Skip to content Skip to footer

IDEAS 2016: Blitzkrieg Defense Solutions Hamza 8×8 MCV

Blitzkrieg Defense Solutions, a privately owned Pakistani defence vendor (formerly known as Cavalier), will be showcasing its internally designed 8×8 wheeled armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) – the Hamza Multi-Role Combat Vehicle (MCV – at the 2016 International Defence Exhibition and Seminar (IDEAS).

According to an apparent marketing video, the Hamza MCV is powered by a 600hp engine. A separate flyer, which appears to be marketing collateral for use at IDEAS, states that the Hamza MCV has a power-to-weight ratio of more than 20hp per ton. If accurate, this would place the Hamza MCV’s weight at 30-tons, which is comparable to other 8×8 AFVs, such as the Paramount Group Mbombe 8 (28-tons).

The same marketing flyer states that the Hamza MCV has a useful payload capacity of 15+ tons. In terms of armour, the Hamza benefits from ballistic protection (up to STANAG 4569 Level-4) and blast as well as mine protection (STANAG 4569 Level-4B). Up to 14 persons can be carried inside the Hamza. The MCV can also be equipped with electro-optical sensors, including night-vision. The Hamza can be armed with either a 12.7mm heavy machine gun or a 30mm cannon.

Notes & Comments:

If the details are accurate, it appears that Blitzkrieg is taking aim at two Pakistan Army requirements.

First, the Army had sought an 8×8 AFV (since at least 2014) to bolster its ability to rapidly move infantry, not only in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) but also along an increasingly pervasive road network in the country. Second, the Army has been pursuing mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles for its counterinsurgency (COIN) operations in FATA.

The Hamza MCV can fulfill both requirements. In addition to the 8×8 configuration, the Hamza’s apparent protection levels, e.g. STANAG 4569 Level-4B for blast and mine protection, affords it with the ability to withstand up to 10 kg in explosive mass under its belly. Furthermore, the STANAG 4569 Level-4 coverage in ballistic protection shields the Hamza from smalls fire from 30 metres and 14.5mm heavy machine gun from 200 metres. In effect, the Hamza MCV can be used in the role of an MRAP.

It is not known if Pakistan will adopt the Hamza MCV, but if the 8×8 AFV requirement is still in place, the Hamza could emerge as the leading candidate. It would preclude the need for a large number of separate MRAPs for use in COIN. First, the Army would not be in a position to choose between two distinct needs, it can amalgamate both into one solution, and channel its resources in that solution. The benefit is that when MRAPs are not needed (e.g. a winding down of COIN operations), the Army would not be left with platforms it has limited utility for in conventional conflict scenarios.

Second, procuring from Blitzkrieg would be in line with the Ministry of Defence Production (MoDP) and armed forces’ mandate of sourcing internally. In fact, a substantive Hamza MCV order could end up being the largest ever defence order made to the Pakistani private sector. In addition to incentivizing Blitzkrieg to continue with in-house initiatives, but it would also trigger activity from the wider private sector. In turn, this could draw the interest of overseas vendors which may be interested in accessing the Pakistani market, which could potentially result in investment in Pakistan (e.g. in the form of joint-ventures looking to secure current and future armed forces requirements).

Show CommentsClose Comments


  • by amar
    Posted November 21, 2016 10:18 pm 0Likes

    I dont think it has been designed by any pakistani company.In my humble opinion it looks like as if assembled in pak.The reason being–no company can design an MRAP in just 1 year–especially a company that has no prior experience- it defies all logic!
    Pakistan doesnt have enough competency to design stuff like chassis,gear box,armour technology,transmission.Kindly note we are not even talking about engine.

  • by Matthys Jacobs
    Posted November 22, 2016 2:51 am 0Likes

    Would it not have been economically feasible to get onto the Paramount Group Mbombe 8 and push for a local Pakistani order and have domestic production and exclusive sales rights to the South East Asian Market?

    Going at it alone in the defence industry pits you against the largest defence contractors who have economies of scale thus collaboration with smaller industry players would be the best financial route to pursue.

  • by nob hamid gul
    Posted November 22, 2016 5:20 am 0Likes

    1 year Old programme?
    Who told you that?

    Pakistan was looking for wheeled infantry fighting vehicle since 2012

    Hamza has been designed in keeping minds of the requirement of Pakistan army.
    I think The first prototype was develop in beginning of this year.

  • by nob hamid gul
    Posted November 22, 2016 7:51 am 0Likes

    No doubt Mbombe 8 is one of the best platform but don’t you think hamza going to give a tough competition.

  • by bill
    Posted November 22, 2016 9:59 am 0Likes

    PA is still in dire need for MRAPs and lightly armoured vehicles, as PA and other law enforcement agencies have lost many precious lives due to absence of armoured platforms. The MRAPS provided by USA are reconditioned and limited in numbers. Further Pak may face problems regarding spares, the other issue with them is that they have high fuel consumption.

    Pa should even consider for some sort of light armour protection on it’s daily usage vehicles alomg with induction of domestic MRAPS on large scale.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 22, 2016 10:28 am 0Likes

    It appears to depend on the companies themselves. I would reckon that if Blitzkrieg and/or Metal Engineering Works secure meaningful orders from the gov’t, that would incentivize other private actors to seek out their own solutions. In that respect, a private firm could try linking up with Paramount Group.

  • by Matthys Jacobs
    Posted November 22, 2016 10:54 am 0Likes

    Agreed however, domestic production should not stop a private pakistani company from aiming to become a exporter as well.

    Pakistan is well placed to provide next generation solutions to South East Asia and South Asian Markets to compete against India.

    It requires a partner though, it has one in China albeit it is predominantly for local markets. If it were to expand to say the African region or South East it could potentially take on additional partners.

  • by Matthys Jacobs
    Posted November 22, 2016 10:56 am 0Likes

    I’m not quite sure of the capabilities of the Hamza but Paramount’s vehicle experience is quite extensive and their other Mbombe variants i.e. 4×4 and 6×6 are currently in use in different countries.

    Similar to the Finnish Patria AMV, Pakistan or BDS could essentially gain economies of scale and put themselves into the value chain of expanded markets.

    It’s just a suggestion though and it does not take away from the achievement from Pakistan and BDS regarding their products.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 22, 2016 11:24 am 0Likes

    I agree. Whether public sector or private sector, Pakistani firms cannot solely depend on domestic requirements to feed activity, they will need third-party/export sales to maintain sustainability.

  • by Shakeel
    Posted November 22, 2016 1:49 pm 0Likes

    I would be inclined to agree with Amar. If we observe the track record of HIT, you cannot help, but to cry in dispair. Some of the armoured vehicle that they produce can be pierced by a kitchen knife, never mind a bullet or a mine. If you look at the turret of these vehicles they resemble a World War 2 vehicle. HIT is a hindrance to innovation.They should visit BMC of Turkey to learn how to design & produce international standard vehicles. Our failure to develop & innovate on baseline models of Al-Khalid or Al-zarrar tanks are self evident. Most worrisome is HIT failure to produce engines through JV or third party countries eg such as Ukraine or China.

    On a positive, the new Hamza 8×8 Blitzkeig vehicle is a step in the right direction.

  • by Hassan Burney
    Posted November 22, 2016 3:04 pm 0Likes

    From its xesigne it looks that it could float… it true?

  • by Navid Butt
    Posted November 22, 2016 3:47 pm 0Likes

    We must stop following Indian’s habits of selfpraizing of non-achievements, non-proven and boasting of recently announced or concieved projects on papers.The name “Blitzkrieg”is a strange name of an Pakistani engineering company unless it is a joint venture with a German company.As far as HIT is concerned, during its 50 years life it has done nothing credible to be proud of .It has been beating the hell out of 70 years old Russian designed tank called T-55 ,re naming it Zarrar and lately Al Khalid ,and that with the help of China,France (Gearbox),Ukrain (Engine) and Allah knows who else.Like Turkey, Pakistan should have sent students to German or American universities for mechanical engineering studies .England in demise or China were/or not the right places for such studies .

  • by Navid Butt
    Posted November 22, 2016 4:01 pm 0Likes

    Long time ago HIT did manage to produce a medium truck called YASOOB in small quantities but corruption made sure that it dies in infancy. The corruption is still there,live and kicking and ……..

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 22, 2016 4:04 pm 0Likes


  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 22, 2016 4:20 pm 0Likes

    The Yasoob was not an HIT program, but a separate venture between Axle Products and a Hungarian company (from whom the design had been bought and produced under license in Pakistan). The Army stopped procuring the trucks after a few hundred (300?) units due to corruption between those involved in the middle (managing the transaction and contracts).

  • by nob hamid gul
    Posted November 22, 2016 4:39 pm 0Likes

    No need for MRAP in large numbers. MRAP has no role in combat and specially against State centric war. And it’s costly too.
    That is why hamza has been designed. It is multi purpose platform. IFV+ APC+Protection

  • by amar
    Posted November 22, 2016 10:00 pm 0Likes

    @Navid Butt
    My dear friend,I was merely suspicious of the origin of this vehicle thats all and all I wanted was a credible proof from the designing agency as to what was their research contribution in this vehicle.Instead of writing 1000 words that bear NO RELEVANCE why dont you go ahead and prove the point?
    As for your remarks about indian “non-achievements”–you do realize the bulk of research activity that goes in india is many times that of pakistan. IN terms of sheer research india is ranked 7th by SCIMAGO. In patent filing alone,IITs scored close to 500 last year. Even HAL filed 756 patents in 2015.These figures point towards an increasing trend of creation of intellectual property rights.
    I have seen this trend–whenever my pakistani friends fail to prove their point they resort to old age rhetoric–“our research is so secretive that no one knows it”. I mean seriously,who are we really fooling here?

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 22, 2016 10:35 pm 0Likes

    Regarding the Hamza 8×8. If it is off-the-shelf, then what off-the-shelf system is it?

  • by Matthys Jacobs
    Posted November 23, 2016 3:26 am 0Likes

    Tell me, besides China and Turkey – which other countries have partnered with Pakistan’s defence industry?

    Also – which banks are supportive of Pakistan’s defence industry?

  • by Sami Shahid
    Posted November 23, 2016 5:55 am 0Likes

    I think this MCV is developed by a private Pakistani firm according to the Pakistan Army requirements and now the Army will start its trials.

  • by Navid Butt
    Posted November 23, 2016 6:33 am 0Likes

    I fully agree,Pakistan must stop being overly secretive and missinforming the nation. None of their “secret”programs have turned out to be state of the art weapons. Burraq(after 12 machines,production stopped),Raad and Babur being non super sonic compare to Brahmos are a few examples. This 8X8 apc is most probably foreign components assembled in a body made in Karachi.Yes you are right, “who are we fooling here?”.

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 23, 2016 8:39 am 0Likes

    Can you point to a system? If it’s off the shelf then it exists somewhere, and if you’re intent on arguing that it is an assembled import, then what was the imported make/model?

    I report the news as it is, and then I comment on it. In the commentary I didn’t go into affirming or dismissing BDS’ claim because there’s no substantive info in either direction. Stuck to a more grounded discussion, i.e. it’s here, how does it factor in terms of rrquirements, etc That’s the general trend for all topics, Pakistan or otherwise, unless it is patently obvious (e.g. Burraq being CH-3A).

    This discussion of Hamza’s origins is a vain discussion because you’re not going to provid proof for the original outside party (I couldn’t find it) and the other side doesn’t really care to make arguments about local IP, R&D, etc, because they mostly don’t know (what’s there an not there). It’ll be a repetitive exchange.

    Move on.

  • by amar
    Posted November 23, 2016 1:01 pm 0Likes

    I don’t understand why do Pakistanis take it offensive when someone asks for a concrete proof. Over this side of the border things are very transparent in the sense everything is Made public and published.
    As for the MRAP,I was merely asking for blietzkriegs contribution,as I’ve not heard of the company before.that’s all! I don’t understand what’s wrong in that?

  • by amar
    Posted November 23, 2016 1:06 pm 0Likes

    Look my friend,babur/raad/nirbhay and brahmos signify two very different missile philosophies.I think it’s rubbish to even compare the two categories. Former are subsonic cruise missiles designed to target fixed ground target from hundred or 1000 of kms away whereas latter is supersonic air breathing ramjet powered anti ship missile designed specifically to take out carrier battle groups and heavy ships. Both of them have very different roles.
    As for the babur though it was China who provided immense reverse engineering help with the crashed tomhawk. That’s the reason why we don’t really find any technical details of Pakistani research or contribution to babur program. Well sadly the research culture of Pakistan is poles apart India’s

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 23, 2016 1:36 pm 0Likes

    From what I was told BDS’ input was the armoured frame (design, configuration and integration). The chassis and engine were imported. The armour technology is probably coming from an external provider (even HIT does this with some light armoured vehicles).

  • by Bilal Khan
    Posted November 23, 2016 2:24 pm 0Likes

    Ukraine and to a lesser extent Western Europe (mostly in low profile subsystem projects).

    Not sure about banks, but I would imagine Chinese ones in programs involving Chinese input (e.g. JF-17).

  • by Shakeel
    Posted November 23, 2016 2:57 pm 0Likes

    Dear Amar, the savvy questions you ask Bilal are akin to you asking IHS Janes. The most likely response you will get is a big cheese, with a letter saying the proof is in the pudding, but the recipe is a secret?. Given your patronising behaviour, perhaps you can liaise with your colleagues at IIT to give you a briefing on the ‘Made in India Brand’. If you asked them what % constitutes made in India, they will say 101%. Add another 10% of mirch masala it become a prophecy, for which you might attain another patent.Recycle this jargon manifolds, it becomes a waste.Save your energy ‘O wise one’.

  • by jamshed_kharian_pak
    Posted November 23, 2016 6:51 pm 0Likes

    Wonderful Creation Hamza Multi-Role Combat Vehicle more interested it has been made at home motorized fast transfer under full Protection of Defenders are positive history making News

Leave a comment