News Flash: JFT carries out a successful WS-13 Flight test.

[Comet]

This is a very good news. I would like to see less and less dependence on Russia.

 

[Comet]

Engine manufacturing is very costly business. If we develop our own engines we would not be able to equate the expenses on the engine R&D and the number of Jets we are going to use that engine on. As stated earlier, if we spend $5 billion on Engine development and use it only in 500 Jets (at most), the result is not fruitful

On the contrary, if we invest in other, lest costly more fruitful, items first and make an export base for our selves, then Engine development can be successful as its cost would be divided on more Jets thus it will result in less cost per unit.

 

[Quwa]

OK...I am trying to figure out where this $5bn figure came from regarding turbofan development...?? The Indians have yet to cross the $1bn U.S. figure of their Kaveri and are in its later stages of development. In any case, I think Pakistan should begin developing its own turbofan engine. I doubt we can equip JF-17 with an indigenous turbofan, but investing for tomorrow's aircraft would be a prudent idea.

Pakistan can start with a pilot investment to set up the foundations, and over a 10-15 year period develop its system with a mix of foreign technology transfer (where acquirable) and domestic initiative. Depending on how serious we are about its potential usage (such as putting it on hundreds of fighters and other aircraft such as UCAV), we may be offered help from foreign companies - or receive additional support from other emerging industries (such as Brazil, Turkey, etc).

Even if the program takes 20 years, it will be there just in time to power a standard 5th generation successor to JF-17, and perhaps even UCAVs & HALE UAVs...and maybe one day lead to the development of a small business jet, which itself will certainly open many other doors.

Nonetheless, setting aside $50-75mn a year for a turbofan program over 10, 15 or even 20 years can't be that unbearable. Even if it comes in 20+ years, who cares, we'd have a matured design to use in the end and build off upon its learning curves for a new system. Remember, the now 30-year old GE404 design is still the basis for newer engines, such as F414 used on Super Hornet and offered for Gripen NG.

 

[mughaljee]

I think Pakistan should begin developing its own turbofan engine.

In the development of WS-13 ,
are we not involved with chines as we were in JFT production?

 

[Quwa]

In the development of WS-13 ,
are we not involved with chines as we were in JFT production?

I don't think so...could be wrong.

 

[Arsalan]

Hi,

So---it would cost pakistan about 5 billion dollars to build one fighter aircraft engine of their own and that is not guaranteed either---so please---good engineers of this board---please discuss where would that engine take off from---for what and how many aircraft that engine would be used on----what is the life span of that engine---how would you recuperate the costs.

Please keep it in mind---pakistan still doesnot have the capability of building a gas auto engine that was built by the americans and german in the 1920's---secondly---pak doesnot have any capability of building turbine engines like the ones the americans had in the same time frame of 1920's.

It has been 100 years---and not one engine of any kind---not even a motorcycle engine of 50cc---.

So--is it out of a habbit of talking big---or talking without any information---or talking without knowing.

THERE IS NO FLYING UNDER THE RADAR OVER HERE---EITHER YOU ARE AN ENGINE BUILDER OR YOU ARE NOT---SECONDLY---WHO WOULD YOU GO TO GET THE BLUE PRINTS FOR A DESIGN FOR YOUR ENGINE---WHICH COUNTRY.

Now---please don't give me this---that we have our own design or we will design our own.

true indeed!!

it is not about we must be taken into account that we cannot go building engines for fighter planes just so that we can say we build them!

as i said in above post, an indegenious engine may not see inductionn in large number as in future PAF already seem to have picked up there choices in terms of what to buy!!

Originally Posted by TaimiKhan
Well the solution can be by starting from smaller ones for UAVs & Cruise Missiles and with joint collaboration do research, make a base of engineers who can do the future research and hopefully in future if financial position is feasible enough, start making our own ones.

that is a good approach. the UAV and cruise missiles will see vast induction, variant modles and continues induction/upgradation in many years to come.
unlike fighter jets, PAF and PA have not chosen imported system as future induction.
the Cruise missile progrma will be a pure indegenious program. the experties in its engine development will not only see good pay back but also improvement in ranges etc.
similarly although foreign collaboration in UAV/UCAV is very likely to happen, indegenious engines will see good application in this filed as well.

i hope i have made my point clear.

regards!

 

[Arsalan]

Dear Mark Sien
brother it is not about 1bn or 5!!

look, let us discuss it in a differenct manner.
suppose we have allocated 1Bn funds for PAF development program. what do you suggest will be wise, to invest in an engine program or investing in avionics program.

experties in radars and avionics will help in upgradation of old fleets to next level, radar experties can be benificial in UAV programs, Helicopter upgradations, Navy, Airforce upgradation, perhaps may also see application in future procurement provided PAF want to stick to indegenious avionics even on imported plane.

on other side, no doubt indegenious engines would also be a big plus but, what would you or anyone other as knowledgeable as you in this field will suggest? will upgarding engines of say, older Mirages be more of an advancement then upgrading of avionices??

if we have fund we must spend these on things with mulitiple applications in use years to come. as far as i can think, development of avoinics, Radars, research in composite materials are of much more importance then going for engines.
even in engines, indegenious development of Tank engines, engines of APCs and other military vehicles will be far far more beneficial then investment in R&D of Air craft engine.

for me, it is very simple, it is, first things first

regards!

 

[Sinnerman108]

Hi,

MK .. Boss... what is going on !

So---it would cost pakistan about 5 billion dollars to build one fighter aircraft engine of their own and that is not guaranteed either---so please---good engineers of this board---please discuss where would that engine take off from

WRONG, it will NOT take 5 billion.
Let me explain in very simple terms.
This is criminally over simplified to the point that i am betraying my profession.

If I were to declare I will make a Jet engine today it would be following stages:

1. Make the Labs ( equipment, tunnels, high speed computers etc)
2. Hire and train engineers
3. Start Aerodynamic research
4. Start material research
5. Start Mechanical research
6. Get the software engineers to start writing control systems.
7. Start taking info from all teams and putting in first design.
8. Make the first design
9 scrap improve and carry on the cycle till you finish.
10. Make factories to put it together efficiently.


None the less, if you can imagine the above 9 steps being done for the first time;
by people who are in it for the first time
by designs which are first of
by business managers who are first of
by factory managers who will be first of

etc etc etc,

So all these first of, increase the chance of failure;
Thus pushing the cost higher higher and higher; its called RnD and
it is called RnD for this reason; no matter how much money you spend over her you never know if last time was real or fake.

CASE 2:
Now Imagine that you are only ASSEMBLING engines;

You get to:
copy the factory and laboratories from some one.
train your people/ engineers and managers
LEARN what it takes to make a running engine.
LEARN the complexities of manufacturing (Remember designing on computer is one thing, mass manufacturing is another).

and Drum Roll .... while you accumulate this knowledge you are actually making money by increasing your % in JF-17's production
how cool is that !

Now try and understand
complex engineering like this is an evolutionary process; there are no jumps here;
If you do not have experience in solid state; you will not do SMT.
if you do not have experience in architecture you will not write good control systems
if you do not have experience balancing propellers you will not balance the engine
etc etc etc

It is pure good luck, if some one comes in holds your finger and gives you a setup(infrastructure) to make a working engine this more than takes care of 63 years of shameless criminal ignorance.

Please keep it in mind---pakistan still doesn't have the capability of building a gas auto engine that was built by the americans and german in the 1920's---secondly---pak doesnot have any capability of building turbine engines like the ones the americans had in the same time frame of 1920's.

It has been 100 years---and not one engine of any kind---not even a motorcycle engine of 50cc---.

Understand that there is a difference between capacity and capability.

do we know how to make a diesel engine . Yes we sure do
are we capable of making an internal combustion engine . Yes we are

Should we make those engines ? depends on if it is feasible $$ wise.

A simple litmus test now: If I ask you make a motor car today from scratch will you do it ?
OR
is it better to ask Toyota to setup a plant like theirs and teach my people to run it AND I protect you as pakistani business with tax relaxation.


Moral of the story:
Our Dilemma is not so much lack of education or of know how;
our Dilemma is we can't make any thing because it is available already cheaper than our own cost because the trade minister makes money from it. Our leaders and government forget to protect us because they are always in bed with tonight's customer

If now you fail to support this initiative, you are advocating ignorance and slavery.
The very same type which we have had for 63 years and it makes you as much a culprit as them.

All I have been fighting for is a CHANCE for once let the know how come in; let the factory come in; and train your own people.

If this article can not explain this point of view, frankly I will not try to explain again.

and to think there are people who pay me for this !

I am tired now, next I will write about economics and finance.

 

[muse]

even in engines, indegenious development of Tank engines, engines of APCs and other military vehicles will be far far more beneficial then investment in R&D of Air craft engine

So, in general, all propulsion systems, isn't that so? Without protection from the air, your tanks are going to last how long?, Your APCs for how long?


Salman says we should try and get a better handle on the economics and finance side of this -- but look, is there an economic angle to survival ? Will we up and decide to die, because it's too expensive to live as free men and women?

I would argue that these kinds of capablitites are vital to our suvival as a free nation state -- We have the example of the sanctions regime, we have the example of what we have suffered in geopolitical terms - Why would we not want to decrease those kinds of dependencies? Why would we want to give adversaries or anybody else more chances to effect us negatively?

In the same way that the nuclear program was deemed vital to national survival, and it was and is, so too are these core technologies and capablities.

Not just engines, but a host of other items that are all dual purpose type of things - the same company that makes Saab aircraft also makes automobiles? The glass for the cockpit can be manufactured by the same businesses that manufacture glass for automobiles? The software can also be writtenm by those who today write software for other commercial applications - the point is that these capablities must be framed in a commercial frame work, Sawaab and Kaabab, if you will. No Kaabab, the possibility of Sawaab will also decrease.

 

[Arsalan]

So, in general, all propulsion systems, isn't that so? Without protection from the air, your tanks are going to last how long?, Your APCs for how long?

thas the point,
do you think indegenious engines will make the air protected.
i can count on a hundred more things that if given priorities will make the air space safer then indegenious engines will do.

i have just one line to say " First thing First" and just one question to ask " do you agre with this line?"

regards!

 

[Arsalan]

MK .. Boss... what is going on !



WRONG, it will NOT take 5 billion.
Let me explain in very simple terms.
This is criminally over simplified to the point that i am betraying my profession.

If I were to declare I will make a Jet engine today it would be following stages:

1. Make the Labs ( equipment, tunnels, high speed computers etc)
2. Hire and train engineers
3. Start Aerodynamic research
4. Start material research
5. Start Mechanical research
6. Get the software engineers to start writing control systems.
7. Start taking info from all teams and putting in first design.
8. Make the first design
9 scrap improve and carry on the cycle till you finish.
10. Make factories to put it together efficiently.


None the less, if you can imagine the above 9 steps being done for the first time;
by people who are in it for the first time
by designs which are first of
by business managers who are first of
by factory managers who will be first of

etc etc etc,

So all these first of, increase the chance of failure;
Thus pushing the cost higher higher and higher; its called RnD and
it is called RnD for this reason; no matter how much money you spend over her you never know if last time was real or fake.

CASE 2:
Now Imagine that you are only ASSEMBLING engines;

You get to:
copy the factory and laboratories from some one.
train your people/ engineers and managers
LEARN what it takes to make a running engine.
LEARN the complexities of manufacturing (Remember designing on computer is one thing, mass manufacturing is another).

and Drum Roll .... while you accumulate this knowledge you are actually making money by increasing your % in JF-17's production
how cool is that !

Now try and understand
complex engineering like this is an evolutionary process; there are no jumps here;
If you do not have experience in solid state; you will not do SMT.
if you do not have experience in architecture you will not write good control systems
if you do not have experience balancing propellers you will not balance the engine
etc etc etc

It is pure good luck, if some one comes in holds your finger and gives you a setup(infrastructure) to make a working engine this more than takes care of 63 years of shameless criminal ignorance.



Understand that there is a difference between capacity and capability.

do we know how to make a diesel engine . Yes we sure do
are we capable of making an internal combustion engine . Yes we are

Should we make those engines ? depends on if it is feasible $$ wise.

A simple litmus test now: If I ask you make a motor car today from scratch will you do it ?
OR
is it better to ask Toyota to setup a plant like theirs and teach my people to run it AND I protect you as pakistani business with tax relaxation.


Moral of the story:
Our Dilemma is not so much lack of education or of know how;
our Dilemma is we can't make any thing because it is available already cheaper than our own cost because the trade minister makes money from it. Our leaders and government forget to protect us because they are always in bed with tonight's customer

If now you fail to support this initiative, you are advocating ignorance and slavery.
The very same type which we have had for 63 years and it makes you as much a culprit as them.

All I have been fighting for is a CHANCE for once let the know how come in; let the factory come in; and train your own people.

If this article can not explain this point of view, frankly I will not try to explain again.

and to think there are people who pay me for this !

I am tired now, next I will write about economics and finance.

do you think that this is one felid that need the most attention.

can you analyze where it comes on priority list??


regards!

 

[muse]

do you think indegenious engines will make the air protected

You may have missed my point, which was that if such a capablity existed, we would not have to be concerned that others, foreigners, adversaries, would have a veto over our abilty to defend ourselves -- so, if we were sanctioned again, and we will be, then such a capabality would make sanctions meaningless.

i have just one line to say " First thing First" and just one question to ask " do you agre with this line?"

Well, certainly, we have to prioritize but I don't know if the paradigm you have set up is an exampe of such prioritzation.

 

[Arsalan]

In the development of WS-13 ,
are we not involved with chines as we were in JFT production?

no my friend!

 

[Arsalan]

You may have missed my point, which was that if such a capablity existed, we would not have to be concerned that others, foreigners, adversaries, would have a veto over our abilty to defend ourselves -- so, if we were sanctioned again, and we will be, then such a capabality would make sanctions meaningless.

sir that is what i am trying to say, perhaps we are both missing each others point.
in our current military hardware and even in near future to come we are using many things of foreign origin that need to be replaced by indegenious ones. i have already put up example of avionic suite radras etc
the only thing is that what need requires to be addressed on priority

Well, certainly, we have to prioritize but I don't know if the paradigm you have set up is an exampe of such prioritzation

thank for understanding, i never was giving a priority list. just quoting an exampl and sharing my view that these are the things that must be given priority.
i think putting an indegenious in a plane with foreign avionic suite, foreign radar, imported missiles, and all will be of mush use.

regards!

 

[muse]

My apologies, I misunderstood.