What's new

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

How do you propose to do the bold?

One possible way is to start incubator programs with R&D Universities and researchers which can then be spun of a independent businesses that can then grow while working with the defense industry; and raising capital from outside investors, who will then be held accountable for profitability etc.

One such example is Integrated Dynamics Ltd. making UAVs and what not could be pulled into various program(s).
 
.
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.

Yes. But what I fear is that the military might develop anxiety for having let go of operations of the defence industry. This could lead them to develop a tendency for obsessive-compulsive intrusions in civilian operations on a regular basis, leading to the eventual breakdown of operations. Of course, if that happens then the defence industry would completely roll back to the military, back to square one.
 
.
Yes. But what I fear is that the military might develop anxiety for having let go of operations of the defence industry. This could lead them to develop a tendency for obsessive-compulsive intrusions in civilian operations on a regular basis, leading to the eventual breakdown of operations. Of course, if that happens then the defence industry would completely roll back to the military, back to square one.
I agree. There's a collective psychological block at play.
 
.
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.

I was actually talking about state run institutions which despite some very competent people failed run or had political appointment at the top. If it was just the issue of have incompetent heads at the top then situation might be remedied but the problem is entire column hierarchy in these institution are corrupt and untouchables. Only reason serving Military officers are successful is because they can with stand political pressures. I am well aware not to indulge in 100 pages long discussion on an irrelevant topic.
 
Last edited:
.
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.

Totally agree with it :tup:. Just need people who can with stand political pressure and blackmailing from within and outside the institution.
 
.
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.
If Pakistan wants efficiency and innovation than have two competing organizations... have them produce competing prototypes on certain deadlines and set parameters and funding. Let these organizations form their own respective ecosystems and supply chains.
Dedicated small teams with talented individuals produce timely results and innovative designs/ideas.
 
.
I was actually talking about state run institutions which despite some very competent people failed run or had political appointment at the top. If it was just the issue of have incompetent heads at the top then situation might be remedied but the problem is entire column hierarchy in these institution are corrupt and untouchables. Only reason serving Military officers are successful is because they can with stand political pressures.
Sorry I misread your post and that you were only talking about state-run enterprises. There are certainly benefits of danda.
 
.
I agree. There's a collective psychological block at play.

Perhaps, mitigate the problem with liability and arbitration clause. The military should approach governmental arbitration body (legislative and judicial committee, or Senate's standing committee) and prove that the certain aspects of the operations are contrary to national interests or defence policies or that the production is not congruent with the military's issued contract. If the military's concerns are found to be correct then the arbitration body should hold civilian management liable and penalise it. If the military bypasses the arbitration body then the military should pay the liability. Having said that, this is, of course, like tying the bell around the cat's neck.
 
Last edited:
. . .
Part of it is probably due to tradition as well, going back to the British etc.
I thought British tankers wore Khaki-like uniforms for those in Armoured formations, but the berets were black (WW2). Although the Wehrmacht Panzer formations used black uniforms.
 
.
But AK-1 is not a better tank than VT4. And army views more evolutionary potential in Al Haider than in Al Khalid series. Possibility exists that there won't be any Al Khalid 2.
Doesn't help with cost neither with technology and seems any sort of R&D was not useful. Addition of one more type of MBT. If VT-4 is better than AK-1, then its better than T-80 UD, Type-85 and other lot too. This is disappointing.
 
.
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.

Huh!!??

HIT, PAC, POF, HMC, NRTC etc are highly subsidized military factories. Only recently NRTC has shown some promise by coming out of the red. HIT has not sold a single tank or APC to any foreign country. PAC is struggling to remain afloat with its large manufacturing and overhauling factories (sales of JF17 are not covering the costs of running this establishment). Same is the case with other uniform run factories. Recently a Senator from PTI refused to approve subsidies for these factories saying that should learn to earn for themselves.

Railways, PIA, PSM etc are political orphanages & not business conglomerates. Unfortunately, Generals, AVM's and Rear Admirals don't know there elbow from their proverbial back side on how business is run. They just ride for the perks and privileges that come with the post
 
.
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.

Another option is to build a simple tank that can be mass produced. Keep it simple, no need to play the world beater game but rather the "quantity is a quality" all its own game. Perhaps something out of the box.

Here is an idea: a two seat tank, with driver and commander, each having HMDs that can cue weapons. Armed with a 40mm gun and 8x ATGMs.
 
.
Huh!!??

HIT, PAC, POF, HMC, NRTC etc are highly subsidized military factories. Only recently NRTC has shown some promise by coming out of the red. HIT has not sold a single tank or APC to any foreign country. PAC is struggling to remain afloat with its large manufacturing and overhauling factories (sales of JF17 are not covering the costs of running this establishment). Same is the case with other uniform run factories. Recently a Senator from PTI refused to approve subsidies for these factories saying that should learn to earn for themselves.

Railways, PIA, PSM etc are political orphanages & not business conglomerates. Unfortunately, Generals, AVM's and Rear Admirals don't know there elbow from their proverbial back side on how business is run. They just ride for the perks and privileges that come with the post

Military production facilities in Pakistan are not meant to make profit, if they do it's a bonus. The primary objective in creating this infrastructure is to meet local demand and save foreign exchange as well as create self reliance.

One can argue this is a unorthodox approach as it is very rare that a military makes products, usually production is private sector driven as it creates competition and promotes innovation. But in Pakistan's case things are different and military making its own hardware works brilliant. We get reliable sourcing and products are made cheaper as profit not involved at the same time we don't face procurement delays or complications (India is a case example of procurement complications). Yes our products are not very innovative but we acquire TOTs/licenses for production of off the shelf products from proven systems in existing, so they are very reliable and proven, also uncertainties and risks of failed projects eliminated.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom