US turns down Pak's request for drone technology

[peacemaker10]

Not cell GSM encryption. Encrypted data over 3G/Edge carried by GSM. Big difference.

And how to track the UAV with sectorised antennas?

To improve the cellular coverage the mobile base station antennas are given small tilt(around 2-3 degrees) towards the intended area (houses). Then also signals are not very great inside some of the rooms. I doubt this can be used to control the drones which operates at high altitudes and are very dangerous if gets out of control. In addition, I suppose these drones will be operating mostly in farmost places not in big cities, how it is possible to get a good mobile coverage there. You have to install a base station and microwave link for mobile everytime you go to new remote location. The most feasible and safe option is to use dedicated communications satellite. I suppose this is the only reason launch of new UAV is getting delayed.


ISRO is fabricating dedicated communications satellite for Indian Armed forces with the inputs from DRDO to provide all weather encrypted communication over the nation. It is easy to imagine that it would have the provision for remote controlling of drones and unmanned combat vehicles, must for precision strike and control.

The most simple option for pak is to use drones at a line of sight and keep the mobile tracking stations within the operating range. Once they sort out the satellite problem, it could be implemented later.

 

[qsaark]

AND ALL THAT WHICH IS GARBAGE FOR THEM.....lolxxxDD

IT HAS BEEN MADE

You are right; Pakistan is given out dated P3-C, Indians are offered P-8 Poseidon and Hawkeye E2-D; Pakistan is given Blk-52, Indians are offered F-18s/F-16IN; Pakistan is given TPS-77 radars, India is offered AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radars and state of the art Airborne Stand-Off Radar (ASTOR), Pakistan is given beaten up Mi-17 helos, India is getting C-17 cargo planes, Pakistan is given M109A5, India is getting latest state-of-the-art M777.... So much for a non-NATO ally and a 'partner' in War on Terror.

waa e nakaami mata e karavaN jata raha
karavan key dil sey ehsas e ziaN jata raha

 

[gubbi]

You are right; Pakistan is given out dated P3-C, Indians are offered P-8 Poseidon and Hawkeye E2-D; Pakistan is given Blk-52, Indians are offered F-18s/F-16IN; Pakistan is given TPS-77 radars, India is offered AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radars and state of the art Airborne Stand-Off Radar (ASTOR), Pakistan is given beaten up Mi-17 helos, India is getting C-17 cargo planes, Pakistan is given M109A5, India is getting latest state-of-the-art M777.... So much for a non-NATO ally and a 'partner' in War on Terror.

waa e nakaami mata e karavaN jata raha
karavan key dil sey ehsas e ziaN jata raha

Qsaark, sorry to burst your bubble, but isnt all that equipment provided to Pakistan for use in its COIN ops?
Where as the equipment India is getting is being bought with hard cash.

Its not a question of just giving it to an 'ally'. Its business for these defense companies. US govt is providing Pakistan with what it needs for its efforts against the militants, not what it wants and definitely what it cannot pay for.
India otoh is getting what it wants by paying for it.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

You are right; Pakistan is given out dated P3-C, Indians are offered P-8 Poseidon and Hawkeye E2-D; Pakistan is given Blk-52, Indians are offered F-18s/F-16IN; Pakistan is given TPS-77 radars, India is offered AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radars and state of the art Airborne Stand-Off Radar (ASTOR), Pakistan is given beaten up Mi-17 helos, India is getting C-17 cargo planes, Pakistan is given M109A5, India is getting latest state-of-the-art M777.... So much for a non-NATO ally and a 'partner' in War on Terror.

waa e nakaami mata e karavaN jata raha
karavan key dil sey ehsas e ziaN jata raha

Buddy i dont know abt the radars.....but we bought JDAMS,SNIPER PODS,BLK 52,And M1O9A5s(ETC) self propelled howitzers which are quiet modern and state of the art....M777 is a light wieght arty and not sp..M109A5 is in a different class and compairable to any other howitzers in its class.
We are paying 78 million $ for upgrading OHP, and M-18s etc are being given in coalition fund PC-3s of PN are being upgraded with latest avionics and hawk eye radar...etc
.....on the other hand indians are buying CJ-17s

 

[qsaark]

Qsaark, sorry to burst your bubble, but isnt all that equipment provided to Pakistan for use in its COIN ops?
Where as the equipment India is getting is being bought with hard cash.

Its not a question of just giving it to an 'ally'. Its business for these defense companies. US govt is providing Pakistan with what it needs for its efforts against the militants, not what it wants and definitely what it cannot pay for.
India otoh is getting what it wants by paying for it.

You have not burst any bubble, the point of the post was not what Pakistan got as charity and what India is getting in return of hard cash. The point was that albeit of the so-called status of a Non-NATO ally, Pakistan is offered inferior system(s). Even if Pakistan could buy thing, the hardware(s) offered to India (or others) would still be off limits for Pakistan for multiple reasons and embargoed F-16s can be given as an example.

 

[indianairforce1]

Dont worry soon we will have our own and we v proved it number of times.

No one seen you when you guys were proving ..??? By the way when was that..??? Is that was in China Or Turky..??


Pakistan as a Major Non-Nato Ally (MNNA) and a founding member of SEATO and CENTO has not been given a single Predator or Reaper. Pakistan has an indigenous UAV capacity, but its drones cannot fire armaments.

At present the laser guided technology helps it to identify targets and then relay that information to a helicopter gunship or a plane. Islamabad is in desperate need of UAV which can fire at the target. Need predicates development, and necessity is the mother of invention. It is like being under sanction. Pakistan was under sanctions when it designed and built the JF-17 Thunder with the Chinese. Now the latest UAVis being built with Turkish and Chinese help. Pakistan’s latest UAV is called the Burraq named after a mythical flying horse.

The Burraq is based on the Falco – SELEX GALILEO technology. We produce information on the Selix Galileo so that an adequate comparison can be made with the Burraq.

Pakistan requested predator drones for the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) so that the Pakistanis could monitor the 2500 kilometer long Durand Line. The request was refused. Pakistan also requested helicopters, and asked the USA to launch a satellite for Pakistan. The requests fell on deaf ears. Pakistan also requested 80,000 M-16s or Klashnikovs for the Frontier Corps who are still using WW2 vintage rifles. The guns have still not arrived. However Pakistan was asked to “Do More.”

 

[Salahadin]

No one seen you when you guys were proving ..??? By the way when was that..??? Is that was in China Or Turky..??

loll its funny from and indian.. "tum logon ne kon sa teer marliya"

 

[qsaark]

loll its funny from and indian.. "tum logon ne kon sa teer marliya"

Correct! Please go to the following thread and carefully read through the post#1625.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...tirole-fighter-thread-3-a-109.html#post795836

The article "Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality? by V.K. Thakur" posted in the above thread could also be read here: http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/58870.aspx

 

[Windjammer]

No one seen you when you guys were proving ..??? By the way when was that..??? Is that was in China Or Turky..??

Actually right on your door step.

Here is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

NO urgent need for any fresh operations

 

[TechLahore]

And how to track the UAV with sectorised antennas?

To improve the cellular coverage the mobile base station antennas are given small tilt(around 2-3 degrees) towards the intended area (houses). Then also signals are not very great inside some of the rooms. I doubt this can be used to control the drones which operates

Well, all I can say is I was not talking about a theoretical possibility. GSM networks have been used to control drones.

Secondly, as I have previously pointed out, this is a short term over the horizon/non LOS solution. Ultimately if this capability is to be matured and enabled over enemy territory, satcomm is a requirement.

 

[TechLahore]

Well i have made my own research and came to know that there are two ways to control the predator one is direct c-band line of sight (can be used for mission in which distance is short and use of satellite is not necessary)

Once again, please refer to my earlier post. This is limited to LOS operations which basically makes the Predator pretty much useless. LOS is a serious limitation. Pakistan would likely not buy Predators restricted to LOS.

 

[dbc]

Once again, please refer to my earlier post. This is limited to LOS operations which basically makes the Predator pretty much useless. LOS is a serious limitation. Pakistan would likely not buy Predators restricted to LOS.

Erieye can provide LOS for drones.

 

[TechLahore]

Erieye can provide LOS for drones.

so with two erieyes we keep 24x7 coverage?

technically possible maybe, with refit, but practically not so. and this would be monumentally expensive and would put the erieyes at risk through over-use.

we will have our own UCAVs soon enough. China must solve the satcomm issue so we will benefit from that also. I don't doubt that we will get all these capabilities within 12-48 months - starting with LOS UCAVs, eventually leading up to unhindered, over the horizon operational capability.

 

[dbc]

so with two erieyes we keep 24x7 coverage?

technically possible maybe, with refit, but practically not so. and this would be monumentally expensive and would put the erieyes at risk through over-use.

Has been done

While the mission operator used the DI-CD software to control the surveillance activities of three ScanEagles, an "observer" in the field sent the location of a time-critical target via a cell phone to an AWACS Block 40/45 operator console. The AWACS operator successfully requested video of the target through the primary AWACS display.

The DI-CD software automatically generated updated ScanEagle task and mission plans, which were shown to the mission operator using the OMM software and sent to the UAVs using standard protocols. The UAVs beamed video back to the mission operator and the AWACS operator, who coordinated a simulated F/A-18 strike on the target. The same target video was relayed to the observer's cell phone