Pakistan Army's VT-4 Main Battle Tank | Updates & Discussions

[PakFactor]

HIT is stuck with the AK Program like a cat on a tin roof on the hottest summer day.

NORINCO is currently in no mood to give Army ToT on the VT4 considering the mess they made of the AK manufacturing program

This is the problem when you have military men with no business background handle operation(s). They should've delegated this to private sector and set up a consortium of sorts with military involved on the design and recommendation side and logistics and manufacturing in competent civilian hands.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

HIT is stuck with the AK Program like a cat on a tin roof on the hottest summer day.

NORINCO is currently in no mood to give Army ToT on the VT4 considering the mess they made of the AK manufacturing program

If that's the case, the only option is to buy MBTs off-the-shelf, but tie them to offsets that help Pakistani industries in other ways. But I doubt our negotiators have the depth to produce such complex deals.

 

[PakFactor]

If that's the case, the only option is to buy MBTs off-the-shelf, but tie them to offsets that help Pakistani industries in other ways. But I doubt our negotiators have the depth to produce such complex deals.

The issue with HIT is it tries to be a one stop shop like a grocery store everything from tracks to engine to sensors, etc. This sort of controlled production limits any development on public side and national industries will not have any idea on what to do if requested to produce something in an urgent matter --

The scary part is that theirs no National Defense Policy to roll the nation over if it comes down to it.

 

[PAR 5]

The issue with HIT is it tries to be a one stop shop like a grocery store everything from tracks to engine to sensors, etc. This sort of controlled production limits any development on public side and national industries will not have any idea on what to do if requested to produce something in an urgent matter --

The scary part is that theirs no National Defense Policy to roll the nation over if it comes down to it.

The problem with HIT is that it’s managed by Uniform

 

[JamD]

The scary part is that theirs no National Defense Policy to roll the nation over if it comes down to it.

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) kya hoa tera wada?

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

@Bilal Khan (Quwa) kya hoa tera wada?

 

[Pandora]

The problem with HIT is that it’s managed by Uniform

Only reason it is working as much is bcz it is being run by Uniform. Not a single uniform run enterprise is running on a loss let it be PAC, POF, HIT, HMC and several others. We tried Civilians in Railway, PIA, steel mill, Ogra and hundreds of other public entities so let me know if even a single public enterprise being run by our civilians is not making a loss right now.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Only reason it is working as much is bcz it is being run by Uniform. Not a single uniform run enterprise is running on a loss let it be PAC, POF, HIT, HMC and several others. We tried Civilians in Railway, PIA, steel mill, Ogra and hundreds of other public entities so let me know if even a single public enterprise being run by our civilians is not making a loss right now.

Those were run by political appointees. We don't want any entity run by PPP/PML folks, rather, we want the armed forces to delegate the day-to-day of PAC, HIT, etc, to actual engineers and other industry professionals. In fact, the generals can form the board of directors and hold the civilian executive accountable for timelines, output, etc. It's not an 'either/or' scenario, there's actually a 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc way to do things.

 

[SABRE]

If that's the case, the only option is to buy MBTs off-the-shelf, but tie them to offsets that help Pakistani industries in other ways. But I doubt our negotiators have the depth to produce such complex deals.

How do you propose to do the bold?

 

[PakFactor]

Only reason it is working as much is bcz it is being run by Uniform. Not a single uniform run enterprise is running on a loss let it be PAC, POF, HIT, HMC and several others. We tried Civilians in Railway, PIA, steel mill, Ogra and hundreds of other public entities so let me know if even a single public enterprise being run by our civilians is not making a loss right now.

Brother what you mentioned are bureaucratic appointed run public entities and that will always be a failure.
The thing about Uniform men they have a straight line of sight they follow, I've rarely seen in Pakistan them having a collaborative mindset. What HIT and other industries need to do is take into confidence public (privately) run enterprises.

Like @Bilal Khan (Quwa) mentioned and I like the idea have the military as Board of Director's -- but no role in day to day management and collaboration agreement interference.

 

[Xone]

men in uniforms are not free from faults and blunders. the need is to find the reason for failure and make a fault-free plan to boost our industry. if uniform can perform better then, make it compulsory for the entire masses of Pakistan

 

[JamD]

Only reason it is working as much is bcz it is being run by Uniform. Not a single uniform run enterprise is running on a loss let it be PAC, POF, HIT, HMC and several others. We tried Civilians in Railway, PIA, steel mill, Ogra and hundreds of other public entities so let me know if even a single public enterprise being run by our civilians is not making a loss right now.

Sorry to be the contrarian here but that's not true. You have taken 5 examples of your choosing. Look at this list of Pakistani companies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_of_Pakistan. A majority of these successful companies are civilian owned/managed. There are several issues with expertise, accountability, incentive structures, and getting lucky with making uniforms head every damn thing but let's not derail this thread about VT-4. We can discuss the merits and demerits elsewhere.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

How do you propose to do the bold?

We basically push for a 90-100% offset by having China source inputs for various items -- be it cars, machinery, civilian aircraft, freighters, trains, etc -- from Pakistan. They can either source it directly from Pakistani suppliers, or they can engage in carefully monitored FDI, specifically through partnerships with Pakistani companies (but with our companies owning 51%). If they falter at any point, we impose penalty fees on the Chinese.

And to be frank, we shouldn't be applying this to just the Chinese, but also the Turks, Europeans, Americans, etc.

The problem here is that executing this takes tight regulatory controls, willing enforcers, and oversight, and of course good negotiators. We lack all of that in Pakistan (or to be more accurate, we suppress and displace it).

Sorry to be the contrarian here but that's not true. You have taken 5 examples of your choosing. Look at this list of Pakistani companies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_of_Pakistan. A majority of these successful companies are civilian owned/managed. There are several issues with expertise, accountability, incentive structures, and getting lucky with making uniforms head every damn thing but let's not derail this thread about VT-4. We can discuss the merits and demerits elsewhere.

To be fair, he was referring to state-owned enterprises. He's right in that they're generally mismanaged, but the ones -- while civilian in skin -- are actually political appointees at heart.

 

[SABRE]

Those were run by political appointees. We don't want any entity run by PPP/PML folks, rather, we want the armed forces to delegate the day-to-day of PAC, HIT, etc, to actual engineers and other industry professionals. In fact, the generals can form the board of directors and hold the civilian executive accountable for timelines, output, etc. It's not an 'either/or' scenario, there's actually a 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc way to do things.

We don't want political appointees but the best civilian engineers you can find would also find it difficult to work under the uniformed personnel and under BPS paygrade. We need to create a corporate and contractual management culture. In short, maintain the state ownership and regulation over defence industry but delegate management, R&D and production to civilian contractors.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

We don't want political appointees but the best civilian engineers you can find would also find it difficult to work under the uniformed personnel and under BPS paygrade. We need to create a corporate and contractual management culture. In short, maintain the state ownership and regulation over defence industry but delegate management, R&D and production to civilian contractors.

Absolutely. The uniform needs to scale back, all the way back to a BoD. But the entity's culture, pay-scale, etc, must be oriented for civilian employees, with the management and executive team also civilian. The Turks are a good model to take a look at... TAI, STM, et. al have uniform BoDs, but the day-to-day is all civilian experts.