Featured Project Azm: Pakistan's Ambitious Quest to Develop 5th Generation Military Technologies.

[ziaulislam]

Exactly. However, we have a habit of setting unrealistic expectations that cause us to compromise and fail later.

The al-Khalid MBT, Agosta 90B, etc all fell to this issue.

I would rather we run a true indigenization program with a consistent and healthy stream of funding across 20-30 years without any pressure on deadlines, expediency, etc, and actually get our own fighter (+ critical inputs, CNCs, jig manfuacturing, etc, etc) by 2040, than to never get it because we lost heart failing due to not setting the right expectations early.

By separating immediate requirements from in-house R&D and domestic production, we can safely remove our generals from leading such posts (and instead leave leadership to engineers and scientists from those entities). There's no need for 'prudent administration' or 'completing X in only 5% the time' nonsense.

Let's take AZM and the FGFA for example.

AHQ can delegate the development of AZM to the R&D community. From now to 2040, AHQ can focus on inducting the FC-31. If it adds a few economists to the negotiating team, we can even construct an offset agreement with the Chinese. Yes, we may not even build a single part of the FC-31 in Pakistan, but we might get 33% (or even 99%) of the contractual cost return to Pakistan via target investments, barters and other benefits from China. So we can maintain our macroeconomic balance while supporting defence. We may even channel offsets to supporting our private sector aerospace industry by giving them revenue, investment, etc to set-up capacity for later.

From 2040, AHQ can go to AvRID and ask, "can we develop an indigenous fighter?" And with now 20+ years of solid R&D work under its belt, AvRID can give a solid plan on how to do it. No more worrying about critical inputs, we'll know how to either develop them or how to integrate them without relying on a foreign supplier. Once we get the fighter ready, PAC can subcontract the manufacturing work to the private sector (which by then would have the capacity to support the work thanks to the offsets via FC-31).

the only option i see is either china pushing its full might and helping PAC (only reason could be strategic i dont see any economic sense for china to do so) or for us joining another consortium..the only one i see are Turks..everyone else wont like us due to china relationship and Indian pressure..hell even the turks might back off due to Indian pressure.

thinking that Pakistan will design everything in house and just buy off the shelf some critical inputs without support in design and testing from a known design company/corp ..unlikely to happen, whats our expertise in design?..we haven't designed a single aircraft independently yet..

people think turkey cant pull if off, even though they have designed a half a dozen air crafts and co produced half a dozen other ..

we all know HAL cant pull it off , they couldnt in tejas and went for external help, even though they have designed half a dozen and built like 10 under licence

 

[GreyHat]

AZM is not about the short term. If it was, we can buy off the shelf. US PAK relations are fine for now, but that is for now. AZM is meant to be ITAR free, it cannot be if Grumman is onboard.

My perspective was more from having an expert opinion and inputs regarding their development instead of shipping some materials from them. If it works, we can have certain "HEAD- START" of Western caliber. If not, (or even ties goes bad ) we will be developing them anyways.

 

[Akh1112]

My perspective was more from having an expert opinion and inputs regarding their development instead of shipping some materials from them. If it works, we can have certain "HEAD- START" of Western caliber. If not, (or even ties goes bad ) we will be developing them anyways.

Why look to NG when CAC/SAC would be able to do the same, just with, far less strings attached? Even the SK's have had issues with US tech aboard KF-X, not being able to gain clearance etc

 

[GreyHat]

Why look to NG when CAC/SAC would be able to do the same, just with, far less strings attached? Even the SK's have had issues with US tech aboard KF-X, not being able to gain clearance etc

Well think , Primarily they should look for NG because, YF-23(& because this seems a model close to it) was a very complex design, which actually was the reason F-22 Raptor won, because it had a simplified design(or they could explain it rather simply).
Complexities can play a factor and pretty sure the design originator "who made it around 15-18 years earlier " , would have more knowledge about it compared to a recently developing Aviation Setup.
Again, I am not saying tech support at all, It is more like an advising company(which alot of firms hire) just from the design perspective, they can be pretty handful (Given we are still in, now about 3rd design cycle). & even if the support doesn't come, we still have nothing to lose

 

[Muhammad Omar]

Looks just like this one which was made on the tail of PAF's C130

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Well think , Primarily they should look for NG because, YF-23(& because this seems a model close to it) was a very complex design, which actually was the reason F-22 Raptor won, because it had a simplified design(or they could explain it rather simply).
Complexities can play a factor and pretty sure the design originator "who made it around 15-18 years earlier " , would have more knowledge about it compared to a recently developing Aviation Setup.
Again, I am not saying tech support at all, It is more like an advising company(which alot of firms hire) just from the design perspective, they can be pretty handful (Given we are still in, now about 3rd design cycle). & even if the support doesn't come, we still have nothing to lose

the program on discovery i saw on the choice of the tactical fighter was that maneuverability was preferred over stealth. although YF23 surpassed all the parameters set by the USAF but F22 won because it was "reasonably" stealthy and that compromise gave it more maneuverability than the YF23.

this preference also lead to another debate of whether have guns on the 5th generation platform or they the thing of the past as the very nature of a 5th generation means that the need for a merge and gun range must be avoided and see first shoot first strategy must be employed making the guns redundant but then again F22 won over because of the generation of the decision makers.

its a given that if at all F22 is deployed in a conflict it will NEVER EVER allow the enemy to get so close to a gun range. it will most definitely employ BVR missiles 99% of the cases and in the remaining 1% case its short range missiles so the guns and their ammo is a dead weight being carried which could've been better used for another missile(s) or mission specific pod/ equipment or module. despite being more "traditional in design (compared to YF 23) F 22 is on the tip of the technological supremacy in the world of military aviation.

my respected brother make some very inspiring and hopeful posts drawing the timeline and projections of the project AZM, knowing the mentality of my fellow countrymen including those in uniform it will be miracle must bigger than the JF17 program if its any better than our Peshawar BRT program. but Allah is so Merciful I wont have to live that long to see what becomes of this project.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Looks just like this one which was made on the tail of PAF's C130

View attachment 664758

no offence meant. this is a fan art and not really original. just a derivative of already existing F22 with added canards to appear different.

 

[monitor]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=520269012129917

 

[Tameem]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=520269012129917

1/ 3 Design

 

[Aryeih Leib]

https://www.facebook.com/114004347010669/posts/159462739131496

Could some one verify this rendering

 

[Aryeih Leib]

What I hear is that canards aren't very good for stealth configuration any respected member can shed some light on it

1/ 3 DesignView attachment 664792

 

[Muhammad Omar]

no offence meant. this is a fan art and not really original. just a derivative of already existing F22 with added canards to appear different.

Yes the canards are more tilted backwards engine have more distance engine area has more space the tail design is different the nose is more sleek and long etc etc

 

[Tamiyah]

1/ 3 DesignView attachment 664792

@Chak Bamu Does the Azm FGF look like this?

 

[Akh1112]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299451191584264193

In regards to the AESA being developed by PAC. I feel like either:

1. it will be for AZM
2. it will make its way down to earlier block JF-17s.

What do you guys think?

 

[Bilal.]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299451191584264193

In regards to the AESA being developed by PAC. I feel like either:

1. it will be for AZM
2. it will make its way down to earlier block JF-17s.

What do you guys think?

Pakistan aims to domestically produce AESA radars

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) is aiming to have Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) produce active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radars

quwa.org