What's new

PNS Azmat Class - Fast Attack Missile Craft | Updates & Discussions.

Not to mention that Pakistan already operates Spada 2000 so CAMM-ER would be perfect successor. I think the issue is that army, airforce and navy are their own kingdoms rather than being subservient to the defense ministry. One ruler could have helped to streamline such procurements from a cost effectiveness perspective.
We don't have the money to be replacing Spada 2000 (which isn't even that old) with CAMM-ER. Even the older Crotales are being upgraded instead of being phased out.
 
.
We don't have the money to be replacing Spada 2000 (which isn't even that old) with CAMM-ER. Even the older Crotales are being upgraded instead of being phased out.
Its not replacing SPADA, its replacing the missile. The PAF already has a project underway for this and may i add its a very questionable one too. Integrating a Chinese missile into the SPADA's sensors.
 
.
We don't have the money to be replacing Spada 2000 (which isn't even that old) with CAMM-ER. Even the older Crotales are being upgraded instead of being phased out.
Not the case. On other side IAF is relifing old expired Soviet era AAMs and upgrading its SA3s despite having such a large budget and here you want to replace crotales.
Afaik PAF plan is to phase out older crotale 2000, and upgrade crotale 4000s which we received in 2nd hand but in almost new condition as they were never used.
 
.
im 99% sure Yarmook comes in at even less than 15m in sensors. They seem to have gone very very barebones. Phalanx was from Tariqs so technically free or however you want to look at it, the radars are crappy budget Chinese stuff, weirdly it has a RIBAT suite, on top of that CURRENTLY no SSM but they are fitting Harbah. The real cost will come via Yarmook batch 2 but that is actually a relatively high end ship.


IMO the biggest f up was the lack of tri-services adoption of the CAMM-ER. Like i actually think it might be the stupidest example of Pakistani procurement i have ever seen? All three branches are/have procured a SAM of the same category but completely different systems lol.

PN- CAMM-ER
PA- HQ-16
PAF- Some weird Chinese missile mated to Spada hybrid system lol

Tri services adoption would have meant significant leverage to push MBDA to set up a local prod line to fulfill our orders. It would have also meant leverage on MBDA to modify CAMM-ER to our requirements. Poland just requested a variant of CAMM, it's an extended-range variant called CAMM-MR. We could have literally JV'ed with MBDA IT to extend CAMM-ER range, using it to form all three layers of AD lol.

CAMM-SR
CAMM-ER
CAMM-LR

And before someone says it would be incompatible with our existing infrastructure, let me tell you the best part... MBDA-IT says CAMM-ER is compatible with ANY 3D Radar lol

That's unfortunate. I think there isn't much a mechanism to collaborate on acquisitions. Each service only consider its own requirements and they have no concept of tri-service wide adoption.

However, as far as PA adopting HQ-16 is concerned that was done way before even CAMM-ER was produced. So that's understandable. However PAF can adapt on newer system. But I think PAF requirements might specifically for long range. You know Balakot kind of intrusions, you simply cannot scramble aircrafts towards the area within seconds. If long range SAMs are covering the airspace then those can be first solutions. So perhaps that's why they went for the ready made solution.
 
.
That's unfortunate. I think there isn't much a mechanism to collaborate on acquisitions. Each service only consider its own requirements and they have no concept of tri-service wide adoption.

However, as far as PA adopting HQ-16 is concerned that was done way before even CAMM-ER was produced. So that's understandable. However PAF can adapt on newer system. But I think PAF requirements might specifically for long range. You know Balakot kind of intrusions, you simply cannot scramble aircrafts towards the area within seconds. If long range SAMs are covering the airspace then those can be first solutions. So perhaps that's why they went for the ready made solution.
CAMM-ER was selected by Spain in 2016, so it was around when PA was shopping

PAF is using a medium range missile to replace ASPIDE, one similar to CAMM in terms of range
 
. .
im 99% sure Yarmook comes in at even less than 15m in sensors. They seem to have gone very very barebones. Phalanx was from Tariqs so technically free or however you want to look at it, the radars are crappy budget Chinese stuff, weirdly it has a RIBAT suite, on top of that CURRENTLY no SSM but they are fitting Harbah. The real cost will come via Yarmook batch 2 but that is actually a relatively high end ship.


IMO the biggest f up was the lack of tri-services adoption of the CAMM-ER. Like i actually think it might be the stupidest example of Pakistani procurement i have ever seen? All three branches are/have procured a SAM of the same category but completely different systems lol.

PN- CAMM-ER
PA- HQ-16
PAF- Some weird Chinese missile mated to Spada hybrid system lol

Tri services adoption would have meant significant leverage to push MBDA to set up a local prod line to fulfill our orders. It would have also meant leverage on MBDA to modify CAMM-ER to our requirements. Poland just requested a variant of CAMM, it's an extended-range variant called CAMM-MR. We could have literally JV'ed with MBDA IT to extend CAMM-ER range, using it to form all three layers of AD lol.

CAMM-SR
CAMM-ER
CAMM-LR

And before someone says it would be incompatible with our existing infrastructure, let me tell you the best part... MBDA-IT says CAMM-ER is compatible with ANY 3D Radar lol
I think DGDP was originally set up to promote joint-services procurement, offsets, etc, but it wasn't given enough teeth to carry out its work. Even if we accept the fact that our generals make the final decision, they could've still established a joint-services commission to bring the best options forward.

IMO, the Army shouldn't have gone with the HQ-16 as it's an older SALH-based system. Like the PN and PAF, it should've pursued an ARH-type SAM from the start, and that would've naturally flowed into a convo about a joint-services SAM order. That's a big enough order for local production, especially if we bake in plans for a long-range variant, upgraded variants (e.g., improved seekers, ECCM, etc), and future platforms/applications. If not MBDA, I'm sure we could have landed a good deal from Roketsan in Turkiye.
 
.
I think DGDP was originally set up to promote joint-services procurement, offsets, etc, but it wasn't given enough teeth to carry out its work. Even if we accept the fact that our generals make the final decision, they could've still established a joint-services commission to bring the best options forward.

IMO, the Army shouldn't have gone with the HQ-16 as it's an older SALH-based system. Like the PN and PAF, it should've pursued an ARH-type SAM from the start, and that would've naturally flowed into a convo about a joint-services SAM order. That's a big enough order for local production, especially if we bake in plans for a long-range variant, upgraded variants (e.g., improved seekers, ECCM, etc), and future platforms/applications. If not MBDA, I'm sure we could have landed a good deal from Roketsan in Turkiye.
Army does not think strategically, and still believes it can do things better on its own without input from A/F and Navy, even though technologically AF is far more learned..
 
.
Army does not think strategically, and still believes it can do things better on its own without input from A/F and Navy, even though technologically AF is far more learned..
The irony is that in the 1960s and 1970s, the Army was willing to think big, relatively speaking. E.g., the tri-services basically procured the Allouette III as a joint-order because they all needed the same type of helicopter for SAR. Similarly, the PAF sought the A-7 to build out its CAS capability to better support Army maneuvers. The Army and PAF even got together in the 1980s to study the chance to bring UH-1 Huey production to Pakistan.

Things started going haywire in the 1990s. Pressler derailed a lot of programs and, worse, the Army and Air Force leaderships took sides in the political chaos at the time. E.g., the PAF got good with Benazir to press ahead with the M2K/-5, and when Benazir got thrown out, the pro-Army interim gov't scrapped the M2K/-5 project.

Though the Army and Air Force have buried the hatchet, the institutional set up (DGDP) didn't properly catch up.
 
.
That's unfortunate. I think there isn't much a mechanism to collaborate on acquisitions. Each service only consider its own requirements and they have no concept of tri-service wide adoption.
Let's hope this isn't the case during actual war planning, if they can't cooperate now, then the likelihood of them smoothly integrating their war-time operations is low too...
 
.
The irony is that in the 1960s and 1970s, the Army was willing to think big, relatively speaking. E.g., the tri-services basically procured the Allouette III as a joint-order because they all needed the same type of helicopter for SAR. Similarly, the PAF sought the A-7 to build out its CAS capability to better support Army maneuvers. The Army and PAF even got together in the 1980s to study the chance to bring UH-1 Huey production to Pakistan.

Things started going haywire in the 1990s. Pressler derailed a lot of programs and, worse, the Army and Air Force leaderships took sides in the political chaos at the time. E.g., the PAF got good with Benazir to press ahead with the M2K/-5, and when Benazir got thrown out, the pro-Army interim gov't scrapped the M2K/-5 project.

Though the Army and Air Force have buried the hatchet, the institutional set up (DGDP) didn't properly catch up.
You are missing one thing. The nuclear program. The PAF was the lead service for it until the early 2000's and pushed hard for it, while the Army (and the Navy) were fairly skeptical about the whole thing. The PAF spent a lot of effort to integrate nuclear warfighting and draft national warplans for the same. This was all done without the input of the other services. Until 1971 the PAF saw itself essentially as an extension of the Army, with the focus on Army support missions and providing AD.. After the start of the nuclear era, the PAF saw its role as a war winner on its own, leading the other services to accuse it of having delusions of grandnuer.
 
.
The irony is that in the 1960s and 1970s, the Army was willing to think big, relatively speaking. E.g., the tri-services basically procured the Allouette III as a joint-order because they all needed the same type of helicopter for SAR. Similarly, the PAF sought the A-7 to build out its CAS capability to better support Army maneuvers. The Army and PAF even got together in the 1980s to study the chance to bring UH-1 Huey production to Pakistan.

Things started going haywire in the 1990s. Pressler derailed a lot of programs and, worse, the Army and Air Force leaderships took sides in the political chaos at the time. E.g., the PAF got good with Benazir to press ahead with the M2K/-5, and when Benazir got thrown out, the pro-Army interim gov't scrapped the M2K/-5 project.

Though the Army and Air Force have buried the hatchet, the institutional set up (DGDP) didn't properly catch up.
A lot of misinformation here. PAF never sought the A7. It was offered but not accepted. There was no talk of UH-1 production in Pakistan. Allouette IIIs were assembled at the Army aviation workshop and there was some talk of Hughes 500 in the 70s. None of the things you talk about were derailed by Presslers as they never existed. Just non-facts put together a support an opinion.
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom