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

[Indos]

My younger self would have been very excited but I guess time takes its toll on everyone.
View attachment 655554

Design is a low bar. Each batch of aerospace engineering student in Pakistan designs an aircraft during their bachelor's. Our class made 36. Every year this happens. The point is that design (especially conceptual design) is an academic exercise that costs very little to do. Furthermore, it is done to get several candidate designs. Finally, these designs are very "big picture", so it's just configuration, shape, engine placement, MTOW etc. It doesn't say anything about where the components will be sourced from, how the manufacturing will take place, how will the avionics be constructed, is the design viable from a control systems perspective. That is, this kind of design is a very "back of the envelope" kind of thing. It is so basic that 3rd year aerospace engineering students do it all the time. And yes, it's PAF professors teaching us all this so I have a pretty good idea of what they must have done (and all the things they definitely don't know) @Goenitz @M.AsfandYar.

Then we can see the missing expertise/infrastructure at PAC for some critical subsystems (like control systems), and I wouldn't hold my breath for PAC producing a "clean-sheet" FGFA prototype within 5 years. I would give this goal at least 15-20 years (even this is optimistic).

Like @Chak Bamu I do not want to share all the things I am privy to on an open forum, but the things I've come into contact with do not fill me with confidence.

Just my (realistic or pessimistic) two cents.

According to you why is so expensive to build STEALTH fighter ? Even KFX/IFX who is not fully STEALTH need 10 billion USD. I dont know where the money actually being spent since the design will be done with their own engineers (KAI+PTDI+ADD) and testing facility have already been there. Most money IMO is spent on building 6 prototypes, flying test, and there are some avionics development cost like AESA radar and others but most subsystems will be imported like engine.

For comparison, Indonesia aerospace (PTDI) only need less than 100 million dollar to develop N 219.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

According to you why is so expensive to build STEALTH fighter ? Even KFX/IFX who is not fully STEALTH need 10 billion USD. I dont know where the money actually being spent since the design will be done with their own engineers and testing facility have already been there. Most money IMO is spent on building 6 prototypes, flying test, and there are some avionics development cost like AESA radar and others but most subsystems will be imported like engine.

For comparison, Indonesia aerospace only need less than 100 million dollar to develop N 219.

Just guessing, but most of the cost probably goes into developing critical inputs such as the flight control system as well as integrating and validating inputs (e.g., engine, flight control, electronics, etc). Never mind next-gen fighters, even the Tejas took India a lot of time and money. So, I wouldn't underestimate these issues. If anything, I suspect South Korea is pulling it off at a relatively affordable cost thanks to its prior expertise and technology base.

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with Pakistan trying to develop the technology. I am in support for Pakistani flight control, engine, composites, electronics, etc. However, it's not realistic to expect Pakistan develop any of this tech in 7-10 years. It would need 15-20 years, at least, to have mature and serviceable products. But the PAF needs its jet by the 2030s, so tying AZM to a looming requirement is setting AZM up for failure or an underwhelming effort.

The right way for the PAF is to split the upcoming FGFA from AZM.

So, for the 2030s, work with China on the FC-31. Heck, simplify it all by taking whatever radar, EW/ECM, weapons, etc the Chinese select, don't complicate matters (and add cost). To be frank, I'm not even sure if Pakistan needs to even manufacture this particular jet. The most economically friendly approach might be to buy the FC-31 from the Chinese like an import, but get a 150% offset agreement where AVIC buys aviation goods/services from Pakistan's public and private sector (e.g., in commercial airliners, trainers, simulators, etc).

But for the 2040s, work on our own NGFA (i.e., AZM). Both the public and private sector will get a jolt from AVIC via the offsets, so they can invest in flight control tech, turbine tech, composites, electronics, etc. Success will vary, but by 2030-2035 we could have a technology demonstrator, and have a clear idea of what we can bring to a NGFA (i.e. 6GFA) on our own and what we'll need to import. In fact, if we develop valuable inputs of our own, others might be more interested in sharing engine tech with us in-exchange.

Basically, through the 2030s the FC-31s can supplant our Mirages and older F-16s, and the NGFA/AZM could take up the JF-17s and newer F-16s through the 2040s and 2050s.

 

[Indos]

Just guessing, but most of the cost probably goes into developing critical inputs such as the flight control system as well as integrating and validating inputs (e.g., engine, flight control, electronics, etc). Never mind next-gen fighters, even the Tejas took India a lot of time and money. So, I wouldn't underestimate these issues. If anything, I suspect South Korea is pulling it off at a relatively affordable cost thanks to its prior expertise and technology base.

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with Pakistan trying to develop the technology. I am in support for Pakistani flight control, engine, composites, electronics, etc. However, it's not realistic to expect Pakistan develop any of this tech in 7-10 years. It would need 15-20 years, at least, to have mature and serviceable products. But the PAF needs its jet by the 2030s, so tying AZM to a looming requirement is setting AZM up for failure or an underwhelming effort.

The right way for the PAF is to split the upcoming FGFA from AZM.

So, for the 2030s, work with China on the FC-31. Heck, simplify it all by taking whatever radar, EW/ECM, weapons, etc the Chinese select, don't complicate matters (and add cost). To be frank, I'm not even sure if Pakistan needs to even manufacture this particular jet. The most economically friendly approach might be to buy the FC-31 from the Chinese like an import, but get a 150% offset agreement where AVIC buys aviation goods/services from Pakistan's public and private sector (e.g., in commercial airliners, trainers, simulators, etc).

But for the 2040s, work on our own NGFA (i.e., AZM). Both the public and private sector will get a jolt from AVIC via the offsets, so they can invest in flight control tech, turbine tech, composites, electronics, etc. Success will vary, but by 2030-2035 we could have a technology demonstrator, and have a clear idea of what we can bring to a NGFA (i.e. 6GFA) on our own and what we'll need to import. In fact, if we develop valuable inputs of our own, others might be more interested in sharing engine tech with us in-exchange.

Basically, through the 2030s the FC-31s can supplant our Mirages and older F-16s, and the NGFA/AZM could take up the JF-17s and newer F-16s through the 2040s and 2050s.

Yup, I just want to know where the cost actually spent. Based on the design it self I have a good comparison on KFX/IFX program. In total ADD Korea and Indonesia Aerospace spent around 46 million USD to design C 103 KFX/IFX that become a base for final C 109 design. It needs 3 years to design C 103 (2011-2013). So basically basic design doesnt cost much. But I dont know the cost of KFX/IFX detail design that started in June 2018 and finished in September 2019.

C 103 KFX/IFX design seen in Indonesia wind tunnel test facility.

In 2014 KFX/IFX program is pending and started again in 2015 with KAI and Lockheed Martin joining the program.

 

[Armchair]

@JamD the parts that are missing like FCS can be borrowed or taken from other parties (China / Turkey, most likely China). Remember, the F-117 had FCS that was borrowed from the F-16 program, and they slapped the same FCS on all three axis, creating the "wobbling goblin".

What our brother saw was very possibly a wind tunnel model, as he chanced upon it. This means that the design stage is complete. Since he could clearly identify it as a cleansheet design, it definitely isn't the J-31 or a similar layout - meaning not a twin engined conventional design. Either a conventional design with a single engine, or a twin engined delta canard.

Since Pak doesn't have the FCS for a delta canard, it therefore is most likely a single engined conventional design. Or so I would deduce.

Just thinking aloud, please don't release your attack dogs.

 

[Figaro]

Just guessing, but most of the cost probably goes into developing critical inputs such as the flight control system as well as integrating and validating inputs (e.g., engine, flight control, electronics, etc). Never mind next-gen fighters, even the Tejas took India a lot of time and money. So, I wouldn't underestimate these issues. If anything, I suspect South Korea is pulling it off at a relatively affordable cost thanks to its prior expertise and technology base.

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with Pakistan trying to develop the technology. I am in support for Pakistani flight control, engine, composites, electronics, etc. However, it's not realistic to expect Pakistan develop any of this tech in 7-10 years. It would need 15-20 years, at least, to have mature and serviceable products. But the PAF needs its jet by the 2030s, so tying AZM to a looming requirement is setting AZM up for failure or an underwhelming effort.

The right way for the PAF is to split the upcoming FGFA from AZM.

So, for the 2030s, work with China on the FC-31. Heck, simplify it all by taking whatever radar, EW/ECM, weapons, etc the Chinese select, don't complicate matters (and add cost). To be frank, I'm not even sure if Pakistan needs to even manufacture this particular jet. The most economically friendly approach might be to buy the FC-31 from the Chinese like an import, but get a 150% offset agreement where AVIC buys aviation goods/services from Pakistan's public and private sector (e.g., in commercial airliners, trainers, simulators, etc).

But for the 2040s, work on our own NGFA (i.e., AZM). Both the public and private sector will get a jolt from AVIC via the offsets, so they can invest in flight control tech, turbine tech, composites, electronics, etc. Success will vary, but by 2030-2035 we could have a technology demonstrator, and have a clear idea of what we can bring to a NGFA (i.e. 6GFA) on our own and what we'll need to import. In fact, if we develop valuable inputs of our own, others might be more interested in sharing engine tech with us in-exchange.

Basically, through the 2030s the FC-31s can supplant our Mirages and older F-16s, and the NGFA/AZM could take up the JF-17s and newer F-16s through the 2040s and 2050s.

It seems like all the information thus far points to Pakistan ditching CAC for SAC ... I would bet right now CAC is in a very big hurry trying to come up with a stealth fighter prototype to counter the FC-31/J-35. It would be a pretty big blow for them to lose this to SAC. And given there has obviously been no green light by the PLA to export the J-20 (or create an export variant for that matter), CAC has its hands strapped behind its back even more.

According to you why is so expensive to build STEALTH fighter ? Even KFX/IFX who is not fully STEALTH need 10 billion USD. I dont know where the money actually being spent since the design will be done with their own engineers (KAI+PTDI+ADD) and testing facility have already been there. Most money IMO is spent on building 6 prototypes, flying test, and there are some avionics development cost like AESA radar and others but most subsystems will be imported like engine.

For comparison, Indonesia aerospace (PTDI) only need less than 100 million dollar to develop N 219.

I won't get into the details on why stealth fighters are so expensive, as Bilal Khan has already explained it excellently. But I will point out if you look at the 3 operational stealth fighters : F-22, F-35, and J-20, they have all been mightily expensive programs. The development costs for these fighters have been in the tens of billions just for R&D development alone (likely around 20 to 60 billion dollars). The Su-57s development costs are also extremely high, which is why you see the induction numbers being so low for 2020s (Russia is by far the most cash strapped out of the Big 3 militaries). This high cost is why I think beyond these 4 stealth fighters (F-22, F-35, J-20, Su-57), I doubt any other independent fifth generation fighter programs are viable beyond the prototyping stage. Forget about technology, money is even more critical.

 

[Cookie Monster]

1 year later...someone posts, "Did You Know Project Azm Had a Stealthy Tanker? The PAF didn't go for it (even though ALL of the capabilities were there) because Swift Retort veterans said 99% of all important targets in India are within 3 feet of the LoC"

@JamD just provided the pics and u just provided the script for some ill informed attention seeking teenager to bust out a YouTube video...with excessive use of words like "دوستوں".

 

[Indos]

I won't get into the details on why stealth fighters are so expensive, as Bilal Khan has already explained it excellently. But I will point out if you look at the 3 operational stealth fighters : F-22, F-35, and J-20, they have all been mightily expensive programs. The development costs for these fighters have been in the tens of billions just for R&D development alone (likely around 20 to 60 billion dollars). The Su-57s development costs are also extremely high, which is why you see the induction numbers being so low for 2020s (Russia is by far the most cash strapped out of the Big 3 militaries). This high cost is why I think beyond these 4 stealth fighters (F-22, F-35, J-20, Su-57), I doubt any other independent fifth generation fighter programs are viable beyond the prototyping stage. Forget about technology, money is even more critical.

Those countries are using the development cost not only for design, prototyping, and testing but also subsystem development. I believe the engine development for F35 is part of F35 development cost. So the overall cost will be quite high. I just want to know whether 5 generation fighter can be build much cheaper if we just buy all of the required subsystem like engine, AESA radar, and others.

If Pakistan want to build 5 generation fighter and buy all of the subsystem from abroad, so I suggest the development cost of the plane might be much cheaper.

I have shown design cost for KFX/IFX program in the period of 2011-2013 that resulted in C 103 design that only cost 46 million USD. That is only basic design while detail design is worked after final C109 design is completed in June 2018. What I know is that detail design will be much more expensive and requires more than 100 designers. Just for assessment, Indonesia Aerospace send 114 engineers during detail design phase and Indonesia only contribute 20 % of the development.

Regardless of that, design phase IMO is relatively not expensive. Making 6 prototype and testing them also IMO is still relatively not expensive since one prototype may only cost below 50 million dollar.

 

[Aadi_1591]

Someone may or may not have seen project AZM design

I can say with 80% confidence that what I have seen is indeed AZM design. I've debated in my head about it and I have decided not to disclose anything about it. I will let some idiot do that when it becomes more widely known. I will only say this: It is a clean sheet design. Now whether Pakistan uses this design to get concessions on J-31/35 is anybody's guess.

cmon bro i work on project azam...... would you believe me?

 

[The Raven]

@JamD the parts that are missing like FCS can be borrowed or taken from other parties (China / Turkey, most likely China). Remember, the F-117 had FCS that was borrowed from the F-16 program, and they slapped the same FCS on all three axis, creating the "wobbling goblin".

What our brother saw was very possibly a wind tunnel model, as he chanced upon it. This means that the design stage is complete. Since he could clearly identify it as a cleansheet design, it definitely isn't the J-31 or a similar layout - meaning not a twin engined conventional design. Either a conventional design with a single engine, or a twin engined delta canard.

Since Pak doesn't have the FCS for a delta canard, it therefore is most likely a single engined conventional design. Or so I would deduce.

Just thinking aloud, please don't release your attack dogs.

Too many assumptions for your bias of a single engine design. A wind tunnel model doesn't necessarily mean the design stage is complete...how can it be if they're testing a wind tunnel model?! Wind tunnel testing goes through a number of design iterations before the aerodynamics testing has been validated. And you keep forgetting that the PAF has stated that Azm will be a twin engine design, but yet you keep harping on about your "stealthy single engine JF-17".

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

According to you why is so expensive to build STEALTH fighter ? Even KFX/IFX who is not fully STEALTH need 10 billion USD. I dont know where the money actually being spent since the design will be done with their own engineers (KAI+PTDI+ADD) and testing facility have already been there. Most money IMO is spent on building 6 prototypes, flying test, and there are some avionics development cost like AESA radar and others but most subsystems will be imported like engine.

For comparison, Indonesia aerospace (PTDI) only need less than 100 million dollar to develop N 219.

N219 A ready-made aircraft. It is even bad to see these cost.

 

[Indos]

N219 A ready-made aircraft. It is even bad to see these cost.

Why do you say it ready made aircraft ?? It is designed from scratch. This program is so beneficial for Indonesia aerospace as it will transfer design experience taken by previous designers into a younger generation designers/engineers.

That is the cost I saw on wikipedia though.

For the development, we just made 3 prototypes though. 1 for static testing and 2 for flying testing.

One plane only cost 6 million dollar (price for customer)

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

Why do you say it ready made aircraft ?? It is designed from scratch. This program is so beneficial for Indonesia aerospace as it will transfer design experience taken by previous designers into a younger generation designers/engineers.

That is the cost I saw on wikipedia though.

For the development, we just made 3 prototypes though. 1 for static testing and 2 for flying testing.

One plane only cost 6 million dollar (price for customer)

It is written on open sources that it was developed through Casa C-212

 

[The Eagle]

Project Azm is our own? Indeed.
We are working on it? In-fact
It may be our own design and with everything. Yes, at-least this is how we planned.
Is there any room for partnership or help from another party? Of-course, we are open in this regard and there are indications that if need be, we will work with our brotherly/friendly nations to achieve our goals.
Is it a must to design and develop our own fighter without a single component from abroad? Why it should be like that as far as any development or cooperation helps in regard to develop our own fighter but one thing is sure, it is going to be ITAR free.
What if in the end it turns out to be FC-31 or something like that in our colours? Well it depends as how the strategical landscape changes in the region especially since our rival's shopping spree. PAF hasn't strictly closed doors for no other option neither it is denied at all. NGF and Azm can go along, if need be. We will fill the gape of 15 -20years, if it happens.

One thing is sure and I am confident about the same that PAF will keep it one step ahead of India even if it about 5ht Gen A/C. As far as I observe, the time frame is pretty much designed on the basis of economic conditions that will eventually get better by the time projects like CPEC will grow. In 5 years, if things move ahead as planned, the point of economic restraints will not be there to be worried. This is the reason why PAF is confident & things are planned and in placed as well. I see that modernization of force will take place with much more pace once we started to receive economic fruits for which, today we are fighting with everything.

 

[Indos]

It is written on open sources that it was developed through Casa C-212

Well there is nothing wrong using proven design like C 212 as a base, but it doesnt mean we copy C 212 design, we just try to make it even a better design. It is wrong to say N 219 is a ready made aircraft though.

Just look on KFX/IFX, it also has relatively similar design like F 22 Raptor, but why it needs about 9 years to finalize KFX/IFX design ?


Here is C 212-400 designed by CASA.

N 219

Cessna Skycourier developed by Textron USA also looks relatively similar

Just made first flight this year

Cessna Skycourier

N 219 during wind tunnel testing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C 212-400

Specifications (Series 400)

Data from Jane's All The World's Aircraft 1989–90[51][52]

General characteristics

• Crew: 2
• Capacity: 26 passengers / 25 paratroops / 2,820 kg (6,217 lb) military payload / 2,700 kg (5,952 lb) cargo payload
• Length: 16.15 m (53 ft 0 in)
• Wingspan: 20.28 m (66 ft 6 in)
• Height: 6.6 m (21 ft 8 in)
• Wing area: 41 m2 (440 sq ft)
• Aspect ratio: 10
• Airfoil: NACA 653-218[53]
• Empty weight: 3,780 kg (8,333 lb)
• Max takeoff weight: 8,000 kg (17,637 lb) military

7,700 kg (16,976 lb) standard

• Max Landing weight: 7,450 kg (16,424 lb)

Performance

• Maximum speed: 370 km/h (230 mph, 200 kn) VMO (maximum operating speed) at MTOW
• Cruise speed: 354 km/h (220 mph, 191 kn) (max cruise) at 3,050 m (10,007 ft)
• Economical cruise speed: 300 km/h (190 mph; 160 kn) at 3,050 m (10,007 ft)
• Stall speed: 145 km/h (90 mph, 78 kn) in take-off configuration
• Range: 835 km (519 mi, 451 nmi) with full military payload
• Ferry range: 2,680 km (1,670 mi, 1,450 nmi) with maximum fuel and 1,192 kg (2,628 lb) payload
• Service ceiling: 7,925 m (26,001 ft)

3,380 m (11,089 ft) on one engine

• Rate of climb: 8.283 m/s (1,630.5 ft/min)
  
• Take-off distance to 15 m (49 ft): 610 m (2,001 ft) (MIL-7700C)
• Landing distance from 15 m (49 ft): 462 m (1,516 ft) (MIL-7700C)
• Landing run: 285 m (935 ft) (MIL-7700C)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N 219

Specifications
Data from Manufacturer[24]

General characteristics

• Crew: 2
• Capacity: 19 passengers
• Length: 16.49 m (54 ft 1 in)
• Wingspan: 19.5 m (64 ft 0 in)
• Height: 6.18 m (20 ft 3 in)
• Empty weight: 4,309 kg (9,500 lb)
• Max takeoff weight: 7,030 kg (15,498 lb)
• Fuel capacity: 1,600 kg
• Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-42 turboprop engines, 630 kW (850 shp) each
• Propellers: 4-bladed Hartzell Propeller

Performance

• Maximum speed: 390 km/h (240 mph, 210 kn)
• Cruise speed: 310 km/h (200 mph, 170 kn) Economical
• Stall speed: 109 km/h (68 mph, 59 kn)
• Range: 890 km (550 mi, 480 nmi) with 19 pax
• Ferry range: 1,533 km (953 mi, 828 nmi)
• Service ceiling: 3,000 m (10,000 ft) operating altitude, max altitude 24,000 feet (7,315 m)
• Rate of climb: 9.85 m/s (1,938 ft/min)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cessna Skycourier

Specifications
Data from Cessna[12]

General characteristics

• Capacity: 19 passengers/5,000 lb (2,268 kg) payload (commuter) or 3×LD3s/6,000 lb (2,722 kg) payload (cargo)
• Length: 54 ft 10 in (16.71 m)
• Wingspan: 72 ft 0 in (21.95 m)
• Height: 19 ft 9 in (6.02 m)
• Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65SC turboprop, 1,100 hp (820 kW) each
• Propellers: 4-bladed McCauley

Performance

• Cruise speed: 230 mph (370 km/h, 200 kn) maximum
• Range: 460 mi (740 km, 400 nmi) Cargo Range (with 5,000 lb payload)
• Ferry range: 1,000 mi (1,700 km, 900 nmi)
• Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,600 m)
• Takeoff Distance : 3,300 ft (1,006 m)

 

[Irfan Baloch]

PAF has stated that Azm will be a twin engine design, but yet you keep harping on about your "stealthy single engine JF-17".

PAF leadership in the past has mentioned "stealthy version of JF17" during its participation in different airshows.

so the harping is not without merit.
generally PAF seems to run away from twin engine fighter like a plague
so they might change mind from ywtwin in to single and back to twin.