UAS Project Team to Turkiye

TAI Anka UAV on finals. TAI

SHAH ALAM: Last year, Malaysian Defence posted two stories on RMAF project teams send overseas to monitor procurement projects. The first one was on the MPA team and the second one was on the FLIT-LCA one.

The posts were based on quotation notices for the MTO companies to be contracted to pack, sent and deliver the personal items of the project team personnel to Italy and South Korea, respectively. There was another QN which I missed was for the Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) project team which will be based at Ankara, Turkiye. The QN for the UAS team was published on July 21 and closed on July 28, the same number of days as the other two and for the same service.

A painted missile on an Anka UAS. Internet

The UAS contract as you are aware was awarded to Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) of Turkiye. The public signing for the contract was done at LIMA 2023. As like the other two project teams, the service was for six RMAF personnel. The team leader is a Lt Colonel while the five officers are all with the rank of Major.
The 12 FA-50 of the Polish Air Force. Poland got their FA-50s early as they took over the aircraft originally destined for the South Korean Air Force. Polish Air Force picture.

The team leader was the commanding officer of No 11 Skuadron, the unit stood up in 2020 in preparation for the MALE UAS requirement of RMAF.

The QN for the UAS team was awarded Kudrat Maritime Sdn Bhd for an LOA of RM264,000. The QN for the FLIT/LCA team was awarded to Economy Packing and Freight Services Sdn Bhd for an LOA of RM152,298.

It must be noted the three teams have already flown to their respective destinations which meant that the aircraft and UASes are already in the pre-production phase or in the production line already.

–Malaysian Defence

If you like this post, buy me an espresso. Paypal Payment

About Marhalim Abas 2192 Articles
Shah Alam


  1. I wonder which variant of Anka we are getting? ANKA-S especially if we intend to patrol long distance?

  2. With the introduction of UAV/UAS in the TUDM inventory, i believe there will be a need to restructure existing pilot training flow to take into account the need to create more UAV/UAS pilots in the future.

    Those going for the UAV/UAS route will need to have a different training path when compared to those flying manned aircrafts. Candidate requirements will also need to be tweaked to take this into consideration.

    What can be done is to return the basic flight training step using an aircraft smaller and lower operating cost than the PC-7 MkII. We have the MD3-160 in the past.

    To bring back the MD3, we can try to restart the production as all the toolings should still be around.

    Upgrades that can be done

    1) replace the Lycoming O-320-D2A avgas engine with Continental CD-170 engine that runs on jet fuel. Same fuel as PC-7 MkII

    2) full Garmin G3X Touch glass cockpit multifunction displays with IFR (instrument flight rules) capability.

    3) add ballistic parachute rescue system.

  3. I understand were getting the unarmed one but can they be reconfigured to carry & launch munitions?

  4. In America (and some other Nato countries) the UAV is flown by NCO “pilots”. They’re still required to take flying lessons but otherwise they’re not as thoroughly trained for flight as the actual flyboys. We can even get by replacing (or at least substituting) the King Air with Anka S

    Arming Anka S is possible (in fact it would only needs hardpoint installation and software update) but a better option is to leave Anka S as a dedicated ISR UAV and buy Bayraktar TB2 for our armed TUAV needs as it’s much cheaper (thus more disposable) and can be operated on the field

  5. The MAF centralised pilot school can be a source for drone pilots. Those who were unsuited for real flight but could manage virtually can be assigned to fly drones giving them a 2nd chance at earning their (virtual)wings.

  6. Would have preferred tb3 though since it’s purpose built for littoral operation. Though I’m not sure what kind of sensors package & effector it would carry.

  7. “Would have preferred tb3”
    Err no. TB3 has just under 2000km range while Anka has nearly 5000km range so for Anka can survey 2.5X more area than TB3 on a single run.

  8. @ dundun

    ” They’re still required to take flying lessons ”

    Which is why I propose the return of the MD3. Those destined for UAS does not need to be extensively trained on expensive PC-7 MkII and FA-50.

    All basic training are on cheaper MD3 (up to night flying, IFR flying, formation, cross country), then only those destined to fly fixed wings go to PC-7 MkII. After MD3, UAS pilots go to UAS OCU, helicopters to EC120. After PC-7 MkII, fighter pilots go to FA-50, transport pilots go for twin engine conversions on King Air 350

  9. >MD3

    An even cheaper option is to send them to commercial flying school to get their license

  10. @hulubalang
    From the airforce-technology article with the headline “Bayraktar TB3 completes fifth flight test, unveils carrier deployment potential”
    [With a maximum takeoff weight of 1,450kg and a payload capacity of 280kg, the Bayraktar TB3 is nearly two times heavier than its predecessor. The UCAV is expected to have a range of 1,000 nautical miles]

  11. @Hulubalang
    According to Google 1000 Nautical Mile translates to exactly 1852km or ‘under 2000km’ to make it sound nice. These days everything is just a Google away.

  12. @ joe

    >>> The UCAV is EXPECTED to have a range of 1,000 nautical miles…

    Now it is PROVEN to have a range of 5700km during its epic 32 hours test flight.

    Compare an expected range and the actual proven range, which information is latest and correct??

  13. Your proven is like those Guinness world records. Meaningless.
    A human being was proven able fly around the world by his own power. But can you do it?

    The expected OPPERATIONAL RANGE is estimated by journalist experts in this field and based on current existing technologies. Unless your hinting that TB3 is running on some novel nuke power or made from super light and hyper efficient aerodynamics that nobody in this industry knows about.

    Mind you that ‘record’ statement was done by Bayraktar and not from any independent 3rd party or verified. So even Guinness records has more credibility than claimed by them!

  14. dundun – “ In America (and some other Nato countries) the UAV is flown by NCO “pilots”

    NCOs also fly helicopters in the U.S. army.

    dundun – “ Bayraktar TB2 for our armed TUAV needs as it’s much cheaper (thus more disposable) and can be operated on the field”

    No doubt but do we have a need at present and how urgent is it in the order of things? An issue is that unless it’s a benign environment something like the TB2 or Predator simply isn’t survivable. There was a lot of publicity in the early days on the TB2 in the Ukraine but as things stand there is zero news about it and a report some time ago indicated that most have been lost and the few survivors are being used for ISR because they’re simply not survivable in the strike role.

    Three was a period when some here were insisting we get the TB2 rather than Anka despite the requirement clearly being for a ISR UAS and not a strike one and Anka being much more suited for ISR. It has also been pointed out that all the UAS strike footage we see whilst impressive is highly misleading. It doesn’t show the instances where a strike fails for what ever reason.

  15. …. – “ To bring back the MD3, we can try to restart the production as all the toolings should still be around”

    Is all the tooling really still around and even if it is can production really be started without any hassle? I would think that there’s a wee bit more to it than that. Also, why bother to start production for a mere few airframes? Doesn’t make sense. Cheaper, faster and more practical to get something off the shelf I’d indeed we have such a requirement and we don’t. Something else more practical is to outsource it to a flying school. We’re not talking large numbers of plots here and we aren’t talking about complex tactical flying.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.