What's new

SAC - FC-31 Grey Falcon Stealth aircraft for PAF : Updates & Debate

The problem is perrineal and long standing. No one is willing to spend money to acquire a special steel plant which would be the basis of creating the alloys needed to create engines. Then we start small and manufacturing motor bike and car-engines to Turbines. That will open doors for other technologies which will result in the AC engine that we want. The real question has always been whether the means justify the end, ie the specialized alloys plant and research into metallurgy equates to engine production. I dont know if anyone has done the maths but-would love to know the logic behind and the sheer investment required to produce the end result. Even if we could do sim0le turbines for power generation it would have been helpful but compared to India we are starting 20 years behind. Then what is the need and what is the-demand.
Lastly Turkey and collaboration with is a very plausible solution as we are more or less at a stage to be able to share technological-advances but for us-the finances remain a problem.
A
I can offer another angle to "why"

Probably, the Pakistani youth are increasingly concerned about Pakistan's ties with China (re: Uyghurs). You notice that our own leadership is silent about the matter -- i.e., they can't even support the Chinese, nor can they deny them in public (for obvious reasons).

However, if the post-9/11 situation has shown us, if we do not "straighten the line," we risk confusing massive swaths of our population and, in turn, leave them open to TTP/AQ-like influences (because they fill the void).

OTOH, a Pakistan that can stand on its own two feet in terms of economy and military technology can say and (up to an extent) do whatever it wants.

The argument I'm making is ... our internal stability and internal cohesion may, at some level, be contingent on the strength of our economy and domestic industry.

Turkey understood this for its own people (who are super proud and split between Europe and Islam, basically), so it said, "we'll carve our own unique path and be our own power so that we can say and do what our people want us to do."

Pakistan will need to do something similar, and I think we'll need to double down on AZM et. al.

Obviously, we can't do jack if we don't implement a real economic development policy, but that's actually quite easy if you put the right people in charge (which is actually the hard part for us).

@SQ8 Thoughts?
 
I can offer another angle to "why"

Probably, the Pakistani youth are increasingly concerned about Pakistan's ties with China (re: Uyghurs). You notice that our own leadership is silent about the matter -- i.e., they can't even support the Chinese, nor can they deny them in public (for obvious reasons).

However, if the post-9/11 situation has shown us, if we do not "straighten the line," we risk confusing massive swaths of our population and, in turn, leave them open to TTP/AQ-like influences (because they fill the void).

OTOH, a Pakistan that can stand on its own two feet in terms of economy and military technology can say and (up to an extent) do whatever it wants.

The argument I'm making is ... our internal stability and internal cohesion may, at some level, be contingent on the strength of our economy and domestic industry.

Turkey understood this for its own people (who are super proud and split between Europe and Islam, basically), so it said, "we'll carve our own unique path and be our own power so that we can say and do what our people want us to do."

Pakistan will need to do something similar, and I think we'll need to double down on AZM et. al.

Obviously, we can't do jack if we don't implement a real economic development policy, but that's actually quite easy if you put the right people in charge (which is actually the hard part for us).

@SQ8 Thoughts?
Agreed - unfortunately this difference of opinion emerges as education and exposure increases until the inflection point or where one ideaology overpowers the other. Only then can progress really start - in Pakistan’s case neither has been reached nor will be in the near future. So growth is to be constrained by the divided purposes of the educated middle class. Both the poor and elite are technically useless in technology growth since either their interests are wholly self serving or they have zero contribution.

On a side note - the US Project Longshot , what a great idea if Pakistan had something like a ground launched version to work incoordination with aerial assets.
 
Agreed - unfortunately this difference of opinion emerges as education and exposure increases until the inflection point or where one ideaology overpowers the other. Only then can progress really start - in Pakistan’s case neither has been reached nor will be in the near future. So growth is to be constrained by the divided purposes of the educated middle class. Both the poor and elite are technically useless in technology growth since either their interests are wholly self serving or they have zero contribution.

On a side note - the US Project Longshot , what a great idea if Pakistan had something like a ground launched version to work incoordination with aerial assets.
It also reminds me of Anatol Lieven's book, "Pakistan: A Hard Country."

Generally, a population's buy-in with their country comes from the economy. No one would want instability because it could threaten their jobs and livelihood. Moreover, to do well in the system, families emphasize the pursuit of education (e.g., even Trump supporters have college degrees), good citizen conduct, etc.

But in Pakistan, that "buy-in" comes from top-down money transfers, which we know come from state coffers, public enterprises, aid, and loans. You "get in" on these transfers by joining a political party (or entering an institution like the civil bureaucracy or armed forces). Or you rely on remittances.

IMO, the "buy in dynamics" of Pakistan is the reason why our governance structure works the way it does, and why "real change" isn't on the horizon. The current system just works for those who matter (and I'm not saying everyone's corrupt: if your tummy's full, why change things?).

Basically, "real change" in our situation is a "new deal" where a revamped development policy focuses on replacing "money transfers" with "living off the economy." For the latter to work, you have to create lots of jobs, generate exports, and invest in social safety nets (public health and education).

I think with CPEC, the Chinese figured they could deliver the raw capacity to support economic growth, but it didn't accurately cope with Pakistan's dynamics. OTOH, the US just didn't care, so the aid went in, and jack-all after that.
 
It also reminds me of Anatol Lieven's book, "Pakistan: A Hard Country."

Generally, a population's buy-in with their country comes from the economy. No one would want instability because it could threaten their jobs and livelihood. Moreover, to do well in the system, families emphasize the pursuit of education (e.g., even Trump supporters have college degrees), good citizen conduct, etc.

But in Pakistan, that "buy-in" comes from top-down money transfers, which we know come from state coffers, public enterprises, aid, and loans. You "get in" on these transfers by joining a political party (or entering an institution like the civil bureaucracy or armed forces). Or you rely on remittances.

IMO, the "buy in dynamics" of Pakistan is the reason why our governance structure works the way it does, and why "real change" isn't on the horizon. The current system just works for those who matter (and I'm not saying everyone's corrupt: if your tummy's full, why change things?).

Basically, "real change" in our situation is a "new deal" where a revamped development policy focuses on replacing "money transfers" with "living off the economy." For the latter to work, you have to create lots of jobs, generate exports, and invest in social safety nets (public health and education).

I think with CPEC, the Chinese figured they could deliver the raw capacity to support economic growth, but it didn't accurately cope with Pakistan's dynamics. OTOH, the US just didn't care, so the aid went in, and jack-all after that.
Pakistanis have become accustomed to free money, whether it is from remits abroad by a few hardworking folk (as a % of population) or by the public sector where people get their salaries for years on end without every working. Even when those enterprises have been shut down like the steel mill.
3rd world countries have this symptom where aid money actually takes away their will to reform or uplift themselves. There are many studies that show this to be true in African countries and it is true in Pakistan's case as well.
But this wholescale change is much harder to achieve then a focused approach for a smaller, more tangible goal such as AZM.
 
Pakistanis have become accustomed to free money, whether it is from remits abroad by a few hardworking folk (as a % of population) or by the public sector where people get their salaries for years on end without every working. Even when those enterprises have been shut down like the steel mill.
3rd world countries have this symptom where aid money actually takes away their will to reform or uplift themselves. There are many studies that show this to be true in African countries and it is true in Pakistan's case as well.
But this wholescale change is much harder to achieve then a focused approach for a smaller, more tangible goal such as AZM.
But AZM (and our defence industry as a whole) can be a starting point. Let's say we develop a cluster: PAC manages final assembly and testing, but the private sector supplies the sub-assemblies, electronics, and critical inputs.

Even if the set-up employs 100,000 individuals industry-wide, that's a direct economic uplift to 500,000 Pakistanis (via families), and indirect uplift to 2-3 million others (via consumption of the AZM employees).

If we scale this across our defence needs and employ 500,000 Pakistanis via the public and private sectors, we can indirectly support 10-15 million Pakistanis. If we can link 20 million to a real economic system, I think we'll see real change.
 
This is not any fake news. But following vLog is telling that Pakistan and Iran has contacted China and shown interest in buying Chinese J-31/ FC-31 . Kindly provide some proof here. Donot reply without solid evidence here.

After jf 17 !! Pakistan to buy China's new stealth fighter Aircraft-•Jun 1, 2021
MILITARY NEWS UPDATE (76.5K subscribers)
The Pakistani Air Force is reportedly considering buying between 30 and 40 of the Chinese stealth combat aircraft to replace the F-16 fighter jets produced by Lockheed Martin Corporation of the US. The FC-31 is designed to fly close air support, air interdiction and other missions.
 
This is not any fake news. But following vLog is telling that Pakistan and Iran has contacted China and shown interest in buying Chinese J-31/ FC-31 . Kindly provide some proof here. Donot reply without solid evidence here.

After jf 17 !! Pakistan to buy China's new stealth fighter Aircraft-•Jun 1, 2021
MILITARY NEWS UPDATE (76.5K subscribers)
The Pakistani Air Force is reportedly considering buying between 30 and 40 of the Chinese stealth combat aircraft to replace the F-16 fighter jets produced by Lockheed Martin Corporation of the US. The FC-31 is designed to fly close air support, air interdiction and other missions.
Close Air support....I think not
Pakistan could collapse
Over 200 nukes.


Is this an Indian video with a voice over?
 
Last edited:
Probably a mock-up display of Shenyang FC-31 Gyrfalcon .
1624214781514.png

1624214833449.png
 
This is not any fake news. But following vLog is telling that Pakistan and Iran has contacted China and shown interest in buying Chinese J-31/ FC-31 . Kindly provide some proof here. Donot reply without solid evidence here.

After jf 17 !! Pakistan to buy China's new stealth fighter Aircraft-•Jun 1, 2021
MILITARY NEWS UPDATE (76.5K subscribers)
The Pakistani Air Force is reportedly considering buying between 30 and 40 of the Chinese stealth combat aircraft to replace the F-16 fighter jets produced by Lockheed Martin Corporation of the US. The FC-31 is designed to fly close air support, air interdiction and other missions.
40 is way to low in my opinion. We should go for 100 J-35/J-31.
 
I was told last year by the same source which told me about Pakistans purchase of 40 J-10CEs that the PAF had also purchased a dozen J-20 fighter jets.

No one believed me since the last 6 months when I said that the first 2 squadrons are expected to arrive by the end of the year but it surprises me that might source also mention the purchase of a dozen J-20s and was adamant about it.

It may be more likely that the PAF may be purchasing a dozen J-31/J35 rather than J20 but my source stood by his word. So far his own sources have been on point.

There would be value in the PAF purchasing a few dozen J-31/J-35 before maybe eventually starting its own production, but the J20 would be of immense value for the PAF and they might have concluded that a few dozen (24) might be reasonable to purchase (in batches of 12)?
 

Back
Top Bottom