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

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

One can wonder how PAC developed FCS of MALE UCAV then.

As you can imagine even the FCS expertise lives in compartmentalized clusters in various SPD organizations that make UAVs and CMs.

 

[JamD]

One can wonder how PAC developed FCS of MALE UCAV then.

The bar is pretty low for an FCS for a slow-flying UAV. Furthermore, we haven't even seen that UCAV flying yet and don't know how capable its FCS is? or is it just a giant R/C plane for now?

Some context on ease of FCS of UAVs - the PAC HSTT uses COTS FCS hardware and software from PixHawk. You can just buy PixHawk/PX4 and change a few things here and there and get a flying thing with pretty decent features. And they were even struggling with that integration because the PixHawk didnt support catapult launch and it was crashing at launch because the FCS was getting confused. These PixHawk boards with PX4 are a totally different beast than a FBW system for a manned jet that has to go supersonic. It's like comparing toys to fighter jets. I mean yes technically a jet is just an aircraft but someone with R/C experience doesn't make fighter jets - unless you're in the fictional world of the excellent movie the flight of the Phoenix

 

[Ali_Baba]

Right. FCS is our biggest blindspot in my opinion. This opinion is based on
1. my undergraduate experience where our university could never find a single capable person to teach us control systems.
2. this is my area of expertise and I've had total cold calls from people working in Azm asking help on FCS. These people were not controls engineers but being asked to do FCS because "how hard can it be" mentality. Of course I can be of little or no use to them sitting outside and giving general directions.
3. I know a lot of people working at Azm and I know their knowledge base. Most of them are undergrads from Pakistan and I already said how much undergrads are taught controls in Pakistan. I can literally count Pakistani control engineers on one hand. The people with masters are all people with expertise in structural CFD and turbo machinery type fields.

But I didn't want to talk about the giant FCS shaped hole because it is after all my area of expertise and I realize that I may be biased towards it and overemphasize its importance.


The only FCS Pakistan has experience with are those of UAVs. To the best of my knowledge there is 0 experience on FBW systems. In fact PAC was unable to absorb any of the FBW tech of the JF17 because they didn't have the human/technical resource for it. As you can imagine even the FCS expertise lives in compartmentalized clusters in various SPD organizations that make UAVs and CMs. FBW is more complicated than a FCS because you have a human directly in the loop and a person in the plane that you need to secure with a lot of redundancy.


These are good steps for sure but without a robust economy and stability all of these will become pipedreams. It's not just the military that needs to get its act together.

Having lots of undergrads is not such a bad thing - as they have the greatest degree of energy for these type of complex projects and hunger and career lifespan once they learn what they are doing - but you do need experience to embed in there. This is beginning of the flaw in Pakistani attempts to develop Azm and why it will fail - the point blank refusal to understand and appreciate that Azm should have been started 20years ago by building the core technology and human resources for that technology. Technology transfer is not the same as being able to build technology.

PS - do you have any books/references if one wanted to learn about control systems? I am curious. If there is one book you would recommend - which one ?

 

[JamD]

Having lots of undergrads is not such a bad thing - as they have the greatest degree of energy for these type of complex projects and hunger and career lifespan once they learn what they are doing - but you do need experience to embed in there. This is beginning of the flaw in Pakistani attempts to develop Azm and why it will fail - the point blank refusal to understand and appreciate that Azm should have been started 20years ago by building the core technology and human resources for that technology. Technology transfer is not the same as being able to build technology.

PS - do you have any books/references if one wanted to learn about control systems? I am curious. If there is one book you would recommend - which one ?

The point about undergrads was that the task was handed off to inexperienced undergrads (and I've been one of those). There is no controls leadership. That is the issue.

Books. I'm at a point in my career where I find every book bad and full of mistakes. I guess that is why people write their own books lol. I would suggest YouTube videos by Brian Douglas for anyone hoping to dip their toes in control. Much more accessible and without unnecessary (and error prone) details.

 

[SQ8]

...and what steps have been taken to retain such a resource by PAF?

Unknown.. I’ll let @JamD comment on that

 

[JamD]

Unknown.. I’ll let @JamD comment on that

As far as I know:
1. Slightly above average pays
2. Contract based hiring which is good for flexibility (but it is bad for some Pakistanis looking for stable government jobs).
3. Slightly laxer scority curtain compared to what surrounds SPD. This promotes better movement of people and ideas.

However, alot remains desired:
1. More intellectual freedom and less doing what the guy at the top envisions with "research" being one guy's vision of it.
2. Better project management so that people are productive and not just kept busy on dead end projects.
3. Better Pakistani economy lol.
4. More hiring of experts. Currently the ratio of experts to undergrad grunts is too skewed for a research organisation in its infancy.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Why titanium? Why not carbon fibre?

Risk of Compressive strength failure, where Carbon fiber does very poorly. It is excellent where tensile strength is required. However, one could design a bi-component part with Boron fiber, but really why bother at all? It would be far easier to have Titanium.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Some conversations from behind these designs:
The second in command of Azm did not want canards because they were providing only marginal benefit at the expense of increased RCS. But for some reason the first in command of Azm has insisted on a design with canards. It would be appear that his persistence has won out. You will recall that there was also a canard-less design. This story didnt fill me with confidence because it sounded like design decisions that should be made on scientific merits were being made on egos/chain of command. Let's see what becomes of this effort. At the very least it is good practice.

Also from all that I heard it didnt appear like structural design was on anyone's minds. It was aerodynamics and RCS.

We should ask a few questions:

1. Is stealth the sum total of 5th gen design innovation?

2. Would stealth in X-band continue to be the sole determinant? Or is it that IRST & other technologies ensure that law of diminishing returns has kicked in seriously?

3. F-117 was sub-sonic (please correct me if I am wrong), but subsequent designs are not so. Does this mean that speed has something to do with 5th gen philosophy too? How fast is fast, & what is "fast enough"?

4. As with speed in #3, same for maneuverability. What is the role of it in 5th gen? Is it purely shoot & scoot philosophy or does having other attributes provide added benefits.

5. Are inter-personal / chain of command issues a good enough explanation for design choices?

I recall a tale of mirasi & mirasan quarrel over the right amount of shakkar (brown sugar) to be used in halwa (sweet), when they actually had no ingredients at hand due to their poverty. I leave it to the imagination of forum-members to see where this tale fits in this story & why.

I'll see myself out..... <scoots>

 

[PakShaheen79]

1. What update are you expecting? The F-35 began its lifecycle in 1995 and other than company updates nothing major was seen until the X-35 was rolled out in 2000.
This was with Lockheed Martin which is a major public defense contractor and well funded.
The J-20 took 10 years from project funding to prototype and this was Chengdu which had been building aircraft for 40 years or more.
Just because you aren’t privy to monthly meetings or the close to 25 different projects running under the guise of this requirement doesn’t mean work was done..

Now, was work done to the degree it was planned is a different question but to bemoan that “Nothing has been done” is plain ignorant

2. Multiple aerodynamic platform designs - a 5th generation fighter is more than what flies: Avionics(radar,ew suite) and powerplant concerns.

3. Possibly and not possibly- Air Staff requirements are evaluated every year if not every 6 months and if it turns out PACs progress or funds alone wont yield a fighter needed by 2028 then they will go with the TFX or anything else.
Chengdu offered the PAF a design as well ten years ago but lack of funds made that go nowhere.

4. Possibly, a lot of brain drain occurs and the lack of stable economic conditions do not bode well for smart people who have other avenues to look for their future. After all, if you are generally a crappy society and academically dishonest then only expect what you can generate. From that perspective you really shouldn’t be complaining because that is what is available to PAC. So keep only those expectations which are realistic knowing that Pakistan Air Force is formed with Pakistanis of which you are one and so is everyone around you including Fazlur Rehman, “I love corruption” PML(N) supporters, Nida Kirmani and the water car engineer.

1. A simple update like one we did back in 2018-19 about completion of first cycle of preliminary design phase. According to that update, 3 more such cycles were to be performed. Just an update if we are on 2nd or 3rd or final cycle. No one asking for giving out the details of changes made in each cycle. Just a generic high level update to give confidence to masses that project is moving forward irrespective of speed of the project.

2. Till 1995, LM had a pretty good idea what it is pursuing. A sketch on paper. Even Indian AMCA is in advanced stage than Azm as there they got one model at least. And I have no idea how can you think about making certain sub-systems when you have no idea what you are pursuing?

3. Even TFX is not coming online before 2035-2040 in with full FoC and export will follow even farther. Their timeline is out.

4. Lack of funds ... seriously? This country was ready to pay 11 Billion USD as fine which thankfully got removed. Allocating 500-700 million USD to a strategic program is not impossible, real problem is political will which in case of defense industry development has never been our priority. Unfortunately, not even when country was run by military literally. I keep hearing this "we will invest when economy will recover" mantra, but matter of the fact is the day we begin to invest in strategic industries like electronics, robotics, AI, High tech defense product, value addition agricultural industry etc. Our economy will began recovering. In 21st century no country with 250 million people is not going to survive by growing wheat and rice in bumper crops. Even now when the government is spending hundreds of billions of rupees on charitable projects like EHSAS, I don't buy that we can't pay our few hundred of couple of thousands engineers working on a sensitive project enough. Real issue is priorities.

Corollary: No real update, like I said. (I doesn't mean no real work. But to believe in something, it must be there or accessible through media).

 

[imadul]

There are around 100 engineers from BAE system helping the design process.

The worry is the engine, but hopefully USA give clearance on the use of GE engine for both prototyping and mass production phase

Turkey Tusas Engine Industries TEI has been working on turboshaft engines, TS 1400 for ATAK T-129 gunships, Parent company TAI has ink agreement with Ukrain Motor Sich to develop aviation engines.
I think Turkey due to its reach and relationship with European aviation industries is best placed to develop latest cutting edge turbofan engines.

 

[SQ8]

1. A simple update like one we did back in 2018-19 about completion of first cycle of preliminary design phase. According to that update, 3 more such cycles were to be performed. Just an update if we are on 2nd or 3rd or final cycle. No one asking for giving out the details of changes made in each cycle. Just a generic high level update to give confidence to masses that project is moving forward irrespective of speed of the project.

2. Till 1995, LM had a pretty good idea what it is pursuing. A sketch on paper. Even Indian AMCA is in advanced stage than Azm as there they got one model at least. And I have no idea how can you think about making certain sub-systems when you have no idea what you are pursuing?

3. Even TFX is not coming online before 2035-2040 in with full FoC and export will follow even farther. Their timeline is out.

4. Lack of funds ... seriously? This country was ready to pay 11 Billion USD as fine which thankfully got removed. Allocating 500-700 million USD to a strategic program is not impossible, real problem is political will which in case of defense industry development has never been our priority. Unfortunately, not even when country was run by military literally. I keep hearing this "we will invest when economy will recover" mantra, but matter of the fact is the day we begin to invest in strategic industries like electronics, robotics, AI, High tech defense product, value addition agricultural industry etc. Our economy will began recovering. In 21st century no country with 250 million people is not going to survive by growing wheat and rice in bumper crops. Even now when the government is spending hundreds of billions of rupees on charitable projects like EHSAS, I don't buy that we can't pay our few hundred of couple of thousands engineers working on a sensitive project enough. Real issue is priorities.

Corollary: No real update, like I said. (I doesn't mean no real work. But to believe in something, it must be there or accessible through media).

1. Who will receive this update (press release, reporter, etc)? After all it took a known political character to declare the PAF was purchasing a major defense item. Who has demanded this update? Civil society or tax payers represented by Shahbaz sharif ? What intellectual equal with authority in Pakistan held the PAF accountable?

2. LM has been building and designing aircraft for a hundred years now. PAF crashed a JF-17 by over stressing the airframe with equipment because they didn’t know any better. Some sub-systems are easier to pursue and also why you can move aspects of a project along if you haven’t finalized other details.
The F-14s AWG-9 & AIM-54 combo was first designed for the F-111B even though those developments were a few years apart. Doesn’t mean the AWG-9 wasn’t used and wasn’t a fierce piece of kit.

3. Possibly, but until the AMCA actually takes flight the PAF has all the decision time it needs. It can always abandon the 5th Gen airframe idea of AZM and just incorporate all its work into an off the shelf Chinese airframe if it feels India is taking the qualitative edge again.

4. Was the $11 billion allocated to PAF budget? I didn’t know the Pakistan Air Force decided the budget of the entire country and made itself first in line.
As far as paying engineers, you pay for subject matter expertise and not engineers. You can find an engineers sitting around having Tea & Samosas all over Pakistani R&D.
Whether they actually studied the key subjects or have experience in building what they have been asked to is an entirely different matter. Those Pakistani that have expertise on these subjects either work for western Aircraft manufacturers and have no reason to abandon theirs and family’s secure lives with a house, comfortable car and vacations to europe to come back and live in a smog ridden city driving an entry level compact car while fearing for his/her family’s safety while some uniform with a chip on their shoulder who has no expertise on the subject is their boss telling them how to do things.

So, to restate - the conclusion you are reaching by getting no updates isn’t completely justified but neither is the expectation attached to it.
Yes, there is a need for higher standard but twenty people on PDF cannot enforce what is an institutional(and overall social/educational) culture change

 

[Al_Muhannad]

The bar is pretty low for an FCS for a slow-flying UAV. Furthermore, we haven't even seen that UCAV flying yet and don't know how capable its FCS is? or is it just a giant R/C plane for now?

Some context on ease of FCS of UAVs - the PAC HSTT uses COTS FCS hardware and software from PixHawk. You can just buy PixHawk/PX4 and change a few things here and there and get a flying thing with pretty decent features. And they were even struggling with that integration because the PixHawk didnt support catapult launch and it was crashing at launch because the FCS was getting confused. These PixHawk boards with PX4 are a totally different beast than a FBW system for a manned jet that has to go supersonic. It's like comparing toys to fighter jets. I mean yes technically a jet is just an aircraft but someone with R/C experience doesn't make fighter jets - unless you're in the fictional world of the excellent movie the flight of the Phoenix

If PAF wants undergrads to use as cheap labor to roll its R&D projects, then the responsibility to conserve past knowledge from work of engineers of past batch, and impart them onto engineers of a new batch falls on its shoulders. The undergrads only bring cheap labor to the table. A new person has to start the work from where the last person left.

The undergrads will lack the research strategy or vision due to lack of expertise. Therefore, a research manager (project manager with excellent subject expertise) can be successful in building a basic prototype starting from an HSTT, then a mushak, and after a lot of iterations & projects, may be JF-17 type aircraft. What PAC can do is offer MS Thesis & internships to improve the overall quality of workforce. PAC can try to entice such people with chances to publish research papers & gain proper industrial experience to get scholarships abroad (PAC has to define a process flow). Israelis do this type of stuff a lot.

Ask some universities to make some special modules for Control systems, SDRs, Simulation, Mathematics (Optimization). I believe it is doable (given than I personally am extra idealistic optimistic person) but there are a lot of threats-to-validity. To conclude, there is a trade-off.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

3. F-117 was sub-sonic (please correct me if I am wrong), but subsequent designs are not so. Does this mean that speed has something to do with 5th gen philosophy too? How fast is fast, & what is "fast enough"?

yes it was subsonic you are right.
reason for less emphasis on speed (it applies for conventional jets after 60s) is that Americans decided that all combat took place at speeds between 1.3 to 1.6 at max and never before and this was based on decades of data spread over tens of thousands of flight hours including combat. so increasing speed for jet fighters became a secondary requirement. the philosophy of stealth jets is that they are not fighters but hunters they are not meant to be seen or engage in a fight but kill and leave the area.
speed was sacrificed for increased stealth for F117 since its doctrine was to quietly enter and leave highly complex enemy defense matrix.

 

[MastanKhan]

We should ask a few questions:

1. Is stealth the sum total of 5th gen design innovation?

2. Would stealth in X-band continue to be the sole determinant? Or is it that IRST & other technologies ensure that law of diminishing returns has kicked in seriously?

3. F-117 was sub-sonic (please correct me if I am wrong), but subsequent designs are not so. Does this mean that speed has something to do with 5th gen philosophy too? How fast is fast, & what is "fast enough"?

4. As with speed in #3, same for maneuverability. What is the role of it in 5th gen? Is it purely shoot & scoot philosophy or does having other attributes provide added benefits.

5. Are inter-personal / chain of command issues a good enough explanation for design choices?

I recall a tale of mirasi & mirasan quarrel over the right amount of shakkar (brown sugar) to be used in halwa (sweet), when they actually had no ingredients at hand due to their poverty. I leave it to the imagination of forum-members to see where this tale fits in this story & why.

I'll see myself out..... <scoots>

Hi,

Speed used to be a thing of the 60's mindset---now we are operating in the plausible reality spectrum---the sub sonic spectrum.

Aircraft cannot out run the fast moving modern missiles---but they can out manouver them at slower speed.

An aircraft moving at 500 knots / hr and pulling 8 g's---the missile travelling at 2000 knot / hr will have to pull around 100 plus G's---maybe 200 g's to turn into the aircraft.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Hi,

Speed used to be a thing of the 60's mindset---now we are operating in the plausible reality spectrum---the sub sonic spectrum.

Aircraft cannot out run the fast moving modern missiles---but they can out manouver them at slower speed.

An aircraft moving at 500 knots / hr and pulling 8 g's---the missile travelling at 2000 knot / hr will have to pull around 100 plus G's---maybe 200 g's to turn into the aircraft.

Thanks for the reply. Also thanks to @Irfan Baloch for confirming the same.

It might be time for speed to re-enter the design arena. I am saying that because newer 5th Gen projects are not adopting DSI, which we know has a design penalty when it comes to speed beyond Mach 1.8. What could be the exact rationale? I can only speculate - reduce NEZ? or adopting shoot-and-scoot approach?