Featured Project Azm: Pakistan's Ambitious Quest to Develop 5th Generation Military Technologies.

[That Guy]

Can a stealth version of the JF-17 be made kind of like the F-15 stealth eagle? Make weapons internally, and add RAM paint which should reduce RCS a whole lot. It could be a stop-gap measure until a 5th gen fighter is built and will give an edge to the JF-17 over the IAF aircraft.

The stealth eagle was a bad idea, and turning the thunder into a stealth fighter is also a bad idea.

It's more efficient to just design a new fighter.

 

[Philip the Arab]

The stealth eagle was a bad idea, and turning the thunder into a stealth fighter is also a bad idea.

It's more efficient to just design a new fighter.

Wouldn't it work as a stop-gap measure for a limited amount of jets? Project Azm will take probably 15-20 years and I'm sure with Chinese help of course a newer JF-17 with stealth features could be made.

 

[That Guy]

Wouldn't it work as a stop-gap measure for a limited amount of jets? Project Azm will take probably 15-20 years and I'm sure with Chinese help of course a newer JF-17 with stealth features could be made.

You're essentially redesigning a jet, which will take a decade to do as well, so no,not even as a stop gap is it a good idea. Buying off the shelf jets is a good stop gap measure, this is not.

[Edit] just to clarify further; the redesign would include a complete change of the fighter frame, and a much more powerful engine. Then you'd have to test it thoroughly, to see if the fighter is working as intended, and once that's cleared, you'd have to build the necessary production lines to build the fighters, which you'd be cannibalizing the current thunder production lines, which is a terrible idea, as it would push procurement plans back by literally years.

 

[CriticalThought]

Cannot compare development time lines of newer tech with older tech. Just because developing an F-16 took decades or several years doesn't mean AZM will also take that long. Besides Pak is not trying to reinvent the wheel, there is already data available or atleast guidelines of what needs to be done to develop a 5th Gen airframe. We have helping hand from China who already has not one but two 5th gen jets. They are trying to improve on them by building a new engine. We wouldn't be building a new engine for Azm and instead would be taking an off-the-shelf solution.

Also to give an example of technological timelines, the advancement in computational speed of 2019 cellphones versus 2018 cellphones is greater than what advancement took place in computers from 1950 to 1970.

It's not about reinventing the wheel. It's about understanding the true capabilities of the wheel. Does the wheel do its intended job? We don't know.

The F-15 was supposed to be the top cover for F-16. In practice, the Viper can beat the Eagle. So even though America only gave us one component of the puzzle, it was enough to kind of solve the entire puzzle.

The F-22 is the air superiority component in the F-22 and F-35 pairing. Can the F-35 alone accomplish air superiority on a modern battlefield? Or, from a slightly different angle, can we be sure that India will never field F-35 against a J-31 derivative? Or some other stealth plane? What are the true range of capabilities of an F-35 type aircraft? I don't know, you don't know, and I am saying that those air marshals sitting in PAF and PAC also don't know given the shoddy state of R&D in the country.

Here is the bigger underlying problem. So far, we followed the Americans with F-16 and we succeeded. I am openly arguing against BLINDLY following the Americans on the F-35 without understanding all the philosophies of modern warfare being adopted by air forces around the world and their true effectiveness.

You're essentially redesigning a jet, which will take a decade to do as well, so no,not even as a stop gap is it a good idea. Buying off the shelf jets is a good stop gap measure, this is not.

[Edit] just to clarify further; the redesign would include a complete change of the fighter frame, and a much more powerful engine. Then you'd have to test it thoroughly, to see if the fighter is working as intended, and once that's cleared, you'd have to build the necessary production lines to build the fighters, which you'd be cannibalizing the current thunder production lines, which is a terrible idea, as it would push procurement plans back by literally years.

See above.

 

[CrazyZ]

It's not about reinventing the wheel. It's about understanding the true capabilities of the wheel. Does the wheel do its intended job? We don't know.

The F-15 was supposed to be the top cover for F-16. In practice, the Viper can beat the Eagle. So even though America only gave us one component of the puzzle, it was enough to kind of solve the entire puzzle.

The F-22 is the air superiority component in the F-22 and F-35 pairing. Can the F-35 alone accomplish air superiority on a modern battlefield? Or, from a slightly different angle, can we be sure that India will never field F-35 against a J-31 derivative? Or some other stealth plane? What are the true range of capabilities of an F-35 type aircraft? I don't know, you don't know, and I am saying that those air marshals sitting in PAF and PAC also don't know given the shoddy state of R&D in the country.

Here is the bigger underlying problem. So far, we followed the Americans with F-16 and we succeeded. I am openly arguing against BLINDLY following the Americans on the F-35 without understanding all the philosophies of modern warfare being adopted by air forces around the world and their true effectiveness.



See above.

Even the Americans don't know the purpose of the "wheel". Stealth fighters have not been used in air combat, yet. F-117 and B2 were bombers....not fighters. Stealth is valuable in that role.

Until F22 or F35 is used against other top line fighters...no one knows their real value. Can you truly have a stealth fighter? The second it turns on its radar and fires....stealth is gone. USN thinks stealth is not that important for fighter AC.

 

[CriticalThought]

Even the Americans don't know the purpose of the "wheel". Stealth fighters have not been used in air combat, yet. F-117 and B2 were bombers....not fighters. Stealth is valuable in that role.

Until F22 or F35 is used against other top line fighters...no one knows their real value. Can you truly have a stealth fighter? The second it turns on its radar and fires....stealth is gone. USN thinks stealth is not that important for fighter AC.

Not entirely true. We can get a good idea in Shaheen type exercises. Given a certain stealth design component, locally produce a small Thunder iteration and field it in a Shaheen type exercise. Note the performance. Collect data. Reach a decision. Repeat. That's how you slowly build capability. Now, the good news is, we have a J-31 prototype flying around. Put the airframe through various scenarios in Shaheen, Anatolian Eagle and other exercises. And compare it against Flankers backed by long range AEWACS and Chinese and indigenous VHF/UHF radars.

Similarly for sensor fusion. Instead of trying to copy the F-35 JHMCS, involve the aces from CCS and pilots from various squadrons. Ask them how we can help you with situational awareness. Do usability testing. Create mock ups. Gather data. Analyze. Make decision. Repeat.

And here is the bottom line: you can do all of this without first creating a university. You need structured thinking and an experimental approach towards program management. When you have learnt the lessons and formed a core group of people, then create academic programs to transfer that learning to the next generation.

@Oscar @messiach @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[CrazyZ]

Not entirely true. We can get a good idea in Shaheen type exercises. Given a certain stealth design component, locally produce a small Thunder iteration and field it in a Shaheen type exercise. Note the performance. Collect data. Reach a decision. Repeat. That's how you slowly build capability. Now, the good news is, we have a J-31 prototype flying around. Put the airframe through various scenarios in Shaheen, Anatolian Eagle and other exercises. And compare it against Flankers backed by long range AEWACS and Chinese and indigenous VHF/UHF radars.

Similarly for sensor fusion. Instead of trying to copy the F-35 JHMCS, involve the aces from CCS and pilots from various squadrons. Ask them how we can help you with situational awareness. Do usability testing. Create mock ups. Gather data. Analyze. Make decision. Repeat.

And here is the bottom line: you can do all of this without first creating a university. You need structured thinking and an experimental approach towards program management. When you have learnt the lessons and formed a core group of people, then create academic programs to transfer that learning to the next generation.

@Oscar @messiach @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

Air force pilots need to be involved in the process..no doubt. Early development can be done in pakistan. It largely involves human labor which Pakistan has.

Computer simulation is the first step. Stealth would not be possible without computer aided design. The shape of the F117 was designed by electrical engineers using computers. As computer power increased, they were able to incorporate curves into stealth AC... the B2. Even tactics can be simulated on a computer long before anything is built.

Next step is scale models... especially to test RCS. Even a flying scaled drone can used. Newer American X AC have been tested as scale drones. Final step is a real size prototype.

What I read of the skunk works was that designers were in the same facility with the builders of the prototypes, any manufacturing issue can be brought to the designers immediately. Kamra has to be modeled on the skunk works to develop prototypes.

Mass production will require assistance from China. That involves machinery and know-how that I'm not sure Pakistan has.

The core is that Airforce pilots, airframe designers, and prototype builders need to be in the same facility...Project AZM.

 

[messiach]

This is a long&broad subject. Bottomline is 'relative invisibility' comes with strings attached. It is over-glorified and massively over-rated. A bottomless pit to bankrupcy.

Not entirely true. We can get a good idea in Shaheen type exercises. Given a certain stealth design component, locally produce a small Thunder iteration and field it in a Shaheen type exercise. Note the performance. Collect data. Reach a decision. Repeat. That's how you slowly build capability. Now, the good news is, we have a J-31 prototype flying around. Put the airframe through various scenarios in Shaheen, Anatolian Eagle and other exercises. And compare it against Flankers backed by long range AEWACS and Chinese and indigenous VHF/UHF radars.

@Oscar @messiach @Bilal Khan (Quwa)

 

[MystryMan]

It's not , it's a new design with Chinese assistance , ie the use of their super comps etc,
Its clean sheet new , albeit might have influences of the Chinese

It may be the rumored single engine design from CAC.

 

[Army research]

It may be the rumored single engine design from CAC.

Dual engine

 

[junaid786]

Even the Chinese are struggling with engines, and they've put in a lot more time, effort and resources. Given the limited resources available, I doubt a domestic engine will be a major focus in this program, outside of a technology demonstrator.

Russians are master at developing powerful engines and we will not have any problem acquiring Russian engine for our jets.

 

[The Eagle]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1123967134902706176

 

[zulu]

Look like some big hint regarding future plans @The Eagle eagle baba whats your input i dont want to be accused reading so much in so little alone @Tps43 hazrat yeh bhi dekh lain

https://twitter.com/x/status/1123967134902706176

 

[Quwa]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1123967134902706176

@Oscar lol I should've waited a day I guess.

 

[Rana4pak]

Short term j 31 medium term tfx long term make their own sixth generation .during that period up grade jf17