What's new

Italian Secretary-General Defense hails Pakistan Navy

Italy exported 761million USD worth of arms to pakistan in 2018, Does anyone know what was the package?
 
.
For what it's worth, the Bombardier Global 6000 (which the Swordfish uses) is Canadian and cleared for military use by anyone. It's ITAR-free. The Turks actually took the same jet and are using it for their stand-off EW platform.

Through the ATR-72 MPA (Sea Eagle) program, the PN basically set-up its own equivalent to the Swordfish -- same sensors, but different CMS and weapons. We just need an experienced integrator to take the Sea Eagle and fit it to the Bombardier Global 6000, which obviously has its challenges (which Saab studied and solved).

We can actually work with the German companies we contracted for the ATR-72 MPA to basically create a direct competitor to the Swordfish. Sea Eagle XR.
Bombardier Global 6000 has a few alternate aircraft like Embraer Lineage 1000 / Embraer 190, Airbus A220-100 / Airbus A320, which can be acquired with systems from Italians.


For such Projects Cost & Benefit analysis has always lead to one result: Marginal Capability Upgrade achieved against Capital Invested. I’ll break it down for simplicity of Young Members here:
Marlin in A2A Config has a Range of 100 Km(apropos reference to your reply)
Current AAMs of PAF already surpass or have the range cited above. Capability in terms of Range is already available to PAF, where as The Capability being attained by Adversary exceeds more than 50% of the Range of the Marlin, Moreover Their Indigenous Product also has a similar range to an under developed under Tested Missile like Marlin. When a country like Pakistan which makes count every $ spent in terms of Weapon import realises that the capability being Attained is less than spectacular therefore it’s always better to go for a ready made solution to save Time, Capacity and Capital. If for say Marlin was a VLAAM or a Ram Jet Powered 100-120 NM AAM I wouldn’t see any reason for PAF to not turn to Denel for any such Proposal/Offer. For such a Project All hands would be on deck. But when you already have AAMs surpassing the capability being developed the Higher Ups wont see any meaningful reason to use limited capital on a project to attain a capability which already exists.
Moreover, PN & PAF have separate acquisition and Development plans and therefore A common acquisition is hardly a thing/ or a part of culture here unless a Project has been locally conceived by a Local Entity i.e AWC or NESCOM for example and it pitches the product on a tri-services level. Therefore I see no reason to invest limited capital on a indigenously manufactured MR-SAM when the capability required is urgent and averse to risk taking approach. One small glitch in the program and it risks taking down 2-3 major projects down with it.
PL-15,Meteor,AIM-120D is the name of the game for PAF now. The Enemy is already at the gates.
Marlin can be a valid option if we consider PAF integrating these on Drones and UCAV. using them against helicopters and as intercepts similar to STAR WARs project of USA.
 
.
For such Projects Cost & Benefit analysis has always lead to one result: Marginal Capability Upgrade achieved against Capital Invested. I’ll break it down for simplicity of Young Members here:
Marlin in A2A Config has a Range of 100 Km(apropos reference to your reply)
Current AAMs of PAF already surpass or have the range cited above. Capability in terms of Range is already available to PAF, where as The Capability being attained by Adversary exceeds more than 50% of the Range of the Marlin, Moreover Their Indigenous Product also has a similar range to an under developed under Tested Missile like Marlin. When a country like Pakistan which makes count every $ spent in terms of Weapon import realises that the capability being Attained is less than spectacular therefore it’s always better to go for a ready made solution to save Time, Capacity and Capital. If for say Marlin was a VLAAM or a Ram Jet Powered 100-120 NM AAM I wouldn’t see any reason for PAF to not turn to Denel for any such Proposal/Offer. For such a Project All hands would be on deck. But when you already have AAMs surpassing the capability being developed the Higher Ups wont see any meaningful reason to use limited capital on a project to attain a capability which already exists.
Moreover, PN & PAF have separate acquisition and Development plans and therefore A common acquisition is hardly a thing/ or a part of culture here unless a Project has been locally conceived by a Local Entity i.e AWC or NESCOM for example and it pitches the product on a tri-services level. Therefore I see no reason to invest limited capital on a indigenously manufactured MR-SAM when the capability required is urgent and averse to risk taking approach. One small glitch in the program and it risks taking down 2-3 major projects down with it.
PL-15,Meteor,AIM-120D is the name of the game for PAF now. The Enemy is already at the gates.
I agree with you on all points. But the reason why I stress the need for indigenous or joint-development is that our long-term pool of options is dwindling.

The PAF is at the point where it must develop a large fighter on its own (Project Azm) because today, it really has no other option.

So, all those risks and resources must be paid for in down the line instead of say 10-15 years ago (had we done this earlier). Likewise, I only bring up the Marlin on the basis of getting access to its critical technologies (rocket motor). If we can absorb the know-how about those rockets, we can develop them in the future and get our own longer-ranged equivalents. We can approach people for the PL-15, AIM-120D or Meteor today, but 10-15 years from now, history tells us that our options for the next wave of BVRAAMs will dwindle to even further (as it has for fighters).

I think we can reach a middle ground where we approach projects like Marlin et. al for the sake of their critical inputs only. So we keep the R&D spending to a minimal for the sake of learning rocket motor tech, seekers, ECCM, etc, and then kick-start a serviceable project with full funding when we really need it.

There was a project named LAAM in SA which even today worth consideration.
D8E-y8fX4AES-Mx.jpg

D8E-01kX4AA7ZOt.jpg


Another thing about this project which is interesting is that one of its version was offered to UK in
The LRAAM participated in the British BVRAAM program for a long-range missile to replace the AMRAAM and Sky Flash. The participants were the BAe / GEC-Marconi / Saab Dynamics / Alenia with the S225X, the Matra MICA, the Daimler-Benz Aerospace with the A3M and the Hughes / Raytheon with the AMRAAM. Everyone would use ramjet propulsion. The winner was the S255X and A3M that were made with the Meteor.
1392664_10200504382712147_1134119261_n.jpg

Source

Here we should keep in mind that India is also working on a similar project name SFDR (source)
Flight-test-of-SFDR-Propulsion-based-Missile-system-1jpg.jpeg


So any equivalent at our side would be a welcome addition
 
Last edited:
.
I agree with you on all points. But the reason why I stress the need for indigenous or joint-development is that our long-term pool of options is dwindling.

The PAF is at the point where it must develop a large fighter on its own (Project Azm) because today, it really has no other option.

So, all those risks and resources must be paid for in down the line instead of say 10-15 years ago (had we done this earlier). Likewise, I only bring up the Marlin on the basis of getting access to its critical technologies (rocket motor). If we can absorb the know-how about those rockets, we can develop them in the future and get our own longer-ranged equivalents. We can approach people for the PL-15, AIM-120D or Meteor today, but 10-15 years from now, history tells us that our options for the next wave of BVRAAMs will dwindle to even further (as it has for fighters).

I think we can reach a middle ground where we approach projects like Marlin et. al for the sake of their critical inputs only. So we keep the R&D spending to a minimal for the sake of learning rocket motor tech, seekers, ECCM, etc, and then kick-start a serviceable project with full funding when we really need it.
When push comes to shove we’ll always have one option or another as long as we have the capital. I’ll agree with you on indigenous capability, it has to be attained but personally involving a SOE has always been a useless proposition. Look what has been the result of ToT for 90-Bs? Are we producing the submarine locally? We can’t compare ourselves to what other countries do when they go for ToT. South Koreans now produce their own version of German S/Ms for which they went for ToT with certain technologies surpassing the original version in many ways. Turks are doing the same. That’s because they have a vibrant private sector, a readily pool of highly talented pool of Engineers and a Real focus on ToT and R&D. Why PN paid an extra 300 Million for ToT(which basically in the end was just a Sub-Assembly or assembling a Knock Down Kit) when Instead of ToT we could have used that Capital for 2 extra S/Ms. It’s because the higher command back then thought that it will provide us a capability to produce our own S/M. So when u spent a capital which could have basically bought you 02 extra S/Ms and believed it will lead to achieving a capability of indigenous production/ self sufficiency and after 10-14 years the capability is not there without the back up of a Private infrastructure etc it will be a redundant capability. Because down 10-14 years the line you’ll again have to spend 6-8 Bn USD to get S/Ms because the local Capacity is simply not there. That’s the Harsh reality. Look at Burraq it’s basically just a Local Chinese Knock Off. While we moved to pay for Burraqs ToT from the Chinese they had already moved to Ch-4/5. Another route Instead of ToT would have saved us a lot of headaches and a major capability boost by slowly going for small batches of Ch-3, and then Ch-4 and so on. Al-Khalid is there, the Capability is there, but When there is No R&D you’ll always end up with Having Trials for the Likes Of Oplot or Vt-4 and name it another project Haider etc. We need to first Restructure the whole Defence SOE and their Subsidiaries, Change the Organizational structure instead of Making Chairman’s post a Welfare Pre Retirement post. ToT for the G-3 has been done by H&K back in the days. It’s been more than 30-40 years and PoF has been churning out the same Wpn decade after decade. The max tweaks that they do or have done is Change the Butt stock, Shorten the barrel here and there, attach rails etc. Why invite FN,CZ,MKEK for trials then when capability is already there which paid precious foreign exchange was paid decades ago for the very same reason I.E So we may not use foreign exchange in the future.
 
. . . .
.
T129 ATAK and other programs.


It says so in the Italian gov't's report to parliament. Pakistan was cleared for 650 m Euro worth of arms in 2018, second largest buyer after Qatar.

http://documenti.camera.it/_dati/le...rlamentari/IndiceETesti/067/002v01/INTERO.pdf
Italy exported 761million USD worth of arms to pakistan in 2018, Does anyone know what was the package?
18 AW139 have been transferred to Pakistan during 2017-18 as per SIPRI. It makes a total of 23 AW139 (5 were transferred im 2016).
79 Puma APCs and 4 76mm naval guns for Milgem Corvette.

IMG_20191021_200912.jpg


(P.S Bangladeshi fanboys were chest thumping about large no of AW139 in their fleet. A total of 4 AW139 have been transferred to Bangladesh so far)
 
. .
We can actually work with the German companies we contracted for the ATR-72 MPA to basically create a direct competitor to the Swordfish. Sea Eagle XR.

I wouldn't discount any possibilities in this regard.

August 2019.

inp-24-10.jpg

According to a statement issued by the Pakistan Navy on Saturday, the visit of German Navy P3C (Long Range Maritime Patrol) aircraft had concluded and it was a manifestation of good bilateral relations and a desire to find new vistas to further strengthen the defence ties between the two navies.
 
.
T129 ATAK and other programs.
That's a possibility, but are we sure Leonardo is still manufacturing parts for the T129? @cabatli_53 is TAI subcontracting some T129 work out to Leonardo still?

18 AW139 have been transferred to Pakistan during 2017-18 as per SIPRI. It makes a total of 23 AW139 (5 were transferred im 2016).
79 Puma APCs and 4 76mm naval guns for Milgem Corvette.

View attachment 585456

(P.S Bangladeshi fanboys were chest thumping about large no of AW139 in their fleet. A total of 4 AW139 have been transferred to Bangladesh so far)
I'm not 100% confident in SIPRI. For example, the MoDP report did not list any AW139 transfers for 2017-2018, nor did I find any on the EXIM logs.
 
.
That's a possibility, but are we sure Leonardo is still manufacturing parts for the T129? @cabatli_53 is TAI subcontracting some T129 work out to Leonardo still?


I'm not 100% confident in SIPRI. For example, the MoDP report did not list any AW139 transfers for 2017-2018, nor did I find any on the EXIM logs.

What Leonardo supplying for T-129 Atak is 20mm gathling gun and landing gears at present. I don’t suppose Leonardo can export T-129 without Turkey bro.
 
.
18 AW139 have been transferred to Pakistan during 2017-18 as per SIPRI. It makes a total of 23 AW139 (5 were transferred im 2016).
79 Puma APCs and 4 76mm naval guns for Milgem Corvette.

View attachment 585456

(P.S Bangladeshi fanboys were chest thumping about large no of AW139 in their fleet. A total of 4 AW139 have been transferred to Bangladesh so far)
Puma afvs. Wow
 
.
18 AW139 have been transferred to Pakistan during 2017-18 as per SIPRI. It makes a total of 23 AW139 (5 were transferred im 2016).
79 Puma APCs and 4 76mm naval guns for Milgem Corvette.

View attachment 585456

(P.S Bangladeshi fanboys were chest thumping about large no of AW139 in their fleet. A total of 4 AW139 have been transferred to Bangladesh so far)
Can you post the link from where did you screenshot it.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom