• Saturday, December 7, 2019

With China as its mentor, Pakistan triples arms exports - Reach $1Billion annually!

Discussion in 'Pakistan Strategic Forces' started by ASKardar, Nov 10, 2019.

  1. doorstar

    doorstar FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,455
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,680 / -0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    China won't but Turkey will (just like it delivered Atak)? has it left NATO already? I missed that historic event.
     
  2. MM_Haider

    MM_Haider FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,993
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    Ratings:
    +1 / 2,103 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    China
    Only one billion! that is a lot less than true potential!
     
  3. doorstar

    doorstar FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,455
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,680 / -0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    is that more or less than zero? by the way when you need to go upstairs, do you start on the first rung or the top one?
     
  4. messiach

    messiach FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,163
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2016
    Ratings:
    +17 / 3,782 / -0
    Country:
    Austria
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Some good-for-NOTHING bureacrate speaking on condition of 'anonymity'. These parasitic babus who have contributed nothing to this country and have no role none atall in this country overall or defence/aeronautical development are now speaking on 'conditions of anonymity'. These should see the doors of gallows first before they open their vile mouths. @Oscar

     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. Bilal Khan (Quwa)

    Bilal Khan (Quwa) SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,313
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2016
    Ratings:
    +21 / 8,814 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    China did back out from buying 250 FC-1s, did it not? That was extra production work that could've gone to PAC and helped with boosting exports (albeit modestly, but noticeably). It was a cornerstone of the MoU, so China jumping ship was a shock for the PAF.

    As for Turkey. TAI offered workshare to PAC as part of the ATAK project, and -- as of IDEAS 2018 anyways -- was willing to expand that to set-up jointly-funded training and MRO facilities for Turkish Aerospace's third-party sales.

    But prior to all of that, TAI even contracted PAC to manufacture parts of the Anka UAV, even though the PAF never committed to buying the Anka. It was a gesture, and it put to use the production facilities PAC set-up for the Falco.

    Can you name one Chinese offset or jointly-funded facility in a foreign country? I can tell you that Turkey's Aselsan has set-up shop in Kazakhstan, and that exploratory teams are coming to see what can work in Pakistan.

    That's the difference. There's one country (China) that, from a defence industry point of view, doesn't need any co-production partners (as it can sustain the necessary economies-of-scale, R&D, etc alone), and others that do and, in turn, are openly asking for it.

    As for NATO countries, there are opportunities (at more modest levels, perhaps in civil/non-military areas) there too. After all, Boeing did agree to an offset agreement with PAC wherein PAC could supply them parts (under the Boeing 777) contract.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  6. doorstar

    doorstar FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,455
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2018
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,680 / -0
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    fantasies aside, the Turks will "co-operate" with Pakistan as much or as little as is permitted by the NATO collective!
     
  7. PakGuns

    PakGuns FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,127
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,132 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    they pushed j 10s instead..
     
  8. beijingwalker

    beijingwalker ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    23,651
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Ratings:
    +13 / 42,875 / -8
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    Believe me, countries choose partners of different kinds by trials and errors, if Turkey had been proven as an able reliable defense partner, Pakistan would've been partnered with Turkey in defense and economy development long time ago due to common cultural and religious background. Turkey doesn't have comprehensive and complete defense industry which's able to produce weapons of all kinds and many if not most Turkish key defense equipment are sanctionable by the west, Pakistani government surely knows it very well.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  9. Bilal Khan (Quwa)

    Bilal Khan (Quwa) SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,313
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2016
    Ratings:
    +21 / 8,814 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Canada
    Look, I'm talking about a very specific metric, production workshare. There's no doubt that China has been the most willing to sell technology to Pakistan, but this topic is about driving up Pakistan's defence exports.

    This is not necessarily the same thing.

    A major part of the JF-17 was that there was an understanding the PLAAF would buy 250 FC-1s, which in turn meant PAC would've entered the PLAAF's supply chain and exported goods to China. This did NOT happen. Yes, China was invaluable with providing technology, but at the same time, it didn't help Pakistan's defence exports as directly as it could have.

    When it comes to exports, I'd rather work with states whom have offered (even in the lowest capacity) to invite us into their supply chains. Boeing has done so (and PAC manufactures parts for them), TAI offered, and in time (based on Aviation Week's interview with PAC a year ago), others will too.

    This is in terms of exporting goods. If we're talking about acquisition for the Pakistani military, then that's a very different conversation, and all of the reasons you raised are valid.
    In terms of Pakistan's supply chain participation, it's still more than AVIC, NORINCO and CSIC.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  10. Philip the Arab

    Philip the Arab SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,340
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2018
    Ratings:
    +5 / 2,363 / -4
    Country:
    Jordan
    Location:
    United States
    I agree Pakistan should cooperate with whoever it can including Indonesia, South Africa, Turkey, Egypt, Serbia, Ukraine, Brazil, etc and anyone who has something to offer that doesn't have a monopoly like Western Europe, US, China, Russia, etc. Focus should be on being able to supplement and eventually replace imports with indigenous equivalents.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  11. Battle of Waterloo

    Battle of Waterloo BANNED

    Messages:
    865
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2019
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,594 / -1
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Title is misleading... $1 billion is the medium-long term GOAL, not the current number.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  12. khansaheeb

    khansaheeb SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    5,948
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Ratings:
    +2 / 6,335 / -1
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    We just need a few nuke subs from China to counter India's buying spree.
     
  13. beijingwalker

    beijingwalker ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    23,651
    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Ratings:
    +13 / 42,875 / -8
    Country:
    China
    Location:
    China
    That's your own speculation, JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 were designed to export, not for induction to PLAAF, we have different priorities, China's potential rival is nothing short of US airforce, the best of the best in the world, we are not fighting insurgencies nor countries like Afghanistan and India, JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 are not up to par for our future tasks. so for JF-17 AND 250 FC-1 we would prefer technology transfer than co production in the long run.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  14. messiach

    messiach FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,163
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2016
    Ratings:
    +17 / 3,782 / -0
    Country:
    Austria
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Turks were never and never be permitted for collaboration. We offered them a 'proposal' some two decades ago, straightforward turned down by unnnnncleSam. This is for records.

    I want to clarify for records, there was never any such agreement to prodeuce FC1 for PLAAF. Instead from the CGP sharing, common controls were derived for both testlines and two seperate fighter assemblies were produced consequently, one for PLAAF, other for PAF. There is nothing else to it.


     
    • Thanks Thanks x 4
  15. syed_yusuf

    syed_yusuf FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,067
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 614 / -0
    the understanding was there but PLAAF backed out due to change in priorities as mentioned above. they also offer Pakistan to join j-10 to fullfill collaboration ask from PAF that PAf refused. that is all history.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1