What's new

PAKISTAN ARMY INDUCTS NEW ARMOURED CARRIERS FOR COUNTERTERRORISM OPERATIONS

If HIT can't produce similar assets locally, about time it should be shut down for good.
HIT is doing much more than that with MBTs, SP Guns, etc for Strike Corps. MBTs being the main factor here. The up-gradation of T-59 to AZ and the production of AK and AK-I were the need of the hour along with mechanization of infantry through M-113 and Talha variants, which gave to LATs getting tracked along with HATs.

Raising 25th Mech DIV and 26th Mech Div without HIT contribution was impossible, along with mechanization of some Infantry Divisions as well as increasing number of armor and MIBs in Infantry Divisions to raise up to Brigade level. The Strike Corps as well as three other Corps HQ (5, 30, & 31) owe a lot to HIT.

Start looking at things from a broader perspective.
 
.
HIT is doing much more than that with MBTs, SP Guns, etc for Strike Corps. MBTs being the main factor here. The up-gradation of T-59 to AZ and the production of AK and AK-I were the need of the hour along with mechanization of infantry through M-113 and Talha variants, which gave to LATs getting tracked along with HATs.

Raising 25th Mech DIV and 26th Mech Div without HIT contribution was impossible, along with mechanization of some Infantry Divisions as well as increasing number of armor and MIBs in Infantry Divisions to raise up to Brigade level. The Strike Corps as well as three other Corps HQ (5, 30, & 31) owe a lot to HIT.

Start looking at things from a broader perspective.
You think they can absorb what you are implying? No.
Our perspective is fixed.
Each div having a LAT or a HAT plus atleast an armoured bde (some having multiple), the numerous IABGs/IMBGs, upgrades of Type85 and 59, AK1, overhauling of T80, VT4, M109s... All of these providing the PA with a strong defence while allowing it to maintain significant riposte capability at the same time.
Without HIT churning out hundreds of Tanks and APCs PA would've been reliant on importing all this equipment ( which we can't). Hence as signalian mentioned, there probably wouldn't have been any 25, 26, 18 Mech divs; 30, V and 31 Corps would've been lacking mechanisation.
And if somehow we would've managed to raise all these formations, who would've looked after their spares, maintenance and service.
HIT is one of the reasons why PA is relatively more mechanised and jas more modern armoured capabilities.
This is all despite HIT not being originally concerned with R&D.
 
.
The amount of money that we put into HiT, its been punching well above its weight for decades.
U provide it funds for R&D n to buy manufacturing equipment plus the funds to hire relevant personal than it will do just that.

U gave a blank cheque to the relevant authorities to built the bomb, they did just that.
 
.
1. if this happens, how will bayrozgar generals and brigadiers get employment and destroy organizational budgets by using its resources ruthlessly?
2. "legislation" doesnt solve anything in Pakistan. many "autonomous" organizations are autonomous in name only and cannot even hire and fire peons independently.
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 up with are generally going to be toxic problems.

Turks had the advantage of getting access to American systems from the very start including component building for F-16s. Pakistan had to turn to China and then incorporate western technology in Chinese equipment.

Having said and done, Pakistan still managed to make AK and JF-17 before Turks produced their MBT Altay and an aircraft TFX.

This has nothing to do with organizational structuring and policymaking.

Okay, let's say we only ever had access to Chinese equipment. Fine. Done. Why is PAC's day-to-day managed by senior PAF officers when there are retired PAF engineers (with PhDs and Masters in various aerospace fields) sitting in Boeing, Textron, and Raytheon? Why did PAC pursue reckless vertical integration (i.e., adding to its overhead for very low-value production work, like bolts that are already available from Pakistani makers)?

The Chinese themselves only have access to Chinese equipment, yet the likes of SAC, CAC, NORINCO, etc, aren't run by PLA generals. They're run by scientists and engineers.

Not everything in life boils down to who your suppliers or allies are. Yes, Turkey had the benefit of being exposed to a lot of Western technologies, but they could have easily messed it all up by making the same organizational mistakes our military did.

And finally, there's an earth and sky difference between the AK/JF-17 and Altay/TFX programs.

I'm not talking about the generational gaps, but the fact that the Turkish ones are exponentially more indigenous than AK/JF-17.

Turkey is designing the TFX's flight control system, developing the composite materials, and producing the entire sensor + electronics stack. Heck, even the air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons of the TFX are all indigenous. Likewise, the Altay will have not one, but two indigenous engine options: diesel and electric.

Heck, Turkey has more competency on the F-16 than we do with the JF-17. Both the Turkish public sector and private sector have manufactured aerostructures for the F-16 from scratch, for example. Turkey also understood enough to design its own F-16V-type upgrade (i.e., OZGUR) and carry out its own weapon integration work with, again, its own munitions technologies.
 
Last edited:
.
The COIN war and cross border terrorism with Afghanistan cannot be solved/won/decided by just MRAPs or similar 4x4. USA had all and better equipment but packed and ran after 20 years.
The point about better force protection in ex-FATA and Balochistan is not meant to suggest that it would result in winning the war, but about reducing casualties while the war continues.
 
.
HIT is doing much more than that with MBTs, SP Guns, etc for Strike Corps. MBTs being the main factor here. The up-gradation of T-59 to AZ and the production of AK and AK-I were the need of the hour along with mechanization of infantry through M-113 and Talha variants, which gave to LATs getting tracked along with HATs.

Raising 25th Mech DIV and 26th Mech Div without HIT contribution was impossible, along with mechanization of some Infantry Divisions as well as increasing number of armor and MIBs in Infantry Divisions to raise up to Brigade level. The Strike Corps as well as three other Corps HQ (5, 30, & 31) owe a lot to HIT.

Start looking at things from a broader perspective.
The only problem HIT has is that of R&D and that requires money.
Upgrades of Type 85,T 80 UD,continued production of AK1's,AFV project shows that HIT is not a failure.
 
.
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 up with are generally going to be toxic problems.



This has nothing to do with organizational structuring and policymaking.

Okay, let's say we only ever had access to Chinese equipment. Fine. Done. Why is PAC's day-to-day managed by senior PAF officers when there are retired PAF engineers (with PhDs and Masters in various aerospace fields) sitting in Boeing, Textron, and Raytheon? Why did PAC pursue reckless vertical integration (i.e., adding to its overhead for very low-value production work, like bolts that are already available from Pakistani makers)?

The Chinese themselves only have access to Chinese equipment, yet the likes of SAC, CAC, NORINCO, etc, aren't run by PLA generals. They're run by scientists and engineers.

Not everything in life boils down to who your suppliers or allies are. Yes, Turkey had the benefit of being exposed to a lot of Western technologies, but they could have easily messed it all up by making the same organizational mistakes our military did.

And finally, there's an earth and sky difference between the AK/JF-17 and Altay/TFX programs.

I'm not talking about the generational gaps, but the fact that the Turkish ones are exponentially more indigenous than AK/JF-17.

Turkey is designing the TFX's flight control system, developing the composite materials, and producing the entire sensor + electronics stack. Heck, even the air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons of the TFX are all indigenous. Likewise, the Altay will have not one, but two indigenous engine options: diesel and electric.

Heck, Turkey has more competency on the F-16 than we do with the JF-17. Both the Turkish public sector and private sector have manufactured aerostructures for the F-16 from scratch, for example. Turkey also understood enough to design its own F-16V-type upgrade (i.e., OZGUR) and carry out its own weapon integration work with, again, its own munitions technologies.
I believe the uniformed personnel in technical departments are Masters at least.
 
.
I believe the uniformed personnel in technical departments are Masters at least.
They are soldiers first. The point being made is that these organizations need to be taken out of the hands of the military and run and staffed by the best personnel available from the private sector. Serving military personnel, who are qualified, should be used primarily for requirement definition and product assessment, and even here should operate in conjunction with private sector experts, with no conflict of interest.
 
.
I am not too familiar with HIT or the workings in it at the moment, but a few years ago I had an interaction with someone who was involved with the organization, and also in PAC and other institutions.

According to them, the main hurdle we face in manufacturing and internal R&D is of metallurgy. You can write a code, you can smuggle blueprints (or maybe you can't, not my area of expertise), but metallurgy is one field in which there are no shortcuts. HIT was trying to collaborate with different universities around the country (and especially with HITECH, although that did not really go forward as well as they had hoped). But then again, the thing with these collaborations is often that the sarkari or fauji mindset in our country does not often go hand in hand with the academia. The professors and even students feel waaayyyy restricted and to put it bluntly, feel as a level below their boss (the military officer).

PAC Kamra started a program where they took fresh grads from the top universities (GIK, NUST, FAST) in different departments. The pay was around 50k (this was in 2017, don't know about now), but the students often complained of the poor work culture, fauji mindset, and the restrictions in their scope of work. Of course, my sample size is low, and this might not be the overall case, but just putting it out there. PAC took the top students from a few batches, 3.8 and 3.9 GPA's...who were pretty sharp and brilliant in their own mind. After 3-4 months (or a year), the students thought to themselves that WTF am I doing...and left for greener pastures, a few to the US.

Point being, military-corporate-academia collaboration is extremely important if you want to create internal R&D, manufacturing, and indegenize products. But for that, and I know some people will disagree with this, sometimes the military has to acknowledge that it has to take a back seat and let the others take charge of a situation. Har cheez main aap expert nhn hotay. This is not to say that some military engineers do not have a sharp mind...but those are far and few in between.
 
.
I am not too familiar with HIT or the workings in it at the moment, but a few years ago I had an interaction with someone who was involved with the organization, and also in PAC and other institutions.

According to them, the main hurdle we face in manufacturing and internal R&D is of metallurgy. You can write a code, you can smuggle blueprints (or maybe you can't, not my area of expertise), but metallurgy is one field in which there are no shortcuts. HIT was trying to collaborate with different universities around the country (and especially with HITECH, although that did not really go forward as well as they had hoped). But then again, the thing with these collaborations is often that the sarkari or fauji mindset in our country does not often go hand in hand with the academia. The professors and even students feel waaayyyy restricted and to put it bluntly, feel as a level below their boss (the military officer).

PAC Kamra started a program where they took fresh grads from the top universities (GIK, NUST, FAST) in different departments. The pay was around 50k (this was in 2017, don't know about now), but the students often complained of the poor work culture, fauji mindset, and the restrictions in their scope of work. Of course, my sample size is low, and this might not be the overall case, but just putting it out there. PAC took the top students from a few batches, 3.8 and 3.9 GPA's...who were pretty sharp and brilliant in their own mind. After 3-4 months (or a year), the students thought to themselves that WTF am I doing...and left for greener pastures, a few to the US.

Point being, military-corporate-academia collaboration is extremely important if you want to create internal R&D, manufacturing, and indegenize products. But for that, and I know some people will disagree with this, sometimes the military has to acknowledge that it has to take a back seat and let the others take charge of a situation. Har cheez main aap expert nhn hotay. This is not to say that some military engineers do not have a sharp mind...but those are far and few in between.
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 building genuine R&D leadership within the armed forces. So, eventually, several of these officers (who'd also be experienced scientists) could head up PAC, SUPARCO, etc, as 1-star or 2-star generals. It's crazy, and it probably makes no sense, but it's bizarre enough that it might just work in our specific case.
 
.
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 building genuine R&D leadership within the armed forces. So, eventually, several of these officers (who'd also be experienced scientists) could head up PAC, SUPARCO, etc, as 1-star or 2-star generals.

Baat end main wohi hai, you have to pay to get the best of the talent. Else the talent goes. Organizations that make the good stuff need to have professionals at the helm who can provide a solid direction. I know that in Pakistan's case, having a civilian at the top is almost impossible, but a structure needs to be carved for this. The military man can take care of the admin efforts. I know at least 2 2 star officers who have a simple BS in their fields, which was attained 30 odd years ago. You are not up to speed with the current advancements in the field, along with a host of other deficiencies.

This is in no way meant to say they are useless. Both the gentlemen are very good at what they are trained to do, and have been doing for their service, and there are many others in the military who are exceptional at what the military does. But the one fits all approach needs to be modified. Not holding my breath though.
 
.
Are you a retard or something??
TTP and BLA are killing our people so how is this America's war??
The brother of a martyred soldier and son of a soldier once asked a question. "Wo Kaun tha?" Arshad Sharif.

Answer to your question lies in that question's answer. Currently military's top brass isn't interested in Pakistan or Pakistani people's (which mostly are bloody civilians obviously) issues/concerns.
 
.
We don't have balance due to corruption civilian side. Let say today we get oil, plus lithium and our yearly earning gets 1500 billion dollars each year and 150 billion dollars is spend on defence. Trust me the other 1350 billion dollars still won't do any good if corruption on civilian side is not controlled. Problem is our incompetent civilian leaders like Nawaz and Zardari. You give them 100000 billion dollars each year and still no good will come out of that and only they would rob all of it.
You are delusional to think that corruption only exists in civilian side 😜. Military and military owned corporations are the real culprits when it comes to financial and authoritarian corruptions. No one can match them. They are the ones who are the guardians and protectors of the corrupt civilian setup. There's is not a hint of doubt left on this matter now. Everything is as much clear and naked as it can possibly be.
 
.
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 building genuine R&D leadership within the armed forces. So, eventually, several of these officers (who'd also be experienced scientists) could head up PAC, SUPARCO, etc, as 1-star or 2-star generals. It's crazy, and it probably makes no sense, but it's bizarre enough that it might just work in our specific case.
No way that could work. Wearing a uniform comes with certain expectations and limitations on creativity. All uniformed personnel have to be held to the same standards. You cannot have two different cultures within the military.


The military has to be a client, not the management. The military should communicate its needs as a client, and civilian experts should design and develop solutions.
 
Last edited:
.
No place for a shielded machine gun Station. Would had been also good with top protection which can be added or removed or opened. Some smoke grenade launchers.
It can support Remote Controlled Weapon Station RCWS. So no need to pop up your head from there and install heavy metal shields to protect it in return.
 
Last edited:
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom