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

[JamD]

I really like your idea of a mini-f-23. I personally would love such a stealth aircraft. However, my "dream" would be for a single engine - WS-15 equiped design rather than a twin engine. Costs / less complexity / lower maintenance / rapid operational turnover / etc make that more sensible for me.

A watered-down Azm would be better than no Azm. The FCS of such a plane would be very interesting. Basically mirror the FCS of the J-20, minus the canards.

Right but the ACM yes said twin-engine quite clearly.

On a related note, the YF-23 design provides a lot of (structural) room for upgrades precisely because it's a little oversized. I kind of like that the PAC is looking at it. At the very least provides a very good/refined baseline to jump off from.

 

[Armchair]

Right but the ACM yes said twin-engine quite clearly.

On a related note, the YF-23 design provides a lot of (structural) room for upgrades precisely because it's a little oversized. I kind of like that the PAC is looking at it. At the very least provides a very good/refined baseline to jump off from.

Sorry I was away for a while, is it evidentially sound to say that PAC is looking at the F-23's design? I thought it was someone's dream...

the last dream I had about war, I saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) and he spoke to me - and a war was about to start - and I was in his army... although I lagged behind while trying to get my helmet, sword and shield on... however, I am not sure I should base reality on a dream...

Yes, you're right, the ACM did say that in an interview about twin engines... however, plans can change? (or so I hope)

 

[JamD]

Sorry I was away for a while, is it evidentially sound to say that PAC is looking at the F-23's design? I thought it was someone's dream...

the last dream I had about war, I saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) and he spoke to me - and a war was about to start - and I was in his army... although I lagged behind while trying to get my helmet, sword and shield on... however, I am not sure I should base reality on a dream...

Yes, you're right, the ACM did say that in an interview about twin engines... however, plans can change? (or so I hope)

If you go a couple of pages back there are screenshots from the 6th September show I believe where PAF showed off the development of the Azm. There were a few screenshots with some analysis of the YF-23 being done- low-fidelty CFD and flight dynamics analysis using DATCOM. That's where this discussion started off from.

 

[Armchair]

What is this?

View attachment 667856

@JamD , if this is Azm, this is definitely doable by 2025 and may even be single engined. The other design is a bit more complex.

 

[JamD]

@JamD , if this is Azm, this is definitely doable by 2025 and may even be single engined. The other design is a bit more complex.

I believe that's just a model of an F-7. I sure hope the Azm isn't an F-7 lol.

 

[Armchair]

Does this brings it closer?

View attachment 668145

This is a genius design from the intake. The entire nose is compressing air for the intake!!!
Some issues with the area ruling of the wings (less than perfect), but the intake is incredible. To understand what I mean, read up on the SR-71 intakes.

 

[Armchair]

I agree. It also takes time (and lots of money) to set-up the jigs to even build a physical prototype. Even if we get the private sector involved and operate at maximum efficiency, we're not going to support more than one fighter production line at a time.

Digital twins may allow us to implement a bunch of the development work before we even get a prototype going. It might even be a way to speed-up the process of transitioning from prototyping to small batch production, and small batches to serial.

Digital twin (the real comprehensive version) may just take longer to make (and even cost more money) than a simple prototype.

 

[JamD]

Digital twin (the real comprehensive version) may just take longer to make (and even cost more money) than a simple prototype.

The idea is that what you're saying is definitely true for simple (read 3rd and 4th gen) platforms. However, for 5 and 5+ gen platforms, with the ludicrous amount of sensors and electronics that need to be tested and integrated, the digital-twin actually saves money on the life-cycle costs.

Obviously, I haven't designed and built aircraft using both techniques to say anything definitely, but what I said seems to be the general wisdom.

 

[CriticalThought]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) digital twins are created by OEMs who have designed and developed something from scratch and then manufactured by them as well. For example, General Electric creates digital twins for their engines. But then, General Electric is up to its neck in the business of aircraft engines. Second, digital twins are created for components that are extremely complex - such as aircraft engines. And finally, creating digital twins needs instrumentation to capture all details.

In a fifth generation fighter, other than the engine, the next most sensitive, intricate, and complex thing is the stealth coating/skin. But here is the thing: if you place instrumentation throughout the skin, you will unnecessarily increase the weight of the aircraft. Except if Pakistani engineers develop some kind of nano-instrumentation techniques, digital twins don't really make much sense. I fear this discussion might be a case of developing technology for technology's sake without any practical use.

 

[Armchair]

I believe that's just a model of an F-7. I sure hope the Azm isn't an F-7 lol.

I think the design is not a F-7 because of the nose and the general dimensions. Looks like an evolution of the J-8 with a single WS-10 engine. It gives an important clue that the images shown were for interns / junior staff working on "assignments", thus putting the F-23 design to just an internal academic exercise for junior staff (just like the J-13 design is...)

Now, the problem I see is that Pak is either booting for an imminent war over Kashmir or it is not. If we assume Pak is booting for a showdown in Kashmir, then we may see the Azm being put on the backburner and J-10s bought as fast as possible.

If the J-10 comes to Pakistan, then the equations change. Azm could then become a single engined WS-10 / WS-15 fighter. If the J-10 doesn't come to Pakistan, we may see Azm being a twin engined fighter with engine commonality with future blocks of the JF-17.

If their is no imminent showdown planned over Kashmir, Pak will then not buy the J-10 and wait for the J-35 and fast-track Azm as a twin engined air superiority fighter.

 

[Cookie Monster]

For as long as Pakistan is under the FATF's spotlight, it won't be able to move the necessary financing or credit to fund a Typhoon purchase. The other constraint is France's probable unwillingness to permit a MBDA Meteor AAM sale to Pakistan. Otherwise, 24 Typhoons with Meteor AAMs and 75 F-16s would be a solid 'edge' (especially with 150-200 JF-17s in the background to carry most defensive duties).

But if we had that kind of cash available, I'd look for ways to guarantee our supply chain.

In other words, I'd see if we can get a good engine developed in Ukraine, and enter into a deep co-production and co-IP-ownership deal. I know they're iffy about giving ToT, but I'd exchange the R&D/IP we'd develop from AZM for their engines.

Sure, it isn't 100% equivalent, they may give up more, but I think more forthrightness on our end (e.g., sharing profits of 3rd party sales, helping them rebuild their air force, etc) would count.

I suspect the Ukrainians wanted a lot more control/benefits from the arrangement. One of the key strategic concerns Ukraine has is that no one's helping it with regards to Russia.

Either we generally lack the courage, or have tied into Russia ourselves. With Ukraine, every little thing they have is life-and-death for them, so we have to give them that respect to get any in-roads.

But if we go too far in helping them, Uncle Sam and Boris will knock on our doors and threaten us to to stop -- like a protection racket. I think only China was willing to go that far for Ukraine (by setting-up a jointly-owned business with Motor Sich).

It's perfectly fine for Ukraine to be protective of its tech...however industries such as jet engines...need a constant stream of funding to keep going. Motor Sich would need to sell engines(or other related tech) in order to continue enough profitability to be able to invest some back into R&D to stay competitive...or else 10-20 years down the line...they would be left far behind the competition...
...which will just feed the vicious cycle of not being able to sell...and not being able to make money to invest in R&D...and fall further behind the competition.

If u look at the operating income and net income of Motor Sich in 2019...it went negative...
...yes 1 year's loss doesn't make a trend...but Ukrainian economy and its manufacturing has been suffering. There were similar concerns regarding Oplot tank(deliveries to Thailand were slow...and as per PDF Pak liked Oplot's performance but due to those same concerns didn't go through with it).

For whatever reason...Ukrainian defense industry has been suffering. It would be perfect timing if Pak could reach some sort of an agreement(perhaps together with China) with Motor Sich. Ukraine too needs to realize that defense industry is like an engine that needs to keep running...or it doesn't take long for it to become obsolete...and allow others in...just enough so all can share in the benefits.

 

[JamD]

cutaway of YF-23, I hope PAC also has these images. View attachment 675459View attachment 675461View attachment 675462View attachment 675463View attachment 675464View attachment 675465

I found a high-res image (I have an even higher res but that cant be uploaded due to forum rules) that might be of interest to engineers here:

Comments:
1-The cross-sectional area (at Mach angles) plots for various Mach numbers are very close to "ideal" and this aircraft probably has very low supersonic drag.

2-The engine is almost entirely hidden from the frontal aspect:

3- There's a lot of space where tanks can be moved around to make space for electronics.

 

[PDF]

I mean if PAF can even replicate Y-23 without any changes, I will be surprised. Right now, we do not have the capability to build 5 Gen aircraft neither are we working enough to develop the competency fast enough. JBH

 

[JamD]

I mean if PAF can even replicate Y-23 without any changes, I will be surprised. Right now, we do not have the capability to build 5 Gen aircraft neither are we working enough to develop the competency fast enough. JBH

What you're saying is absolutely right. Changes would be inevitable. We don't have access to PW F119. This alone can result in massive airframe changes to accommodate the physical engine, and to accommodate for the different pressure recovery requirements leading to inlet redesign. We might not have advanced enough materials/manufacturing tech and might need to modify the structure accordingly. And we haven't even started to talk about the electronics/sensors.

To me it feels like there's 60% commitment to develop Azm. A lot of money is being thrown at the problem but not nearly as much is needed, and there's a lot of fumbling around with regards to basic tech development. Hopefully, this will self-correct. I am an optimist at heart (or at least used to be).

 

[JamD]

Azm's MALE UAV's wing jig: