Pakistan buys Italian SPADA2000

[riksavage]

Viper7 & RRTX - Jet Engine technology came to the US via the Tizard Mission, the same way it arrived in the USSR. German Jet Engine designs were unrelaible hence the US went with a Whittle design first flown in 41.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizard_Mission

 

[rrrtx]

I don't think the US has anything new in that category - they don't really have anything current between Stinger-based and Patriot systems. I-Hawk would be about the only thing on offer in the same category as Spada 2000 - and the same from Diehl BGT actually.

I was thinking in more general terms actually - like selling F-16s for example.

I agree that the US has nothng to offer in that category. The US has never put much effort into air defense. They are too accustomed to having air superiority. But of course I would say that if we did it would end up in China's reverse engineering labs anyway.

 

[swerve]

I don't think the US has anything new in that category - they don't really have anything current between Stinger-based and Patriot systems. I-Hawk would be about the only thing on offer in the same category as Spada 2000 - and the same from Diehl BGT actually.

CLAWS - surface-launched AMRAAM. Terminated by the US Army, but Raytheon might be able to offer it privately. But it's shorter-range.

Apart from that, all I can think of is Raytheons share in NASAMS (also SL AMRAAM), developed with Kongsberg.

AFAIK, the only orders for Spada 2000 before this had been upgrades of older Spada systems.

 

[radiosilence]

I was thinking in more general terms actually - like selling F-16s for example.

I agree that the US has nothng to offer in that category. The US has never put much effort into air defense. They are too accustomed to having air superiority. But of course I would say that if we did it would end up in China's reverse engineering labs anyway.

We sold Pakistan F16s in early 80s when it was a pretty new platform, care to provide some evidence that it ended up in China for reverse engineering?

 

[rrrtx]

We sold Pakistan F16s in early 80s when it was a pretty new platform, care to provide some evidence that it ended up in China for reverse engineering?

I think they got everything they needed from the Lavi thanks to Israel.

My point was that in selling Pakistan F-16s now there isn't as much exposure. Not a very new platform any more. Probably not much to be learned from reverse engineering at this point.

 

[radiosilence]

My point was that in selling Pakistan F-16s now there isn't as much exposure.Not a very new platform any more. Probably not much to be learned from reverse engineering at this point

We sold the F-16s in the early 80s so that blow a big hole in your arguement. We continue to sell Pakistan F-16C/D Block 50/52 which is still a very capable aircraft. Not many countries have the F-16C/D Block 50/52. You are making general assumptions without any evidence.

 

[rrrtx]

We sold the F-16s in the early 80s so that blow a big hole in your arguement. We continue to sell Pakistan F-16C/D Block 50/52 which is still a very capable aircraft. Not many countries have the F-16C/D Block 50/52. You are making general assumptions without any evidence.

What argument are you blowing a hole in?

At this point I sure regret using the F-16 as an example.

 

[funtz]

What argument are you blowing a hole in?

At this point I sure regret using the F-16 as an example.

From my limited ability to comprehend this language, it seems as if the argument with the aforementioned 'hole' is the intent of the military of Pakistan to supply military equipment procured from other suppliers to the Chinese military, so that the Chinese military can study these equipment and decide weather it is worth the time to reverse engineer these equipments and produce a cheaper version or incorporate the technology gathered from the study of these equipments into other on going or future projects for the military.

As for my insignificant opinions on this, well what is the problem here if Pakistan and China think this can help, why not. After all they are strong allies who have co developed military projects before, Infact it will be naive not to do this.
For this particular platform well the Chinese seem to have access to much better technology if they were indeed in the mood for some good old reverse engineering.

 

[rrrtx]

From my limited ability to comprehend this language, it seems as if the argument with the aforementioned 'hole' is the intent of the military of Pakistan to supply military equipment procured from other suppliers to the Chinese military, so that the Chinese military can study these equipment and decide weather it is worth the time to reverse engineer these equipments and produce a cheaper version or incorporate the technology gathered from the study of these equipments into other on going or future projects for the military.

As for my insignificant opinions on this, well what is the problem here if Pakistan and China think this can help, why not. After all they are strong allies who have co developed military projects before, Infact it will be naive not to do this.
For this particular platform well the Chinese seem to have access to much better technology if they were indeed in the mood for some good old reverse engineering.

Thanks for helping to get the discussion back on track.

I agree that Pakistan and China would be rather naive not to try and learn from the SPADA2000 and China is highly proficient at reverse engineering. Would you make the sale if you were the Italian manufacturer? That is what I am really curious about. What does a supplier do in a situation like this?

 

[mysterious]

What 'radiosilence' and 'funtz' are saying is that the Chinese 'already' have access to much better tech than Spada2000 which is why they're not interested in 'examining' any Spada2000 systems WHICH IS WHY, the Italian manufacturer didn't have to worry about Spada2000 being reverse-engineered since they know that the Chinese are already ahead on this; NO NEED to look at systems being acquired by Pakistan. How difficult is that to comprehend?

 

[abrahavt]

There are severe restrictions on some of the stuff like F-16s and night vision goggles etc. that the US has sold Pakistan. eg. The F-16s have to be housed seperately from Chinese origin aircraft and the US takes periodic inventory of missiles, goggles etc. to make sure none have been diverted to China.

 

[rrrtx]

What 'radiosilence' and 'funtz' are saying is that the Chinese 'already' have access to much better tech than Spada2000 which is why they're not interested in 'examining' any Spada2000 systems WHICH IS WHY, the Italian manufacturer didn't have to worry about Spada2000 being reverse-engineered since they know that the Chinese are already ahead on this; NO NEED to look at systems being acquired by Pakistan. How difficult is that to comprehend?

"How difficult is that to comprehend?" - Is that really necessary?

Just curious - if Chinese tech is better why would Pakistan buy from Italy and not from China? The price would certainly be more attractive and their defense industries already have a very close relationship.

 

[rrrtx]

There are severe restrictions on some of the stuff like F-16s and night vision goggles etc. that the US has sold Pakistan. eg. The F-16s have to be housed seperately from Chinese origin aircraft and the US takes periodic inventory of missiles, goggles etc. to make sure none have been diverted to China.

Sensible precautions under the circumstances. I think the political instability is another issue to be concerned about. Even with such agreements a change in government might put someone in power who has little interest in staying in compliance. And possibly much to gain by giving foreign powers access to western tech.

 

[radiosilence]

Sensible precautions under the circumstances. I think the political instability is another issue to be concerned about. Even with such agreements a change in government might put someone in power who has little interest in staying in compliance. And possibly much to gain by giving foreign powers access to western tech.

Are you finish BS-ing?

 

[rrrtx]

Are you finish BS-ing?

A well thought out and perceptive critique of my comment. I never thought of it that way. I stand corrected.

To borrow a word from your grammar deficient sentence - I "finish".

 

[radiosilence]

To borrow a word from your grammar deficient sentence

It was intended to be. . Your comments have no merits and yet you keep repeating them.

 

[tphuang]

Thanks for helping to get the discussion back on track.

I agree that Pakistan and China would be rather naive not to try and learn from the SPADA2000 and China is highly proficient at reverse engineering. Would you make the sale if you were the Italian manufacturer? That is what I am really curious about. What does a supplier do in a situation like this?

China has no need for something like SPADA 2000. HQ-9, S-300, HQ-12 and HQ-2 have the entire country covered already.

"How difficult is that to comprehend?" - Is that really necessary?

Just curious - if Chinese tech is better why would Pakistan buy from Italy and not from China? The price would certainly be more attractive and their defense industries already have a very close relationship.

they don't have a SAM like spada 2000 currently in service unless you count the naval SAM of shtil or HH-16 (even those are longer ranged). Generally, China requires longer ranged SAMs to cover more area.

Are you finish BS-ing

PLEASE DO NOT INSULT ANOTHER POSTER

 

[radiosilence]

PLEASE DO NOT INSULT ANOTHER POSTER

Have you been reading his post? They are irrelevant to this thread.

 

[Grand Danois]

By all means, please keep China and the topic of tech theft out of this thread.

Where are all the discussions of how Pakistan intend to use this new system, how it fits into current doctrine, etc...?

/GD

 

[mysterious]

Grand Danois, those relevant discussions can only take place when we make sure to knock some sense in to particular members to keep their political agendas aside when visiting DT.

Now coming to SPADA-2000, it does seem to make sense for Pakistan to go for these as it would be quite a qualitative improvement over aged Crotales & HQs. What the original report that started this thread doesn't make crystal clear is the number of SPADA systems being procured by Pakistan. It leaves some questions unanswered.

Is Pakistan planning to completely overhaul its integrated air-defence network or the SPADA-2000 is a stop-gap measure meant to plug the necessary gaps in the current air-defence framework? A detailed response would be much appreciated frm one of the more learned members. Thanks