immense firepower. @Oscar is perhaps thinking of CAS as a short loiter trainer type. But a proper CAS aircraft has excellent loiter compared to a trainer or a "multirole" fighter.
But large CN-295 types, they would be sitting ducks against India in a war. Using them as transport would be of minimal benefit in a war.

Bottom line is a simple, cheap rugged CAS aircraft would be a major detterent against an Indian armored thrust, "cold start", "luke warm start", whatever. The logic hasn't just been thought through yet.

 

[SQ8]

Absolutely brilliant post and idea. Something that has made sense to me for a long time.

1. The utility of such a CAS platform would be that, in a war with India, even with heavy losses, it would have a decisive impact on the front. Large and concentrated formations of forces would be decimated. Remember 71 when PAF was willing to sacrifice its expensive and hard to replace jets to help the ground forces? You simply don't need that - you use a dedicated CAS aircraft instead.

2. Army budget vs air force budget is the issue. If we think of it in terms of reducing PAF focus on air defense, the logical answer is the CAS aircraft is a no-go. If we think of getting 10 tucano type aircraft (perhaps a Chinese eq), instead of x number of new tanks, the value proposition is very attractive. Far more effective at thwarting an armored thrust and utilizable at multiple fronts at short notice.

3. Recon role during peacetime. Maritime role. Anti-UAV role (which seems to keep crossing the border). Why is peacetime even an issue? An F-7PG is excellent for intercepts during peace time, so why is the F-16 needed? Equipment is bought for war time requirements.

4. Use in low intensity conflicts would be immensely useful. And these kind of conflicts wouldn't stop anytime soon given geopolitics.

5. Tucanos in exchange for JF-17s - an offer Brazil would be hard-pressed to refuse given their dire need of fighters.

6. The main thing about an AC-295 or similar is they have great loiter time and immense firepower. @Oscar is perhaps thinking of CAS as a short loiter trainer type. But a proper CAS aircraft has excellent loiter compared to a trainer or a "multirole" fighter.
But large CN-295 types, they would be sitting ducks against India in a war. Using them as transport would be of minimal benefit in a war.

Bottom line is a simple, cheap rugged CAS aircraft would be a major detterent against an Indian armored thrust, "cold start", "luke warm start", whatever. The logic hasn't just been thought through yet.

Not necessarily
All types have seperate battlefield utility uses and combat types.
The major air aspect of the WoT is as such over and now what is needed is gunships and loitering times. The former is being taken care of by the Mi-35 and the latter by armed UaVs.

The PAF is soon going to face a pilot shortage as well as the talent loss speeds up for officers leaving for airlines or gulf money. In such a scenario we have to ensure a streamlined asset build rather than disparate types.

I am a strong advocate of creating a PaF reserves wherby pilots can still fly and where such types make sense. Having weekend pilots will allow to indict such cheaper types.

 

[ZedZeeshan]

Not necessarily
All types have seperate battlefield utility uses and combat types.
The major air aspect of the WoT is as such over and now what is needed is gunships and loitering times. The former is being taken care of by the Mi-35 and the latter by armed UaVs.

The PAF is soon going to face a pilot shortage as well as the talent loss speeds up for officers leaving for airlines or gulf money. In such a scenario we have to ensure a streamlined asset build rather than disparate types.

Gulf Countries have stopped hiring Pakistani pilots. Now they prefer GORAAS .

 

[MastanKhan]

Used to be the case.....and Pakistani pilots gladly went in as mercenaries in the past. Now it is all Emirati pilots.....they even have started to train PAF squadrons on exercises (at Al Dhafra AB) to help them integrate better with NATO counterparts (some interaction helps in picking up knowledge rather than no interaction at all).

Hi,

You use the term pakistani pilots as mercenary pilot---and not being disrespectful---as you mentioned your father worked in the gulf---. Was he also a mercenary pilot---???

 

[Raider 21]

Gulf Countries have stopped hiring Pakistani pilots. Now they prefer GORAAS .

The number of goraas have reduced quite significantly. The Pakistanis part is still there but a lot less....but mostly due to their lack of competence.

Hi,

You use the term pakistani pilots as mercenary pilot---and not being disrespectful---as you mentioned your father worked in the gulf---. Was he also a mercenary pilot---???

He's still flying there....but as a fighter IP on a consultant role. He doesn't partake in any form of combat. There were Pakistani pilots in the past the flew combat missions for some of the Middle Eastern air forces..

It is still the case. UAE is hiring western private military contractors to fly these planes.

Very rarely. Mostly on the instructional role....

 

[MastanKhan]

The number of goraas have reduced quite significantly. The Pakistanis part is still there but a lot less....but mostly due to their lack of competence.


He's still flying there....but as a fighter IP on a consultant role. He doesn't partake in any form of combat. There were Pakistani pilots in the past the flew combat missions for some of the Middle Eastern air forces..


Very rarely. Mostly on the instructional role....

Hi,

A mercenary is someone who has no emotional or ideological attachment to the cause---he is just there for the money to partake in a task for personal financial gains---.

So---pakistani military men do not fall under the category of being a mercenary---.

 

[Raider 21]

Hi,

A mercenary is someone who has no emotional or ideological attachment to the cause---he is just there for the money to partake in a task for personal financial gains---.

So---pakistani military men do not fall under the category of being a mercenary---.

The combat pilots I'm referring to were paid....but anyways it is an old thing....
Cheers !!!

 

[Armchair]

Not necessarily
All types have seperate battlefield utility uses and combat types.
The major air aspect of the WoT is as such over and now what is needed is gunships and loitering times. The former is being taken care of by the Mi-35 and the latter by armed UaVs.

The PAF is soon going to face a pilot shortage as well as the talent loss speeds up for officers leaving for airlines or gulf money. In such a scenario we have to ensure a streamlined asset build rather than disparate types.

I am a strong advocate of creating a PaF reserves wherby pilots can still fly and where such types make sense. Having weekend pilots will allow to indict such cheaper types.

Hi Oscar,

Thank you for your reply. Weekend warriors is a great idea, imho. As is the concept of enlisted pilots (non commissioned).

While I appreciate what you are saying in terms of UAVs and attack helicopters, there are two major issues (and many minor ones), viz:

1. Attack helicopters are very expensive. 30-50 million dollars a piece. They also do not have endurance.

2. UAVs, while useful in a non-contested environment, will quickly be shot down against a near-peer opponent. Thus they have little utility in in Indo-Pak scenario.

SOP of attack aircraft against peer opponents is fly fast and low, pop up, deliver munitions, scoot. A simple and rugged CAS aircraft is the most efficient solution for this. They are not only cheaper than attack helicopters, but more survivable and have greater loiter time.

It is one of the weapons that can level the playing field for Pakistan against a larger enemy on the battlefield. Technical cost estimates of a study I did is $5-$7 million per unit. Would fit in perfectly with concepts such as enlisted officers or weekend warriors.

 

[SQ8]

Hi Oscar,

Thank you for your reply. Weekend warriors is a great idea, imho. As is the concept of enlisted pilots (non commissioned).

While I appreciate what you are saying in terms of UAVs and attack helicopters, there are two major issues (and many minor ones), viz:

1. Attack helicopters are very expensive. 30-50 million dollars a piece. They also do not have endurance.

2. UAVs, while useful in a non-contested environment, will quickly be shot down against a near-peer opponent. Thus they have little utility in in Indo-Pak scenario.

SOP of attack aircraft against peer opponents is fly fast and low, pop up, deliver munitions, scoot. A simple and rugged CAS aircraft is the most efficient solution for this. They are not only cheaper than attack helicopters, but more survivable and have greater loiter time.

It is one of the weapons that can level the playing field for Pakistan against a larger enemy on the battlefield. Technical cost estimates of a study I did is $5-$7 million per unit. Would fit in perfectly with concepts such as enlisted officers or weekend warriors.

1. Attack helicopters have dual utility
2. UAVs arent always that easy to kill

We need equipment capable of dual use since no once seems to care for or address the elephant in the room that is the VERY limited budget of Pakistan.

 

[fatman17]

Defence.pk fans jhaan koi weapon dekha dil machal gya

majboori hai

 

[Imran Khan]

majboori hai

per koi had hoti hai sir

i have never seen an f-16 thread of any country where Pakistani fans did not ask for used f-16 can be buy for PAF . saaly mangty

 

[MastanKhan]

The combat pilots I'm referring to were paid....but anyways it is an old thing....
Cheers !!!

Hi,

Combat pilot or otherwise---they are still not mercenaries. Over here brother hood---religion---similar ideology is a factor---.

Was Tariq Bin Ziyyad a mercenary---. Were the hundustani muslims going to Turkey to fight during Khilafat movement mercenaries---?