Pakistan's Service Rifle (G-3, Type-56) Replacement Competition 2016.

[DESERT FIGHTER]

And it would take longer to get the new rifle (already a long span project)
Thanks

If they can come up with sniper rifles,DMRs and HMGs ... they sure can come up with an assault rifle...

I hope they do...

Ironically the last indigenous AR they made was a small Calib which didn’t fly with the SF testing it or the army... effectively killing it..

As well as other weird rifles they came up with based on G3 & MP5 parts.

But still they market it internationally! Ironic!

 

[Armchair]

If they can come up with sniper rifles,DMRs and HMGs ... they sure can come up with an assault rifle...

I hope they do...

Ironically the last indigenous AR they made was a small Calib which didn’t fly with the SF testing it or the army... effectively killing it..
View attachment 476732
As well as other weird rifles they came up with based on G3 & MP5 parts.

But still they market it internationally! Ironic!

They just need to stop coming up with ridiculous designs and give the designing job to established outsourced gun-smiths. Something on the lines of "here is a SCAR and here is a Bren. Please make something like them but one that not too closely resembles them, so that we can call it our own rifle". Easiest job in the planet. The only hurdle are the advanced composites and plastics needed for the framing. This tech can be separately bought from a variety of sources including China, Poland, Italy, Czech, Ukraine, Russia, variou EU vendors, and even South Korea / Singapore. Not to mention Turkey.

A little smartness goes a long way. But no. They will do "what they have always done". "Licence produce a design from a gora company.

 

[Bossman]

They just need to stop coming up with ridiculous designs and give the designing job to established outsourced gun-smiths. Something on the lines of "here is a SCAR and here is a Bren. Please make something like them but one that not too closely resembles them, so that we can call it our own rifle". Easiest job in the planet. The only hurdle are the advanced composites and plastics needed for the framing. This tech can be separately bought from a variety of sources including China, Poland, Italy, Czech, Ukraine, Russia, variou EU vendors, and even South Korea / Singapore. Not to mention Turkey.

A little smartness goes a long way. But no. They will do "what they have always done". "Licence produce a design from a gora company.

Well the Indians tried it with their own INSAS and we all know the results and they have a more sophisticated military Industrial complex than Pakistan.It is one the worst rifle to enter service in any military. Copying is easy and Pakistani are very good at it every thing from Glocks to AKs but a main assault rifle is a entirely different ball game. Spend a little time thinking and researching.

 

[Armchair]

Well the Indians tried it with their own INSAS and we all know the results and they have a more sophisticated military Industrial complex than Pakistan.It is one the worst rifle to enter service in any military. Copying is easy and Pakistani are very good at it every thing from Glocks to AKs but a main assault rifle is a entirely different ball game. Spend a little time thinking and researching.

I think its a faulty analogy to compare anything India does with anything a decent MIC should be able to do. The long litany of failed white elephants is up for show.

With the INSAS, our Indian friends tried to take bits and pieces from different rifle designs and make a "new" design. This is a fundamentally flawed approach. You don't need to make a Frankenstein.

The Bren is essentially a SCAR. They are so similar. You just need to take one design and make a closely similar assault rifle.

Let me reiterate this point - INSAS is trying to take bits and pieces of designs from a host of divergent designs. Its by a country that would mess up the formula for making lolly pops. There is nothing worth comparing this to a real system.

There is a gun company in Pakistan for instance, that exports guns, including military grade handguns. They made their own "design", basically copied a well established design and made a few changes. Its now being exported and bringing forex for your country. Its that simple. You're telling me a small Pakistani private company can do this, but Pakistan's military cannot?

You're also ignoring that there are a wide assortment of global gunsmiths that can do this for you. Yes, you can also go to a gora to get it done for you if you like. You'd still have your own brand of assault rifles and not have to pay licence fees, or face export restrictions.

 

[denel]

I think its a faulty analogy to compare anything India does with anything a decent MIC should be able to do. The long litany of failed white elephants is up for show.

With the INSAS, our Indian friends tried to take bits and pieces from different rifle designs and make a "new" design. This is a fundamentally flawed approach. You don't need to make a Frankenstein.

The Bren is essentially a SCAR. They are so similar. You just need to take one design and make a closely similar assault rifle.

Let me reiterate this point - INSAS is trying to take bits and pieces of designs from a host of divergent designs. Its by a country that would mess up the formula for making lolly pops. There is nothing worth comparing this to a real system.

There is a gun company in Pakistan for instance, that exports guns, including military grade handguns. They made their own "design", basically copied a well established design and made a few changes. Its now being exported and bringing forex for your country. Its that simple. You're telling me a small Pakistani private company can do this, but Pakistan's military cannot?

You're also ignoring that there are a wide assortment of global gunsmiths that can do this for you. Yes, you can also go to a gora to get it done for you if you like. You'd still have your own brand of assault rifles and not have to pay licence fees, or face export restrictions.

Well said friend. You are going to hit your head on the wall; bottom line too many vested interest and no purpose to serve and prevail. If they had a good sense of seperating industry from the military it would not have been at this stage. That is exactly what we did back since 50's under no circumstances SADF gets involved in the affairs of Armscor, Atlas, PMP etc ... instead each was left to innovate with a steady stream of graduates who took interests in various mechnical, electrical, aeronautical problem areas etc; SADF role was to provide the specifications of what they needed; in your case you cannot have the doctor also be a patient performing surgery - bad analogy but true.
The same issue is not only about basic rifles but across the board and if it was not 'Copy Mao', you can imagine the state of affairs then. You have been very fortunate to have China to essentially give you blueprints to make a screw. Furthermore every argument is about India or someone; as you rightfully put it, God has given you brains, use it and crave your own route.
Look at us, during the sanctions time, it was the best time in terms of where we took R&D in my country and it brought the country forward leaps and bounds across each and every sector - mining, agriculture, industrial - chemical industries, petrochemical - SASOL(80% of fuel in SA is derived locally from Coal using GTL - Fisher Thropp process) etc. The list is just endless if you get my drift; that also translated into our military support complex with Cheetah, Impalas, world pioneers in HMDs, secure comms, mine proof vehicles, hand guns, cannons, helicopters/gunships, aams, etc etc. During the cheetah program we needed to plumb them with IFR - back to the drawing board and a solution was found; it baffles me that you have the manpower and brainpower and cannot produce a local solution for handguns, or service rifle. At my university we produce some of the world's best gliders - jonkers just look it up - Prof Jonkers started this effort on his own - he had a will to do something. If there is a will there is a way is what I am saying.
Thanks... keep challenging the status quo. That is when there is a spark of change. But if society takes a backseat and says this is the way things are done, then your society is unfortunately doomed to remain in backwaters until perpetuity.

 

[Sine Nomine]

The only hurdle are the advanced composites and plastics needed for the framing. This tech can be separately bought from a variety of sources including China, Poland, Italy, Czech, Ukraine, Russia, variou EU vendors, and even South Korea / Singapore. Not to mention Turkey.

If you look at our Military Industrial Complex,designing a Rifle for our Gunsmiths is a joke,it's only matter of the fact that We Want To Field a Home Grown Rifle or Not.

 

[Armchair]

Well said friend. You are going to hit your head on the wall; bottom line too many vested interest and no purpose to serve and prevail. If they had a good sense of seperating industry from the military it would not have been at this stage. That is exactly what we did back since 50's under no circumstances SADF gets involved in the affairs of Armscor, Atlas, PMP etc ... instead each was left to innovate with a steady stream of graduates who took interests in various mechnical, electrical, aeronautical problem areas etc; SADF role was to provide the specifications of what they needed; in your case you cannot have the doctor also be a patient performing surgery - bad analogy but true.
The same issue is not only about basic rifles but across the board and if it was not 'Copy Mao', you can imagine the state of affairs then. You have been very fortunate to have China to essentially give you blueprints to make a screw. Furthermore every argument is about India or someone; as you rightfully put it, God has given you brains, use it and crave your own route.
Look at us, during the sanctions time, it was the best time in terms of where we took R&D in my country and it brought the country forward leaps and bounds across each and every sector - mining, agriculture, industrial - chemical industries, petrochemical - SASOL(80% of fuel in SA is derived locally from Coal using GTL - Fisher Thropp process) etc. The list is just endless if you get my drift; that also translated into our military support complex with Cheetah, Impalas, world pioneers in HMDs, secure comms, mine proof vehicles, hand guns, cannons, helicopters/gunships, aams, etc etc. During the cheetah program we needed to plumb them with IFR - back to the drawing board and a solution was found; it baffles me that you have the manpower and brainpower and cannot produce a local solution for handguns, or service rifle. At my university we produce some of the world's best gliders - jonkers just look it up - Prof Jonkers started this effort on his own - he had a will to do something. If there is a will there is a way is what I am saying.
Thanks... keep challenging the status quo. That is when there is a spark of change. But if society takes a backseat and says this is the way things are done, then your society is unfortunately doomed to remain in backwaters until perpetuity.

Thanks for this excellent post Denel. The will, the right methodology, and resources. South Africa did wonders. If only South Asia could follow in its footsteps.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Thanks for this excellent post Denel. The will, the right methodology, and resources. South Africa did wonders. If only South Asia could follow in its footsteps.

Functionally, it seems HIT, PAC, POF and KSEW operate like supply depots of the PA, PAF and PN more so than actual arms companies. Basically, product development is tied to exactly what the armed forces want, and if the armed forces can't be bothered to push for a better design, then the "companies" just persist with what they're already doing until new orders come.

If we 'de-link' the two (e.g. de-link POF from the PA), then what could occur is POF proceeding with a new rifle program - along with the $250-300 m cost of re-tooling the factory, setting-up new polymer supply units, etc - ahead of the PA pushing for a new rifle. POF can market its new rifle for exports (in an effort to recoup the transition costs) and work on cost-reduction.

However, pulling this off basically requires swelling the MoDP budget accordingly so that it can invest in POF et. al. In fact, this was the original idea of the MoDP - i.e. to copy the Turkish SSM model (the SSM invests in state-owned and private sector defence products separately from armed forces requirements, enabling the Turkish industry to advance separately).

Sadly, the practical manifestation of this effort is basically taking money away from one branch and then giving it to another branch. We get feudal over this stuff so you can imagine why it was a non-starter.

 

[Armchair]

Functionally, it seems HIT, PAC, POF and KSEW operate like supply depots of the PA, PAF and PN more so than actual arms companies. Basically, product development is tied to exactly what the armed forces want, and if the armed forces can't be bothered to push for a better design, then the "companies" just persist with what they're already doing until new orders come.

If we 'de-link' the two (e.g. de-link POF from the PA), then what could occur is POF proceeding with a new rifle program - along with the $250-300 m cost of re-tooling the factory, setting-up new polymer supply units, etc - ahead of the PA pushing for a new rifle. POF can market its new rifle for exports (in an effort to recoup the transition costs) and work on cost-reduction.

However, pulling this off basically requires swelling the MoDP budget accordingly so that it can invest in POF et. al. In fact, this was the original idea of the MoDP - i.e. to copy the Turkish SSM model (the SSM invests in state-owned and private sector defence products separately from armed forces requirements, enabling the Turkish industry to advance separately).

Sadly, the practical manifestation of this effort is basically taking money away from one branch and then giving it to another branch. We get feudal over this stuff so you can imagine why it was a non-starter.

That is an interesting insight. There may be some additional issues. Like:

1. These ancillary organizations are sometimes seen as a way to ease into retirement
2. The mindset of the military does not work with regards to R&D, generally speaking, there are exceptions of course.
3. Technical competence takes a back burner when the people running the show (armed forces officers) don't have that capability to understand. There is a saying in the US that only a good programmer can pick another good programmer.
4. In the end, these state enterprises do not have much of a profit motive. The employees rightfully think they have employment for life. There is little incentive to reach for that extra mile.

A practical approach may be to make these organizations independent of the military. The initial management can perhaps come from a mix of the experienced technical staff within and staff taken in initially from the SPD.

Corruption is a serious issue and has to be addressed in terms of procurement - anyone making procurement decisions, them and their family should not ever be allowed to leave the country. With very strict punishment for caught cases. Because, even if you make an excellent product, the politics may not allow you to actually produce it.

The nuclear program of Pakistan was a very successful program. One reason being, perhaps that the management was technically competent. This was run by people who where engineers and had experience with R&D. Not by former military administrators.

Denel makes a good point that the patient cannot be the doctor. That metaphor may be very insightful here.

It's not as desperate a situation, its just a matter of time before a handful of key decision-makers realize the issues and begin implementing change. Question is, how far is Pakistan from getting that handful of honest arbitrators?

 

[Sine Nomine]

If we 'de-link' the two (e.g. de-link POF from the PA), then what could occur is POF proceeding with a new rifle program - along with the $250-300 m cost of re-tooling the factory, setting-up new polymer supply units, etc - ahead of the PA pushing for a new rifle. POF can market its new rifle for exports (in an effort to recoup the transition costs) and work on cost-reduction.

What would happen to Army Officals in there.

 

[Armchair-General]

Aren't hk

What would happen to Army Officals in there.

Remove them, aside from testing and stating the specifications of the weapons, they have no other use.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Aren't hk

Remove them, aside from testing and stating the specifications of the weapons, they have no other use.

Then forget de-linking

 

[django]

Perhaps these may be put to the test.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1002315234353303558

 

[Zarvan]

Perhaps these may be put to the test.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1002315234353303558

No they won't come. But China is catching up with rest of the world in small arms.

 

[django]

No they won't come. But China is catching up with rest of the world in small arms.

Hazrat no harm in evaluating the product, we are under no obligation to procure it, I suspect it is a upgrade of type 81, a fine assault rifle.Kudos Hazrat