Countries that have the "know-how", but not the money?

[stud40111]

Which countries do you guys believe have the technical know how to produce weapons ranging from fighter aircraft, missiles and tanks down to small arms just as good as those produced by the Europeans, but simply don't have the money for it?

Are there any?

If so, please post their names.

Thanks.

 

[rjmaz1]

Russia of course.

They were closer to the US than any other country in the cold war.

 

[Grand Danois]

Russia was also my first thought, but it is actually considered an European state that extends into Asia...

So I can't think of any.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Russia was also my first thought, but it is actually considered an European state that extends into Asia...

So I can't think of any.

How about Japan? No wait they probably have the money.

South Africa may be another contender had/had the know how, but not the money.

 

[Grand Danois]

How about Japan? No wait they probably have the money.

South Africa may be another contender had/had the know how, but not the money.

Ahh, the cognitive block went away! Now we're getting somewhere.

How about adding Taiwan to that list. They make fighters and cruise missiles etc. So they could probably do the rest of the portfolio if they had the money. Perhaps Israel and Australia also. Hmm. Or am I reading the criteria wrong.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Ahh, the cognitive block went away! Now we're getting somewhere.

How about adding Taiwan to that list. They make fighters and cruise missiles etc. So they could probably do the rest of the portfolio if they had the money. Perhaps Israel and Australia also. Hmm. Or am I reading the criteria wrong.

The issue is can a country produce all the parts needed to produce a platform.

To be honest I don't think that even US produces a major platform out of components solely built in the US. They produce the finished systems/components that slot in, they probably own much of the IP as well, but there may well be chips etc.. that are built overseas.

When you consider airframe/engine/radar/integration of systems not to many countries do that off their own bat, even the Gripen has US engines I believe.

 

[Grand Danois]

The issue is can a country produce all the parts needed to produce a platform.

To be honest I don't think that even US produces a major platform out of components solely built in the US. They produce the finished systems/components that slot in, they probably own much of the IP as well, but there may well be chips etc.. that are built overseas.

When you consider airframe/engine/radar/integration of systems not to many countries do that off their own bat, even the Gripen has US engines I believe.

Yes Gripen use a GE F404 derivative.

I think examples of US platforms with high foreign content would be the LCS and the JSF. Perhaps the F-22A is an example of an indigenous platform. (?)

Defence industry is absolutely woven together across the Atlantic (and Israel, Australia, etc.). So it is impossible to say say what is local and what is outside know-how .

 

[stud40111]

Does anyone think that South Africa or Australia currently fit the criteria that I outlined in my initial post? How about Turkey?

 

[Whiskyjack]

Does anyone think that South Africa or Australia currently fit the criteria that I outlined in my initial post? How about Turkey?

South Africa dis produce significant enhancements to existing platforms and indeed new platforms during the 80s early 90s.

 

[stud40111]

South Africa dis produce significant enhancements to existing platforms and indeed new platforms during the 80s early 90s.

But do you think it has enough "know-how", if given the right amount of money and motivation, to keep up with the developments that have been made since then?

 

[Whiskyjack]

But do you think it has enough "know-how", if given the right amount of money and motivation, to keep up with the developments that have been made since then?

IMO opinion, probably not now as SA has suffered quite a 'brain drain' over the last decade.

 

[stryker NZ]

Does anyone think that South Africa or Australia currently fit the criteria that I outlined in my initial post? How about Turkey?

i think Australia does fit the criteria in most aspects except being able to manufacture their own aircraft but everything else in your intial post seems to be being build in Australia.

 

[icelord]

If the info coming in on this site is right(which it would be), then Singapore may have more then its willing to tell us. Perhaps not an aircraft, but a Fire arm, missile, or some form of vehicle or boat.
Singapore_Shows_Off_Its_Arsenal
Australia definetely, we have the industry to build almost anything we purchase, which is a main criteria with any new purchases. But desgin plus construction is limited. Austal recently designed the Littoral Ships for the USN, although the RAN does not consider it a priority, it could easily build the LCS without to much hassle here. The systems and weapons are now days spread across the world, from many countries, so this would impact on a sole platform.
The bushmaster for us would be a show of Aussie made-defence only equipment, so in limited areas we already do this.
The money for many is not the problem, its the willingness to spend on research when its readily available elsewhere.

 

[atilla]

india? pakistan romania turkey ukrain ı thınk these countrıes have tech but has less money to produce

 

[Gerasimos]

india? pakistan romania turkey ukrain ı thınk these countrıes have tech but has less money to produce

Except India,why do you think that these countries have tech?Are there any proofs?Here in Greece we have built our own apc "Kentavros" (and other things),but it is based mostly on foreign systems does this mean that Greece has advanced tech?No of course.I agree with the example of Russia because it is a country that has its own unique projects not tech based on previously found systems of other countries...

 

[LtDragon]

Canada... they are just too poor. the "have'' the technical know-how and ressources...it's just all gone to the US.... They really don't need much... being so close to the US...

 

[TrangleC]

Take the 10 000 brightest heads of any random country and give them the recources needed for the basic research and the following design work and production facilities and they will build you everything.
It is all just a question of money, time and education.
And since the elites of most third world countries send their children to western universities, i see no reason why an ethiopian engineer for example, shouldn't be able to do what a american or european engineer does, given the same resources.

 

[contedicavour]

Take the 10 000 brightest heads of any random country and give them the recources needed for the basic research and the following design work and production facilities and they will build you everything.
It is all just a question of money, time and education.
And since the elites of most third world countries send their children to western universities, i see no reason why an ethiopian engineer for example, shouldn't be able to do what a american or european engineer does, given the same resources.

I agree, but you also need a significant industrial environment to back up those smart and well trained engineers. If (as is the case almost everywhere) the defence industry is owned by the government or depends heavily on orders by the government to live, then you need sustained levels of R&D for decades to build up the environment that can help those smart engineers come up with something innovative and that can technically be produced in large numbers.
I think the countries with strong enough defence industries to develop all main weapons systems (sea, air & land) by themselves, if the need did arise, and if money were available without limits, would be :
> obviously US (lockheed, boeing, northrop grumman...)
> russia with its huge military-industrial complex
> the main EU countries linked by joint ownership of EADS, MBDA, etc : Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and of course the UK
> UK because of BAE, Vickers, etc
> Italy because of Agusta Westland and the rest of the Finmeccanica empire (Oto Melara, WASS, Selex Sistemi Integrati ex AMS, Avio, etc)
> France because of Dassault, DCN, Giat, etc
> Germany because of its central role in EADS, besides HDW, etc
> Japan with its industries' partnerships with the US ones (Mitsubishi for ex)
> Arguably Sweden in most sectors (gripen, SSKs) but not all (the latest MBT being German, not Swedish), and Spain as well (great Navantia in shipping industry).

On their way to join the list above I see obviously China, India, S. Korea...

Then there are countries who in theory could develop anything because of their level of development and rich economies... but who haven't developed a sizeable defence industry (probably a good choice, as money is definitively not limitless and taxpayers get angry fast...) : Canada, Australia ...

cheers

 

[vijayshimla]

Defence Know-how

I think at present only USA and Russia are the two countries which have the know how to independently develop - manufacture and field any- but any defence system be it Aircraft, Naval vessel, Missile system or any related equippment- without any dependence on another nation for parts- labour - or design. Of course US has all the money- & russia has all the talent and long tradition of weapons design- but no money. Every other country, be it France, UK, Germany, Italy, Sweden , Spain, China,Israel, India, et. al. can only do fragments of a weapon system and beg- borrow or steal design & components to complete todays' complex weapon systems. USA & Russia straddle the entire spectrum of weapons manufacture.

 

[darsh]

lol! i wouldnt put india anywher near tht list. if anythng we seem to hv more money and less tech. for e.g. the design for lca and arjun tanks would be ancient by the time they go in to prodctn, if ever tht is. on the other hand we are buying phalcons, mrca, scorpenes, frigates all worth billions of dollars. the only decent tech we seem to hv developed are the missiles.