Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 514
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby pralay » 25 Apr 2019 08:07

chola wrote:We are forced to make do with self made models for Tejas:

If someone can provide me 3D designs of our systems(only exterior shapes), I am interested in bringing out set of indigenous systems, also if anyone is willing to join hands in such adventure, I will be happy. If anyone willing , kindly send me PM or send an yeemail at YesAyeYemEyeEyeAreDeeYes @gmail.com

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 25 Apr 2019 15:20

Karan M wrote:In fact, seeing the specifications of the Chinese radars, and the ZDK-03, KLJ-7 related events on the 27th of Feb show, its fair to say the manner in which China has frittered money across multiple programs etc ends up costing them the kind of focused progress that would have been otherwise possible with a more limited set of programs.


Karan ji, if they went the traditional commie route they would have spent even more money and ended up with even less performance had they just one program. That had always been the weakness of the soviet system versus the Western market place. Cheen is aping the US system.

I actually don't think they spent more money (as in specific program directed money for all of these radars.)

The fact they have multiple firms making airborne AESA -- and we know from the experience of their drone industry that there are always others who can enter the race - actually means they are getting prototypes of products being pitched to the military without funding.

The LETRI air cooled model (LKF601E) is most likely an unfunded product versus the NRIET KLJ-7A which is a follow-on to the current Bandar KLJ-7. In fact, the KLJ-7A might not be funded by the PLA either and is only an export product. The sanctioned AESA sets on the J-20/-16/-10C are different from these and probably from each other. So domestically there are many options for Cheen and possibly for the PAF. (Many being a relative term since even the US has two main airborne suppliers in Northrup and Raytheon.)

On the UK and Cheen:
https://scmp.com/news/china/society/article/2171242/britain-sell-china-unlimited-amount-military-radar-equipment

On Israel? This is from a day ago. The Israelis never left the chini market.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/israels-support-chinese-military-could-harm-united-states-53872

IMHO the PAF has options for AESA because the chini system resembles the US one with multiple firms/agencies hawking models on their own.

The effectiveness of their AESA sets can be argued but not the fact that they have them and have them in various varieties on established PLA aircraft and in export forms.
Last edited by chola on 25 Apr 2019 15:30, edited 1 time in total.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 25 Apr 2019 15:29

ramana wrote:Folks i was asked a question. How many combat squadrons PAF has now?


I posted this a little bit back:

chola wrote:Paki fighter squadrons. Many still flying ancient Mirages and MiG-21 clones.
Image

CCS is Combat Commander School squadron that trains a particular type:

Sky Bolts - Mirage
Fierce Dragons - Blunder
Dashings - F-7
Aggressors - F-16

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 25 Apr 2019 16:00

pralay wrote:
chola wrote:We are forced to make do with self made models for Tejas:

If someone can provide me 3D designs of our systems(only exterior shapes), I am interested in bringing out set of indigenous systems, also if anyone is willing to join hands in such adventure, I will be happy. If anyone willing , kindly send me PM or send an yeemail at YesAyeYemEyeEyeAreDeeYes @gmail.com


Pralay ji, that would be fantastic!

Please look at this:
https://grabcad.com/library/lca-tejas-navy-1

This is perhaps the best 3D model I've seen. You should contact the young man who built it.

Image
Image

pralay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 514
Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby pralay » 25 Apr 2019 20:34

chola wrote:Please look at this:
https://grabcad.com/library/lca-tejas-navy-1

Thank you, I am looking in the design, even though it needs many modifications, it will be very very helpful starting point.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 04 May 2019 04:06

chola wrote:Karan ji, if they went the traditional commie route they would have spent even more money and ended up with even less performance had they just one program. That had always been the weakness of the soviet system versus the Western market place. Cheen is aping the US system.

I actually don't think they spent more money (as in specific program directed money for all of these radars.)

The fact they have multiple firms making airborne AESA -- and we know from the experience of their drone industry that there are always others who can enter the race - actually means they are getting prototypes of products being pitched to the military without funding.


You are just repeating the same thing again. Their drone industry is nowhere comparable to making radars. Its not the same. Please understand how complex and expensive making radars is, especially airborne ones, as versus just going to a field and launching drone designs to experiment.

You also don't understand the depth of competence in the Soviet system which the PRC has copied, and are disparaging it without understanding how technically proficient the Soviet system was. NIIP and Phazatron were the 2 primary Soviet designers, with their manufacturers & suppliers being shared amongst them. NIIP is part & parcel of the Almaz Antey group which to this date makes some of the leading SAM systems in the world. And in recent years, to avoid duplication of efforts, KRET is the umbrella defence avionics organization under which all these firms now operate. And it was Phazatron which supplanted Elta in providing technology transfers to China for its airborne radars.

Hence, it makes absolute sense why PRC copied the Russian system with 2 labs and yet, even the Russians realize the amount of waste they had by duplicating efforts in 2 labs, once the Soviet Union collapsed and funding for multiple programs dried out and are now forcing standardization. Zhuk MSE vs N011, Zhuk MSFE vs Bars, then Irbis. Multiple AESA designs at Phaza none of which enter service (but design gets transferred to PRC). Phaza is to NIIP what LETRI is to NRIET.

The LETRI air cooled model (LKF601E) is most likely an unfunded product versus the NRIET KLJ-7A which is a follow-on to the current Bandar KLJ-7. In fact, the KLJ-7A might not be funded by the PLA either and is only an export product. The sanctioned AESA sets on the J-20/-16/-10C are different from these and probably from each other. So domestically there are many options for Cheen and possibly for the PAF. (Many being a relative term since even the US has two main airborne suppliers in Northrup and Raytheon.)


Air cooled is a fancy way of saying, here's a radar which may perform worse but at least you don't have to fit in expensive and heavy cooling equipment. PS: NRIET/LETRI are the manufacturer of the entire fighter radar line up for the PLAAF. And no, domestically there are *not* many options for these fighters, only 2 designers.



If this gets complex, the US will likely move to block it. At this moment its most likely component suppliers given the license after they proved the Russians were providing similar gear and it would be stupid of the UK to miss out on the deal.


Its fairly obvious that the PRC worldview is very much shaped by taking what other's do and improving upon it, to get things done "quickly". This is the reverse of the Indian indigenization fetish, wherein we have to prove we can do everything on our own.


Cao Yunhe, an award-winning military radar scientist at Xidian University in Xian, capital of northwest China’s Shaanxi province, said the export licence was good news for China’s military strength and radar research.

“If they are willing to sell we are willing to buy,” he said. “We want to know how their systems operate. It will help us improve our own design,” he said.

However, it was unlikely the technology and equipment being sold by Britain would be its most advanced.

“There will always be some restrictions. If not on quantity, then on quality,” he said.


Award winner is all too eager to copy other folks work.. yet to see a single desi scientist jumping up and down over Su-30 TOT gasping at how copying Russian stuff would help desi MMR. And is ok with lesser quality gear too..

..and confirmed by..

Wang Tong, who is also from Xidian University and works on radar systems for China’s military aircraft and satellites, said the exchanges between Chinese and British experts would not go “too deep”.

Britain shares a lot of intelligence with the US, so China could not possibly allow British experts to get directly involved in its military radar programmes, he said,

“Sharing information about models and specifications is strictly prohibited. I believe both sides are fully aware of the consequences,” Wang said.


We have American and British guys visit and provide general information, they also get awards etc. US/Brit suppliers also supply us many subsystems for prototypes.

At the end we have to do the heavy lifting, period.

The PRC approach has been to take other peoples designs & instead of working things out from first principles, take what works and then try to improve it for rapid gains.

And this approach can flop or cause severe issues if the external TOT is not easy to master OR has growth limitations.

The Russians themselves ditched the Gen1 AESA designs at Phazatron and moved to newer architectures.

The real power behind the Chinese FCR throne is Phazatron. The initial Chinese FCRs (variants of which made their way to the Flankers) were virtual replicas of Phazatron prototypes and I had posted an interview from the head of Phazatron who was happy his organization was supplying components and designs en masse to China.

That was Phase1 of the Chinese FCR program and ended up giving them FCRs that went on the J-10, the various Flanker variants.

Phase 2 was to move to AESA. Again, a Ukrainian firm gave them the design & production assistance for their first large Naval AESA (with whatever they had at the time) & the Israelis helped them with manufacturing AESA modules with reliability for their AWACS programs. Before assistance could get to the critical X-Band area, the US had Israel pull the plug.

The Russians were themselves behind the compact AESA game but were all too eager to share what they had from Phazatron to keep that agency going. The initial FGA-29 tech ended up with Russia.

Russia was ok with this as its primary radar house was now NIIP and its Irbis-E was also made available later, once the Byelka AESA program for the PAK-FA picked up.

Today, PRC are struggling with the fighter AESAs. Instructive. This just shows how their approach has been to cobble together whatever they could spread across multiple programs, rather than a single methodical approach driven by one lab working from first principles.



This article quotes events which have occurred from quite a long back & is upset the Israelis continue to show some amount of deference to the PRC. No evidence of radar transfers or tech transfers. It doesn't in anyway state that the Israelis never left the Chini market. If they hadn't left, there would be no space for the Russians.

Heck, the initial PRC AESA' FCRs were virtual architectural clones of the Phazatron Zhuk AE FGA-29 which was languishing as NIIP was chosen to supply the PAK-FA radar.

IMHO the PAF has options for AESA because the chini system resembles the US one with multiple firms/agencies hawking models on their own.

The effectiveness of their AESA sets can be argued but not the fact that they have them and have them in various varieties on established PLA aircraft and in export forms.


You are just repeating the same things again & again, with zero evidence that for the airborne segment, there are any other options beyond the first 2, NRIET and LETRI.

You have come to a conclusion the Chini system resembles the US one to a T, and are force fitting the facts to fit the narrative, which makes for a flawed analysis. Nor is there any evidence the Chinese AESAs are available in quantity on their domestic birds. Fuzzy pics/staged PR are a PRC specialty.

And, here as I had expected above, PRC's public song and dance apart, here is the reality noted in the latest submission of the USG to the Senate etc.

the J-20 may have begun active service in small numbers, possibly with a testing and training unit. A modified FC-31 prototype made its first flight in late December 2016, although production is unlikely to begin until at least 2019. China is having difficulty with the engines and radars for these aircraft.


The entire USG submission is about playing up the Red China threat to get more funds. And yet, this bit was included. Says it all, really.

JF-17 RWR, not Chinese, replaced with Indra (Spain's) RWR. Why? Even India had to struggle a lot with RWRs, we are still mastering them. Look simple, but for supersonic fighters, anything but. And clearly PRC is in the same boat.
For entire avionics kit, PAF did everything it could to replace RWR/EW/Radar/SD-10 with French RC-400/EW/RWR/Mica/IRST. India scuppered this deal with its own deal for expensive Mirage 2000 upgrades. One of our rare diplomatic successes re: military gear which we don't advertise for obvious reasons. Again, the bigger reason is why did PAF prefer a "less powerful" radar/missile etc combination than what it was getting from PRC?
The answers are obvious. PAF Chief went to international airpower conference (where he made a presentation on PAF using US Goodrich pods, FLIR on C-130 as BDA tools for F-16 PGM strikes) and complained about Indian interference in his procurement. Very angry, lol.

It added up then, and clearly still remains an issue.

I am glad PRC remains stuck with some of its own pork barrel inefficiencies. These structural issues are not easy to change, e,g. India with OFB, especially in a country like PRC with complex political ties of patronage and power.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 04 May 2019 04:51

^^^ Karan ji, I appreciate the in-depth reply very much! Learned many things.

I think you are correct in that I see the chinis copying the US to the tee and then cherry pick facts to fit into that framework. Basically crafting my analysis around a pre-formulated hypothesis, a major no-no in my proper job. lol

I do think they copy the US when ever possible (look at the number of students in the USA versus the rest of the world) but they still have a soviet style framework too.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 04 May 2019 04:53

About the private sector Chinese drones...
https://www.janes.com/article/87680/us- ... -in-africa

US general dismisses Chinese kit in Africa
04 April 2019

The Chinese military equipment being acquired by African countries is not of a high quality, according to the US Army general nominated as the next commander of the US military's Africa Command (AFRICOM).

"Chinese engagement has marginally improved some African militaries through military equipment sales and limited training, although endemic quality concerns probably make any improvements short-lived," General Stephen Townsend said in written answers to questions submitted before a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee on 2 April.

He gave one example, saying the Chinese unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that Nigeria acquired to improve its counter-terrorism capabilities are used infrequently due to their "poor quality".


Nigeria's acquisition of armed CH-3 UAVs was revealed in January 2015 when photographs of one that had crashed with its weapons emerged on social media.

"Low cost and short delivery timelines entice African partners to purchase Chinese equipment but these purchases frequently do not address the underlying military need, complicating US security force assistance [to African countries]," Gen Townsend added.


Ask anyone in the tech. industry who worked with PRC competitors head to head, and unless & until they had significant western/proven suppliers in their ecosystem, tech buy-outs etc, they may "look the same" but aren't.

The PRC's made tons of money out of the US's stupidity in arriving late to the market & its ITAR, State Dept, driven BS. But doesn't mean that's automatically translated into the PRC suddenly becoming a leader in terms of efficacy or quality either.

Baseline requirements for basic UAS are not met by many PRC drones. Yet the Chinese add even more bombs, missiles on them and hawk them as weaponized systems. And African, Middle East countries buy

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 04 May 2019 05:08

chola wrote:^^^ Karan ji, I appreciate the in-depth reply very much! Learned many things.

I think you are correct in that I see the chinis copying the US to the tee and then cherry pick facts to fit into that framework. Basically crafting my analysis around a pre-formulated hypothesis, a major no-no in my proper job. lol

I do think they copy the US when ever possible (look at the number of students in the USA versus the rest of the world) but they still have a soviet style framework too.


Thanks, I don't mean to disparage your passion. All I am pointing out is that China is a very complex and political country where the Central Party Leadership *has* to ensure a very large MIC is kept alive to keep multiple power centers happy. I had once done an analysis of Euro/US civilian TOT to China in aerospace. What boggled my mind was the number of factories in all sorts of remote PRC cities still "active" producing dead-end designs of transports, trainers, obsolete MiG knockoffs and all of these factories were getting some handful of TOT from these Euro/US firms who were so greedy for Chinese money, they were willing to hand off some real crown jewels (e.g. wing manufacturing).

You can see the parallels in HAL being made to start a factory in Korwa, in Koraput, OFB setting up a factory in Nalanda for BMCS .. and PRC setup was 10x larger in size. Huge number of employees, large factories. All this flies in the face of western/capitalistic models of industry clusters driven by talent, geography, academic support.. not isolated factory towns.

So..
The Chinese could have leveraged all that TOT much much better if they had concentrated their resources, but they didn't and couldn't.
That same year a trade mag carried a very detailed inside look into the PRC industry (they got some special access). Confirmed what I had thought (OFB redux) and also how the entire structure ran. Basically, a lot of these factories were receiving funds and largesse from Beijing as baksheesh and did their own thing. One Factory head laughed and quoted an old saying "mountains are tall and Beijing is far away" to explain how he did not have to worry about too much accountability. This was ~ 2011.

No doubt PRC has made huge strides in semicon manufacturing, private firms dime a dozen, and are now making electronics components to the nth level, but they still have some severe structural problems that they have not and will not (in all likelihood) overcome. Unlike the dog eat dog, competition above all, western model. Both India & PRC have complex local needs (employment and perception driven) which ensure the survival of inefficient structures. Note, Modi can't shut down OFB, so he is bypassing them in areas where he feels they are not delivering, and is still giving them a chance in Dhanush, Sarang etc.

PRC DPSU structure is 10x our size. Replacing it, supplanting it, and provoking labor unrest will be the last thing any PRC satrap will want.

Also explains why PRC makes so many fighters which by our standards, just aren't worth the effort. I mean, why would you make a J-10 in the hundreds which was likely not even as good as the PAF's original Block 15/20 F-16s? The answer lies in part in keeping these factories humming. Also explains why they must overproduce every darn thing made in their factories from cement to steel.
Of course, numbers have a quality of their own, but from the viewpoint of a western style "efficient use of capital resources" model, its very very ineffective.

If we replicate this model, we will go bankrupt. The HAL Rafale TOT deal, i think reflects our realization that even we have moved away from this "social service" mindset re: manufacturing.

We must spend more, manufacture more (what PRC is doing right), but also involve the private sector more (and move away from the PRC style setup of having Shenyang and CATIC alone mass produce fighters). But of course, will require ringfencing and laws for long term indian ownership.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 04 May 2019 13:51

^^^ Agree, Karan ji, that Cheen is a complex, paradoxical nation with both Soviet and Western elements.

But here is my take. Mind you, I am free market biased.

To me, the most interesting fact is that Cheen should have any Western elements (mainly the East Asian form of Western -- Japanese, Taiwanese, SoKorean.) It is after all, a nominally commie state. This one fact alone makes it worth looking into unlike say North Korea.

From the economic aspect, their growth (which had been nothing short of spectacular) had been powered by the private sector involvement in their export engine which in turn led to a massive consumption market in white goods, electronics and entertainment. Without it, they would be at the same GDP we are today and we would probably not talk about them in the same manner.

I think their private sector bleeds into their MIC. That philosophy is different from the ponderous one of PSUs and allows quick reaction to market opportunities. It doesn't matter if they cannot match Khan's drones, for example. They couldn't match Khan's in their white goods exports either. But cheap and "good enough" had always been their MO in the civilian manufacturing base too. And we've seen where that philosophy taken them. Selling a product also creates a positive feedback loop of sales --> investment --> refinement/new products.

Now, I followed the J-10 since I was beating it like a red-headed stepchild back two decades when it was a rival of the LCA. It was a dangerous plane with multiple crashes during its prototype stage. It surprised me as it grew into a frontline aircraft with mark after mark.

But I see no reason why they wouldn't have built it in the hundreds just like we should (and, now, would) the Tejas. It might not match the F-Solah or M2K or even the MiG-29 or any number of gora AC. But it is theirs and in order to build a MIC like the goras you have to support it like they do.

I've always said our access to the best on market of both the West and the Russians is both a boon and a bane. On the one hand, we have far better equipment should we go to war with Cheen at this given moment. But it also puts our MIC at a disadvantage because our military will expect top flight equipment in quality and quantity our industrial can't produce yet -- unless we give it the billions now allocated to phoreners and fund its capital investment.

Cheen had gone the other route and went manufacturing at whatever cost to its military warfighting capability. It doesn't go to war and the large and growing military even with cheap arms discourage chances of anyone wanting to fight it. If no war happens, then their MIC becomes their main form of "military" competition. That would include the export market and because their military is made to support the MIC, they have a certain advantage in the marketing. Remember, Japan and South Korea made their public buy inferior domestic cars until their industries grew into worldbeaters.

Over time, like anything Cheen or anyone else selling to the market are forced to do, they will have to create better and more choices for their customers and that is where the pakis will benefit.

I would like to see us be sellers too and not just the world's biggest buyers. That's why I harp on the private sector so much. Why we couldn't have cornered the hobby drones market and then attacked the Middle Eastern UCAV one was not because of technology level but because of a difference in philosophy and in flexibility that comes with not having a proper private sector in defense. It is ironic because Cheen is communist and we are not.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1148
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby rkhanna » 04 May 2019 14:54

chola wrote:^^^ Agree, Karan ji, that Cheen is a complex, paradoxical nation with both Soviet and Western elements.

But here is my take. Mind you, I am free market biased.

To me, the most interesting fact is that Cheen should have any Western elements (mainly the East Asian form of Western -- Japanese, Taiwanese, SoKorean.) It is after all, a nominally commie state. This one fact alone makes it worth looking into unlike say North Korea.

From the economic aspect, their growth (which had been nothing short of spectacular) had been powered by the private sector involvement in their export engine which in turn led to a massive consumption market in white goods, electronics and entertainment. Without it, they would be at the same GDP we are today and we would probably not talk about them in the same manner.

.........................er private sector in defense. It is ironic because Cheen is communist and we are not.


Just want to add one thing.

Alot of Chinese "Elephant" Companies like Hwuaei / Alibaba / Tencent / SMIC were founded with direct or indirect backing of the Politburo - Sons/Relatives of Politburo/PLA Members were founders and the shareholding and sources of capital has almost always come from the state. ( I worked in IB with exposure to the APAC region and have a certain amount of experience dealing with their (specially tech)companies. )

These "Private" companies were derisked of Capital raising risk and market risk by the Politburo giving them captive Markets domestically (keeping foriegn players out and bullying out any other domestic free enterprise players) - They then used the Large Chinese Dispora (with rising national pride) across ASEAN and other parts of the world to expand their Markets to gain respectability.

A number of Political Risk analysis we used to do would essentially project these companies as nothing but extended arms of the PLA/PRC.

These companies (like Huawei) use the Chinese Foriegn Minstry to do effective negotiations to win foreign contracts, Use Chinese Banks as bottomless cash sources for WC requirements, etc.

While this model has been incredible to propel China to its current highs, its hardly sustainable.

PS - Comment on Chinese consumer Industry/market growth -

As China Opened up in the 80s it gave rise to a very rapid and rising middle class (though a majority of them are/were party workers) -

1 & 2 Generations later you now have a unique situation in China Due to the one Child Policy you have 1 Child now Inheriting decent amounts of assets from 2 Sets of Grand Parents - This has created an unprecedented consumer boom in the economy over the past 10/15 years - Which further promted Chinese Infra developers and Banks to print notes to build "ghost cities" anticipating this trend to continue ( due to a still low base effect as there is still a vast number of poor in China).

this COUPLED with the massive flood of black money flowing in from HK to the Mainland post unification created a Temporary Consumer Bubble. And is simply NOT sustainable. Black money now goes to the west (London, NY, SF, Vancouver) and given the demographic challenges - not enough women to marry, aging population etc - even the 'inheritance boom' is starting to slow.

All this + The stupidity of OBOR is leaving massive massive stress on their banking system.

I predict that going forward Chinese support for the Pakistanis is going to be alot more guarded and with alot more "Collateral" from the Pakis.

(Mods feel free to delete / edit since a bunch is OT)

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 04 May 2019 15:39

rkhanna wrote:
Which further promted Chinese Infra developers and Banks to print notes to build "ghost cities" anticipating this trend to continue ( due to a still low base effect as there is still a vast number of poor in China).



The normal poor nation (which Cheen was even until 1980) cannot raise enough capital or print enough paper without going into hyperinflation to build a SINGLE desperately needed modern city that can generate returns, forget the dozens of "ghost" cities that Cheen could produce that currently can't.

That is why poor nations are poor. They simply cannot raise or print capital even for needed infrastructure. But Cheen broke that mode and by incredulous margins too. When people say "hah, they are wasting trillions by building ghosts cities", Wall Streeters ask how the hell they were able to accumulate those trillions to waste. That is the far bigger story. You can always deal with efficiency later. Being efficient with 1 crore rupees still leaves you far worse than the guy who wastes 500 crores but can produce 1000.

It certainly wasn't communist ideals that allowed Cheen to break the poor mode or else the USSR would still be here and North Korea would be as wealthy as Cheen. It was their private sector participating in the export market and then their own consumer market. Without it, it is doubtful that Cheen would have much to offer Pakistan today.

But you are right, we are way off topic.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66591
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 04 May 2019 16:31

Cheen jungle capitalist slash and burn model now works in quick 3-5 year cycles

Eg a raft of cycle renting startups got funded , became unicorns and now are dying fast unable to turn profit

But this is only consumer sector

Their high tech stem investments and expansion of labs and univ sysem is the real play for next phase

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 05 May 2019 01:12

Chola,
I agree private sector bleeds into PSUs in PRC. But unlike India, even the Pvt sector in PRC is basically quasi public in all but name. Funded and led by PRC's elite party guys. I doubt that's good for their MOD, negotiating power to extract quality/performance is reduced.

Also about mass manufacture. Can you imagine the threat PRC would have been if instead of making 400 J-10s of low grade marks, they had saved the funds, and made only 100, and used the money finally to order 200 J-10s of the best quality? And saved the money making dozens of near worthless obsolescent platforms and poured that into a select few modern ones. They would have been a much much greater threat.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 05 May 2019 01:14

The levels to which US monitors its equipment usage and also prevents it from going to Cheen

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... -ties.html

Suspicious of stolen technology, U.S. suspends weapon exports to S.Korea
Posted on : Nov.21,2011 12:50 KST Modified on : Nov.21,2011 12:50 KST

Analysts say the suspicions follow other claims of stolen technology
The “Tiger Eyes” sensor suite installed on the F-15K No. 3, is highlighted by the red circle, and visible in an airport hanger in Seoul. (Photo by Lee Jung-a)

By Lee Soon-hyuk 
 
Following the war of nerves between South Korea and the United States over the unauthorized dismantling of “Tiger Eyes,” a sensor suite installed on the F-15K, in August and September, the controversy over stealing defense industry technology has recently been spreading to other weapons. The Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) and others are officially playing down the importance of the issue, but there are signs the fallout may grow, with the United States suspending the export of strategic weaponry to South Korea.

Controversy over technology theft

U.S. suspicions that South Korea was stealing defense technology began with an incident involving the breaking of seals around the F-15K’s “Tiger Eyes” sensor suite. Installed under the fuselage of the F-15K, these sensors help to accurately bomb targets even at night and in poor weather.

In August, the United States sent an investigation team led by a deputy undersecretary of state to South Korea, where they pressed Air Force officials - then in the middle of the Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercise - about whether they had taken apart the Tiger Eyes without authorization. The Air Force responded that the seals on the Tiger Eyes had been damaged when they were installed on the aircraft. In September, a joint South Korea-U.S. investigation team was formed, but DAPA recently explained that the team’s investigation was unable to find signs that the part had been disassembled. According to a source, however, South Korea demanded the United States produce evidence that they had illicitly examined the device, but the U.S. did not, saying that to do so could reveal an informant. The source said that the United States was not convinced by South Korea’s explanation, and that both governments appear to have reached different conclusions.


Some analysts also claim that this is about more than just the Tiger Eyes, and that complaints from the U.S. government had been accumulating. A typical example is the ALQ-200, an external radar jammer manufactured by LIG Nex1. The Agency for Defense Development (ADD) has promoted the ALQ-200, which, when attached to the underside of an aircraft, detects radar waves coming from enemy missiles and scrambles them, as its own technology, but the United States suspects the technology was pirated. In particular, the U.S. was reportedly shocked when South Korea pushed to export the technology to Pakistan, where it might be installed on Chinese-made fighters, and plans to export the jammer were canceled.


Stopping strategic weapons exports to South Korea

After returning to the United States, the investigation team that had looked into the Tiger Eyes suspicions reported to the White House and Congress, resulting in the suspension of export of strategic weapons to South Korea. A typical example was Congress’s application of the brakes to the export of the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle, which South Korea has been discussing adopting since the Roh Moo-hyun administration.

Local defense industries, for whom weapons development itself becomes difficult if key parts cannot be imported from the United States, also went into a state of emergency. Talk has spread within and outside of the military of one firm that sent high-ranking executives to the United States to beg in vain for the United States to allow it to export one of its products with U.S. technology.

In addition, the U.S. State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) has reportedly decided recently to investigate suspicions of technology piracy in major weapon systems South Korea that has been promoting as developed using indigenous technology. Accordingly, the U.S. Embassy is currently investigating. The fire controls of the K1A1 tank, which, along with the ALQ-200, had previously been a matter of controversy, the MLRS system and the Cheong Sangeo and Hong Sangeo torpedoes are said to be major targets of the investigation.

D&D Focus Editor in Chief Kim Jong-dae, who first reported on the Tiger Eyes controversy in Defense 21, an online webzine on military matters run by the Hankyoreh, said the situation was brought on by a combination of the U.S. keynote of selling weapons to Korea but not transferring technology, and the DAPA’s and ADD’s lax and easy-going attitudes. He expressed concern about the after-effects, such as South Korea’s bargaining power dropping greatly during next year’s “F-X” project to adopt a next-generation fighter.

Meanwhile, regarding the U.S. government’s accurate grasp of the breaking of the Tiger Eyes seals, the existence of a U.S. informant has also become a matter of controversy. The Defense Security Command and NIS have reportedly begun trying to uncover the informant.

  

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7500
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Rakesh » 07 May 2019 03:26

Hurting from India's strikes in Balakot, Pakistan turns to Russia for anti-aircraft missile system
https://zeenews.india.com/india/hurting ... 00117.html

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7460
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Peregrine » 07 May 2019 03:46

Fully Posted on the Terroristani Thread

Army to induct 460 Russian-origin tanks to add muscle on Pak front

Image

Pakistan is also discussing a deal with Russia for acquiring 360 T-90 tanks
Cheers Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 07 May 2019 04:04

Pakistan is also buying Su35s and wants a nuclear sub as well. So what else is new from Beggaristans fevered dreams.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1846
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Bart S » 07 May 2019 05:07

That, and the Russians (and their local arms dalals) have been know to spread such rumours in the hope of influencing an Indian decision.

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1845
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Vips » 07 May 2019 18:28

Gaur farmaiye from 23:50 onwards.... :rotfl:



Pakistan government imposed a levy on petroleum products for making funds available for "modernising of refineries". It was supposed to be for 3 years only but has been collected now for 18 Years and is still continuing. There is no separate clarification or accountability for the amount/funds collected and how/where it is being used. When Imran was in the opposition he made noise about it and as soon as he was (s)elected he was given a briefing about this. The person was told to contact the petroleum minister the next day in his office. The next day this person was made to wait for the minister and was given just a minute to give his documents after which no acton has been taken.....

We have our answer on how the Paki defence forces are thriving and are able to increase their funds allocation in a country with decreasing exports and decreasing Real GDP situation.

The levies on petroleum products and power consumption is collecting more then 60 Billion rupees and no administration (Zardari,Sharief and Imran) has control on its use. The fund is most likely being collected for and used by the Pakistani defence forces without any oversight and accountability.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2639
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 07 May 2019 18:30

It's become an old tactic. There was a dialogue in a movie,
"Never engage an enemy for too long in the same way". In a 70 year old relationship, every tactic is going to turn out old.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 07 May 2019 18:38

I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen fighter, is gonna cost them? Even a bunch of repainted FC-31s would be prohibitive. But the Pakis are claiming it will be something more and better than just chini maal. It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10924
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 07 May 2019 19:14

chola wrote:I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen fighter, is gonna cost them? Even a bunch of repainted FC-31s would be prohibitive. But the Pakis are claiming it will be something more and better than just chini maal. It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!


it will be like Iran's Qaher 313.


samsher
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 43
Joined: 28 Jan 2009 05:23

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby samsher » 08 May 2019 02:51

And this from undee-tv!

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/the-pak ... eststories

Just needs an AESA radar, AAM-RAM integration and it's good to go hain ji!
Pakis already got the fast track on 6th Gen++
:shock: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 08 May 2019 02:53

chola wrote:I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen fighter, is gonna cost them? Even a bunch of repainted FC-31s would be prohibitive. But the Pakis are claiming it will be something more and better than just chini maal. It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!


The Turkish economy is propped up on a wing and a prayer, with Erdogan the great taking cheap foreign debt en masse and propping up his state owned firms and economy. When debt servicing hits all these fancy projects will go for a toss. Right now, cheap foreign money and Turkish sultanate dreams amongst all the idiots.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 08 May 2019 09:34

Aditya_V wrote:
chola wrote:I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen fighter, is gonna cost them? Even a bunch of repainted FC-31s would be prohibitive. But the Pakis are claiming it will be something more and better than just chini maal. It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!

it will be like Iran's Qaher 313.

LoL. The Qaher 313 is such a bizarre attempt. That flimsy craft obviously can't flight. Kind of taints the rest of their projects. I thought they did a good job of reverse-engineering the F-5 and J-85 turbojet -- a far greater effort than any of the Pakis' screw and paint schemes.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3642
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby chola » 08 May 2019 09:41

Karan M wrote:The Turkish economy is propped up on a wing and a prayer, with Erdogan the great taking cheap foreign debt en masse and propping up his state owned firms and economy. When debt servicing hits all these fancy projects will go for a toss. Right now, cheap foreign money and Turkish sultanate dreams amongst all the idiots.


Shhhh, not so loud Karan ji. Turks are Pakis' Great White Hope. Pakis bring up Turks for all kinds of TFTA (western) dreaming.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10924
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 08 May 2019 11:02

chola wrote:LoL. The Qaher 313 is such a bizarre attempt. That flimsy craft obviously can't flight. Kind of taints the rest of their projects. I thought they did a good job of reverse-engineering the F-5 and J-85 turbojet -- a far greater effort than any of the Pakis' screw and paint schemes.

The F-5 and F-14 fleet was maintained by clandestine supplies from the Israels-Yes and the Americans- this is right from the 1980's, similarly there have been lot of supplies from Russia and China especially ballistic missiles. In 1980's US and Israel did not want Iran to go under Saddam.

I have learnt one thing many of these rightly controlled regimes public ally, make fabulous claims and never face tech difficulties, have very little domestic industry. You cannot progress in defence without having allied civilian Industries developed from Trucks, ships, steel metals, IT etc.

It is like the JF-17, not one bolt or screw used in PAC Kamra comes from Pakistani Industry, yet it is 100% Pindigenous. Similarly their Army uses only Hino trucks and Toyota Pickups and 4*4 , nothing made in Pakistan, yet they always perfect all techs by the first launch. The H-4 was claimed to be wonder weapon RAAD air launched CM for the last 10 years, we now know how it faired on 27 Feb 19.

Similarly many of Turkey's defense exports are nothing but NATO exports through the Back door like Paki F-16 upgrade , T-129 for A-129. Almost all the software and Hardware for F-16 came from uncle, it was just done in Turkey.

Many of these regimes claim imports as Reverse Engineered etc for prestige, rather than saying they import, See the case of former PLAN officer who now lives in LA USA, in 1994 he stole KA-28 to Laos to China thinking the Chinese can just take it apart and start manufacturing it and he will be rewarded. Instead the Russians got the Chinese to punish him. And thats the reason why the entire J-11 to J-16 the Russians have control, sure the Chinese will manufacture much of it like HAL and take off some aircraft with primer but China can neither maintain these or manufacturer them without Russian parts. I suspect this was the case also with the F-7, the Russians were getting some royalty for all the Chinese Sales - which they had stopped manufacturing by 1985.

Any clean sheet design will always take time and presents a threat to the handfull of worlds hitech arms manufacturers and will be resited tooth and nail.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1551
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Khalsa » 08 May 2019 15:02

chola wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:it will be like Iran's Qaher 313.

LoL. The Qaher 313 is such a bizarre attempt. That flimsy craft obviously can't flight. Kind of taints the rest of their projects. I thought they did a good job of reverse-engineering the F-5 and J-85 turbojet -- a far greater effort than any of the Pakis' screw and paint schemes.

The 313 is not there. Its just plywood and cardboard around the reverse engineered F-5.
I think they created something in attempt to let US know that ... we can stealth too bro ;-)

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10924
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 08 May 2019 15:26

No, that's not a F-5...its a Toy.

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 587
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby rajsunder » 09 May 2019 05:56

Aditya_V wrote:
chola wrote:I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen fighter, is gonna cost them? Even a bunch of repainted FC-31s would be prohibitive. But the Pakis are claiming it will be something more and better than just chini maal. It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!

it will be like Iran's Qaher 313.

The video is of a RC toy plane. I don't think Iran still has the capability to design and manufacture a 5th generation plane on its own.

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3976
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby sanjaykumar » 09 May 2019 07:01

Whoa, that is one homely airplane. Even uglier than the JF-17.

tandav
BRFite
Posts: 383
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 08:24

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby tandav » 09 May 2019 09:31

Aditya_V wrote:
chola wrote:I wonder much AZM, their 5th gen ... snip.... It will have TFTA western input from the Turks!


it will be like Iran's Qaher 313.



I like it, quite jagged and good looking. Though it appears to be more a proof of concept rather than an actual flying machine. The above the wing engine intake for a fighter is a concept that I have only seen in artistic renders of 5th Gen A/C. At high AoA likely to choke airflow to the engine

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Atmavik » 14 May 2019 12:11

PIA is hiring active affsars from TSPA and TPAF. and they will be working for PIA in uniform

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZAIC5SPs_4

@ 28:43

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Atmavik » 14 May 2019 12:18

Atmavik wrote:PIA is hiring active affsars from TSPA and TPAF. and they will be working for PIA in uniform

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZAIC5SPs_4

@ 28:43


PIA's new CEO is a retired AM. to follow process an advertisement was put in the newspaper for recruitment. there was a requirement for experience aerial and naval warfare. :rotfl:

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2639
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby ArjunPandit » 14 May 2019 14:21

^^does that lead to any intelligence gathering while performing PIA flying over our airspace??

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4309
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 18 May 2019 00:51

PAF prepares for arrival of final JF-17 Block 2 and JF-17B

The final three Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (PAC) JF-17 Thunder Block II multirole combat aircraft are set to be delivered to the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) by late June, the service has told Jane's .

The aircraft are part of an order placed by the PAF in late 2017 for an additional 12 platforms that are currently on the Aircraft Manufacturing Factory (AMF) final assembly line at PAC Kamra. AMF has built more than 100 JF-17s since the first JF-17 (serialled 09-111) was rolled out in November 2009.

Production of the Block III variant is expected to begin later this year PAF Air Chief Marshal Mujahid Anwar Khan told Jane's, adding that the service "will make a decision on one of the two new Chinese AESA [airborne electronically scanned-array] radars we are currently evaluating for these aircraft". He noted that, although supportability and cost will be factors in the decision, the service hopes to have the aircraft operating with the new radar by March 2020.

The Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology's KLJ-7A radar is being marketed by China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC) with air-cooling and liquid-cooling options. The second contender is Leihua Electronic Technology Research Institute (LETRI), which offers an air-cooling AESA radar known as the LKF601E.

Meanwhile, the Aircraft Repair Factory (ARF) at PAC Kamra recently completed its first 1,000th hour inspection on the first JF-17.
This comes after PAC Kamra and China's Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAC), which co-developed the fighter, worked on two JF-17s each to develop the working procedures.

mmasand
BRFite
Posts: 507
Joined: 19 May 2009 23:46

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby mmasand » 18 May 2019 00:56

ArjunPandit wrote:^^does that lead to any intelligence gathering while performing PIA flying over our airspace??


None, they don't fly over our airspace and it's merely to reduce their overhead. They can't afford a cadet program and hence save both time and money just like the Maharaja in the 80's and 90's.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18087
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby Karan M » 18 May 2019 02:33

About the poor BVR tactics and lack of commitment to the close-in fight shown by the PAF pilots. Looks like the PAF has been more hype than substance for a long while.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... -aggressor

Confessions Of A Navy F-14 Fleet Pilot Turned F-5 Aggressor
By Francesco "Paco" Chierici and Tyler RogowayMay 8, 2019

In the first part of our two-part series on the high-flying adventures and in-cockpit experiences of Francesco "Paco" Chierici, he talked in-depth about flying Grumman A-6 Intruders during the twilight of the type's service. In the second part, we get into Paco's experiences, trials, and tribulations going from a 'mud-mover' to a dogfighter in the legendary F-14 Tomcat. Eventually, Paco would go from a Tomcat pilot to an F-5 adversary reserve pilot tasked with teaching fleet pilots how not to die in the highly unforgiving realm of air-to-air combat. But beyond the flying, we discuss so much more, from the U.S. military's pilot shortage to dealing with the loss of comrades to becoming a documentary filmmaker and eventually an author.


I flew BFM against a variety of dissimilar aircraft as a Tomcat pilot. During a memorable week off the coast of Pakistan we flew a number of BFM and BVR sorties against the Pakistani Air Force. I still have some spectacular HUD footage from engagements against MiG-21s (J-7s).

I remember being amazed at the lack of proficiency and proper weapons employment from their F-16 pilots.


When we were in the Persian Gulf, we had a week where we fought the Emirati Mirage 2000-5 pilots. They were actually quite aggressive pilots who displayed a keen awareness of the tactics to employ against the weaknesses of the F-14A. They would jam to the merge, then pull 9Gs, flying so high we almost lost sight. If we did, they would tag us with a heater (infrared short-range guided missile). But if you could survive the first merge to employ follow-on BFM, they became easy prey.

ashbhee
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 70
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:05

Re: Pakistan Armed Forces: News & Discussion Thread

Postby ashbhee » 18 May 2019 06:05

This Pakistani dare to speak the truth. I hope and pray his family is safe back in Pakistan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcirDrcXQEw


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests