Vendor development and defence industry in Pakistan

[war&peace]

Defence industry often requires exacting precision and the state of the art technologies. Over past few decades, Pakistan has developed a wide spectrum of defence industries ranging from ship and submarine building, to aircraft manufacturing, ballistic and cruise missile development, tanks, heavy armour and artillery etc to name a few. We need to channel the R&D gains made in the defence for the advancement and up-gradation of our local industry and vendor development to reduce the cost, for self reliance and development of skills. The cost of a few components can be astronomical when purchased from international market e.g. a few bolts and screw used in certain systems cost around GBP 5000 / st. Despite such exorbitant costs, an indigenously produced system is less expensive than an off-the-shelf system, in addition to, the development of skills, human resource and facilities along with the virtues of self reliance and independence etc.

However there is a chasm between the defence industry and the civil industry. We need to address the missing links by establishing a stronger liaison between mainstream industry, academia and defence industry. A wider vendor base for the defence industry can help in precision engineering, heavy industries and automotive sectors. Whether we take a top down approach from large defence industrial complexes down to small vendors or a reciprocal bottom-up approach, it will benefit if the right interface is made between the vendors and the industry.

Once the vendor base has been broadened, Pakistan can afford a foray into bigger projects e.g. SLV, business and regional passenger airplanes, commercial satellite development, automotive industry and advanced machine tools etc. Government should make a comprehensive integrated policy and suitable 5-year plans to facilitate growth of the industry and R&D sector by identifying the right set of skills and industries to be developed in the next 5 yrs. This will attract the investors and entrepreneurs and a streamlined investment will be facilitated and this will go a long way in winning the confidence and trust of the investors and in turn, developing and consolidating our industrial base.
What do you suggest?
Do we need new integrated policies for industrial, scientific and technology development in the country?
@Zarvan @Akheilos @Horus @MastanKhan
@VelocuR @Ghazwa e Hind @ghazi52 @PurpleButcher @elitepilot09 @B+ Dracula @PWFI @AsianUnion @Viny @Tipu7 @Pakistan Cyber Defence @Pakistanisage @Thinkingsoldier @Spring Onion

 

[Tipu7]

We cannot rush in and spend a lot of money in R&D ................ There are few steps which must be followed before

1:Our education system is not creative enough, it needs reforms. More practical approach is required.
2: Peace is essential for every thing.
3:Stable economy, we cannot use our talent as long as money is not their to support the programs.
4:TOT projects, as long as we are unable to build any thing from scratch, working on TOT projects is best thing. And this is what we are doing. However there exist a sensitive stage between TOT and self reliance, ...... this stage is cleared by R&D by education, money by stable economy and well directed goals by policy makers.
5:We are lucky that we have access to both TYPES of tech, China is source of Non NATO tech and Turkey is source of NATO tech. We can learn a lot from them and combining the ideas can create new innovations.

Its a slow process which is covered gradually but under controlled conditions, once you lose the friendly environment, you lose entire path..............

 

[war&peace]

Even for tot, we need a broad industrial and vendor base. The article focusses on benefitting for the R&D that has already taken place in the defence industry and apply it the vendors and civil industry for growth and advancement.

 

[<ScRipT>.<3DiT>]

1:Our education system is not creative enough, it needs reforms. More practical approach is required.

thats the reason we dont produce much enventers/devolepers then western countries so sad but true

 

[war&peace]

thats the reason we dont produce much enventers/devolepers then western countries so sad but true

Yes we need a good education system but it must go hand in hand with industrial development. It cannot occur in isolation rather good education and industrial are closely linked in a feedback system that continually improve each other. Thus a great industrial development policy will positively affect the education standards in the country.
MIT cannot exist in isolation and thus industrial giants like Ford, General Motors, GE, Lockheed Martin, Rockwell, Boeing and thousands of others provide sufficient demand for high quality engineers and scientists and thus keep research quality high at these institutions.

 

[PAR 5]

The biggest WRONG in Pakistan is the military industrial complex being in the hands of Government. This has to change sooner or later. Tanks, Aircrafts, UAV's, Ships, armaments, ammunition etc have to be manufactured with greater efficiency and cost at the hands of the private sector. Government should only regulate exports of the equipment being produced.

 

[war&peace]

The biggest WRONG in Pakistan is the military industrial complex being in the hands of Government. This has to change sooner or later. Tanks, Aircrafts, UAV's, Ships, armaments, ammunition etc have to be manufactured with greater efficiency and cost at the hands of the private sector. Government should only regulate exports of the equipment being produced.

It is because the private sector is not that advanced and financially strong and points to our bad industrial policies and especially the nationalisation during 70s destroyed whatever private industry Pakistan had at that time. The sector requires huge investment and for that, some guaranteed customers are also needed. Thus currently only the govt is able to invest in this sector but slowly and steadily private sector has started to grow up and that can be seen from their participation in IDEAS on biennial basis. These companies are getting business and orders both from Pak armed forces but also foreign customers / armed forces. Thus within next decade we will see a much larger contribution by the private defence industry than now.

 

[PAR 5]

It is because the private sector is not that advanced and financially strong and points to our bad industrial policies and especially the nationalisation during 70s destroyed whatever private industry Pakistan had at that time. The sector requires huge investment and for that, some guaranteed customers are also needed. Thus currently only the govt is able to invest in this sector but slowly and steadily private sector has started to grow up and that can be seen from their participation in IDEAS on biennial basis. These companies are getting business and orders both from Pak armed forces but also foreign customers / armed forces. Thus within next decade we will see a much larger contribution by the private defence industry than now.

Private Sector in Pakistan is still far more capable then the Government in any capacity. There is always a starting point in this direction. That starting point is to privatize military complexes like HIT, POF, PAC, etc etc and by appointing qualified civilian COO's to head these organizations under principals of business. Additionally and to promote the private sector in defense equipment manufacturing, allow long term tax holidays. 99% of the private sector you saw at IDEAS was actually local companies representing foreign manufacturers involved in contracts with the military HQs in Pakistan. There were hardly any true private sector military manufacturers from Pakistan. Do not count armoring of soft vehicles as military manufacturing. I for one do not see any private sector participation in defense manufacturing in Pakistan for a good number of years owing to Government prohibition, complexed procedures to establish a defense industry etc. Ask companies like Satuma, East West Infiniti, etc and they all will have sob stories of Government neglect and complexed bureaucracy in getting things done.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Nothing is stopping private investors to make a fighter jet in Pakistan
Nothing is stopping private investors to make a local Tank
Nothing is stopping private investors to make a APC

• Pakistan is the most favorable country for Business / Private business

It is just matter of interest by the private sector into more advance Weapons and Technology research

We have not seen a situation where 10-15 Billionaires (Pakistani) come together and form a Defence company for weapon production to create a company with market cap of 10-15 Billion to do research in weapons and systems.

Quite a few have companies offshore and some property investment

So really it is up to private sector to create something meaningful why should Pakistan Military change a system that works for them ?

Created

• K-8
• JF-17 Thunder
• Al Khalid Tank
• APC
• Guns , Ammo , Cannon etc much much more

In Europe the defence companies are made with Private fund of billionaires

 

[Safriz]

The biggest WRONG in Pakistan is the military industrial complex being in the hands of Government. This has to change sooner or later. Tanks, Aircrafts, UAV's, Ships, armaments, ammunition etc have to be manufactured with greater efficiency and cost at the hands of the private sector. Government should only regulate exports of the equipment being produced.

Dude seriously?
We are not Europe or America, so stop following them blindly

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Most of Turkey's top defence vendors are state-owned. The key for them wasn't privatization, rather, it was the fact that the armed forces took a back seat when it came to running those entities. So, for example, Turkish Aerospace isn't led by some TuAF general, but a team of engineers with corporate leadership experience.

That said, there are some big private sector entities in Turkey too, but they can credit their growth to the local prime contractor -- e.g. Turkish Aerospace -- in securing offsets, and then delegating work to the private sector. Because there was opportunity for business, the private sector invested in developing new technologies, systems, etc. And now, in some cases, they're competing with the public sector (e.g., Bayraktar vs. Turkish Aerospace).

But a major difference between them and us is that the Turks fostered an environment that allowed the public and private sector to come up with original products. So, the Turkish forces would set requirements, but when it came to designing the actual solution, the companies were given leeway up until the point their work was selected. That is a big reason why you'll see the Turks have 2-3 IFV options across Otokar, FNSS, etc.

In contrast, HIT is vertically controlled by the Army leadership, which not only sets the requirement, but has a direct say in how HIT's solution should emerge. So with the MIFV requirement, you see the Viper, essentially a worked up Talha APC. In a way, HIT wasn't allowed to speak to Otokar or Ukraine on designing a next-generation solution to propose to the Army. Likewise for POF and assault rifles.

The gist of all this is, to be frank, generals have no business running the day-to-day of these entities. Best to leave it to engineers, process experts, business development professionals, etc. I'm cool with the Army et. al earning the dollars off these entities, but they're neither helping themselves or the nation by insisting that their 'business skills' are good enough to steer HIT, POF, PAC, etc.

 

[Safriz]

Most of Turkey's top defence vendors are state-owned. The key for them wasn't privatization, rather, it was the fact that the armed forces took a back seat when it came to running those entities. So, for example, Turkish Aerospace isn't led by some TuAF general, but a team of engineers with corporate leadership experience.

That said, there are some big private sector entities in Turkey too, but they can credit their growth to the local prime contractor -- e.g. Turkish Aerospace -- in securing offsets, and then delegating work to the private sector. Because there was opportunity for business, the private sector invested in developing new technologies, systems, etc. And now, in some cases, they're competing with the public sector (e.g., Bayraktar vs. Turkish Aerospace).

But a major difference between them and us is that the Turks fostered an environment that allowed the public and private sector to come up with original products. So, the Turkish forces would set requirements, but when it came to designing the actual solution, the companies were given leeway up until the point their work was selected. That is a big reason why you'll see the Turks have 2-3 IFV options across Otokar, FNSS, etc.

In contrast, HIT is vertically controlled by the Army leadership, which not only sets the requirement, but has a direct say in how HIT's solution should emerge. So with the MIFV requirement, you see the Viper, essentially a worked up Talha APC. In a way, HIT wasn't allowed to speak to Otokar or Ukraine on designing a next-generation solution to propose to the Army. Likewise for POF and assault rifles.

The gist of all this is, to be frank, generals have no business running the day-to-day of these entities. Best to leave it to engineers, process experts, business development professionals, etc. I'm cool with the Army et. al earning the dollars off these entities, but they're neither helping themselves or the nation by insisting that their 'business skills' are good enough to steer HIT, POF, PAC, etc.

The real criteria is Patriotism, and sincerity . Whoever has that shall lead.
The "Bloody Civvies" are only loyal to a plate of Biryani and a tractor trolly ride to the polling station, whoever gives it to them, wins the elections. A bit higher up, they are loyal to money.
In Turkey national pride, patriotism and sincerity to the country are much higher and them and us cannot be compared.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

The real criteria is Patriotism, and sincerity . Whoever has that shall lead.
The "Bloody Civvies" are only loyal to a plate of Biryani and a tractor trolly ride to the polling station, whoever gives it to them, wins the elections. A bit higher up, they are loyal to money.
In Turkey national pride, patriotism and sincerity to the country are much higher and them and us cannot be compared.

Okay, say you've got candidates of only loyal patriots, who would you put in charge? The one who knows what they're doing, or the one who doesn't?

 

[Safriz]

Okay, say you've got candidates of only loyal patriots, who would you put in charge? The one who knows what they're doing, or the one who doesn't?

In Pakistan we dont and thats a fact. Even if the guy himself is a patriot he will get influenced by some chahcha mama. These things dont happen with a military guy sat on the top.
YOu guys should seriously come back to ground realities and stop thinking that our nation is as mature as the Japanese, the Turks and the Koreans and such. Because they are not.

 

[fitpOsitive]

Just make defense industry tax free, and they will be allowed take money which they will earn from the outside world to anywhere, and the investment from within the country must be declared.. simple.
Paisa hi paisa, jobs hi jobs, and technology hi technology....