Karakorum - 8 (K-8) | Jet Trainer Aircraft.

[JamD]

Well they worked with China to create the JF17 with more than 100 flying, they have exported 100s of Mashaks including to your country, they have kept 50 year old Mirages contemporary battle worthy. You are talking about Pakistan, our private or the civilian public sector does not have the capacity to manage such projects. If PAF didn’t do it nobody else would have. Maybe it can be corporatized in the future. Coming from a country without a serious airforce and which was not able to export even one of its indigenous attack helicopters you should avoid making sweeping, ill informed statements. Your post are usually good but this time you distinctly reminded me of the village idiot on this forum I.e Mastaan Khan

I've been following your conversation with denel and didnt feel the need to respond but this post has forced me to respond.

Firstly, PAF engineers played only a small part in the design of the JF-17. It is a jet primarily designed by CAC. PAF engineers gave design directions and steered some aspects of the design. All the nitty gritty was done by the Chinese. We manufacture large parts of it but we certainly did not design it ourselves. You overestimate our capability by a lot.

Secondly, the reason our private sector does not have any capacity is due to the very conscious effort to stifle its growth. You can read my posts on the forum or @Bilal Khan (Quwa)'s @PAR 5's for details of what I mean. There is horrendous redtape for any private sector defence company and all contracts go to China. Furthermore SOEs like PAC wont even let pvt sector make screws. Pvt sector all over the world in defence exists because governments fund them. They cant foot the bill for super expensive defence R&D based on the profits they dont make because our armed forces just go and buy Chinese.

Thirdly, South Africa's defense industry is WAHY more advanced than ours. I cant even believe I have to say this. Pakistan regularly sends engineers to South Africa for courses and training. We buy a lot of tech from them. So I would really take what South Africa has to say on this much more seriously.

Lastly, always be respectful. There is never a need for name calling.

 

[Bossman]

I've been following your conversation with denel and didnt feel the need to respond but this post has forced me to respond.

Firstly, PAF engineers played only a small part in the design of the JF-17. It is a jet primarily designed by CAC. PAF engineers gave design directions and steered some aspects of the design. All the nitty gritty was done by the Chinese. We manufacture large parts of it but we certainly did not design it ourselves. You overestimate our capability by a lot.

Secondly, the reason our private sector does not have any capacity is due to the very conscious effort to stifle its growth. You can read my posts on the forum or @Bilal Khan (Quwa)'s @PAR 5's for details of what I mean. There is horrendous redtape for any private sector defence company and all contracts go to China. Furthermore SOEs like PAC wont even let pvt sector make screws. Pvt sector all over the world in defence exists because governments fund them. They cant foot the bill for super expensive defence R&D based on the profits they dont make because our armed forces just go and buy Chinese.

Thirdly, South Africa's defense industry is WAHY more advanced than ours. I cant even believe I have to say this. Pakistan regularly sends engineers to South Africa for courses and training. We buy a lot of tech from them. So I would really take what South Africa has to say on this much more seriously.

Lastly, always be respectful. There is never a need for name calling.

I've been following your conversation with denel and didnt feel the need to respond but this post has forced me to respond.

Firstly, PAF engineers played only a small part in the design of the JF-17. It is a jet primarily designed by CAC. PAF engineers gave design directions and steered some aspects of the design. All the nitty gritty was done by the Chinese. We manufacture large parts of it but we certainly did not design it ourselves. You overestimate our capability by a lot.

Secondly, the reason our private sector does not have any capacity is due to the very conscious effort to stifle its growth. You can read my posts on the forum or @Bilal Khan (Quwa)'s @PAR 5's for details of what I mean. There is horrendous redtape for any private sector defence company and all contracts go to China. Furthermore SOEs like PAC wont even let pvt sector make screws. Pvt sector all over the world in defence exists because governments fund them. They cant foot the bill for super expensive defence R&D based on the profits they dont make because our armed forces just go and buy Chinese.

Thirdly, South Africa's defense industry is WAHY more advanced than ours. I cant even believe I have to say this. Pakistan regularly sends engineers to South Africa for courses and training. We buy a lot of tech from them. So I would really take what South Africa has to say on this much more seriously.

Lastly, always be respectful. There is never a need for name calling.

I know everything you just said but you are as ill informed as Denel, maybe you are the same. South African aviation was created before the apartheid and now it is pretty much dying. Their engineers are coming to work for countries like Pakistan or have emigrated. I don’t want a two bit South African to be bad mouthing PAF’s effort. And you as well as Denal and Quwa are so wrong about the capability of non-military sector in Pakistan. Obvious none of you are close to Pakistan or have ever lived here.

 

[JamD]

I know everything you just said but you are as ill informed as Denel, maybe you are the same. South African aviation was created before the apartheid and now it is pretty much dying. Their engineers are coming to work for countries like Pakistan or have emigrated. I don’t want a two bit South African to be bad mouthing PAF’s effort. And you as well as Denal and Quwa are so wrong about the capability of non-military sector in Pakistan. Obvious none of you are close to Pakistan or have ever lived here.

lol ok.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The private sector can support the armed forces, but it'll only happen when the armed forces decide to support the local economy. @JamD clearly brought up the example of simple stuff such as screws and bolts. If the armed forces can't even open up that -- even though the private sector can definitely supply it -- then forget anything more. There isn't going to be any growth in our industry, we'll instead scurry off to China or Europe and help their industries.

The right policy is to open up the supply of inputs to the private sector and incentivize them to expand their capacity and develop new products.

It starts with low-end stuff like nuts and bolts, but it gradually moves up to fuzes, polymers, composites, steel, and eventually to complete parts, structures, etc. It culminates in entire systems.

If they get the simple business, they'll build capacity to meet the need and, in turn, use the proceeds to grow and get better. That's how business works. It's been like this for thousands of years, but only fails when there's an unnatural element in the mix -- like gov't sanctioned monopolies, rent-seeking, etc.

Our problem is that we think it'd be a long process, and yes, we could be looking at 15-20 years. But that was true back in 2000, and back in 1980, and back in 1960, and even in 1947. In fact, in 1949, we got close to starting on the right path when the PAF was working with a tycoon from Hyderabad-Deccan to bring the P-80/F-80 production line (starting with assembly and moving to manufacturing) to Pakistan.

But that program failed because some babus decided it was a better idea to pick up the Supermarine Attacker from Britain. Herein lies the problem. We got babus who'll throw up excuses like "urgency" and what have you to burn precious hard currency on foreign goods without even as much as an offset deal (which could see at least some of that money return to our economy).

Today, we have a willing South Africa wanting to partner with us to co-develop tech -- and we know they've got expertise on rockets for AAM/SAM, turbojets for LACMs, etc -- yet we're ripping our hair out on how to improve on the SD-10. And to climb to the next step, we're willing to take on an even bigger expense for something we may not need, even though we can spend less and collaborate with others.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Didn't Sohail Aman say he wanted to see more Public-Private partnerships?

The private sector can support the armed forces, but it'll only happen when the armed forces decide to support the local economy. @JamD clearly brought up the example of simple stuff such as screws and bolts. If the armed forces can't even open up that -- even though the private sector can definitely supply it -- then forget anything more. There isn't going to be any growth in our industry, we'll instead scurry off to China or Europe and help their industries.

The right policy is to open up the supply of inputs to the private sector and incentivize them to expand their capacity and develop new products.

It starts with low-end stuff like nuts and bolts, but it gradually moves up to fuzes, polymers, composites, steel, and eventually to complete parts, structures, etc. It culminates in entire systems.

If they get the simple business, they'll build capacity to meet the need and, in turn, use the proceeds to grow and get better. That's how business works. It's been like this for thousands of years, but only fails when there's an unnatural element in the mix -- like gov't sanctioned monopolies, rent-seeking, etc.

Our problem is that we think it'd be a long process, and yes, we could be looking at 15-20 years. But that was true back in 2000, and back in 1980, and back in 1960, and even in 1947. In fact, in 1949, we got close to starting on the right path when the PAF was working with a tycoon from Hyderabad-Deccan to bring the P-80/F-80 production line (starting with assembly and moving to manufacturing) to Pakistan.

But that program failed because some babus decided it was a better idea to pick up the Supermarine Attacker from Britain. Herein lies the problem. We got babus who'll throw up excuses like "urgency" and what have you to burn precious hard currency on foreign goods without even as much as an offset deal (which could see at least some of that money return to our economy).

Today, we have a willing South Africa wanting to partner with us to co-develop tech -- and we know they've got expertise on rockets for AAM/SAM, turbojets for LACMs, etc -- yet we're ripping our hair out on how to improve on the SD-10. And to climb to the next step, we're willing to take on an even bigger expense for something we may not need, even though we can spend less and collaborate with others.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Didn't Sohail Aman say he wanted to see more Public-Private partnerships?

The PAF seems to be more open to this, but there's a long way to go. It starts with a lot of unlearning of bad habits (like over-bearing red-tape) and learning new things at the leadership and institutional level. It won't be easy.

 

[PAR 5]

The problem with the military mindset regarding the private sector in Pakistan is that no one wants to invest in R&D required to develop modern weapons systems. Military mantra for the private sector is NO COST NO OBLIGATION BASIS which essentially means you do it at your cost while we think about buying it or not. This convoluted thinking by military planners is the single reason why the many major capable companies in Pakistan refrain from supporting the defence set ups. Anyone having any doubts regarding Pakistan private sector ability should read Usman Ansari’s latest article in Defence News (also posted on this forum). No country in the world can develop its private sector for defence production until such time the Military actually invests in the proposed programs.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The problem with the military mindset regarding the private sector in Pakistan is that no one wants to invest in R&D required to develop modern weapons systems. Military mantra for the private sector is NO COST NO OBLIGATION BASIS which essentially means you do it at your cost while we think about buying it or not. This convoluted thinking by military planners is the single reason why the many major capable companies in Pakistan refrain from supporting the defence set ups. Anyone having any doubts regarding Pakistan private sector ability should read Usman Ansari’s latest article in Defence News (also posted on this forum). No country in the world can develop its private sector for defence production until such time the Military actually invests in the proposed programs.

Exactly. The other issue is that with all that vertical integration, the armed forces are spending more on fixed -- and underutilized -- overhead. There's a cost to maintaining an HIT that rolls out only 50% of its al-Khalid output; there is a cost to maintaining those screw/bolt facilities at PAC; there's a cost for the Kinder Surprise shenanigans at POF; and so on. We are sinking a part of our defence budget in that overhead instead of procurement.

This is not an efficient -- or fair -- use of public funding. This is actually unjust to the Pakistani taxpayer who is not only footing the bill for defence, but now a spate of inefficiencies caused by generals who literally aren't doing their job (which is war on the battlefield, not on the board table).

The right approach is to shift that overhead to the private sector. This will do several things. First, it'll free overlay in the armed forces (which they can put into purchases). Second, the private sector will find a way to use that capacity -- either to efficiently supply the armed forces, or to drive exports (and bring ForEx).

Even in Turkey, the big state-owned entities (e.g., TAI, STM, etc) rely on the private sector to supply a lot of the key inputs. In turn, they spend more time on design and R&D, but actively work to transfer production (which is a costly overhead) to the private sector.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Our problem is that we think it'd be a long process, and yes, we could be looking at 15-20 years. But that was true back in 2000, and back in 1980, and back in 1960, and even in 1947. In fact, in 1949, we got close to starting on the right path when the PAF was working with a tycoon from Hyderabad-Deccan to bring the P-80/F-80 production line (starting with assembly and moving to manufacturing) to Pakistan.

But that program failed because some babus decided it was a better idea to pick up the Supermarine Attacker from Britain. Herein lies the problem. We got babus who'll throw up excuses like "urgency" and what have you to burn precious hard currency on foreign goods without even as much as an offset deal (which could see at least some of that money return to our economy).

I will point out that your assertion here about the babus is in fact misplaced. Decisions to go for Supermarine Attacker and other transport aircraft at that time were due to the RAF chiefs in charge of the RPAF back in the early days and they wanted to line their pockets and didnt care for PAF.

 

[Falcon26]

The PAF seems to be more open to this, but there's a long way to go. It starts with a lot of unlearning of bad habits (like over-bearing red-tape) and learning new things at the leadership and institutional level. It won't be easy.

I know you have Quwa but have you thought of writing an opinion piece on Dawn or other Pakistani newspapers making these arguments?

 

[denel]

The problem with the military mindset regarding the private sector in Pakistan is that no one wants to invest in R&D required to develop modern weapons systems. Military mantra for the private sector is NO COST NO OBLIGATION BASIS which essentially means you do it at your cost while we think about buying it or not. This convoluted thinking by military planners is the single reason why the many major capable companies in Pakistan refrain from supporting the defence set ups. Anyone having any doubts regarding Pakistan private sector ability should read Usman Ansari’s latest article in Defence News (also posted on this forum). No country in the world can develop its private sector for defence production until such time the Military actually invests in the proposed programs.

This is exactly the problem statement - there are other vested interests. Until there is a tacit dictatum to innovate and build locally to buy locally the status will remain. Every bit of brain power needed or even solutions will be outsourced to China.
Forget the fact you want military hardware - start with the basics - alloys productions etc. Surely is that not the base for manufacturing.

Well they worked with China to create the JF17 with more than 100 flying, they have exported 100s of Mashaks including to your country, they have kept 50 year old Mirages contemporary battle worthy. You are talking about Pakistan, our private or the civilian public sector does not have the capacity to manage such projects. If PAF didn’t do it nobody else would have. Maybe it can be corporatized in the future. Coming from a country without a serious airforce and which was not able to export even one of its indigenous attack helicopters you should avoid making sweeping, ill informed statements. Your post are usually good but this time you distinctly reminded me of the village idiot on this forum I.e Mastaan Khan

Complete b/s.... you have no clue on how baseless reply you are putting. I will not even dignify a response to your claims which are laughable.

Exactly. The other issue is that with all that vertical integration, the armed forces are spending more on fixed -- and underutilized -- overhead. There's a cost to maintaining an HIT that rolls out only 50% of its al-Khalid output; there is a cost to maintaining those screw/bolt facilities at PAC; there's a cost for the Kinder Surprise shenanigans at POF; and so on. We are sinking a part of our defence budget in that overhead instead of procurement.

This is not an efficient -- or fair -- use of public funding. This is actually unjust to the Pakistani taxpayer who is not only footing the bill for defence, but now a spate of inefficiencies caused by generals who literally aren't doing their job (which is war on the battlefield, not on the board table).

The right approach is to shift that overhead to the private sector. This will do several things. First, it'll free overlay in the armed forces (which they can put into purchases). Second, the private sector will find a way to use that capacity -- either to efficiently supply the armed forces, or to drive exports (and bring ForEx).

Even in Turkey, the big state-owned entities (e.g., TAI, STM, etc) rely on the private sector to supply a lot of the key inputs. In turn, they spend more time on design and R&D, but actively work to transfer production (which is a costly overhead) to the private sector.

Bilal, you have hit the nail on the head bang on.

Dodo birds should be focusing on what they are paid for... be at the borders not being project managers, trying to run the show when it is out of their league. As you and I have stated, there needs to be a client/seller demarkation. This is not being done.

The challenge is the mindset... first putting dodo birds on a high pedestal and then letting them have fingers in all pots; this is grossly incoherent of any sound policy or process and the results are in front of all to see.

 

[Bossman]

This is exactly the problem statement - there are other vested interests. Until there is a tacit dictatum to innovate and build locally to buy locally the status will remain. Every bit of brain power needed or even solutions will be outsourced to China.
Forget the fact you want military hardware - start with the basics - alloys productions etc. Surely is that not the base for manufacturing.


Complete b/s.... you have no clue on how baseless reply you are putting. I will not even dignify a response to your claims which are laughable.


Bilal, you have hit the nail on the head bang on.

Dodo birds should be focusing on what they are paid for... be at the borders not being project managers, trying to run the show when it is out of their league. As you and I have stated, there needs to be a client/seller demarkation. This is not being done.

The challenge is the mindset... first putting dodo birds on a high pedestal and then letting them have fingers in all pots; this is grossly incoherent of any sound policy or process and the results are in front of all to see.

Please don’t lean on Bilal to defend your lack of information and knowledge. I appreciate what Bilal does but he is hardly an expert either. Picking bits and pieces from the internet and rehashing it and calling it an expert article does not make one an expert. He has very little knowledge of the reality on the ground. The problem with these forums is that it gets a lot of second generation emigrants who think that simply by the virtue of living in the west they know better and are quick to put down anything Pakistani.

Lets go back to the topic of private sector involvement in the defense production. Institutions like HIT and POF have significant sub contracting to civilian firms. This is because Pakistani auto component manufacturing industry including foundries, forges and machining are relatively developed and can undertake such subcontracting. A lot of components for the Alkhalid and T series tanks as well as the M series APCs are supplied by private sector vendors. In addition there are private sector firms supplying fuses, bomb and shell casings and other stuff to POF. Almost all vehicles including specialized vehicles are provided by the private sector.

The issue with PAC is that there are maybe one or two private sector firms which can produce high precision aviation grade components hence little or involvement of the private sector in the aviation sector. There is hardly any civilian aeronautical engineers in Pakistan.

Now let’s focus on public sector companies like People’s Steel Mill (makes specialized alloys including for tank barrel blanks), Heavy Mechanical Complex, Karachi Ship Yard, NRTC, Pakistan Machine Tools. They were either closed or working under capacity. They were revived by transferring them to the Strategic Projects Division (a subset of the nuclear program) and in case of Karachi ship yard to the Navy and all of these firm are now close to full capacity utilization and profitability.

I will add little interesting personal story here. Many years ago I was helping a friend run a small foundry making tractors parts. One day a naval officer showed up with the business end of a Torpedo in his Suzuki 800 car and asked us if we could replicate it. We tried but we couldn’t do it.

I am not saying that private sector should not be involved. I am all for it. What I am saying don’t be quick in passing judgment without understanding the history and the situation. Nobody is putting anyone on a pedestal but don’t make ill informed statements and take credit away where it is due.

There is no evidence that involvement of the military in industrial projects has impacted its operational preparedness specially the Air Force. infact it could be to the contrary if we compare it with India’s defense production model.

Also a lot of high tech design and development for the aviation sector is done by NESCOM and not by PAC.

Even if all the components are in place it will take multiple decades before a significant private sector aviation industry can be created in Pakistan. The Air Force is not discouraging it. In fact it has taken steps to encourage it.

 

[JamD]

Exactly. The other issue is that with all that vertical integration, the armed forces are spending more on fixed -- and underutilized -- overhead. There's a cost to maintaining an HIT that rolls out only 50% of its al-Khalid output; there is a cost to maintaining those screw/bolt facilities at PAC; there's a cost for the Kinder Surprise shenanigans at POF; and so on. We are sinking a part of our defence budget in that overhead instead of procurement.

This is not an efficient -- or fair -- use of public funding. This is actually unjust to the Pakistani taxpayer who is not only footing the bill for defence, but now a spate of inefficiencies caused by generals who literally aren't doing their job (which is war on the battlefield, not on the board table).

The right approach is to shift that overhead to the private sector. This will do several things. First, it'll free overlay in the armed forces (which they can put into purchases). Second, the private sector will find a way to use that capacity -- either to efficiently supply the armed forces, or to drive exports (and bring ForEx).

Even in Turkey, the big state-owned entities (e.g., TAI, STM, etc) rely on the private sector to supply a lot of the key inputs. In turn, they spend more time on design and R&D, but actively work to transfer production (which is a costly overhead) to the private sector.

It's really a giant case of conflict of interest. Suppose I'm a person managing all military production SOEs in Pakistan. Now also assume I get to take x amount of money each year from the government in the name of national security, no questions asked. Why in God's name do I need to do anything to shake the status-quo or do things more efficiently? I literally have no reason to. The military makes the defence industry policy (or doesn't let the civilians make it, take your pick), and also completely manages the industry. Everything in the world happens because of incentives.

 

[Bossman]

It's really a giant case of conflict of interest. Suppose I'm a person managing all military production SOEs in Pakistan. Now also assume I get to take x amount of money each year from the government in the name of national security, no questions asked. Why in God's name do I need to do anything to shake the status-quo or do things more efficiently? I literally have no reason to. The military makes the defence industry policy (or doesn't let the civilians make it, take your pick), and also completely manages the industry. Everything in the world happens because of incentives.

It doesn’t work this way. Military has a threat perception. A strategy is created to deal with the threat perception. Weapons are acquired in response to the strategy and tactics. The military provides characteristics and requirements of the weapons systems and the industry meets those requirements. There is very little innovation for sake of innovation. It’s too expensive and nobody will pay for failure. There are obviously technological breakthroughs that can change strategic balance and threat perception.

 

[JamD]

Please don’t lean on Bilal to defend your lack of information and knowledge. I appreciate what Bilal does but he is hardly an expert either. Picking bits and pieces from the internet and rehashing it and calling it an expert article does not make one an expert. He has very little knowledge of the reality on the ground. The problem with these forums is that it gets a lot of second generation emigrants who think that simply by the virtue of living in the west they know better and are quick to put down anything Pakistani.

I can't speak for Bilal but let me assure you I am not any kind of immigrant and have lived my entire life in Pakistan (not that I need to convince you of that).

The issue with PAC is that there are maybe one or two private sector firms which can produce high precision aviation grade components hence little or involvement of the private sector in the aviation sector.

Incorrect. PAC does not need to make screws. PAC does not need to do casting. PAC does not need to make rubber seals and gaskets. PAC does not need to make lights. I can go on for paragraphs like this. These can be very easily made by private sector.

There is hardly any civilian aeronautical engineers in Pakistan.

Super incorrect. I am one example (but again I don't need to convince you of anything). There are more civilian aeronautical engineers in Pakistan than can be employed. Otherwise, all my colleagues would have jobs. I PERSONALLY know around 300 civilian aerospace engineers. What do you think places like IST have been producing since 2002???

There is no evidence that involvement of the military in industrial projects has impacted its operational preparedness specially the Air Force. infact it could be to the contrary if we compare it with India’s defense production model.

Let's not compare to India. I can compare to Republic of Congo. Compare to Turkey and see what that analysis gets you.

Also a lot of high tech design and development for the aviation sector is done by NESCOM and not by PAC.

And your point is NESCOM buys from private sector? Or am I missing the point here?

Even if all the components are in place it will take multiple decades before a significant private sector aviation industry can be created in Pakistan.

Yes exactly. You need to start 30 years ago. We still haven't started.

The Air Force is not discouraging it. In fact it has taken steps to encourage it.

They say they are. A lot of people say a lot of things. But have they put in policies that materialize what they're saying? I haven't seen anything, have you?

It doesn’t work this way. Military has a threat perception. A strategy is created to deal with the threat perception. Weapons are acquired in response to the strategy and tactics. The military provides characteristics and requirements of the weapons systems and the industry meets those requirements. There is very little innovation for sake of innovation. It’s too expensive and nobody will pay for failure. There are obviously technological breakthroughs that can change strategic balance and threat perception.

If that is the argument then we shouldn't claim "has taken steps to encourage it". Then we should say we are not interested in creating an industry, end of story. Of course we've seen how foreign powers have had us by the gonads because we are forced to buy weapons from them, but apparently that doesn't threaten our national interests because "I buy shiny weapon now".