SAC - FC-31 Grey Falcon Stealth aircraft for PAF : Updates & Debate

[applesauce]

I really like the K-FX design
View attachment 708515

Looks much simpler/cheaper than internal bay 5th gen.

simpler and cheaper for sure, but also much worse in terms of radar reflection

 

[Incog_nito]

J-31 is Tech demonstrator, it has been discussed on this forum and others. ADHD issue ?

DO you mean by the name?

 

[MIRauf]

DO you mean by the name?

Name and or Type, the current platform is a Tech demonstrator, still one beautiful / sleek looking bird. Will something concrete comes out of it ? only time will tell. Will J-35 be based off the J-31 platform ? so far just speculations that it will be.

"PS: Sorry, I didn't mean to write thesis on this, just couldn't pen it all down in Cliff Notes."

-- .. .-.

 

[Incog_nito]

So, PAF might be getting FC-35 in the coming years.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Pakistan will never get license production of RD-93. And even if it does in the unlikely case, the engine costs will go up significantly. Better to have an overhaul and repair facility instead.
Also, I don't think RD-93 is a good choice for an engine for a NGF. The only reason we have it for JF-17 is as it was the only choice for a low cost fighter. AZM's 5th gen fighter cant be one where we are pinching pennies or cutting corners (in the long run RD-93 might cost more than a western engine anyways). That is why I think we should really try for an option from Europe and EJ200 is a terrific engine if we can get it. I don't think the Chinese engines have the maturity either to have them be the powerplant for our top end fighter jet yet.

Another idea, albeit controversial and probably unrealistic, is to work with Ukraine in developing an RD-93MA-class engine.

Ukraine has an engine industry, albeit focused on 42kN class afterburning engines and high bypass turbines. But, they know a lot about the fundamentals, and have worked on the Klimov engines as long as anyone in terms of maintenance, repair and overhaul.

In theory, we can look at commissioning them to develop a decent 97 kN engine. However, they'll probably want to keep critical tech to themselves (it's an issue of survival for them), but sharing co-production with them is better than purely importing.

 

[Trailer23]

...is to work with Ukraine in developing an RD-93MA-class engine.

The Commander of the Ukrainian Air Force was in Pakistan last year.

I do wonder what these meetings are all about. I mean they speak of 'mutual interests' and throw words like 'strategic' every now and again, but I have yet to see or even hear about Companies like Antanov.

PAF should be working closely with Leonardo, Antanov and Embrear.

It feels like PAF has put all its eggs in one basket & labelled it 'AZM'.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Another idea, albeit controversial and probably unrealistic, is to work with Ukraine in developing an RD-93MA-class engine.

Ukraine has an engine industry, albeit focused on 42kN class afterburning engines and high bypass turbines. But, they know a lot about the fundamentals, and have worked on the Klimov engines as long as anyone in terms of maintenance, repair and overhaul.

In theory, we can look at commissioning them to develop a decent 97 kN engine. However, they'll probably want to keep critical tech to themselves (it's an issue of survival for them), but sharing co-production with them is better than purely importing.

I was meaning to reply back but I think this requires some thought or discussion. The latest news from Aero India that for me is the most worrisome is that they have now abandoned the Kaveri and are going to have Rolls Royce basically design and develop an engine for them to be used in the AMCA as well as LCA Mk 2. Not only that, RR will also give them technology to produce the engine at home. A similar bid for collaboration from France was apparently rejected due to cost. The video also made a point that GE414 will not be the powerplant for LCA Mk 2. (Cant seem to find which thread had that video now to link here).

That to me indicates two things ... first they are perhaps rightfully so divesting from the GE engine due to potential sanctions from the US due to their S400 purchase. And second, UK is more than willing to transfer the technology and develop a new engine for them. I can't imagine it being that different from what the Turks-UK cooperation would have entailed but clearly UK is a source of technology which the US specifically does not want to share with any potential competitors.

This engine will allow them immense technological leap as well as security and cost savings in the future and will become the backbone of their fleet and combat UAVs/loyal wingman. Things will be clearer by the end of the year but it does not bode well for us if we are planning on sticking with the RD-93. And unfortunately Ukraine is not going to be the source for an engine we need for the next say 50 years. India has the advantage of two decades of dabbling with the tech, and while Kaveri is a failure, setbacks teach you more than success. I still think we need to figure out a way to collaborate with the Brits on our future jet engines too.

Working with the Brits, and for argument sake joining in the efforts with the Turks could be the best way forward. Pakistan does not have the political clout, money or the local demand by itself. However, if we take TuAF and PAF together, then there is a huge fleet of aircraft that the Brits would be supplying to and keeping their own industry alive and profitable. I think it will be a win-win for all parties involved. Clearly, the IAF down the line has a requirement for a 300-400 hundred fighters at least that the new engine will power. PAF (Mirages + F-16s) and TuAF (F-16s +F-4s) combined have a similar, if not larger air component that needs to be replaced in the future.

Thoughts? @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @airomerix @SQ8 @Hodor @HRK @The Raven @Bilal Khan 777

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I was meaning to reply back but I think this requires some thought or discussion. The latest news from Aero India that for me is the most worrisome is that they have now abandoned the Kaveri and are going to have Rolls Royce basically design and develop an engine for them to be used in the AMCA as well as LCA Mk 2. Not only that, RR will also give them technology to produce the engine at home. A similar bid for collaboration from France was apparently rejected due to cost. The video also made a point that GE414 will not be the powerplant for LCA Mk 2. (Cant seem to find which thread had that video now to link here).

That to me indicates two things ... first they are perhaps rightfully so divesting from the GE engine due to potential sanctions from the US due to their S400 purchase. And second, UK is more than willing to transfer the technology and develop a new engine for them. I can't imagine it being that different from what the Turks-UK cooperation would have entailed but clearly UK is a source of technology which the US specifically does not want to share with any potential competitors.

This engine will allow them immense technological leap as well as security and cost savings in the future and will become the backbone of their fleet and combat UAVs/loyal wingman. Things will be clearer by the end of the year but it does not bode well for us if we are planning on sticking with the RD-93. And unfortunately Ukraine is not going to be the source for an engine we need for the next say 50 years. India has the advantage of two decades of dabbling with the tech, and while Kaveri is a failure, setbacks teach you more than success. I still think we need to figure out a way to collaborate with the Brits on our future jet engines too.

Working with the Brits, and for argument sake joining in the efforts with the Turks could be the best way forward. Pakistan does not have the political clout, money or the local demand by itself. However, if we take TuAF and PAF together, then there is a huge fleet of aircraft that the Brits would be supplying to and keeping their own industry alive and profitable. I think it will be a win-win for all parties involved. Clearly, the IAF down the line has a requirement for a 300-400 hundred fighters at least that the new engine will power. PAF (Mirages + F-16s) and TuAF (F-16s +F-4s) combined have a similar, if not larger air component that needs to be replaced in the future.

Thoughts? @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @airomerix @SQ8 @Hodor @HRK @The Raven @Bilal Khan 777

There's a fundamental issue here.

The Indians will say and 'plan' for a lot of things, and they'll attempt to take a crack at it. In a lot of cases, they'll fail, but at that failing point, they get a 'graceful exit' (e.g., UK's RR offering engine tech).

Our problem is that when we say, "let's make an engine," we get, "totally impossible, we can't do it, we must not do it, we'll be in Tejas-mode like India, blah, blah, blah, blah."

The net impact is that we develop zero expertise in the technology, and we have nothing to show or leverage with experienced parties. India has Kaveri, for example. Heck, Turkey has the TR Motor engine.

What do we have, besides Negative Naeems I mean? @JamD

 

[Indos]

I was meaning to reply back but I think this requires some thought or discussion. The latest news from Aero India that for me is the most worrisome is that they have now abandoned the Kaveri and are going to have Rolls Royce basically design and develop an engine for them to be used in the AMCA as well as LCA Mk 2. Not only that, RR will also give them technology to produce the engine at home. A similar bid for collaboration from France was apparently rejected due to cost. The video also made a point that GE414 will not be the powerplant for LCA Mk 2. (Cant seem to find which thread had that video now to link here).

That to me indicates two things ... first they are perhaps rightfully so divesting from the GE engine due to potential sanctions from the US due to their S400 purchase. And second, UK is more than willing to transfer the technology and develop a new engine for them. I can't imagine it being that different from what the Turks-UK cooperation would have entailed but clearly UK is a source of technology which the US specifically does not want to share with any potential competitors.

This engine will allow them immense technological leap as well as security and cost savings in the future and will become the backbone of their fleet and combat UAVs/loyal wingman. Things will be clearer by the end of the year but it does not bode well for us if we are planning on sticking with the RD-93. And unfortunately Ukraine is not going to be the source for an engine we need for the next say 50 years. India has the advantage of two decades of dabbling with the tech, and while Kaveri is a failure, setbacks teach you more than success. I still think we need to figure out a way to collaborate with the Brits on our future jet engines too.

Working with the Brits, and for argument sake joining in the efforts with the Turks could be the best way forward. Pakistan does not have the political clout, money or the local demand by itself. However, if we take TuAF and PAF together, then there is a huge fleet of aircraft that the Brits would be supplying to and keeping their own industry alive and profitable. I think it will be a win-win for all parties involved. Clearly, the IAF down the line has a requirement for a 300-400 hundred fighters at least that the new engine will power. PAF (Mirages + F-16s) and TuAF (F-16s +F-4s) combined have a similar, if not larger air component that needs to be replaced in the future.

Thoughts? @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @airomerix @SQ8 @Hodor @HRK @The Raven @Bilal Khan 777

Nope, they will use F414 for both Tejas MK2 and AMCA. The plan to collaborate with RR to develop engine is their wishlist only.

 

[GriffinsRule]

There's a fundamental issue here.

The Indians will say and 'plan' for a lot of things, and they'll attempt to take a crack at it. In a lot of cases, they'll fail, but at that failing point, they get a 'graceful exit' (e.g., UK's RR offering engine tech).

Our problem is that when we say, "let's make an engine," we get, "totally impossible, we can't do it, we must not do it, we'll be in Tejas-mode like India, blah, blah, blah, blah."

The net impact is that we develop zero expertise in the technology, and we have nothing to show or leverage with experienced parties. India has Kaveri, for example. Heck, Turkey has the TR Motor engine.

What do we have, besides Negative Naeems I mean? @JamD

I totally agree. Even with their failed attempts at SAMs and A-A missiles for example, they have eventually learned from their failures and are on the verge of producing a lot more capable missiles and more importantly, self-sustainment in the long run. However, they have had a lot of help recently from Israeli military complex, which has to be with a tactic nod from the US. But failure is nothing to be ashamed of and while it is fun to make fun of their programs, they have been attempting to indigenize in as many domains as possible.

Pakistan has had limited successes in our own weapons but we either failed to get projects started/funded or gave up whenever it was possible to buy from US or China. Its an effective short-term strategy for small countries, but Pakistan is not a small country and it can not afford to think in short-term goals.

If Brazil and South Africa could collaborate to make A-A missiles decades ago, I don't see why we can not do so now. We have been operating and manufacturing tactical drones for years now, so buying CH-4 or CH-5 does not make any sense to me. These solutions should have come from Pakistan as a natural progression of things even if we had to get the Chinese to supply us with the innards such as cameras/comms etc. We should not be buying complete systems from anyone where ever possible as a path forward.

These advances can really only come at a faster clip from private/public industry collaboration, which is what India realized and it is starting to bear them fruit now. We should try to replicate where they had success and where we can leverage Chinese help in advanced weapon development.

I don't think its late for Pakistan to start on new smarter/smaller weapons as technology is always in a flux and there are always advances happening. That means you can jump in during anytime and play catchup with the help of others.

Basically we should focus on weapons that will help us against Indian military in a future war. It might mean developing weapons that cater to those specific requirements, and might not be available in the market place even. For eg new loitering munitions that can be carried in larger quantities will definitely be the future in A-G roles, specially in a target rich environment of the subcontinent and will help negate the disadvantage of a smaller fighter like the JF-17. Same applies for decoys that can loiter and confuse the enemy air defenses etc.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

I totally agree. Even with their failed attempts at SAMs and A-A missiles for example, they have eventually learned from their failures and are on the verge of producing a lot more capable missiles and more importantly, self-sustainment in the long run. However, they have had a lot of help recently from Israeli military complex, which has to be with a tactic nod from the US. But failure is nothing to be ashamed of and while it is fun to make fun of their programs, they have been attempting to indigenize in as many domains as possible.

Pakistan has had limited successes in our own weapons but we either failed to get projects started/funded or gave up whenever it was possible to buy from US or China. Its an effective short-term strategy for small countries, but Pakistan is not a small country and it can not afford to think in short-term goals.

If Brazil and South Africa could collaborate to make A-A missiles decades ago, I don't see why we can not do so now. We have been operating and manufacturing tactical drones for years now, so buying CH-4 or CH-5 does not make any sense to me. These solutions should have come from Pakistan as a natural progression of things even if we had to get the Chinese to supply us with the innards such as cameras/comms etc. We should not be buying complete systems from anyone where ever possible as a path forward.

These advances can really only come at a faster clip from private/public industry collaboration, which is what India realized and it is starting to bear them fruit now. We should try to replicate where they had success and where we can leverage Chinese help in advanced weapon development.

I don't think its late for Pakistan to start on new smarter/smaller weapons as technology is always in a flux and there are always advances happening. That means you can jump in during anytime and play catchup with the help of others.

Basically we should focus on weapons that will help us against Indian military in a future war. It might mean developing weapons that cater to those specific requirements, and might not be available in the market place even. For eg new loitering munitions that can be carried in larger quantities will definitely be the future in A-G roles, specially in a target rich environment of the subcontinent and will help negate the disadvantage of a smaller fighter like the JF-17. Same applies for decoys that can loiter and confuse the enemy air defenses etc.

I agree.

If we go around announcing programs like India, some might accuse of vaporware, but vapor is matter too. I mean, we can undertake R&D in these areas and develop varying levels of research, IP, and even demonstrators. If anything, you can at least bring some value to the table with potential partners.

Obviously, if we restrict the domestic market to source domestically (including high-tech domains), then there's incentive for the private industry to invest and support the R&D base.

 

[MastanKhan]

There's a fundamental issue here.

The Indians will say and 'plan' for a lot of things, and they'll attempt to take a crack at it. In a lot of cases, they'll fail, but at that failing point, they get a 'graceful exit' (e.g., UK's RR offering engine tech).

Our problem is that when we say, "let's make an engine," we get, "totally impossible, we can't do it, we must not do it, we'll be in Tejas-mode like India, blah, blah, blah, blah."

The net impact is that we develop zero expertise in the technology, and we have nothing to show or leverage with experienced parties. India has Kaveri, for example. Heck, Turkey has the TR Motor engine.

What do we have, besides Negative Naeems I mean? @JamD

Hi,

The indians have lived under slavery for close to a 1000 years---while we have had ample experience in manufacturing weapons during those times---.

It is just a matter of time when the indians will break that unseen threshold---.

So---let's not get cocky over issues.

People don't understand the monstrosity that is living behind science---. The enemy is always a breakthrough away from becoming invincible---.

 

[HRK]

The latest news from Aero India that for me is the most worrisome is that they have now abandoned the Kaveri and are going to have Rolls Royce basically design and develop an engine for them to be used in the AMCA as well as LCA Mk 2. Not only that, RR will also give them technology to produce the engine at home. A similar bid for collaboration from France was apparently rejected due to cost. The video also made a point that GE414 will not be the powerplant for LCA Mk 2. (Cant seem to find which thread had that video now to link here).

there no official announcement fro RR, so wait for it; but for general discussion yes engine development is the most important venture of aerospace Industry of any country could take.

 

[GriffinsRule]

there no official announcement fro RR, so wait for it; but for general discussion yes engine development is the most important venture of aerospace Industry of any country could take.

This is from last summer and it spells it out more or less. Its going to be an advanced engine which will propel Indian aviation industry ahead by a few decades. Its an Indian source thats quotes RR spokes person but if the Indian government has given it the green light, it will be in the news sooner or later.

Detail Report: DRDO-Rolls Royce Jv for 110 kN Jet engine soon: Rolls Royce India – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

This venture has clearly been thought about and pursued to some extent for a few years at least. Perhaps even since the Jag upgrade was envisioned and the latest joint venture is an offshoot of that Darin upgrade program.

Co-creating the future of combat

Co-creating the future of combat

www.rolls-royce.com

"The government can invest in programmes where companies can participate and work together to co-create products and solutions. For example, in defence, when there is co-creation of an aircraft technology, then it could be a joint IP between governments. Whether it is then manufactured here in India or elsewhere, India could be a co-owner of that IP and that is what makes this a powerful proposition for the future of combat."

 

[araz]

There's a fundamental issue here.

The Indians will say and 'plan' for a lot of things, and they'll attempt to take a crack at it. In a lot of cases, they'll fail, but at that failing point, they get a 'graceful exit' (e.g., UK's RR offering engine tech).

Our problem is that when we say, "let's make an engine," we get, "totally impossible, we can't do it, we must not do it, we'll be in Tejas-mode like India, blah, blah, blah, blah."

The net impact is that we develop zero expertise in the technology, and we have nothing to show or leverage with experienced parties. India has Kaveri, for example. Heck, Turkey has the TR Motor engine.

What do we have, besides Negative Naeems I mean? @JamD

The problem is perrineal and long standing. No one is willing to spend money to acquire a special steel plant which would be the basis of creating the alloys needed to create engines. Then we start small and manufacturing motor bike and car-engines to Turbines. That will open doors for other technologies which will result in the AC engine that we want. The real question has always been whether the means justify the end, ie the specialized alloys plant and research into metallurgy equates to engine production. I dont know if anyone has done the maths but-would love to know the logic behind and the sheer investment required to produce the end result. Even if we could do sim0le turbines for power generation it would have been helpful but compared to India we are starting 20 years behind. Then what is the need and what is the-demand.
Lastly Turkey and collaboration with is a very plausible solution as we are more or less at a stage to be able to share technological-advances but for us-the finances remain a problem.
A