The third option for attack helicopter

[syed_yusuf]

cant stop smiling

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

PA tested Rooivalk yearly ago... why rejected ?

I don't think such tests occurred. RSA might be worried about sparing what few helicopters they have for our tests (which are intense, to say the least). If you're going to approach Rooivalk (Mk2), then it has to be as a development program like Project Azm NGFA, Jinnah FFG, Hangor SSP -- i.e., untested, unproven. So, what's the point? Basically, to get our own solution so that we're never relying on anyone else (at least for a complete system).

especially since the requirement is 200+
you will need something to replace the mi 17. it cant be an import solution
you have to build two chopper a light one to replace the bells and medium one to replace the mi 17
of course buy the off shelf heavy one if needs arise
but with requirement of 100+ for light and 200 for medium..its just not feasible or economical to buy of the shelf

even if the cots for home program is higher, all that money still goes back to employ people and developing capabilities

i am pretty sure there were several options on the table if PA, PAF, PN joined hands

I was thinking about this.

So, the good thing about the Rooivalk Mk2 is that you can leverage the Airbus H225M Caracal right away, i.e., the same engine, rotors, transmission, etc. You'll get commonality between the heavy attack and transport helicopter and, on paper, the H225M is comparable to the Mi-8/17/171 and Sea King.

The big challenge with the Rooivalk (besides the cost of funding it) is that Airbus Helicopters can say "no" to transferring the critical tech.

Well, you can get around that challenge by ordering H225Ms (to be manufactured in France). Of the helicopters in its class in Europe, it's more affordable. The lesser-spec'ed H215M Super Puma is also available, and cheaper. So, you can mix it up (while sharing the same engine/critical components); have H225Ms for naval and special mission scenarios, and H215Ms for troop transport, logistics, etc.

But the big issue here is whether the H225M and H215M would cut it in Pakistan. If these helicopters aren't good enough for our conditions, then it'll be a serious problem, and Rooivalk/Mk2 is a non-starter. However, if it is good enough, then you have leverage with Airbus Helicopters, i.e., if we order H225/H215, we get the Rooivalk tech -- i.e., ToT basis, we want to manufacture this helicopter at home.

As for a lighter utility helicopter, the PAF already inducted the AW139. So, the most logical route is building up around that platform and scaling its fixed overhead costs. One option is getting the 7-ton version (if we haven't already), and developing variants, e.g., naval/ASW, CSAR, Army utility, etc.

And if we notch up enough orders, Pakistan could ask Leonardo to set-up an assembly line in Pakistan, plus sizable workshare for manufacturing, parts, MRO, etc.

If none of that works, then invest in the Turkish T625 and 6-ton ATAK. They're going to use the same engines (i.e., the Turkish engine) and other critical components. Basically, commit to a large enough attack helicopter order to justify a co-production agreement, maybe with most of it (for the ATAK) occurring in Pakistan (while Turkey moves ahead to the ATAK-2).

Sadly, it sounds like we're going to import from the Chinese again, and as usual, close the books on all of this opportunity. This is our fate now, to chase India one step at a time, but always be 1-2 steps behind, and never invest in ourselves with willing partners to try and leapfrog.

I get that we have to maintain readiness and stuff, but my God, look at our government and generals, they're doing what they can to avoid a war. This is the policy now. And if there's a war, it would be a short one before 'things go nuclear'. So, here's my question, why aren't we then investing in creating the means to avoid going nuclear -- i.e., conventional deterrence (the means to affordably build large forces of modern helicopters, tanks, artillery, etc)? Why are we just feeding into the same situation? Why not break out of it?

 

[Haris Ali2140]

I don't think such tests occurred. RSA might be worried about sparing what few helicopters they have for our tests (which are intense, to say the least). If you're going to approach Rooivalk (Mk2), then it has to be as a development program like Project Azm NGFA, Jinnah FFG, Hangor SSP -- i.e., untested, unproven. So, what's the point? Basically, to get our own solution so that we're never relying on anyone else (at least for a complete system).


I was thinking about this.

So, the good thing about the Rooivalk Mk2 is that you can leverage the Airbus H225M Caracal right away, i.e., the same engine, rotors, transmission, etc. You'll get commonality between the heavy attack and transport helicopter and, on paper, the H225M is comparable to the Mi-8/17/171 and Sea King.

The big challenge with the Rooivalk (besides the cost of funding it) is that Airbus Helicopters can say "no" to transferring the critical tech.

Well, you can get around that challenge by ordering H225Ms (to be manufactured in France). Of the helicopters in its class in Europe, it's more affordable. The lesser-spec'ed H215M Super Puma is also available, and cheaper. So, you can mix it up (while sharing the same engine/critical components); have H225Ms for naval and special mission scenarios, and H215Ms for troop transport, logistics, etc.

But the big issue here is whether the H225M and H215M would cut it in Pakistan. If these helicopters aren't good enough for our conditions, then it'll be a serious problem, and Rooivalk/Mk2 is a non-starter. However, if it is good enough, then you have leverage with Airbus Helicopters, i.e., if we order H225/H215, we get the Rooivalk tech -- i.e., ToT basis, we want to manufacture this helicopter at home.

As for a lighter utility helicopter, the PAF already inducted the AW139. So, the most logical route is building up around that platform and scaling its fixed overhead costs. One option is getting the 7-ton version (if we haven't already), and developing variants, e.g., naval/ASW, CSAR, Army utility, etc. And if we notch up enough orders, Pakistan could ask Leonardo to set-up an assembly line in Pakistan, plus sizable workshare for manufacturing, parts, MRO, etc.

If none of that works, then invest in the Turkish T625 and 6-ton ATAK. They're going to use the same engines (i.e., the Turkish engine) and other critical components. Basically, commit to a large enough attack helicopter order to justify a co-production agreement, maybe with most of it (for the ATAK) occurring in Pakistan (while Turkey moves ahead to the ATAK-2).

Sadly, it sounds like we're going to import from the Chinese again, and as usual, close the books on all of this opportunity. This is our fate now, to chase India one step at a time, but always be 1-2 steps behind, and never invest in ourselves with willing partners to try and leapfrog.

I get that we have to maintain readiness and stuff, but my God, look at our government and generals, they're doing what they can to avoid a war. This is the policy now. And if there's a war, it would be a short one before 'things go nuclear'. So, here's my question, why aren't we then investing in creating the means to avoid going nuclear -- i.e., conventional deterrence (the means to affordably build large forces of modern helicopters, tanks, artillery, etc)? Why are we just feeding into the same situation? Why not break out of it?

What about financial aspects. All the above projects will be needing serious fundings.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

What about financial aspects. All the above projects will be needing serious fundings.

There's a trade-off. You either spend $1.5 b by importing, or you spend $1 b on the local industry program, and have only $500 m available to buy the thing you need. It sounds like a raw deal, and if you can't see the benefit of your own industry you'll do what the Army is doing now, importing.

However, that $1 b you spent on the industry can help in a few ways:

1. It can make buying that equipment you need cheaper. So, you have lower labour costs, but also you're now putting the USD that would've gone overseas into your local economy (keeping BoP more in-tact).

2. You can use that local industry base to attract foreign orders, which can help you gain USD (and you can put that money aside for further development in other areas, not just defence). So this local industry base could get you $2 billion USD in returns. This gives you $2.5 billion to spend (vs $1.5 b in the beginning).
​

It's still risky, and to be honest, I don't think the folks in charge of any of our institutions will know how to handle this competently. The generals running HIT, POF, etc aren't real seasoned business professionals, nor economists or trade experts.

You would have to give the reins of these projects to the professionals, i.e., business experts, trade experts, finance experts, engineers, experienced project managers, etc. Our generals + politicians need to learn how to take a back seat, and they can't. It's third-world mentality -- don't accept others know more and can do more, etc.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

There's a trade-off. You either spend $1.5 b by importing, or you spend $1 b on the local industry program, and have only $500 m available to buy the thing you need. It sounds like a raw deal, and if you can't see the benefit of your own industry you'll do what the Army is doing now, importing.

However, that $1 b you spent on the industry can help in a few ways:

1. It can make buying that equipment you need cheaper. So, you have lower labour costs, but also you're now putting the USD that would've gone overseas into your local economy (keeping BoP more in-tact).

2. You can use that local industry base to attract foreign orders, which can help you gain USD (and you can put that money aside for further development in other areas, not just defence). So this local industry base could get you $2 billion USD in returns. This gives you $2.5 billion to spend (vs $1.5 b in the beginning).​

Maybe we had such a deal with the Turks. They are buying Mushshaks from us.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Maybe we had such a deal with the Turks. They are buying Mushshaks from us.

The Mushshaks were an offset to us. I believe the T129 was originally offered with workshare to PAC as well, not sure now as we're unwilling to rework it for T625/6t ATAK. But rest assured, China ain't giving us any workshare should we get Z-10MEs, nor will America for AH-1Z.

 

[Haris Ali2140]

The Mushshaks were an offset to us. I believe the T129 was originally offered with workshare to PAC as well, not sure now as we're unwilling to rework it for T625/6t ATAK. But rest assured, China ain't giving us any workshare should we get Z-10MEs, nor will America for AH-1Z.

Thats why I am in favor of T-129. We should go for Z-10 only if AH-1Z are not arriving. As you said earlier working with newer companies give us leverage.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Thats why I am in favor of T-129. We should go for Z-10 only if AH-1Z are not arriving. As you said earlier working with newer companies give us leverage.

I mean, we can throw everything off the table and start from scratch. All you have to do is ask, "who's working on an ITAR-free attack helicopter, and who needs co-funding and economies-of-scale?" The answers to this are South Africa and Turkey. That's basically it. There's no discussion otherwise, if the above is your priority.

But what the Army is asking is, "I have old Cobras that can't fly, where can I get a good replacement ASAP?" Then the answer is China. It's a valid question, but then I have to ask is, "okay, but you're of the belief that any war will go nuclear anyways, so will this solve that problem, yes or no?" If a "no" (and I'm 100% sure that's the answer), I have to ask, "okay, why not try solving this problem by taking the longer route?"

I am not going to insinuate generals have agendas and stuff. I have no proof of that. Based on what I can see, all I can say is, they're not thinking along the right lines. They need to bring in outside (expert) voices to the table.

 

[ziaulislam]

I don't think such tests occurred. RSA might be worried about sparing what few helicopters they have for our tests (which are intense, to say the least). If you're going to approach Rooivalk (Mk2), then it has to be as a development program like Project Azm NGFA, Jinnah FFG, Hangor SSP -- i.e., untested, unproven. So, what's the point? Basically, to get our own solution so that we're never relying on anyone else (at least for a complete system).


I was thinking about this.

So, the good thing about the Rooivalk Mk2 is that you can leverage the Airbus H225M Caracal right away, i.e., the same engine, rotors, transmission, etc. You'll get commonality between the heavy attack and transport helicopter and, on paper, the H225M is comparable to the Mi-8/17/171 and Sea King.

The big challenge with the Rooivalk (besides the cost of funding it) is that Airbus Helicopters can say "no" to transferring the critical tech.

Well, you can get around that challenge by ordering H225Ms (to be manufactured in France). Of the helicopters in its class in Europe, it's more affordable. The lesser-spec'ed H215M Super Puma is also available, and cheaper. So, you can mix it up (while sharing the same engine/critical components); have H225Ms for naval and special mission scenarios, and H215Ms for troop transport, logistics, etc.

But the big issue here is whether the H225M and H215M would cut it in Pakistan. If these helicopters aren't good enough for our conditions, then it'll be a serious problem, and Rooivalk/Mk2 is a non-starter. However, if it is good enough, then you have leverage with Airbus Helicopters, i.e., if we order H225/H215, we get the Rooivalk tech -- i.e., ToT basis, we want to manufacture this helicopter at home.

As for a lighter utility helicopter, the PAF already inducted the AW139. So, the most logical route is building up around that platform and scaling its fixed overhead costs. One option is getting the 7-ton version (if we haven't already), and developing variants, e.g., naval/ASW, CSAR, Army utility, etc.

And if we notch up enough orders, Pakistan could ask Leonardo to set-up an assembly line in Pakistan, plus sizable workshare for manufacturing, parts, MRO, etc.

If none of that works, then invest in the Turkish T625 and 6-ton ATAK. They're going to use the same engines (i.e., the Turkish engine) and other critical components. Basically, commit to a large enough attack helicopter order to justify a co-production agreement, maybe with most of it (for the ATAK) occurring in Pakistan (while Turkey moves ahead to the ATAK-2).

Sadly, it sounds like we're going to import from the Chinese again, and as usual, close the books on all of this opportunity. This is our fate now, to chase India one step at a time, but always be 1-2 steps behind, and never invest in ourselves with willing partners to try and leapfrog.

I get that we have to maintain readiness and stuff, but my God, look at our government and generals, they're doing what they can to avoid a war. This is the policy now. And if there's a war, it would be a short one before 'things go nuclear'. So, here's my question, why aren't we then investing in creating the means to avoid going nuclear -- i.e., conventional deterrence (the means to affordably build large forces of modern helicopters, tanks, artillery, etc)? Why are we just feeding into the same situation? Why not break out of it?

AW139 should have been ordered in 100+ numbers under a license agreement and basic tot (every major deal has offsets). we would learn some basic manufacturing from it. PAC could have built them slow 6-8/yr and over next 15 years.
You learn step wise, first you have depot maintence, than you do assembly and finally you go into critical systems.
we havent moved forward nor planning to into assembly beyond depot maintence.

the problem seems to be lack of coordination between all three services..they are unable to agree on a single platform to get enough numbers
we should learn from Indians, with bureaucracy were than us they are doing better

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

AW139 should have been ordered in 100+ numbers under a license agreement and basic tot (every major deal has offsets). we would learn some basic manufacturing from it. PAC could have built them slow 6-8/yr and over next 15 years.
You learn step wise, first you have depot maintence, than you do assembly and finally you go into critical systems.
we havent moved forward nor planning to into assembly beyond depot maintence.

the problem seems to be lack of coordination between all three services..they are unable to agree on a single platform to get enough numbers
we should learn from Indians, with bureaucracy were than us they are doing better

Agreed. The AW139 opportunity is still there, it just depends on what the Army and Navy want. If they both settle and agree on the AW139, then a large-scale requirement through many incremental orders is possible. It would be interesting if we could design a naval ops variant of the AW139, i.e., with sonar, radar, lightweight torpedoes, etc.

 

[ziaulislam]

I mean, we can throw everything off the table and start from scratch. All you have to do is ask, "who's working on an ITAR-free attack helicopter, and who needs co-funding and economies-of-scale?" The answers to this are South Africa and Turkey. That's basically it. There's no discussion otherwise, if the above is your priority.

But what the Army is asking is, "I have old Cobras that can't fly, where can I get a good replacement ASAP?" Then the answer is China. It's a valid question, but then I have to ask is, "okay, but you're of the belief that any war will go nuclear anyways, so will this solve that problem, yes or no?" If a "no" (and I'm 100% sure that's the answer), I have to ask, "okay, why not try solving this problem by taking the longer route?"

I am not going to insinuate generals have agendas and stuff. I have no proof of that. Based on what I can see, all I can say is, they're not thinking along the right lines. They need to bring in outside (expert) voices to the table.

they aren't aware of the reality of ground situation..
in today's world military budgets are unsustainable if they don't bring benefits to the table..people simply don't buy this heavy spending..

if you built your own chopper you provide jobs to the whole ecosystem but not with expensive imported solutions..look at jf-17 ..imagine PAF had opted for out of shelf solution..we would have been in a big headache..but jf17 was out of necessity not foresight..and different dynamics(relatively poor china in early 1990s)

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

they aren't aware of the reality of ground situation..
in today's world military budgets are unsustainable if they don't bring benefits to the table..people simply don't buy this heavy spending..

if you built your own chopper you provide jobs to the whole ecosystem but not with expensive imported solutions..look at jf-17 ..imagine PAF had opted for out of shelf solution..we would have been in a big headache..but jf17 was out of necessity not foresight..and different dynamics(relatively poor china in early 1990s)

I agree. Unfortunately, we'll have trouble building a culture of accountability about defence spending. You have an India that's very belligerent, and it clearly has twisted dreams about how to treat Muslims in South Asia.

With this fear in mind, any questioning of defence spending is shut down, which gives the ones in charge room for genuinely bad decisions. It doesn't help when the likes of Nawaz Sharif are buddy-buddy with New Delhi, or the fact that the PPP totally gutted the private sector in the 1970s.

You basically need a serving or recently retired general to step up and state the truth about procurement, defence industry, and the need to change things. That's the starting point, and from there, the military needs to find a mix of military and civilian experts (i.e., engineers, scientists, economists, etc) to manage things.

 

[Pakistan Ka Beta]

I think we need an attack helicopter v much so PAA should decide about it as soon as possible .

 

[Zarvan]

Although most likely T-129 issues will get setteled and what I know is Vipers will arrive also but if they don't I don't think Z-10 ME will be obvious option it would be a fight between Z-10 ME vs MI-28 vs KA-52

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Although most likely T-129 issues will get setteled and what I know is Vipers will arrive also but if they don't I don't think Z-10 ME will be obvious option it would be a fight between Z-10 ME vs MI-28 vs KA-52

There's no Russian option. Never will be unless the Russians pay us to buy their stuff. Otherwise the US will sanction Pakistan.