What's new

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

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,225
64
19,331
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
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?
 

SQ8

ADVISORS
Mar 28, 2009
34,195
356
70,109
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
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.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,225
64
19,331
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
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.
 

GriffinsRule

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 18, 2015
2,499
5
3,652
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
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.
 

Bilal Khan (Quwa)

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 22, 2016
5,225
64
19,331
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
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.
 

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


Top Bottom