What's new

Featured Project Azm: Pakistan's Ambitious Quest to Develop 5th Generation Military Technologies.

ProudPak

FULL MEMBER
Feb 26, 2019
610
0
672
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Agreed.

And these smart whiz kids need to sit away from all the noise, unencumbered by any organizational biases, etc. In short, an independent analysis of our national capabilities. Call it a 'National Commission for the Analysis of Technical Capabilities' (a very Soviet sounding name) - a group of people who can look at everything that we have - the quality and content of our engineering education, skills and capabilities of our PhDs (local and those coming back from abroad), develop a national database of key individuals who have experience in these areas e.g. some university professors who have worked at NESCOM, KRL, etc, explore avenues for international collaborations, hunt for locally available laboratories and high tech equipment, analyze the capabilities of local industry (SMEs, SOEs and other private sector orgs) which may help in projects of national importance (cue NGFA, SLV, etc). All of this data can provide a true picture of our capabilities and help policymakers set realizable goals for the short, medium and long terms.

The NGFA is an umbrella project and provides an excellent opportunity to develop key infrastructure, capabilities as well as critical inputs or atleast the capability to develop them. We must be training engineers in specific focus areas which will build up capability for the future.





Jingoistic and 'compartmental-istic' tendencies will see to it that any capacity that the Erieye resurrection did build will be ultimately wasted. It was good for PR though, when presented on the Mujahideen-e-Aflak show.




Agreed. No arguments there.




I probably suffer from a 'Go big or go home' problem, hence the lofty ideals :lol:

Whatever we choose to focus on - big ideals or small, basic problems - the issue remains the same: a severe shortage of people who have the ability to zoom into grand visions and see how they will be implemented on the ground. We need strategists and tacticians, not for battle, but to catalyze change within our defence R&D sphere. Sohail Aman had a dream - good for him - what we need are people who can translate that dream into the nuts and bolts, who can draw up a solid plan for how that grand dream will be implemented on the ground in a country without basic high tech infrastructure, without govt backing of any such ventures, with extreme corruption, an extremely underdeveloped work ethic and an overall national level ethos of rent-seeking, taking shortcuts, making easy money and not going the extra mile.

With that said, I don't know how we can have people like Gene Kranz or George Mueller. But we can take some steps in that direction. I have tried to explain the details below.

Pakistan's top engineering universities (most of them) have DIRECT ties with the military establishment. What is stopping them from keeping a list of the brightest and most genius students that study there or have studied there? Sure enough, this would require some amount of active engagement, some provision of extra benefits, etc but it can be done. Conduct specially designed tests (IQ, EQ, 'engineer-like qualities :lol: ', leadership, etc - just a bunch of stuff that psychologists, educationists and some world-class researchers can come up with). Conduct multiple interview rounds - find out what these kids want in life: their vision, their attitude to life, their approach to problems, what drives them, etc etc. Weed out those who don't fit the bill at each stage.
Provide targeted financial support to the ones that are left after all of the above while they are in college and once they graduate, offer them something like a commission in the armed forces. Some would accept, some would not (write them off as investments in the youth).

In the background, use diplomacy to secure slots for these young engineers in Turkey, China and other friendly countries - the UAE and perhaps maybe Italy. Selling this idea to these countries will require some serious work by the govt. Some creative benefits plan for these engineers can be worked out in which the host countries do not have to shoulder the burden of hosting these engineers. In a few years (say 4-5), these engineers will start coming back, having worked on the JF-17 in Chengdu or on the T129 in Turkey in specific, focused areas. They will have gained very valuable experience. Once they are back, the buildings and facilities are waiting to receive them. New institutions must be set up for them, with specific mandates and assured funding and administrative autonomy. In short, these engineers must come back to provide the first generation of leaders for a nationally sanctioned program to develop next generation warfare capabilities for the armed forces - exactly how the nuclear program was managed in Bhutto's era.

Several cycles of this activity can be run, i.e. send engineers abroad every year (wherever they can get the opportunity to work on relevant areas) and have them work and study abroad for a certain number of years. Wthin a decade or so, an entire cadre of skilled personnel will have been formed.




The key problem is that Azm is essentially a PAF project, it has not been declared as a national project, like the nuclear program was. Govts are too stupid and lack capacity to understand the significance of Azm and as such, there is no political ownership. Also, since it is an internal PAF thing and lacks transparency, the PAF can not be held accountable by anyone in the case that Azm doesn't work out.

If the govt was actually overseeing and directly funding this project, then specific deliverables would have been agreed upon and specific technical targets would need to have been met at certain intervals. In this environment, the PAF would have felt the need to step up its game and find creative ways to deliver (by collaborating with private sector, etc etc). Right now, it is just another project among the multitudes of projects vying for a chunk out of the PAF's own budget and just a step away from being axed due to changing priorities or the lack of vision by any future Air Chief. Indeed, if Azm gets stuck at some point and remains so for some time then that could give a good excuse to a future CAS to quietly kill the project. This is usually what happens in Pakistan.




JF-17 was not designed and built by Pakistan. We just made a User Requirement Document and sent it to China along with some engineers who watched over the shoulders of their Chinese counterparts as the aircraft took shape. These engineers pointed out things which didn't match the requirements of the PAF and told the Chinese 'how it should be' and the Chinese went ahead and did it that way. Some engineers did take part in the actual work - software development, design, simulation, manufacturing and testing but when seen as part of the overall effort, their role comes out to be low and certainly not enough to help us in the NGFA. Besides, the JF-17 was developed nearly a generation ago - the PMO and the engineering personnel have mostly moved on.

We're not pulling stories out of the ground. We have real info, provided to respected PDF members, which shows us that Azm has a serious risk of failing because the people behind it do not have the requisite experience for it. Its that simple.





I have not heard of the Air Cdr, but have read similar things in articles written by Dr AQ Khan. He wrote that early in the 1980s, around 60-70% of the salary of each KRL employee was converted to a tax-free 'project allowance' courtesy of GIK who was a Federal Secretary and on the controlling board for KRL. AQ Khan also mentions a daily shuttle service from Kahuta to Rwp to take the children of KRL employees to their schools/colleges/universities. These may sound like very trivial things to some, but these tiny conveniences provided by an organization to its employees build up morale tremendously.

Such morale and dedication can not be built by offering a contractual position to a fresh grad by taking advantage of his desperate need to find a job after graduation.
[/QUOTE]
I am sorry bro but I know the architect of the jf17 program and I know what we did on this project and you are very very wrong to say Pakistan had little to no input in the design of the airframe. The modular design that allows jf17 evolution is a Pakistani concept for the Chinese industry. The aircraft was at all levels designed by Pakistan as much as China. We didn't have designer shortages but we had limited manufacturing base. That has now been developed to level where we can be independent to an extent...not 100%. Sadly we always think better of others and put our own achievements down. Anyways...you are entitled to your opinion and I respect that
 

Ghessan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2018
1,035
0
1,035
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The way it is planned right now, I agree. In my opinion the solution is a rethinking of the goals of the project. Some very smart people need to sit and analyze our capabilities, our niche in collaboration with international partners, and how to fill any small gaps in our capacity. Most importantly, we should not be hoping to fill FGFA sized gaps in our capability within ten years with 100 thousand dollars. The primary goal should be capacity building through smartly selected projects. For example the MALE program, excellent project. Build on that and develop a really dumb and cheap loyal wingman UCAV.




I feel as a nation that we live through so much collective trauma that we hang on for dear life to every piece of good news we can find. While the Erieye thing was impressive, it was a one off thing a decade ago. What capacity did it really build? Did we see anything happen with that capacity? I'm building to a point, trust me.



I will not even make it about all of those ideals of a good researcher. An even more basic requisite is PRACTICE. Literally, just practice. Take a PhD from MIT, and then put him in SUPARCO for 20 years. Take a PhD from QAU and put him in Boeing for 20 years. Who do you prefer to manage your R&D? I am sure there are very talented officers in the PAF who get PhDs from very reputable international universities. I personally know many.

Unfortunately, and I cannot stress the unfortunateness of this enough, how they practice their knowledge is what fails them. And by practice I mean not at all. PAF guy gets a PhD in aerodynamics, comes back and what does he work on? Managing the assembly line of the JF-17. PAF guy gets a PhD in flight dynamics and control, comes back and what does he work on? Desk jobs doing paper analysis to keep busy.

So what's the issue here? The issue is that we do not have actual aerospace projects where talented people can work at - practice and hone their craft. So what's the solution? Have numerous projects under numerous roofs. Keep these projects simple and achievable (like a loyal wingman UCAV) and involve the private sector so Pakistan can retain and keep in practice many more talented individuals.

If Pakistan can somehow employ 1000 engineers in a productive project for a decade who are free to move around companies (and not live under SPD rocks), that itself will create an aerospace industry regardless of what this project produces. That's my understanding of the "basic problem": talent retention and what the talent practices.






Those are some lofty ideals and we have a long way to go. It is my opinion (emphasis on opinion) that we should try to identify increasingly simple and basic problems because only those problems lend themselves to any kinds of workable solutions. For example, how do you propose you make the managers of our mil industry like Gene Kranz? I sure as heck don't know how.

But the problem that I identified above about talent retention and practice. Sure it sounds less fancy but I can think of at least one solution: start a loyal wingman UCAV competition under project Azm and invite consortium of pvt companies to compete. Promise two winners enough funds and access to APF factories to produce a prototype and promise the winner of the competition a contract of 60 UCAVs. This will EASILY employ hundreds and possibly thousands of very talented people for many years, and create an aerospace ecosystem for Pakistan. THIS is the kind of thing that builds "Aviation City", not hiring "ML engineer" and "FPGA Engineer" and "Accounts Officer" to put in an empty building in Attock.

Rant over.
it is inevitable that we perceive, we need to develop institutions and the way you narrated precisely, with projects running, we need to think out of the box.
we have drainpipe thinking keeping one target in our mind and that is our neighbor/enemy and how to neutralize the threats emerging.
with such habit we can go nowhere but draining funds with no achievement in the name of achievements.

this attitude can be well explained, which must go, in a way that: had we have an enemy/neighbor like S. Korea or Japan we would have come up with a better way to walk the rope?

i don't know how this thinking develop into a monster in the institutions but this lack of research the way it shouldn't be is harming in many ways.
 

iLION12345_1

FULL MEMBER
May 1, 2016
1,495
10
4,130
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
It is not that JF17 is a state of the art fighter. In fact, the block 1 does not even have complete FBW (it only has it in pitch axis). Even Block 3 is not expected to have complete FBW comparable to F16 as the airframe and controls are not fine tuned from the initial design stage. So, if PAF did not reject JF17, it would not reject LCA type plane which has much better configuration. It is more rational for PAF to go for a 4th gen plane like LCA rather than try to go for 5th gen ones which is beyond reach for at least 30 years
Actually JF-17 doesn’t even have an engine, anytime you see it flying, it’s just CGI, what Pakistan should have done is order LCA Tejas from India, I’ve heard it’s a 6th generation fighter that is going to replace the F35 in US service soon.
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
1,788
3
1,261
The Shaheen series was developed by nuclear scientists and not aerospace engineers. They literally went to the local library to pick out books on rocketry and learnt the ropes with Chinese assistance.
That would be because we errrr....didn’t have any.
And the Shaheen series was an absolute shitshow initially. It took a lot of effort to make them into what they are today.
You need to start **somewhere**. Accept initial sub optimal products as the cost of entering into a business.
 

JamD

FULL MEMBER
Mar 26, 2015
1,613
62
5,235
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
it is inevitable that we perceive, we need to develop institutions and the way you narrated precisely, with projects running, we need to think out of the box.
we have drainpipe thinking keeping one target in our mind and that is our neighbor/enemy and how to neutralize the threats emerging.
with such habit we can go nowhere but draining funds with no achievement in the name of achievements.

this attitude can be well explained, which must go, in a way that: had we have an enemy/neighbor like S. Korea or Japan we would have come up with a better way to walk the rope?

i don't know how this thinking develop into a monster in the institutions but this lack of research the way it shouldn't be is harming in many ways.
Interesting point. I guess we are both lucky and unlucky that our main rival and us are cut from (sort of) the same cloth.

Interestingly (I won't say fortunately or unfortunately because I don't know), with India's economy and the stupid amount of money they can and have invested into buying defence items and developing a local aerospace industry, Pakistan will have an increasingly hard time to maintain nonnuclear parity as time goes on.

Unfortunately for us, the bigger the perceived nonnuclear parity, the more reckless our stupid neighbor tends to be with things like Balakot. Regardless of the fact that PAF came out on top, it was a dangerous situation for South Asia. And through the cruelty of circumstance it is up to us to "keep up" with India to maintain nonnuclear parity.
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
1,788
3
1,261
On the issue of AZM, comparisons with a nuclear program are neither here nor there. That was an issue of strategic consequence. AZM is just another tactical program, important yes. The nuclear program and its ancillaries, the delivery systems, were too important to fail and the Government was fully committed to them come hell or high. Tactical weapons systems? After a certain point, no. That's a reality that we have to accept and just because a project fails to materialize does not mean it was a waste of time. Look at Israels Lavi fighter, they did not get a plane out of it, but one hell of an avionics industry.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,888
73
22,973
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
On the issue of AZM, comparisons with a nuclear program are neither here nor there. That was an issue of strategic consequence. AZM is just another tactical program, important yes. The nuclear program and its ancillaries, the delivery systems, were too important to fail and the Government was fully committed to them come hell or high. Tactical weapons systems? After a certain point, no. That's a reality that we have to accept and just because a project fails to materialize does not mean it was a waste of time. Look at Israels Lavi fighter, they did not get a plane out of it, but one hell of an avionics industry.
The issue is that AZM -- or an NGFA as a whole -- should take on strategic significance. The PAF's desired specifications (twin-engine, heavyweight) aren't available to Pakistan on the market, certainly not in the configuration the PAF would prefer (e.g., accessible to its own SOW and ALCM stocks). The PAF wants a long-range offensive asset, and no one will provide it in the numbers the PAF wants.

Granted, the PAF isn't looking for nuclear strike capability, but the conventional strike capability did provide some strategic benefit during Swift Retort. Basically, the PAF learned that if it can attack specific enemy targets (via conventional means) quick and accurately, it could thwart Indian momentum, for example. It can create a conventional deterrence that could discourage another Balakot-type scene in the future (as India would know Pakistan can strike back conventionally with relative ease).

These are all strategic considerations, albeit not nuclear. Ultimately, I don't think the tri-services were uninterested in the idea of a NGFA (after all, the PN would benefit hugely thanks to the PAF finally having a long-range fighter to patrol the EEZ). Rather, Pakistan simply lacks the R&D expertise and industrial basis to pull it off. Our nuclear weapons program actually drew on a pretty good preexisting basis that we had built in the 1950s and 1960s thanks to the 'Atoms for Peace' program and our initiatives. So, when the planners asked, "can we build a nuclear weapon?" there were scientists in that room to both give an answer and spell out how exactly to do it (and across two different methods -- uranium and plutonium -- no less).

In contrast, if the government were to ask, "honestly, can we build a fighter?" no one will be able to answer that without saying, "no" and giving a timeline of 20-25 years to do it 100% indigenously (and even that would be optimistic). Simply put, the basis is largely non-existent, especially at the industrial level.

Like you said, AZM wasn't necessarily a waste of time. I hope that it brought a realization that this is a complex initiative that requires us to actually upgrade the Pakistani economy.

If an indigenous NGFA is of significance, then there's no excuse for not investing in gas turbines, composites, semiconductors, steel, and heck, even wiring and tyre materials. If we take this realization to heart and start implementing it, I guarantee you it would lead to an economic revolution in Pakistan, even if we don't get an NGFA out of it.

Imagine a dozen Pakistani companies vying for aerostructure or other sub-contracting work in Boeing and Airbus, and in turn, generating tens of thousands of jobs of various kinds within Pakistan. Scale that across each and every little area that makes up an aircraft, and you could have several hundred thousand direct industry jobs plus a million supporting jobs around those core workers. In turn, all those guys and gals will pay taxes, and that will bankroll the next NGFA, indigenous or imported. Heck, you could import an NGFA but require 50%+ offsets that'll involve re-using your homegrown aerospace industry, thereby restart the entire loop.

Interestingly, I'd say the road to getting to an NGFA has exponentially more strategic value (economically, industrially, technologically) than the NGFA in of itself.
 

sparten

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2006
1,788
3
1,261
Rather, Pakistan simply lacks the R&D expertise and industrial basis to pull it off. Our nuclear weapons program actually drew on a pretty good preexisting basis that we had built in the 1950s and 1960s thanks to the 'Atoms for Peace' program and our initiatives. So, when the planners asked, "can we build a nuclear weapon?" there were scientists in that room to both give an answer and spell out how exactly to do it (and across two different methods -- uranium and plutonium -- no less).

In contrast, if the government were to ask, "honestly, can we build a fighter?" no one will be able to answer that without saying, "no" and giving a timeline of 20-25 years to do it 100% indigenously (and even that would be optimistic). Simply put, the basis is largely non-existent, especially at the industrial level.
1) Actually we probably have a lot more expertise in Aerospace than we did in nuclear physics and rocketry when we started those. We have built aircraft and make components for Boeing.

2) No. For the nuclear program, we weren't trying to make the latest most advanced high yield low weight bombs and warhead like the Soviets or the US had. We had much more modest goals, a bomb small enough that you could carry one or two on a fighter and with enough of a "boom" to flatten any city when thought needed killing, The missiles weren't Pershing or SS-20s, but again more akin to the early 1960s, with long preparation times and rudimentary guidance systems. We built on these products when in service and made improvements so that now we actually **do** have warheads and missiles that are cutting edge.

AZM is not that. AZM is us being asked to make F22 or J20. The latest and greatest. If the Government had instead said "ok build us a Su-30 or an F15 clone" then likely we would already have had a fighter on the tarmac. But while a modest-capacity nuclear arsenal is a good deterrent, a non-stealthy twin-engine aircraft is a death trap, or at least thats the perception amongst policymakers. Rightly or wrongly.

AZM might still succeed. The unmatched success of our centrifuge program has masked major delays and setbacks on other aspects of our nuclear program. It took 20 years for our plotonium reactor project to produce its first reactor and another decade for it to be refined to a level that we could build several. The solid missile program took a dozen years. Cruise mIssiles program needed the gift of several working Tomahawks.
Patience.
 

Ghessan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 28, 2018
1,035
0
1,035
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Interesting point. I guess we are both lucky and unlucky that our main rival and us are cut from (sort of) the same cloth.

Interestingly (I won't say fortunately or unfortunately because I don't know), with India's economy and the stupid amount of money they can and have invested into buying defence items and developing a local aerospace industry, Pakistan will have an increasingly hard time to maintain nonnuclear parity as time goes on.

Unfortunately for us, the bigger the perceived nonnuclear parity, the more reckless our stupid neighbor tends to be with things like Balakot. Regardless of the fact that PAF came out on top, it was a dangerous situation for South Asia. And through the cruelty of circumstance it is up to us to "keep up" with India to maintain nonnuclear parity.
Hence i would say if we will not stop acquiring assets just to neutralize the threat but do something remarkable with AZM project, we are wasting a rarely available time. Which in future we may not have and will be forced to go shortcuts by acquiring assets as usual to meet the demand and would not be able to induct resources at that ease we can do now to achieve something big that can stand us on our feet.

Like i said we don't have to judge the enemy by the threat level to come up with a solution. Rather we must be already there not to try find it rather are ready to make it available.
 

Goku-kun

FULL MEMBER
Jun 13, 2018
515
0
338
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
The design work for the TFX is mostly done, if the mock-up is to be taken as the nearly final design. Why can’t Pakistan send a time to each Turkey and China and work on design parts of project AZM with each of the teams that designed parts of their respective 5th Gen jets. They would probably love to get the e chance to apply their knowledge on another program and Pakistan gets to go through the process in proven manner. The Project AZM design shares similarities with the YF-23, so Amongst countries Pakistan reach out to collaborate, they have probably studied the design well enough to help out. Once the WS-15 matures, with its higher thrust, China may switch from a four poster tail to a Pelikan tail and YF-23 style exhaust. Perhaps even ditch the canards for increased stealth if other control surfaces can help. The J-20 may evolve into the design the PAF hopes Project AZM will become.
why don't we copy the f-14 'tom cat' in this regard?
just like f-14 which can fold and expand its wings on purpose so we can add canards to the jet but we know that it increases radar cross section but when you need it you open canards and when you dont need just close them..
 

Yasser76

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 28, 2017
2,433
1
3,636
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
The issue is that AZM -- or an NGFA as a whole -- should take on strategic significance. The PAF's desired specifications (twin-engine, heavyweight) aren't available to Pakistan on the market, certainly not in the configuration the PAF would prefer (e.g., accessible to its own SOW and ALCM stocks). The PAF wants a long-range offensive asset, and no one will provide it in the numbers the PAF wants.

Granted, the PAF isn't looking for nuclear strike capability, but the conventional strike capability did provide some strategic benefit during Swift Retort. Basically, the PAF learned that if it can attack specific enemy targets (via conventional means) quick and accurately, it could thwart Indian momentum, for example. It can create a conventional deterrence that could discourage another Balakot-type scene in the future (as India would know Pakistan can strike back conventionally with relative ease).

These are all strategic considerations, albeit not nuclear. Ultimately, I don't think the tri-services were uninterested in the idea of a NGFA (after all, the PN would benefit hugely thanks to the PAF finally having a long-range fighter to patrol the EEZ). Rather, Pakistan simply lacks the R&D expertise and industrial basis to pull it off. Our nuclear weapons program actually drew on a pretty good preexisting basis that we had built in the 1950s and 1960s thanks to the 'Atoms for Peace' program and our initiatives. So, when the planners asked, "can we build a nuclear weapon?" there were scientists in that room to both give an answer and spell out how exactly to do it (and across two different methods -- uranium and plutonium -- no less).

In contrast, if the government were to ask, "honestly, can we build a fighter?" no one will be able to answer that without saying, "no" and giving a timeline of 20-25 years to do it 100% indigenously (and even that would be optimistic). Simply put, the basis is largely non-existent, especially at the industrial level.

Like you said, AZM wasn't necessarily a waste of time. I hope that it brought a realization that this is a complex initiative that requires us to actually upgrade the Pakistani economy.

If an indigenous NGFA is of significance, then there's no excuse for not investing in gas turbines, composites, semiconductors, steel, and heck, even wiring and tyre materials. If we take this realization to heart and start implementing it, I guarantee you it would lead to an economic revolution in Pakistan, even if we don't get an NGFA out of it.

Imagine a dozen Pakistani companies vying for aerostructure or other sub-contracting work in Boeing and Airbus, and in turn, generating tens of thousands of jobs of various kinds within Pakistan. Scale that across each and every little area that makes up an aircraft, and you could have several hundred thousand direct industry jobs plus a million supporting jobs around those core workers. In turn, all those guys and gals will pay taxes, and that will bankroll the next NGFA, indigenous or imported. Heck, you could import an NGFA but require 50%+ offsets that'll involve re-using your homegrown aerospace industry, thereby restart the entire loop.

Interestingly, I'd say the road to getting to an NGFA has exponentially more strategic value (economically, industrially, technologically) than the NGFA in of itself.
No nation outside US and China are building a true 5th/6th gen aircraft on their own (I do not count the Russian offering as up to scratch) UK is teaming up with Sweden and Italy and Germany is teaming up with France, even Korean and Turkish offerings are not true fully comparable to F-35.

Even if Pakistan were to double the economy overnight and double our defence industry base we would struggle, and for what? An order of say 100-150 fighters max?

NGFA will certainly be joint, possibly even less then 50% Pakistani, but even if it were say just 25% Pakistani, that in itself would be a major leap for us.

I suspect a heavily modified Chinese design with a large amount of Pakistani input.
 

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
5,213
20
6,313
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
why don't we copy the f-14 'tom cat' in this regard?
just like f-14 which can fold and expand its wings on purpose so we can add canards to the jet but we know that it increases radar cross section but when you need it you open canards and when you dont need just close them..
I think/hope your being sarcastic, or I’m misunderstanding your suggestion that canards could be retracted and used when needed for “extra maneuverability”. There are probably ways smaller surfaces can be used along the plane to get the same results along with thrust vectoring. The canards add to the RCS and a standard exhaust can still put up a significant IR signature; which sensors like the F-35’s EOTS can pick up. A design like the YF-23 may have the lowest signature (RCS and IR) of a stealth aircraft, just behind the B-2.
 

ProudPak

FULL MEMBER
Feb 26, 2019
610
0
672
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
No nation outside US and China are building a true 5th/6th gen aircraft on their own (I do not count the Russian offering as up to scratch) UK is teaming up with Sweden and Italy and Germany is teaming up with France, even Korean and Turkish offerings are not true fully comparable to F-35.

Even if Pakistan were to double the economy overnight and double our defence industry base we would struggle, and for what? An order of say 100-150 fighters max?

NGFA will certainly be joint, possibly even less then 50% Pakistani, but even if it were say just 25% Pakistani, that in itself would be a major leap for us.

I suspect a heavily modified Chinese design with a large amount of Pakistani input.
Could u be any more negative? Chalo....let's assume 1 % Pakistani input. That's 1% better than nothing and 100% more than the negative people on this forum. Jf17 was unachievable too.
 

CriticalThought

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 10, 2016
6,858
16
7,189
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
Let me correct some unspoken misconceptions here. The end result of successful Azm is NOT 100 NGFA, 70 F-16, 36 J-10, 150 JF-17, 100 Mirages, and 30 F-7 PGs. Why? The financial cost of manufacturing and then operating/maintaining 100 NGFA is astronomical even if we are producing everything locally. The raw materials needed are rare and competition is stiff globally. A more realistic number is 20-30.

You cannot fight an entire war with 20-30 planes of whatever capability against an adversary like India. You CAN win a war using them. I invite people to think on this.

Forget about America giving AESA technology to Pakistan. And by that I mean, even if Joe Biden comes personally to Pakistan to offer F-22s, you cannot create your war plans against India based off American technology. What America giveth, America taketh away as well, Feb 27 notwithstanding.

Almost everyone here wants to replace Mirages and F-7 PGs. Ever thought what that replacement should look ilke? If you say JF-17, you need to learn a lot more about capability of various platforms.

Finally, here is a highly confrontational assertion I shall make: If you buy J-10, you will be buying some version of J-31/J-20 as well AND Azm will NEVER be realized. NEVER. You will move into an arbitrary Tejas like useless program that wastes money without producing results. I invite everyone to think on this.

Given the above, what Azm SHOULD look like is an indigenously produced medium weight fighter that is the next iteration of JF-17. This JF-17 NG should produce fraternal twins: a clipped delta similar to F-16 but with side inlets, and a pure delta/delta canard with side inlets. This iteration is perfect to try out elements of LO design as well. This should take us into the mid 2030s.

Then, we should produce an indigenous twin engine design. This should take us into the mid 2040s.

To counter India's acquisition of latest tech such as Rafale and S-400, we need to invest in better AEWACS, supersonic/hypersonic weapons, drone swarms, longer range air to air missiles, SAM systems etc. I have no problem in buying these off-the-shelf. Even a procurement of J-20 is OK. But NOT J-10.

After 2040s you can realistically take a stab at fifth/sixth gen aircraft.
 

Yasser76

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 28, 2017
2,433
1
3,636
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Could u be any more negative? Chalo....let's assume 1 % Pakistani input. That's 1% better than nothing and 100% more than the negative people on this forum. Jf17 was unachievable too.
Not negative at all my firned, realistic, but it would still be a great acheivement, if Pak even contributes 25% of a pure 5th/6th Gen fighter, that is 25% more 5th/6th Gen tech then countries like Malaysia, India or Russia....
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom