Search results

As far as @Zarvan is concerned, Salman Ali's going to bring the G-3 to every program, every region, and every time period. It's a war between the guy who says the G-3 now sucks, and the guy who says the G-3 is still the best.

I think the markets that originally bought from Russia could open up for both China and Turkey. So, for example, Algeria. That said, I agree with you, Pak Army might be more interested in an original design project with Turkey than specifically the Altay. Basically, the Turkish industry is very...

1,200 hp to 1,300 hp turbocharged IIRC.

The Turks seem to be go-getters provided there's a genuine business opportunity. So, they could look at developing an entirely new 'eastern' Altay variant (with a 125 mm gun and other specific changes). However, you'd have to present a real market worthy of the investment. That or we work with...

IIRC... 700-900 tons, AIP, ASW and AShW, SOF, ELINT/SIGINT.

Saab could've stepped in as early as 1986 as, at that time, the PAF was working on the Sabre II with the U.S. and China. The PAF had hoped for a lightweight multi-role fighter to complement the F-16s. However, the Sabre II option was getting too expensive (relative to output). The Gripen...

Conceptually, this STM 500 is like an enlarged X-Class, if not more. Basically, the STM 500 is supposed to take everything you'd get in a full-sized SSP (like the Agosta 90B), but pack it in a smaller design. The only thing I can see the PN changing about the STM 500 is enlarging it a bit more...

The PN has a shallow-water attack sub requirement. This was confirmed by the CNS.

I need to post it in the Pakistan Navy forum. It'll become true.

It's probably just a statement the State Department and DoD put in to help ensure the deal gets through Congress. They're saying, "hey, we need to keep these F-16s serviceable or else Pakistan will lose the ability to support COIN/CT." That said, I do think the PAF will try getting the F-16V...

The statement says that this specific F-16 program is also a consolidation of upcoming programs. So, instead of seeing a bunch of $50-75 M releases, the PAF and Pentagon put them all into one program. I think this will likely cover the next 5-7 years.

tbh I don't think so. Let's say, for example, the U.S. likes our military leadership, okay, but does that necessarily translate into furthering our national interests? Washington could still get their preferred individuals, but it doesn't mean they have to improve our conventional warfighting...

3rd-party transfers still require U.S. approval.

THIS...is the actual issue here. The only ones who benefit from awami squabbles are the 3rd-tier people running our country. PPP's been running Sindh for decades, yet the province is practically under water and the people are suffering. So, instead of coming to terms with their own failure...

I agree. Our problems go beyond the discussion of how these institutions should run, and more to do with the psyche of our leaders (general, politician, judge, etc). Whatever mental block they're all suffering from is also blocking our progress as a nation.

IIRC, I've seen some 4x4 LAVs have MRAP subvariants with v-shaped hulls. That said, if the DongFeng Mengshi GEN-III CSK-182 news is accurate, it seems the PA is moving towards the 4x4 LAV model.

Frankly, the only short-term solution I can think of is to basically convert every defense R&D engineer and scientist into a commissioned officer (e.g., a short-service commission) that gives them a solid 10-year contract, a fair starting rank (i.e., prestige), and -- hopefully -- a road ot...

You're exactly right. Our problems go well beyond policy or legislation. There's a critical fault in our collective thinking, especially among our leaders (be it military or political or bureaucracy or courts). When the guys at the top don't think on the correct basis, the 'solutions' they come...

@JamD y u no make dis? u better do it this afternoon.

Thing is, when most people say, "privatize POF/HIT/PAC, etc" they don't do it without articulating the exact problems with those state-owned enterprises (SOE) and how private ownership would solve them. That's why I take the "middle road" approach. Let's keep POF, HIT, PAC, KSEW, etc, as SOEs...