Quantcast
Roketsan successfully test-fired HİSAR-O medium-range SAM
August 18, 2017
Photo Credit: Defence Blog

Roketsan successfully test-fired HİSAR-O medium-range SAM

Turkey’s leading munitions maker Roketsan successfully test-fired its HİSAR-O medium-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) system.

The Turkish state-owned news agency Anadolu Agency reported that the test was done in Aksaray in central Turkey on Saturday, 03 December.

Roketsan’s test was witnessed by Turkey’s Minister of National Defence, Fikri Işık, who praised Aselsan, Roketsan, and Havelsan for their collaborative efforts and success in the HİSAR SAM program.

As per Roketsan, the HİSAR-O is capable of reaching 25 km and was designed to defend critical assets from aerial threats such as combat aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles, among others.

The HİSAR-O is powered by a dual-pulse solid-propellant rocket. The HİSAR-O’s guidance suite is comprised of an inertial navigation system (INS) supported by mid-course guidance corrections from a surface radar via data-link. Once close enough to the target, the HİSAR switches to its imaging infrared (IIR) seeker.

The Turkish Undersecretariat for Defence Industries (SSM) commissioned the development of the HİSAR under the T-LALAMIDS and T-MALAMIDS (for short and medium-range SAM, respectively) in 2011. The development cost of the short-range HİSAR-A (15 km) and HİSAR-O (25 km) is reportedly $332 million U.S. and $255 million U.S., respectively (TR Defence).

Aselsan was tasked to develop and produce the radar, command and control, and fire control systems, while Roketsan was responsible for the development of the missile and its propulsion.

The HİSAR-A short-range SAM was tested in 2013 and is slotted to enter service in 2017 (IHS Jane’s). The HİSAR-O is expected to enter service with the Turkish armed forces in 2020 (Daily Sabah).

Notes & Comments:

The HİSAR-series is a component of Turkey’s wider effort to domestically source defence systems. Ankara’s rationale for the course was to mitigate potential (and previously felt) challenges to both modernizing its armed forces and ensuring a stable supply-chain in times of crisis or international tension.

This sentiment was summarized by Turkish’s Defence Minister, Fikri Işık (Daily Sabah):

“Some countries that we consider as friends have the habit of limiting, enforcing an embargo even when we face the slightest problem. That is why we have the aim to have all the critical technologies, developing them and becoming one of the few countries that does so.”

Considering the substantial upfront investment made in bringing the HİSAR-A and HİSAR-O to fruition, it would be natural to consider the HİSAR a long-term effort, one that could accrue improvements. SSM has issued a tender calling for the development of short, medium, and long-range SAM systems for use on the TF-2000 frigate program. The HİSAR could figure prominently in this program, which would make sense given that it would scale substantial investment made in the program to-date.

In November, the head of SSM Dr. İsmail Demir confirmed Ankara’s intention to domestically develop a long-range SAM system. However, it will also be seeking a system off-the-shelf, and SSM could potentially link that program to its domestic program via transfer-of-technology.

  • Donny G

    Pakistan should develop one too.

    • Matthys Jacobs

      The quickest route for Pakistan would be to partner with another nation such as China or South Africa.

      South Africa’s Denel is looking for a partner to develop a long range radar guided surface to air missile (umkhonto (“spear)) with a range of 60 km’s and a dual ramjet powered air-to-air and surface to air missile (marlin) with a range of 100 km’s.

      It already has the 20 km ranged Umkhonto IR in service with the South African Navy, Finland Navy and Algerian Navy. The South African Army will be taking the land launched variant into service within the next few years.

      It is able to couple with Thales, SAAB and South African made Reutech Radars.

      Denel is looking to develop an extended IR variant which would be capable of reaching out to between 30 km’s to 40 km’s.

      It’s one of the only non western vertical launched missiles available to developing countries.

      Of course China is also an option but technology transfer would be hard to achieve.

      • Syed Arbab Shah

        Pakistan is cash strapped at the moment. Our preference would always be battle proven and readily available systems with complete/partial TOT and ofcourse sanction proof

        There are gaps in our defenses that need to be plugged in the near future if not immediate future

        Q. Any idea about the estimated time frame and the amount of $ of R & D budget we are talking about here, if Pakistan becomes an equal partner?

        • Turkey put in $600m into the development of both the Hisar-A and Hisar-O. In the absence of rocket and seeker technology relevant to this space, Pakistan can only offer money, and in this case, we’re talking about $300m in just R&D, no actual product. That will be an added cost.

          Pakistan won’t foot R&D funding for SAM technology. Turkey has shown that the supplier base for such stuff has grown, and thus, the impetus to fund domestic development in Pakistan is going to be even less than what was there before, which was nothing.

          Just as the PAF procured the HQ-16 off-the-shelf, the PN will procure an MR-SAM of its own off-the-shelf (assuming its future surface warships will be designed for such capabilities in the first place). The options are many: Hisar-O, Aster-15, CAMM, Umkhonto and Norinco DK-10.

          We might be able to get our industry some workshare by tying a purchase to offsets. I think Turkey and South Africa would be the best opportunities in that regard so either one could re-invest a portion of the contract back into Pakistan. That might accrue some transfer-of-technology, though its nature will be dependent on Pakistan’s technology base and what it can readily absorb.

          • MT

            But by known report many of technology is licensed from diehl Germany nd electronics come from Swiss company.

            If u see IRIS-T nd Hisar you just can’t differentiate.

          • Matthys Jacobs

            Having worked in the industry and although having not worked within it for over two decades, my view is that it would be far cheaper to partner with South Africa due to the Rand exchange rate. Historically South Africa has developed systems far cheaper than Western countries and slightly more than China but closer to Russia in terms of pricing because it prices in Rands.

            It’s development costs are significantly lower as well.

            The Umkhonto offers a good starting base for Pakistan. A highly capable 20 km ranged SHORAD with the ability to expand it into a HIMAD system with a variant of between 30 km’s to 40 km’s then a radar guided variant between 60 km’s to 80 km’s.

            At the end of the day range means little if a missile’s seeker is unable to find the target when coupled with radar and more so if it loses maneuverability the longer the range and under different conditions.

            What any country needs is a common missile family with multiple ranges suited for different targets that can be used on aircraft, ships or land based in order to have commonality amongst various arms of services and to reduce costs overall.

            South Africa has proven it’s reliance on technology transfer. It did this with Brazil with the A-Darter, UAE with the NIMR-35, Pakistan with the Raptor and MUPSOW, UAE with Umbani and Malaysia with Electronic Warfare suites.

            Although Turkey has a fantastic industry, it would always seek to have the most stake in any potential deal whereas since South Africa is roughly the same size as Pakistan in terms of economic strength it could be a ar better partner in multiple industries.

        • Matthys Jacobs

          Pakistan’s massive human capital potential actually bodes well for it’ future economic aspirations.

          There’s a conundrum with battle proven. For instance the most capable aircraft in existence only partook in battle, mind you not even the battle it was originally developed for i.e. the F-22 in Syria as of 2014, almost two decades after its development.

          In modern times, it’s important for countries to have some sort of local capabilities within the defence sector. Russia and China are obvious choices for Pakistan in terms of sanction proof to a degree however, Russia and China have shown that they will tend to abide to UN arms sanctions if say the country in question offers little to no strategic value to them.

          What countries should aim for is to incorporate as many commercial off the shelf components as possible in their defence equipment to ensure that availability of components or spares is readily available and not obstructed by arms related sanctions.

          Well to give you an example, Brazil invested just US$52 million to have full technology transfer of a 5th generation missile in which only 5 missiles of the type exist today. In comparison Germany invested $440 million to the IRIS-T, Italy $200 million and the balance amongst sweden, greece, austria and canada.

          South Africa in comparison developed the entire A-Darter programme for US$130 million. It took 4 years from Brazil’s investment to go into onboard aircraft flight testing. The programme would have been faster if Brazil had invested more or if South Africa had more funds. But Brazil benefited hugely by attaining a 5th Generation missile without even developing a 4th Generation Missile.

          For the Marlin missile Denel requires around $100 million for the programme and for the extension to the variant and ranges of the Umkhonto Denel requires around half that. They’ve already tested both technologies based on proven designs, components etc. What they require is another nation besides South Africa to join the development and co fund and co order.

      • The Marlin is an interesting program. Unfortunately, Pakistan seldom spends on developmental efforts. It only does so when there is absolutely no other alternative, which is what you saw during the Raptor SOW and Ra’ad days. On the other hand, and this is a long shot, the PAF might consider the co-development/funding route as a means to strengthen the domestic supply base, which it is consciously pursuing via the Kamra Aviation City initiative. In this respect, South Africa could be a strong option.

        • Matthys Jacobs

          It’s a pity since Pakistan has the demand needed to ensure local development.

          In these trying economic times, it’s harder for countries to go at it alone. Also hedging oneself by using multiple partners ensures some insulation against major financial losses.

          I remember the Raptor and MUPSOW deal during my time at Kentron. It’s a pity that the now Denel did not proceed with the long range TORGOS, it could have given Pakistan a 500 km + land attack or anti-ship cruise missile capability. Denel/Kentron also had the LRTM (Long Range Tactical Missile) which was a supersonic missile in the same weight class as the Exocet missile but with a 300 km range.

          Unfortunately South Africa does not have the financial muscle nor the defence needs to finish these projects and this is why you see Kentron designed products within Pakistan’s arsenal. A strengthening of relations between both countries could open up more than just defence industry development. The financial sector, consulting, ICT, medical, education etc are all major potential industries.

  • nob hamid gul

    If Turkey goes with this pace than I am sure that they will develop s-300 and s-400 like system by 2030.

    if everyrhing goes smooth in Turkey under AK party for another 15 years than Muslim countries will no longer be dependent on America and Europe for defence procurement.

    • MT

      Engine navigation system licensed product from diehl Germany. Missile looks ditto similar to various IRIS-T German SaM and seeker come from a Swiss company.

      • Shakeel

        It’s called improvising. May be you are trying to deflect attention to the ‘Made in India Brand’. Are we gonna go through the motions of ‘tit for tat’ again or are we going to let common sense prevail.

        Kudos to Turkey.

      • Matthys Jacobs

        It’s quite technically challenging to start from scratch and using components from different providers is actually quite common.

        Having worked in the defence industry, I can assure you the majority of countries do this. Israel as an example used to have joint projects with Kentron (South Africa) whereby we would share development of components.

        • MT

          I can bet that german didnt share source code of navigation system & software based radar.
          Its mostly optimization parameters & learning configuration module licensed while the base core binary code is enrcypted polymorphically

          If Israel didnt give india the source code of navigation system despite 4 bill $ barak8 order then u can assume what kind of license system HISAR would be

          • Matthys Jacobs

            It depends on various factors.

            In the MOU a OEM would ordinarily state what is provided and although the full source might not be provided, a client could be provided with plug-ins or the ability to expand code base of functionality. Very few OEM’s allow full changes to the core or kernel because this would obviously have implications of maintenance. I know that in the past Kentron did not allow for this but Denel has changed this by handing not over just the full source code but also providing training to clients for adapting the source to their specifications.

          • MT

            Denel have sold many technology off the hook.MUPSOW nd raptor are among few . Isn’t pak raad cruise missile designed by denel& they shared softwares code with few safety measures so that hardware used in raad Need some sourcing frm south Africa.

            I don’t see German selling source code for few mill€ which are core to building a sam.
            Israel gets order of 4bill$for Barak 8 from India nd they part with no source code.

            French were asking India 3-4bill$ for tech related to short range SAM MICA . So I still believe that Hisar Sam made with 500mll$investment is not sufficient money to grab technology.

            Its mostly licensed produce for every unit sold

          • Matthys Jacobs

            Yes, you are correct. It was actually pre-Denel when it was called kentron.

            Germany tends not to sell the source since this would affect their warranty status. South Africa on the other hand believes in client after sales because it’s a smaller country and can’t compete in terms of financing such as Germany.

            Agreed.

            This is why if pakistan were to start it’s own air defence project it would require a partner who would do total TOT.

      • ahmria

        Hello everyone,
        I am new to the discussion forum of Quwa but have been a regular visitor to the site which I think is very informative. This is my first post and I just want to say what a great site it is. Back to the topic at hand. I think this is a great step forward for Turkey and Turkish defence independence. I think MT is being a bit unfair towards Turkey. Yes this missile system may have foreign components but I think in the long term all of these components will be developed and built in Turkey unlike the Israeli Barak system that India has bought and is claiming to be indigenous.

        • jamshed_kharian_pak

          hello ahmria
          we must support Great Turkey a wonderful Kardish Country, you are very welcome I am here since few months quwa.org very good site with excellent friends and we learn a lot

    • Matthys Jacobs

      Having worked on multiple missile systems, I respectfully disagree the gap between a medium and long range in terms of capability is actually quite complicated.

      The HISAR was in development since 2008 and over $580 million USD was spent on the development to date. This is only for the land variant, it would probably cost around half of that to validate it for maritime use. The next step in seeker technology which Turkey specifically Roketsan has gotten some technical assistance from Rafael.

      To develop a long range or THAAD or HIMAD system would require substantial funding.

      Israel as an example spent Between $2.4 billion over 20 years on the Arrow system.

      Taiwan spent roughly double that for a system with far less capabilities.

      Turkey has a fantastic defence industry but it is still a long way off from developing a system like that by itself but it’s following the correct steps in mastering SHORAD first.

      Just a thought, South Africa is not a muslim country but it is quite a reliable defence partner and has quite substantial skills in missile development. Unfortunately it lacks economies of scale and funding to develop its products further.

      During my time at Kentron, we punted a 100 km range surface to air missile. Present day Denel is working on a dual use Air to Air and Surface to Air missile family that shares commonality i.e. an AIM-120 in the air and a Barak-8 from the surface within the 80 km – 100 km range. If South Africa, Turkey, Pakistan and perhaps Algeria partnered on a programme such as that for land, air and maritime use it could have a substantial product to export to the rest of developing world.

      I’m not quite sure on South Africa’s muslim population but having worked with dozens of South African muslims, they’re incredibly bright, honest and hardworking.

      • A multilateral partnership between South Africa, Turkey, Pakistan and Algeria would certainly be interesting.

        Between the four I imagine there is enough money and talent, certainly among the former two, to bring a MR/LR-SAM and LRAAM into fruition. The situation isn’t generally rosy with Pakistan, but during IDEAS some industry firms made a few interesting and unexpected moves, e.g. a $600m deal between HIT and Ukraine (which many had written off for various reasons, appeasing Russia among them). If the prospect of a naval MR/LR-SAM is higher with Denel Dynamics, I think there is a chance that Pakistan could look in that direction.

        • Matthys Jacobs

          Since the JF-17 uses Russian engines I suppose it would be difficult to continue to work with Ukraine.

          The Marlin aims to be a MR/LR SAM for land and naval based applications as well as for aircraft based launched.

          • I think Pakistanis may have overestimated how much Russia actually cares about Pakistan’s defence/commercial ties with Ukraine. It would be an issue if one begins affirming Ukraine’s geopolitical stance vis-a-vis Russia, that will be a problem, but procurements and technical collaboration haven’t seemed to be an issue. Ultimately, even Moscow understands that it can’t provide anything to Pakistan that might alter its multi-billion dollar stakes in India, such as Su-35s or MBTs. To expect anyone, even Pakistan, to hang around and not take what’s on offer from Ukraine when Russia isn’t willing to provide them is unrealistic.

            Interestingly, both Rosonboronexport and Ukroboronprom had shown up at IDEAS in Karachi, and each one was marketing very distinct elements of Pakistan’s security requirements. Russia/Rosonboronexport was taking aim at the internal security – i.e. counterinsurgency and law-enforcement – element, while Ukraine/Ukroboronprom focused on conventional defence capabilities (e.g. MBTs, naval solutions, etc).

          • Matthys Jacobs

            I tend to agree.

            At the end of the day, India is a far larger market for Russian products.

            Russian sales management is quite bad as well where it loses focus and fails to market its services correctly. Their sales technique differs from say France.

      • ahmria

        Hi Matthys, it’s safe to say that the Israeli Arrow has benefited both financially through American financial aid and missile know how Through its development. I also think what South Africa has achieved in missile technology especially in air to air and now sam technology is nothing short of phenomenal and I hope that Pakistan will look to tap into that wealth of experience and try to set up some joint programs in this field.

        • Matthys Jacobs

          South Africa benefited hugely from Israel and France with it’s own missile development and projects. Obviously the two must now regret it given that South Africa is a competitor albeit on the lower scale of the market and within the Short to medium range.

          I personally think that South Africa, Pakistan, Malaysia, Algeria, Argentina, Iran, Nigeria and Finland could reach economies of scale if they worked together and developed a common series of 5th Generation of surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles for applications within air, land and sea.

          It makes far more economical sense to partner together rather than compete against each other.

      • jamshed_kharian_pak

        Hello Matthys Jacobs my friend you can also include in your listed countries IR Iran a Powerful Islamic country who has excellent relations with the Republic of South Afrika

        • Matthys Jacobs

          I’ve only visited iran twice once on the Sasol ticket and the MTN ticket.

          It’s a frontier economy i.e. an economy with untapped potential.

          I might not agree with Iran’s political and religious views but this should not preclude any economic cooperation as long as Iran is not committing any major human rights violations.

          I would think if sanctions is relieved the local economy would do quite well and the government would probably ease some of the restrictions within civilian daily life.

          MTN and Sasol already do business within Iran. I know that several SA banks wish to participate in Islamic Finance within Iran but would require an invite. Secondly, retail stores such as Woolworths, Pick n Pay, Shoprite would also like to be in the Iranian economy. Obviously an area of huge potential is tapping into Iran’s science and defence industry.

  • bill

    Turkish have missed the train by declining Chinese offer of LRSAM. May be Russia is expected supplier but Russia is in habit of supplying downgraded versions as happened many times in the past. Further there are big question marks regarding performance of S300MPU against Israeli fighter jets in Syria.

    Turkey should seriously again consider Chinese path.

    • Matthys Jacobs

      I think the issue Turkey faced with going with a Chinese platform is because of its NATO membership, in terms of commonality it would have been easier to attain the patriot system.

      Besides the US, only Israel, Taiwan, Russia and China have managed to develop long range SAM’s. Only the patriot system has been tested in combat and shares other NATO systems for plug and fight capabilities.

      It would be costly for Turkey to integrate a non NATO platform into their systems from an integration perspective.

      One can imagine the cost to develop their own system. China merely reversed engineered the S-300.

  • Freebird

    Turkish defense industry is superior than one in India. This year Turkey exported defense products cost 1.7 billion dollars. By comparison, Saab is also using inputs from US. Inputs are important if one do not risk to produce something like Arjun tank or Tejas fighter. Turkey has been an exporter of armoured vehicles to more than 17 costumers around the world, still felt need to get assistance from Korea as cumulation is necessary to produce inexpensive and reliable products. India is, on the other hand, still trying to design stuff on its own believing that they are taking steps. Never worked for them so far.

    • MT

      Superior in some sense but petty Hollow by local r&d. Turks papers on aeronautics , radars aesa pesa seeker armour engine is not even 20%of what India produce.

      Name % of indigenous components in so-called Turkish Korean copy tank with German subsystem.

      Export of assembled product is not big deal ?soon pak ll export a bill$ of jf17 but that still puts pak a decade or more behind India in aeronautics.

      Real evaluation of countries is done by research nd patents which put Turks nd iran on same level.

      Turks hv done well bcoz of nato and mtcr membership.

      Even till 2015 India was barrred importing moong actuator for drones/cruise missiles from USA company: moong office based in Bangalore runs largest r&d in asia

      On the contrary Turks almost outsourced and licensed most technology of TaI Anka from American companies.

      Flight control inertial navigation sar module nd engine are all American.

      Turks license produce American inertial MEMS sensors,buy/integrate American radar but rename them with Turks . They haven’t made indigenous aesa radar,EW,awacs radar,sam or any missile.

      On the contrary india build everything from scratch. They may be ordinary but they r built atop local r&d backed by local research. The tech access to American nd European system is bare minimum despite hubris of indo usa defence cooperation

      If a country like Turk with minimal r&d can produce so much with licensed systems so why underestimate India whose civilian pvt sector r 10tmes Bigger than Turks(Turks r more of home to western company manufacturers but india is led by local Indian companies in. Civilian technology)

      India has just started to get accessories of western defence system as it joined mtcr this yr so we ll hv right comparison n next decade.

      • Freebird

        My friend, warfare is a tradition in Turkey. Turks conquered vast territories (list is long, let’s just count India by now) by employing Hungarian cannons, Greek soldiers, Mongolian cavalry, Italian ships and navigators. I know t-129 is Italian, Altay is Korean, German and even Israeli, Milgem has so many parts from Nato countries. But who cares? They are monster weapons, they are simply among top lists. They make money during peace, they kill during war, protect Turkish soldiers at deadliest explosions. In Turkey, soldiers worship Kirpi, Nurol Ejder, Cobra as they owe their life to them. Russia admitted during conflict that Koral can blind about 150 km of s-400. Milgem stealth ship sneaked Greek territory without their knowledge. T-129 is performing better than Super Cobra. You guys are saying that Tejas is a start point, but you engineered aircrafts before but they were performing poor as well. This starting point for India remains always as a start point not any further. On making money, India can’t sell them. On war, they are unreliable (that’s why you guys buy Russian products). BONUS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt6tblh2gSs

        • MT

          indian pvt companies were barred from making weapons otherwise indian even now make better cars,machinaries than turks.
          India produces more research and patents so lets see how india come on top in a next decade

    • amar

      That is your opinion my friend–because you believe whatever is fed to you by media. You don’t care to go deeper into the vast plethora of research publications out there. Instead you choose to go by petty journos who work on the behest of a MNC.
      As for the defence industry of turkey being superior to India– you are indeed free to dream whatever you feel like.No one can stop you from dreaming.
      But reality is quite opposite, kindly pay a little more attention to the design and development of LCA tejas. And the entire eco system of aerospace research that have come up in India. I’m sure , you’d still go by your petty religious sentiments

  • Shakeel

    Perhaps we can trace back the origins of the Hisar rocket to the Vedic age. Almost everything else seems to originate from there.

    • amar

      Hi shakeel
      I don’t think anyone here is stupid enough to claim anything originated from vedas.I’m an agnostic in case you were wondering. Anyways instead of veering off topic,why can’t we discuss research a bit more strictly?

      • Headstrong

        You really shouldn’t tease them so. After all, this is ‘their’ site, which gives them carte blanche

  • amar

    Dude you’re wasting your time. You’re trying to preach to a population that staunchly believes that they designed the jf17 and can design anything. These folks have nothing in the name of industrial research or innovation–patents to show yet they’ll blatantly claim tall and fictions things.
    Do you really think they’d take the pain of going through the achievements of DRDL and RCI– the major contributers of barak 8 project?

    • MT

      Turks only paper on dual pulse engine is literature review of the topic

      Pretty much expose the origin of HISAR.

  • Matthys Jacobs

    I don’ think it’s too late for Pakistan. However I do think it would require Pakistan officials to attract South African investment and coerce South Africa into joint development.

    At present South Africa faces no conventional threat and more so develops it’s own missiles to retain the skills and IP and has shown time and time again that it can develop highly capable systems for 60% of the cost of most Western systems. The Umkhonto system as an example which has a Land based and Ship based variant capable of a range of 20 km’s and altitude of approximately 10 km’s and has the capability to strike surface targets as well cost a fifth of the cost of Turkey’s entire HISAR programme. Having worked on the development, it had a long envelop of evolution in terms of extended ranged variants such as a discardable nose cone variant, radar guided variant and dual pulse rocket powered variant.

    Pakistan should perhaps consider following Algeria in procuring the Denel Umkhonto as a SHORAD for its Army and Navy and request South Africa’s Denel to develop a medium and long range variant and allowing for joint development of the missile. Previously South Africa approached Brazil but Brazil is currently undergoing a massive economic crisis and much like South Africa faces no conventional military threats thus the requirement of a medium and long range air defence system is minimal.

    • Shakeel

      I wholeheartedly agree with you that SA offers great scope for Pakistan. I am constantly at adds with some of the decision making taken in the past. To illustrate my point Pakistan has coughed up $600 million to acquire 10 batteries from MBDA Italy for the Spada 2000 plus system. Such shoddy decsion making does not justify paying such an extortionate amount for a SAM sytem which has only has a range of 20km, and furthermore static land based sytem. If only we held back on a fraction of that amount (i.e $100), to plough into a system such as Marlin would have given Pak greater scope for indigenisation & greater range, with significant amounts of TOT. We are making the same mistakes again recently, by acquiring off the shelf solutions such as LY-80 from China with a possible range of 40-50km. This also comes at a hefty premium.

      My understanding from the past are that SA gave Pakistan the blueprints to develop the H2 SOW & H4 SOW. Since then co-operation has somewhat diminished. Another impediment to Pakistan’s full embrace of SA is the increasingly influential & vocal community in ‘Durban’ which will throws the spanners in the works at any moment in time. You only have to look at how lobbying pressures capitulated Pakistan efforts to acquire 8 F-16 recently. There is always the outside chance of sanctions on Pakistan,for third party countries indulging in defence trade with Islamabad. The latter stems from threat perception of certain countries, Can SA withstand such impositions?

      The partnership between Brasil & South Africa showed great promise, Both countries had the intellectual base to derive maximum synergies from increased co-operation. Mectron & Denel alliance could have formed the basis for a long-term partnership, but Brasil economic woes have hindered this partnership. Both countries were eyeing Pakistan as their launchpad customer for their new generation of AAM. To this day, I cannot understanding why Pakistan was sitting on the fence, and not indulging in a three way partnership.

      I hope that the recent visit by Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Production & former chief army staff visit to SA has pushed forward the case for joint collaboration. I hope our dysfunctional leadership has the foresight to do a SWOT analysis on the merits of embarking on joint ventures, which means short-term sacrifices, for long term gains. Only time will tell how Pakistan will move forward.From my point of view Pakistan, has more to gain from forming a partnerhip with South Africa,

      • Matthys Jacobs

        Pakistan didn’t make a bad decision by procuring the SPADA 2000 I think they ordered around 750 missiles and 10 batteries for around €415 million EUR.

        South Africa as an example sold 100 Umkhonto Missiles to Algeria for €20 million EUR for their two new Frigates. i.e. two 32 cell VLS with accompanying integration, electronics and qualifications. I would rate that the Umkhonto offers the same performance of the Apside except for the Apside only having a semi-active radar homing variant whereas the Umkhonto has an Infrared seeker. If the Umkhonto were fitted with the Radar seeker and discardable nose cone or the rocket boosters that were developed for it then it’s range would triple if not slightly more.

        Reutech, a South African company has paired up the ground based Umkhonto variant with its RSR 320/DBR XL dual band 3D radar which can track up to 100 targets simultaneously to a range of 220 km’s

        It all comes down to Pakistan’s requirements, if Pakistani officials note that the threat level requires an immediate acquisition then perhaps South Africa is not the best choice.

        Yes, at the time Kentron knew that the SANDF was in all likelihood not going to press ahead with the majority of projects such as Raptor 2 and MUPSOW therefore they decided to sell the IP to pakistan and assist their local ordinance industry.

        I doubt very much there would be any civilian concerns in Durban or in South Africa at large with a deal with Pakistan. Although South Africa,notably Durban has a large indian community it’s quite small compared to other race groups. Also South Africa makes no distinction between Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan etc. anyone regarded as Asian is put down as Indian. It’s an unfortunate legacy of a system of racial segregation we had during Apartheid.

        South Africa still provides equipment to nations like Iraq and Algeria which the US previously sanctioned for various issues. South Africa also exported items to Libya as well. It really just depends on the sort of item. For instance, South Africa is one of the core telecommunications providers to Iran and has pushed back on an EU, US or Israeli led financial sanctions to push out of MTN from the Iran market. Because South Africa had multiple trade partners it is far easier to go against the trend so to speak. South Africa also uses multiple commercial off the shelf components and in house developed components.

        Brazil will in all likelihood dwindle down in terms of its defence industry. The new administration has decided to sell off it’s stakes to various Israeli and American companies especially since it follows a more right leaning economic model as opposed to it’s previous left economic model which dictated local development.

        Personally I think Pakistan would offer multiple opportunities to South Africa in terms of economic activity and Pakistan has yet to actively compete in Sub Saharan Africa as India has done. it could certainly compete with India on price for services in industries such as ICT, Telecommunication, Consulting etc. with the correct Sub Saharan African partner. From what I understand pakistan has a sizeable expat community within South Africa but mostly within informal trading stores and barber shops. It hasn’t really attempted any penetration into the formalised markets in South Africa.

        • Shakeel

          Thank you Matthys,

          I stand corrected on the monetary value of the Spada 2000 plus deal. You are right.

          I believe that a ground based system, would not serve Pakistan interest well, against a more standalone mobile unit such as the S-300/S400. With an interception range of just over 20km & tracking range of 60km. Even the modfied Iranian Hawk (have a interception range of 40km) Furthermore, specs of the Spada 2000 does not bode well against the Barak 8 missile. Also SOW munitions nowadays have a strike range in excess of 70km.

          The Abbotabad raid debacle in May 2011 serves to highlight flaws in our air defence system. I am not defending any non state actors.It’s about sovereignty.The former president Mr Zardari (Mr 10%) told the media that the incident did not register on their radar (another words they were switched off).Not a good ‘Omen’ for a 3 tier air defence system. If the spada system was so good, why did Kuwait choose the Raytheon system in more recent times.

          Against this backdrop, is it really value for money, I don’t think so?

          The problem of Indian sphere of infuence on SA is not confined to civilian life (see below). It extends beyond that:-

          http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/south-africa-guptagate-despite-fresh-corruption-allegations-president-zuma-wont-be-ousted-1550971

          http://www.sunday-guardian.com/extra/indo-american-lobby-boosted-ties

          You correctly pointed out, that South Africa does offer abundant opportunities of co-operations in all facets of life – not just defence.

          I eagerly anticpate the day when joint ventures with SA will become visible.This would herald a new dawn of co-operation between two emerging nations.

          • Matthys Jacobs

            The Barak 8 is quite capable.

            What you are referring to is a transportable system or vehicle mounted like the S-300/S-400 i.e. not a static system.

            The Umkhonto has a static and transportable i.e. truck mounted launcher.

            I stand corrected but I thought the SPADA could have this variant as well.

            The SPADA however is a SHORAD system, essentially it’s a short range and low altitude system.

            The Hawk and Barak-8 is considered a HIMAD system i.e. Medium to High Range and Medium to High altitude.

            The S-400 would be considered to be a THAAD system as in terminal defence in terms of anti-ballistic capabilities.

            A modern air defence system has multiple layers both static and mobile.

            South Africa envisioned the SABLE system which would be a plug and fight system which encompassed static and mobile CRAM, VSHORAD, SHORAD and HIMAD systems using commonality.

            I would say Germany and Israel dominate the above.

            Germany obviously partnered with multiple EU and NATO parties and Israel partnered with the US and India.

            Russia, Israel, Taiwan, Japan, Germany, UK-France, China are the only countries that have active THAAD systems that are locally developed.

            I assume the incident you refer to is when US special forces used modified low observable enhanced Helicopters to fly below radar coverage. What pakistan would require to prevent things like this is a holistic solution. Low Observable technology requires passive radar which is generally overlooked by most air defence systems.

            It could very well be that there was operator issues in detecting their helicopter or there was collusion with the US. Ideally a modern air defence system is somewhat autonomous and operates independently and has IFF integrated. In a region that Pakistan is in, one would think this would be the norm.

            There are obviously better systems but I’m not quite sure how pakistan conducts its tender processes for the acquisition of new defence equipment.

            You are referring to the Gupta family who has undue influence over the current sitting president of the ANC – the ruling party of South Africa. They’re actually Indian born businessmen who emigrated to South Africa several years ago. If one reads the local media, the local South African indian population despises the Gupta’s. Essentially the Gupta’s have bribed the president by bribing his son. It’s not an official South African position and the current president faces huge pressure within his party as well as the general population. This is why his party has lost significant power in major metros and cities.

          • Headstrong

            ‘Despises’ may be an understatement of sorts. Indian South Africans want nothing to do with the Guptas. I believe they came under such pressure, and blackballed by the Indian community, they hot footed it to Dubai, where a secure sinecure awaits Zuma as well?

          • Matthys Jacobs

            From what I understand they have decided to stay in South Africa.

            I would think 2017 might determine whether they stay or leave SA for good.

  • jamshed_kharian_pak

    Excellent News Republic of Turkey must continue to develop its own systems, NATO or not NATO must be the Moto, Turkey has great influence in the Islamic world, comprising around 62 countries a great market, have a good journey my friends

Social Media

Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter

Quwa Daily

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement