What's new

Pakistan's Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircrafts

Yes, it was parked outside, which can taken photo during sunny beautiful day, however, they learned their lesson to control public information. No one will see the picture of damaged Erieye inside the hanger and Google map I have used before is not always accurate.

so my dear sir if they didn't post a pic and no one seen them damaged or destroyed how on earth i have to believe on internet guys then air force and minister of defense statements ?i will say sorry when someone post here a pic of damaged destroyed saab as we have no prove of all saab-2000s are ok other side also have no prove that 1-2-3 are damaged destroyed . simply we both are in dark . saying my friend my uncle my nephew will not work here .
 
and everyone can see a flame from 10km . now please show me same blast and flame smoke on kamra attack .air force didn't hide anything they informed that one saab was damaged by RPG hit on hanger its only here few want to destroy all of saab2000. and i am 99% sure there is no such internal info things .

pns-mehran-afp-543.jpg


once again, same bs rhetoric, what's your source that tells no SAAB is destroyed, rather it was damaged only

Even the MoD, the theoratical boss of PAF, has told, SAAB was inside hanger, RPG penetrated the HANGER, DESTROYED the SAAB inside,

So Pray tell us, How can we get "PUBLIC PICS" of something destroyed inside HANGER?

so my dear sir if they didn't post a pic and no one seen them damaged or destroyed how on earth i have to believe on internet guys then air force and minister of defense statements ?i will say sorry when someone post here a pic of damaged destroyed saab as we have no prove of all saab-2000s are ok other side also have no prove that 1-2-3 are damaged destroyed . simply we both are in dark . saying my friend my uncle my nephew will not work here .

Are you more informed or Lt.GEN and Admiral ( sec def and additional sec def) are more informed about the defense dealings?
 
once again, same bs rhetoric, what's your source that tells no SAAB is destroyed, rather it was damaged only
sir i have same qes to you what is your source ??????? that its damaged destroyed ?
Even the MoD, the theoratical boss of PAF, has told, SAAB was inside hanger, RPG penetrated the HANGER, DESTROYED the SAAB inside,
well i am still on that statment yes one of them was damaged and we give a contract of 200mn$ to recover it



So Pray tell us, How can we get "PUBLIC PICS" of something destroyed inside HANGER?

same as it i will say were are pics they were damaged ? we both are on same boat you have doubts and i have no very simple logic


200 million dollars questions for PAF



Farrukh Saleem
Friday, September 07, 2012




ISLAMABAD: In October 2005, Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget or Saab, the Swedish manufacturer, agreed to sell us the most modern airborne tactical surveillance system — a high-speed turboprop that uses 4,591 shp Rolls-Royce AE 2100 turboprop engines and is equipped with Ericsson Microwave Systems’ Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C) based on the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA).



In 2009, we got the best and the most cost-efficient air policing platform but paid through the nose a wholesome Swedish krona 8.3 billion or an equivalent of $1.2 billion — $800 million for Saab and $400 million for the Erieye.



Saab 2000 Erieye was built to specifications of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) with a 450-km Erieye radar range. The Erieye is not only data-linked to the PAF command and control infrastructure but links up with our F-16 Fighting Falcons as well.



PAF Base Minhas has two fighter squadrons. On December 10, 2007, a suicide bomber attacked a PAF employees’ bus. On January 18, 2008, four rockets were fired one of which landed on the “roof of the NCO mess and two rockets inside the Mirage Rebuild Factory.” On October 23, 2009, a “suicide bomber killed eight people on a check post outside the base.” That’s a total of three attacks on the same PAF Base.



In between, PNS Mehran’s principal assets the Lockheed P-3 Orions, the $36 million four-engine turboprop anti-submarine and maritime surveillance aircraft, also came under attack and were severely damaged.



On August 16, 2012, PAF Base Minhas came under a serious attack yet again. The attack was targeted and the target was Saab 2000 Erieye. Rocket propelled grenade(s) were fired at the Orions and rocket propelled grenade(s) were fired at the Saab 2000. According to some reports, one Saab 2000 was destroyed and two others were damaged. Other reports claimed one destroyed and one damaged. All said and done, that’s at least a $200 million loss, if not a lot more.



Is the PAF unaware of the fact that Pakistan is in a state of war? How can rocket propelled grenades penetrate hangars that house the Orions and the Saab 2000? Why was more than one Saab in one location? Hasn’t the PAF built Hardened Aircraft Shelters (HAS), Kevlar deployable shelters or underground shelters for the most prized of our aircraft? How did the intruders know the exact location of the Orions and the Saabs? Why can’t we have buffer zones around facilities that store Orions and Saabs? Why did the base commander himself jump into the firefight? We are at war and the PAF ought to be practicing dispersal at bases as well as dispersal between bases.



Ejaz Haider, in his column titled ‘Analysis: the bigger questions surrounding Kamra’, calls P-3 Orion as Pakistan Navy’s (PN) eyes and Saab 2000 as Pakistan Air Force’s eyes. Imagine; our enemy is taking out our eyes — one at a time — and PAF was caught catnapping. An experienced aviator once said: “There are only two types of aircraft — fighters and targets.”

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-130520-200-million-dollars-questions
 
and everyone can see a flame from 10km . now please show me same blast and flame smoke on kamra attack .air force didn't hide anything they informed that one saab was damaged by RPG hit on hanger its only here few want to destroy all of saab2000. and i am 99% sure there is no such internal info things .

pns-mehran-afp-543.jpg

You dont have to have something up in flames to declare it a write off or destroyed.
 
You dont have to have something up in flames to declare it a write off or destroyed.

so what i have to do my dear sir ?:)

while i am sitting here i am 100% sure PAF is doing its best to recover the bird and i trust them more then my father .
 
so what i have to do my dear sir ?:)

while i am sitting here i am 100% sure PAF is doing its best to recover the bird and i trust them more then my father .

Look at it this way. What if you did lose the aircraft to an extent where repairing it will cost more than the original aircraft itself. What if you decide that a lot of the equipment is salvageable and may be used for reverse engineering practice. If you declare the whole thing burnt to the ground..you get to keep that stuff and declare it lost as scrap.
 
Look at it this way. What if you did lose the aircraft to an extent where repairing it will cost more than the original aircraft itself. What if you decide that a lot of the equipment is salvageable and may be used for reverse engineering practice. If you declare the whole thing burnt to the ground..you get to keep that stuff and declare it lost as scrap.

from history i learn that PAF annouce loses and didn't play cheap shots i have many examples such as C-130 loses f-16 loses and many more . if they were intreasted in TOT they can sign a TOT . still i am on the spot sir we damaged one bird and its recoverable otherwise no BASTARD dare to smile here ..... even me

4b66420ef0459d01f141374c070e6908.jpg
 
sir i have same qes to you what is your source ??????? that its damaged destroyed ?

well i am still on that statment yes one of them was damaged and we give a contract of 200mn$ to recover it





same as it i will say were are pics they were damaged ? we both are on same boat you have doubts and i have no very simple logic


200 million dollars questions for PAF



Farrukh Saleem
Friday, September 07, 2012




ISLAMABAD: In October 2005, Svenska Aeroplan Aktiebolaget or Saab, the Swedish manufacturer, agreed to sell us the most modern airborne tactical surveillance system — a high-speed turboprop that uses 4,591 shp Rolls-Royce AE 2100 turboprop engines and is equipped with Ericsson Microwave Systems’ Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C) based on the Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA).



In 2009, we got the best and the most cost-efficient air policing platform but paid through the nose a wholesome Swedish krona 8.3 billion or an equivalent of $1.2 billion — $800 million for Saab and $400 million for the Erieye.



Saab 2000 Erieye was built to specifications of the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) with a 450-km Erieye radar range. The Erieye is not only data-linked to the PAF command and control infrastructure but links up with our F-16 Fighting Falcons as well.



PAF Base Minhas has two fighter squadrons. On December 10, 2007, a suicide bomber attacked a PAF employees’ bus. On January 18, 2008, four rockets were fired one of which landed on the “roof of the NCO mess and two rockets inside the Mirage Rebuild Factory.” On October 23, 2009, a “suicide bomber killed eight people on a check post outside the base.” That’s a total of three attacks on the same PAF Base.



In between, PNS Mehran’s principal assets the Lockheed P-3 Orions, the $36 million four-engine turboprop anti-submarine and maritime surveillance aircraft, also came under attack and were severely damaged.



On August 16, 2012, PAF Base Minhas came under a serious attack yet again. The attack was targeted and the target was Saab 2000 Erieye. Rocket propelled grenade(s) were fired at the Orions and rocket propelled grenade(s) were fired at the Saab 2000. According to some reports, one Saab 2000 was destroyed and two others were damaged. Other reports claimed one destroyed and one damaged. All said and done, that’s at least a $200 million loss, if not a lot more.



Is the PAF unaware of the fact that Pakistan is in a state of war? How can rocket propelled grenades penetrate hangars that house the Orions and the Saab 2000? Why was more than one Saab in one location? Hasn’t the PAF built Hardened Aircraft Shelters (HAS), Kevlar deployable shelters or underground shelters for the most prized of our aircraft? How did the intruders know the exact location of the Orions and the Saabs? Why can’t we have buffer zones around facilities that store Orions and Saabs? Why did the base commander himself jump into the firefight? We are at war and the PAF ought to be practicing dispersal at bases as well as dispersal between bases.



Ejaz Haider, in his column titled ‘Analysis: the bigger questions surrounding Kamra’, calls P-3 Orion as Pakistan Navy’s (PN) eyes and Saab 2000 as Pakistan Air Force’s eyes. Imagine; our enemy is taking out our eyes — one at a time — and PAF was caught catnapping. An experienced aviator once said: “There are only two types of aircraft — fighters and targets.”

200 million dollars questions for PAF - thenews.com.pk



Behs braye behs, When on 9 FEBRUARY 2013, the updated info was provided to Pakistani AWAM by PAF AND MOD that ONE SAAB DESTROYED ON SPOT


GOSH, I DON'T KNOW WHY PEOPLE ACTING DUMB OR JUST PURPOSEFULLY IGNORING THE 6 FEB 2013 MOD CONFESSION IN PARLIAMENT AND NEWS OF THAT CONFESSION APPEARING IN NEWSPAPERS ON 9 FEB 2013.


TWO WORDS, GROW UP
 
Behs braye behs, When on 9 FEBRUARY 2013, the updated info was provided to Pakistani AWAM by PAF AND MOD that ONE SAAB DESTROYED ON SPOT


GOSH, I DON'T KNOW WHY PEOPLE ACTING DUMB OR JUST PURPOSEFULLY IGNORING THE 6 FEB 2013 MOD CONFESSION IN PARLIAMENT AND NEWS OF THAT CONFESSION APPEARING IN NEWSPAPERS ON 9 FEB 2013.


TWO WORDS, GROW UP

only personal attacks in your posts sir . i can do better attacks but no :)
 
from history i learn that PAF annouce loses and didn't play cheap shots i have many examples such as C-130 loses f-16 loses and many more . if they were intreasted in TOT they can sign a TOT . still i am on the spot sir we damaged one bird and its recoverable otherwise no BASTARD dare to smile here ..... even me

4b66420ef0459d01f141374c070e6908.jpg

And this will keep going on and on. The simple facts we can ascertain from published sources are;

1. the PAF ordered 4 AEW equipped SAAB-2000's and 1 Training aircraft.

2. There was one loss as clearly confirmed multiple times in the media. Since 10025 is listed by this site as stored then that might be the airframe that was lost.

3. We have seen footage of 10040 in the recent exercises which means it is flying and good. That leaves two whose status we are unsure of.. 10049 and 10045. Since 10045 served as company demonstrator as well, it might be that it was elsewhere.
 
And this will keep going on and on. The simple facts we can ascertain from published sources are;

1. the PAF ordered 4 AEW equipped SAAB-2000's and 1 Training aircraft.

2. There was one loss as clearly confirmed multiple times in the media. Since 10025 is listed by this site as stored then that might be the airframe that was lost.

3. We have seen footage of 10040 in the recent exercises which means it is flying and good. That leaves two whose status we are unsure of.. 10049 and 10045. Since 10045 served as company demonstrator as well, it might be that it was elsewhere.

so noting confirm here sir we have to wait till we got pics of others 2 ????????????
 
read this newspiece, it has the contract details in support with an "undisclosed" country, notice the "red part" denotes a single system.


Saab has signed a five-year, SEK1,100 (USD170 million) contract to support its Saab 2000 Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) aircraft in service with an unidentified international customer, the company announced on 21 March.

Saab rolled out the first Saab 2000 AW&EC Erieye aircraft for Pakistan in March 2008. It was delivered in December 2009. (Saab)
Saab rolled out the first Saab 2000 AW&EC Erieye aircraft for Pakistan in March 2008. It was delivered in December 2009. (Saab)

The contract includes "a comprehensive set of spares and support services for a previously delivered system ... equipped with the advanced Erieye radar system and ground equipment", Saab said in a statement.

While the Erieye radar system has been fitted to several platforms, including the Saab 340 and Embraer 145, for eight customers, Pakistan is the only international military customer for the Saab 2000.

Pakistan received the first of four aircraft in December 2009.

Saab announces Saab 2000 Erieye maintenance contract - IHS Jane's 360
 
read this newspiece, it has the contract details in support with an "undisclosed" country, notice the "red part" denotes a single system.

That's looking into words too much. The system is used industry wide for both singular and plural when referring to a product. So the MGM-140 ATACMS weapons system denotes the product.. but a delivery of ten of these may be referred to as systems.The confusion may however, be caused by Jane's condensed report.
This is the original SAAB announcement

The contract concerns a comprehensive set of spares and support services for a previously delivered system,Saab 2000 AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning & Control). The Saab 2000 AEW&C comprises of Saab 2000 aircraft equipped with the advanced Erieye radar system and ground equipment.

The wide-area surveillance system in combination with ground equipment enables control over both land and sea, and can play an important role for border surveillance and rescue operations as well as in combating terrorism and organised crime.

"Our surveillance system provides the customer with improved solutions for defence and civil security. This contract is a result of our close cooperation with our customer and can be seen as a further confirmation of our strong capability to provide our customers with advanced service and support solutions”, says Gunilla Fransson, Head of Saab’s business area Security and Defence Solutions

From
Saab signs support contract for airborne surveillance system
 
put it short most likley we lost one SAAB

I guess making a double wall/barrier/..placing a patrol, cameras or motion sensors cost more than SAAB...probably why we had none of them there..they just walked right in there by breaking a 60s built single wall

it seems PAF defense of high value target are at same level of 1960s
 
put it short most likley we lost one SAAB

I guess making a double wall/barrier/..placing a patrol, cameras or motion sensors cost more than SAAB...probably why we had none of them there..they just walked right in there by breaking a 60s built single wall

it seems PAF defense of high value target are at same level of 1960s

Cameras, motion sensors and active/frequent patrols are the way top go - and they are cheaper relative to anything having to do with an AWA&C ship like the Saab

Or are we next going to argue that we are too poor to care for ourselves
 

Back
Top Bottom