Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > Commercial Vehicles


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 2nd November 2009, 11:01   #91
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Firstly, it is the Su 30 MKI (FACTS??), and, secondly, the DRDO has nothing to do with it. Thank God!!
Would like to correct myself here. The Nav Attack system and the RWR are of DRDO origin. Which further goes to show that whenever the DRDO has come up with good products, the Armed Forces have been more than happy to accept them.
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd November 2009, 12:55   #92
BHPian
 
inreverse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: MH-12.com
Posts: 137
Thanked: 8 Times
Default

More About Arjun MBT on Wikipedia

I've heard that the anti-helicopter shell (round) developed for Arjun has been rejected by the Indian Army. This is probably the one of its kind round that was designed to retaliate a pack of attack gunships.

I do know that it was a pre-fragmented proximity fuse based round which would cover a larger area by detonating once it is close to it's primary target in the air. The fragments achieve high velocity upon detatonation and hit any secondary targets in the vicinity especially slower moving choppers.

This was impressive at least on the books. I think Indian Army babus thought that Arjun would not be hit by enemy choppers so they showed the finger to this advanced round. :(
inreverse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd November 2009, 19:09   #93
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Have heard of the Anti-Ac shell. Don't have much gen on it though. However, the acceptance of a shell is a long drawn process. A lot of parameters and particulars have to be validated. So while the Army may have rejected the shell based on its present performance, as and when the shell does meet the Army's QRs, I'm sure it will be inducted just like the Arjun!

The Arjun has fired the Israeli LAHAT though, which is a fearsome weapon. Last known, no MBT in the world has any effective defence against it and it's range of 6 Km is way more than any other anti tank round. What makes the feat even more intresting is that the LAHAT was fired form a rifled barrel (120mm for the Arjun) while the LAHAT was developed for firing from a smoothbore gun. The DRDO developed a rubber sleeve over the round which burns out after the round leaves the barrel.
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 13:59   #94
BHPian
 
windiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Capital
Posts: 345
Thanked: 55 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The defence of a nation is not a game. It is a serious proposition with devastating results for the looser. So can we really wait and take a chance? And secondly, even your costing "nothing" indigenous projects are expensive. For the LCA the sanctioned amount initially for Phase I was Rs.2188 crores, and for Phase II was Rs. 2,340 crores. These figures have been significantly overshot. To put it in perspective, a Mirage 2000 was bought for 200Cr each. and the LCA will not be as capable as the Mirage 2000.
Yeah, sadly you're right neel385, not just the DRDO, as a whole nation we've sidelined our Armed Forces thinking that that wars have gone out of vogue, where both China and Pak haver been steadily increasing their potential ours has steadily deteriorated and now even Nepal and Bangladesh have been added to our threat perception. What do we do in return- move a Su30 Sqn upto Tezpur... one Sqn of Sukhois against the Red Army, good lord shoot me first. Remember how the Lt Cols had to struggle to get a decent salary and how veterans returned their medals? why are smart boys from Sanawar and Mayo not joining the Forces today? Because the nation does'nt give a damn. So what if DRDO also does'nt. Just keep hoping there's no war

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385
The MiG 21 is the most successful fighter in the world, and this is as per the number of sales of the fighter and as per the Discovery channel, in it's " The Worlds Best" series it puts the MiG 21 at the 2nd or 3rd spot! So the point you make elludes me. If you are basing your emotions on the media hype around the MiG 21 crashes in the recent past, well, obviously, whatever plagued the IAF at that time has been addressed since the reports on such crashes have reduced drastically. And if you are suggesting that crashes just should not happen, well, that would be asking for the impossible! Even your cycle breaks down from time to time!!
I think the Mig-21 crashes have a lot to do with cheap unreliable spares and lack of a proper jet trainer. Its a tough plane to land, comes in quite fast and the track of the landing gear also I think is narrower, it won us the 71 war remember even the sabres could'nt stand up to it, and this one's still flying.

Last edited by Zappo : 4th November 2009 at 00:10. Reason: Merged
windiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 18:45   #95
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by windiesel View Post
Yeah, sadly you're right neel385, not just the DRDO, as a whole nation we've sidelined our Armed Forces thinking that that wars have gone out of vogue, where both China and Pak haver been steadily increasing their potential ours has steadily deteriorated and now even Nepal and Bangladesh have been added to our threat perception. What do we do in return- move a Su30 Sqn upto Tezpur... one Sqn of Sukhois against the Red Army, good lord shoot me first. Remember how the Lt Cols had to struggle to get a decent salary and how veterans returned their medals? why are smart boys from Sanawar and Mayo not joining the Forces today? Because the nation does'nt give a damn. So what if DRDO also does'nt. Just keep hoping there's no war
You're right on this one Windiesel! But given the capabilities of the Su 30, even one sqn can do a lot. Specially in case of a sudden outbreak of hostilities. Thereafter, forces in all probability will be re-deployed in any case.

About the way the nation looks at the forces...well what is there to say? We are the ones who vote the decision makers into power. So when we want it bad enough, maybe we will force a change!! The VI Pay commission has done its bit to improve upon the pay aspect though!
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 21:40   #96
BHPian
 
gshanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Coimbatore / Bangalore / New York
Posts: 718
Thanked: 13 Times
Default

To tackle indegenisation, how hard it is to convince some private foreign company to set up shop in india, either by themselves, or through a joint venture with a govt. or private organization?

I do agree that it makes no difference if the product itself is foreign or about 60% of parts in a product made by DRDO are foreign. As long as INDIA does not develop the expertise required to build and deliver these complex systems, it is going to be tough.

Reading most of anmol's posts, he thinks most of the folks in army responsible for purchasing equipment are corrupted. Though it may be true, I am wondering if any one has insights about why DRDO is not capable as yet to be a top defence equipment manufacturer.

Is it
1) Regional Politics within the organization?
2) Incompetence?
3) Corruption in recruitment, promotion, etc.?
4) what else?

Finally does DRDO deserve any credit for Brahmos?
gshanky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 21:52   #97
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 615
Thanked: 11 Times
Default

Gentlemen,

While i appreciate the knowledge and information posted by intelligent and knowledgeable TBHPians, let us not forget that this is a public website and all this information is accessible across our borders as well. So it would be prudent on behalf of ourselves for the sake of our country that we refrain from sharing sensitive data on the internet.

I hope that our learned moderators will take note of this and remove this thread from the forum completely with immediate effect.

- An Indian who cares for the defence forces
man23ish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 22:53   #98
BHPian
 
windiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Capital
Posts: 345
Thanked: 55 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by man23ish View Post
Gentlemen,

While i appreciate the knowledge and information posted by intelligent and knowledgeable TBHPians, let us not forget that this is a public website and all this information is accessible across our borders as well. So it would be prudent on behalf of ourselves for the sake of our country that we refrain from sharing sensitive data on the internet.

I hope that our learned moderators will take note of this and remove this thread from the forum completely with immediate effect.

- An Indian who cares for the defence forces
Your concern is appreciated sir, but nothing in this thread appears to be classified or unavailable at someplace or another on the net

Quote:
Originally Posted by gshanky View Post
Finally does DRDO deserve any credit for Brahmos?
Pl. be informed that the Brahmos (from Brahmaputra and Moskva) is a carbon copy of an operational russian missile the p-800 Yakhont just the navigational algorithms have been tinkered with. Brilliant marketing effort though!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
But given the capabilities of the Su 30, even one sqn can do a lot.
That's reassuring pal....

Last edited by Zappo : 4th November 2009 at 00:12. Reason: Consecutive posts merged
windiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2009, 23:58   #99
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gshanky View Post
Though it may be true, I am wondering if any one has insights about why DRDO is not capable as yet to be a top defence equipment manufacturer.

Is it
1) Regional Politics within the organization?
2) Incompetence?
3) Corruption in recruitment, promotion, etc.?
4) what else?

Finally does DRDO deserve any credit for Brahmos?
The main reason for this could be that India and the Indian scientific community itself is today lacking certain core technologies, e.g. metallurgy. India has not been able to develop a single hi performance engine so far, the Kaveri engine for the LCA and the engine for the Arjun MBT being a case in point.

While the reason for this can be debated, the question to me is how do we move forward from here. One might try and re-invent the wheel, but by the time you are able to do it, a better wheel will be out. So then, perhaps the best way forward will be to get it from someone who already has it and thereafter move forward from there. The DRDO somehow does not seem to be in this mode for reasons best known to them. While several technologies may actually not be available for sharing, for the rest, could it be that in case they openly went for the technology from a third party, they would have to compensate with lesser "funds"? In most cases these technologies have been procured from a third party after a lot has been spent in trying to develop the same inhouse.

Interestingly, the Chinese have gone the reverse engineering way. Why don't we do the same?

Quote:
Originally Posted by man23ish View Post
Gentlemen,

While i appreciate the knowledge and information posted by intelligent and knowledgeable TBHPians, let us not forget that this is a public website and all this information is accessible across our borders as well. So it would be prudent on behalf of ourselves for the sake of our country that we refrain from sharing sensitive data on the internet.

I hope that our learned moderators will take note of this and remove this thread from the forum completely with immediate effect.

- An Indian who cares for the defence forces
Second Windiesel on this one. Firstly all the material here is open source. And secondly, I dont see any reason for anybody here to be any less patrtiotic!!
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2009, 10:27   #100
BHPian
 
pamiboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cochin
Posts: 259
Thanked: 102 Times
Default

[quote=neel385;1563881] But given the capabilities of the Su 30, even one sqn can do a lot. Specially in case of a sudden outbreak of hostilities. Thereafter, forces in all probability will be re-deployed in any case.

One question though. Doesn't China already has those Sukhois 30 / those with similar or even better capabilities. Or at least they are good at "reverse enginnering" / stealing designs and projecting those as their own. Now what help would be one sqadron of Sukhoi MKI against a similar war plane. Common sense says that it'll be a stalemate if in equal numbers and a loss if enemy's numbers are high.
Now the Chinese already know the exact number of Su MKI over the border and we know nothing about them. I think they are good at war games too. Right ?
pamiboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2009, 13:02   #101
BHPian
 
windiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Capital
Posts: 345
Thanked: 55 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Have heard of the Anti-Ac shell. Don't have much gen on it though.
It's a prefrag round with a VT/Proximity fuze, not sure whether it gonna be fired through the main gun or s separate launcher, given the limited elevation of a tank main gun.
windiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2009, 19:14   #102
BHPian
 
neel385's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kharagpur
Posts: 530
Thanked: 401 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pamiboy View Post
One question though. Doesn't China already has those Sukhois 30 / those with similar or even better capabilities. Or at least they are good at "reverse enginnering" / stealing designs and projecting those as their own. Now what help would be one sqadron of Sukhoi MKI against a similar war plane. Common sense says that it'll be a stalemate if in equal numbers and a loss if enemy's numbers are high.
There us a lot of difference between the Chinese SU30MKK and our MKIs. Ours are a league better. Even though the airframe and the engine is the same, in the avionics front, our MKIs are much better. So we do have a qualitative edge as far as the aircraft itself is concerned.

Secondly, the aircraft is only as good as the pilot who flies it. Let us not forget our pilots in the 71 war used the Gnats, which the RAF itself did not fly, to shoot down the Sabare, which at that time was considered the best fighter in the world. Going by the reports that we are reading about the performance of our pilots in international exercises, we can perhaps also safely assume that the human factor will also probably be in our favour.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pamiboy View Post
the Chinese already know the exact number of Su MKI over the border and we know nothing about them. I think they are good at war games too. Right ?
What makes you think that our own boys do not keep tabs on the Chinese? I'm sure they do!! Probably we are not aware of the details becuse it is kept to a "need to know" basis.
neel385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2009, 23:07   #103
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
There is enough "equipment" being used for an informed person to compare MTBFs. It is only after using the equipment that this conclusion has been reached. However, I am not in a position to divulge all the details of the equipment here for obvious reasons.
I am sorry but I don't buy this Orwellian doublespeak also it is an association fallacy. We started this discussion on Arjun tank, and all we know is that DRDO is eager for Army to find flaws in their tanks by making Arjun compete with T-90 tank but for very obvious reason(no different from the hasty purchase of T-90's) army have been delaying those trials.

This kind of argument is exactly what raises lot of suspicions, as Defense forces want the taxpayers money to be spent but don't want any oversight on how purchases and comparisons are done. For obvious reasons of course.

And if we have to go by the MTBF kindly tell me Defense forces reason to go with the Russian radars on SU30MKI which have exceptionally poor MTBF. But then the Defense forces suggest that those are far economical than the alternative that is why those were accepted.

Going by same logic the Arjun tank is infinitely cheaper as most of the money stays in the economy and circulates.

But unlike the trash that Defense forces love, Arjun tank have much better record and have aced the recent trials, again read the how Defense personnel rated Arjun Tank against T-90.

Quote:
Quote:Minister of State for Defence Production, Rao Inderjeet Singh recounts, “I’ve spoken, off the record, to officers who have gone through the trials. Even the crews (from 43 Armoured Regiment)… who have been testing the tank… I forced them to choose between the Russian tanks and the Arjun. I said, you’ve driven this tank and you’ve driven that tank (the T-90). Now mark them out of ten, which tank is better? And I’ve found that the Arjun tank was given more numbers than the T-90 tank.”
Speaking of MTBF, Arjun was Driven for over 60000 kms and fired more than 8000 rounds and there was no problem if you are suggesting that this is not good enough then kindly give us data on Bhishma.

What is stopping the Defense forces to make Bhishma to go and compete with Arjuna in comparative trials ?. If Bhishma aces Arjun in those trials, then it will put rest to this debate and Defense Forces would not be pressurized to buy Arjun.

And for very obvious reason they don't want to do that, and let me suggest what that reason it :- gifts from Rosoboronexport with love.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Since the start of this debate, I have been doing some research on the Arjun and have come to the logical conclusion the the Arjun MBT today is a formidable platform.
You do know what is MBT ? It is the one that Army buys in large number and this is not the case with Arjun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
As you have correctly brought out, the DRDO has been able to rectify many (not all) of the observations of the Army and probably.
With the unusual habit of our pristine defense-ministry babus</sarcasm> to change to goalpost to when it comes to indigenous equipment to suit videshi imports it is if I may suggest impossible to satisfy every requirement as it is mostly a moving target which is not the case with russian stuff.

And then some people in this forum wonder why DRDO is not able to satisfy the babus, I on the other hand laud the efforts of our scientists who have cornered the babus so bad that they are running away from comparative trials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
, this is the reason for the MBT being accepted today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
However, during the course of my research, I came upon some amazing facts about the Arjun MBT. As the title of this thread implies, we are talking about "indigenous" equipment here. But I was pretty surprised with the indigenous content of the Arjun!
1. Engine: 1400 HP German MTU diesel
2. FCS: Based on the Marconi SFCS600- British, linked to a Barr & Stroud Tank Laser Sight-British and IR8 Thermal Imager in the initial versions. In the current version, the FCS has been developed by BEL in conjunction with Elbit of Israel

So, lo-and -behold, the "indigenous" MBT runs on an imported powerplant and the FCS, the heart of the MBT is also from a foreign vendor!!

All in all imported components used in the Arjun rose from 27% in the 1987 to 60% in PPS. So much for "indigenisation"!
This information might be new to you, but if you will read some of my earlier posts you would find that I had mentioned the MTU engine and Israeli FCS. But I wonder if you don't find it odd that these parts are not world class enough for our Defense Forces.

BTW you may like it or not but Arjun is an indigenous attempt at making Tanks though it runs on the imported items but that is to satisfy Defense forces world class requirements.

And as you would see from your own data that indigenization is a slow process, but one needs to start from somewhere. That is one of the reason why India applies duties on imported items in order to encourage indigenization.

And look at the result, today we have a world class auto industry where people are not hesitant to set up the manufacturing and R&D plants. Can you tell me would that have been possible if the duties against the imports were not in place ?

Give me one example of a country where duties are/were not in place yet they have a world class auto industry.

This is why people like me support Arjuna, because it will help us develop necessary technologies and will make us self-reliant.

And going by their actions, this is exactly what Defense forces have been hindering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And we payed all the money that has gone into the project for what? Just for the DRDO to buy the goodies and integrate then to give us the Arjun.
So I guess you are a Tank specialist now to make such a claim that all DRDO have done is to integrate. I wonder if what you think about Chinese MBT T-99 which is powered by German MTU MB871ka501 engine ? And Ukrainian power plant in Al-Khalid ?

I guess all of these are shoddy attempt of integrating imported parts by incompetent people ? </sarcasm>

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Even the integration was shoddy which was the reason why the initial hit rates were 20-30% which has now increased to 90%.
So you are surprised that the things under development improve with time / development .

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The point here is this : Even now, when we have our Swadeshi Arjun, if any if the vendors decide that they are not happy, the MBT goes bust.

That point here is quite an illogical :- your argument which suggests that buying / relying on 100% imported and non indigenous tank is better and safer than buying a Tank which is already more than 60-70 (you are referring to old data) which would continue to become more indigenous with time.

Whereas if in future T-90's assembly lines would stop Defense forces will have no option but to shamelessly come to the doorsteps of the much ridiculed Indian Scientists to bail out their imported trash.

BTW, do you have any idea that we have licenses to manufacture the parts in India itself and as most parts have been developed with DRDO's input they can actually improve upon these parts unlike Russian parts where we cannot even think of tinkering with Russia's approval. Then how can you even suggest that project would go bust ?

And do you know that Chinese tanks are no purists either ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
As per Mallika Joseph the Assistant Director of Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies: "While the DRDO does deserve credit for the project, the army too could be given some credit, for it can be argued that if not for the uncompromising and scathing criticism from the Army, the Ajun would have ended up as an obsolete T-80 tank and not a state-ofthe-art next generation tank." So, evidently, the Army had a role to play in the standards that Arjun possesses today!!
Now I should listen to the drivel of some people in some odd think tank rather than ? :-

Quote:
Minister of State for Defence Production, Rao Inderjeet Singh recounts, “I’ve spoken, off the record, to officers who have gone through the trials. Even the crews (from 43 Armoured Regiment)… who have been testing the tank… I forced them to choose between the Russian tanks and the Arjun. I said, you’ve driven this tank and you’ve driven that tank (the T-90). Now mark them out of ten, which tank is better? And I’ve found that the Arjun tank was given more numbers than the T-90 tank.
Quote:
Experts at the seminar — including Israeli tank legend, Maj Gen Yossi Ben-Hanan, who designed that country’s successful Merkava tank — pointed out that tank design is evolutionary, each design building upon the previous one.
That is the opinion of the maker of the worlds best tank and the defense personnel who used both Arjuna and T-90, I give more weigh to their opinion.

And the you are mentioning the opinion of some lady in some think tank who is glossing over the Defense Forces habit of hindering the indigenization of defense inventory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Ask the Chinese!!
And we are up against them and Pakistanis, while you have insinuated that their attempt at indigenous tanks are shoddy kindly tell me why do you think we need :- world class </sarcasm> tank ?

While they have used this opportunity to develop the capability, why do our Defense forces want us to be reliant on others ? Do you believe that it will be any good for national security when Chinese and Pakistani would continue to develop their tanks while we will rely on Russians who have stopped spending money on R&D ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Firstly, this is probably the first time that a comparitive trial is being carried out- the reason- it is the first time that the DRDO has come out with something that can be compared, which in itself says a lot about the DRDOs competence!
I see that you are indulging in selective amnesia, how can you forget :- INSAS Dhruv and Arihant ? And what about the Yukthirath developed by OFB and DRDO, its story was posted a while back in this thread. It was compared against South African import and found to be better and cheaper.

Well I shouldn't have expected you to know any of DRDO's and our scientists contribution as you have expressed that you are oblivious to what they have delivered. :-

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
I would request you to kindly elaborate on "what all the labs have delivered till now."

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And secondly, as I have stated before, the Armed forces have never shunned the DRDO.Whenever an equipment has been provided by the DRDO that has met the requirements of the Armed Forces, they have been readily embraced. It is only when something does not meet it's requirements that the Armed Forces have said no.
IMHO buying T-90 with all its flaws (failure of Fire control system in Indian heat where these are supposed to be used) in large number while running away from Arjuna-Bhishma comparative trials is == Shunning DRDO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
But again, look at the results that DARPA and NASA have given for the investments. Once you look at it that way, you'll realise that DRDO is actually no comparison.
Looking at great disparity on the defense, education, science and R&D spending of two countries, your conclusions are greatly impartial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Please get your facts right. ISRO and DRDO are not run by the same people. They are two completely different organisations.
If I failed to explain my point properly let me try again :- there exists a large group of scientists who have led both ISRO and DRDO in past. eg. APJ Kalam,
Sivathanu Pillai etc.

Because of similarity of their work a lot collaboration takes place, kindly take a hint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
As I have already stated, there is enough "equipment" being used for an informed person to compare MTBFs. It is only after using the equipment that this conclusion has been reached.
Another example of association fallacy and orwellian doublespeak. There is no point to remind Defense forces of the poor record of imported equipment when they are not short of excuses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Misinterpretation of facts. The Navy has been crying for subs for a long time time. It is the GOI that has not responded in time. In fact the CAG report was a wake up call to the GOI for neglecting the plight of the Navy. Take a closer look at the sub fleet of the Navy and its vintage. The reasons for frequent breakdowns will be evident.
I am not misinterpreting facts, the facts support my argument that the reliance on imported equipment have made us extremely vulnerable. Due to geo-strategic issues buying submarines is never easy and various sanctions delay the process that is why we should only encourage indigenization as a hedge against blockades and sanctions.

Still it is no excuse of unreliable imported equipments, submarines are supposed to be used for decades and should not have such a short MTBF. Hence it is nail in the coffin on Defense force's argument that imported equipment is better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Again out of context. I have brought out the life cycle costs of the Mirage, not the cost of upgradation.
I am sorry but YOU statements were / are out of context, let me remind you how :-

For my following comment :-

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
Do you know what forces GOI and Defense Services to resort to that ? Because videshi defense contractors often stop supporting the equipment we bought, or they are for exorbitant prices. For example Mirage or Admiral Gorshkov.
You replied :-

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel386 View Post
According to the latest reports, the life cycle costs of the Mirage is amongst the lowest. So really cant be called expensive or exorbitant!
For which I posted :-

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
Quote:
The reason: a breakdown in India’s long-running negotiations with French aircraft manufacturer, Dassault Aviation, for upgrading 51 Indian Air Force Mirage-2000 fighters. According to senior IAF sources, Dassault has flatly refused to reduce its quote of Rs 10,000 crores (US $2.1 billion) for extending the service life of the IAF’s Mirage-2000 fleet by fitting new radars and avionics. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) considers this price --- Rs 196 crores (US $41 million) per aircraft --- unacceptably high, given that the airframes and engines will not be changed.
Ministry of Defense disagrees with you, and goes on to show how reliance on foreign equipment have made India poorer and vulnerable.
So I started by saying that Defense contractors often stop supporting their own equipment or else charge exorbitant prices, then you wrote that Mirage have low life cycle cost for which I gave you recent development where Ministry is said to be unhappy with Dassault for charging exorbitant amount of money to extent the life of Mirages.

Now you are accusing me of taking things out of context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel386 View Post
How easy it is for you to make a statement like that! After all your life is not in line!
How easy is for you and the Defense Forces to make such a statement and get away without any oversight over purchases. It was BTW as easy as some tend to derided the sacrifice of the Indian scientists who lost their life while serving nation like anyone else in Defense forces.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And again, the Chinese, Americans, French and the Russians themselves do not buy anything that is indigenous. They buy only those equipment that fit their bill.
Chinese had no hesitation to accept their Tanks which you insinuated are of shoddy quality, same with Pakistanis, Americans(earlier M1A1 had lot of issues) and Russians (Who continued with their own tanks in WWII even though Germans had better tanks, and were victorious with help of sheer numbers on their side) and France(Continued with Rafale rather than JSF).

Can you claim that in the above mentioned cases they had no better alternative ? for example JSF vs Rafale ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Yup! And now you are the Expert! Conspiracy theories are all nice, but kindly remember that theories are all they are.
So you are suggesting that Defense personell like you indulge in Conspirace theories and there is no possibility for a cover-up even though not doing so would have hurt Russia's image. And you are saying this while knowing that similar incident have happened in past where many hundreds defense personnel died due to explosion in missile ?

These may seem to you as conspiracy theories but these are Russia's own defense personnel theory for the cause of accident. And I find more weight in their words than some salespeople.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
In the case of Wg Cdr Khanna, the facts have been put on the table and it is the fuse that was to blame.
And you blame DRDO for that and not the OEM that sold you that Aircraft and later on ditched the Defense Forces ? I am sorry Defense Forces are themselves are responsible for that, after all they bought the aircraft from an unreliable company which is not at all unusual as this happens quite often.

Also tell me if there is any company which services EOL unsupported equipment like Jaguar and what made Defense Forces not chose them ?

And BTW whose fault was the crash of the MiG day before the crash of Jaguar, which took life of 4 civilians ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
You do not even have the vaguest idea of what the Defence Forces are all about. So it would be nice, or rather proper, for you not to comment on the attitude of the Forces.
I only pointed out huge flaw in what you posted that it was Human fault and Russians were able to fix it. I also reminded you that Indian Defense Forces can readily accept imported equipment which have had fatal accident, which is not at all the case when it comes to Indian equipment.

And you don't people to question such partiality ?

BTW where was your self control when it came to your opinion on Indian Scientists ? especially in case of those who lost their life while serving the nation ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Again factually wrong. The DRDO does not support the Forces in the maintenance of it's equipment.
Then why are you accusing DRDO for Jaguar accident ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
So please impress upon the DRDO to provide the replacements for the EOL equipment in time. It is the DRDO who promise the moon but deliver nothing that the Forces have EOL equipment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And what "trash" are you talking about? Kindly elaborate.
For that Defense Forces should end their bad habit of changing the goal post and contributing to feature creeps. For example in case of Army first they wanted Arjun to have hit-survivability design then in middle of development they changed their mind and later wanted hit-avoidance features which surprisingly</sarcasm> right at the moment were in T-72s and hastily they purchased thousands of those.

Kindly read Prasun Sengupta's writeup on this :-


Quote:
∑ The Indian Army, which wanted to acquire a MBT incorporating hit-survivability design features (something that the home-grown Arjun Mk1’s design strongly signifies), from late-1982 became surprisingly reconciled to acquiring some 1,900 T-72M/M1s that incorporated hit-avoidance features. This despite the fact that by late 1980 when the Army conducted field trials of the T-72M it found out to its utter horror that basically, with the exception of the T-55, the overall Soviet approach to MBT design in the post-World War II era was found to be flawed on two major counts: namely, the gamble on not being hit rather than on surviving hits, and the refusal to perceive survivability of the tank crew as a quite distinct issue from survivability of the vehicle, with the former having priority over the latter. The combination of these two shortcomings produced design solutions such as the T-72M’s carousel autoloader and ammunition reserve being accommodated on the turret floor. This indeed allowed for a very compact configuration and ensured that the ammunition is less likely to take a direct hit—but it also entailed a very high risk of ignition or sympathetic detonation should the fighting compartment be penetrated, in which case there went the MBT and the crew with it. In fact, in mid-1982 in Lebanon the 105mm APFSDS rounds fired by Israeli Merkava Mk1 MBTs with 105mm rifled-bore guns routinely pierced the Syrian T-72M’s front glacis, went straight through the MBT and exited through the engine compartment, leaving a turretless hulk behind. The Indian Army got a first-hand demonstration of the T-72M’s acute vulnerability in October 1987 when LTTE guerrillas exploded improvised explosive devices underneath two T-72Ms deployed with 65 Armoured Regiment for Operation Pawan during the battle for Jaffna, which resulted in armour penetration and the ensuing catastrophic detonation of the MBT’s ammunition reserve (this being stored in a carousel autoloader on the turret’s floor), resulting in the turrets being blown off. Subsequent events in 1991 during Operation Desert Storm would convincingly highlight the T-72M’s totally flawed design features.

Quote:
Contracting with the MoD: stealing lollipops from babies

The Hawk assembly line in Bangalore. HAL claims that BAE Systems has failed to provide drawings, jigs, and parts according to the agreed schedule. BAE Systems denies the charge.


by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 3rd Nov 09

If India’s military eventually plumps for primarily American equipment, a major reason will be: soldiers, sailors and airmen are completely sick of being gypped through poorly-framed acquisition contracts that entirely favour the foreign suppliers.

Take India’s contract with BAE Systems, UK, for 66 Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers (AJTs), a billion dollar procurement that took 18 years to finalise. That contract, it now emerges, was framed so poorly that today --- with HAL Bangalore blaming BAE Systems for failing to properly transfer technology --- India’s Ministry of Defence can do nothing to twist BAE Systems’ tail.

The MoD now finds that the Hawk contract contains no provisions for liquidated damages in case BAE Systems defaults on its obligations. And, in an act of inexplicable generosity, India’s MoD paid BAE Systems an unprecedented “up-front” amount of 30% of the contract value; such a payment seldom, if ever, exceeds 15%. Now, with more jet trainers needed and the production line facing delays, fresh inquiries have gone out to global manufacturers, restarting procurement afresh.

Why do such fiascos routinely occur? Astonishingly, because India’s MoD does not have the legal experts needed for negotiating and framing complex defence contracts. The MoD’s forlorn Legal Cell, manned by 10-12 lawyers on deputation from the Ministry of Law, comes up during the framing of every defence contract against a battery of specialised contracting experts, an integral part of the establishment of every global arms vendor.

This year, the Indian MoD’s beleaguered and inadequate legal team will oversee capital expenditure of more than Rs 50,000 crores. When the MoD finalises its choice of medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA), these less-than-legal-eagles will have to negotiate and frame a single contract worth Rs 50,000 crores. Supplementary contracts will be needed governing offsets worth half that value again.

Within the MoD, alarm bells have long been sounding. The Solicitor General and the Attorney General have been approached for help in accessing top-class legal advice. But, so far, there has been no response.

The complexity of a defence contract is virtually unparalleled. A “standard contract” is rarely feasible because the usage of each piece of equipment is radically different. Being an international contract, reaching agreement on arbitration is always difficult, especially considering confidentiality and non-disclosure arrangements. Defining “force majeure” is extremely important, especially when governments can invoke national interest during the execution of a contract. The MoD’s civil servants deal routinely with such issues, but without the benefit of solid legal advice.

India’s military has long suffered from flawed and inconsistent contracting, especially with Russian suppliers. Since the early 1980s, India’s strike corps --- the tank units that would spearhead a thrust into Pakistan during war --- have faced frustrating shortages of on-board fitment equipment that an ethical defence vendor would supply as a part of the contract. In an instance that generated much resentment, India’s first T-72 tanks were supplied by Russia without the tarpaulin covers that keep out dust and rain. When the military asked for tarpaulins, Russia demanded a supplementary contract, eventually supplying them at highly inflated prices.

In some contracts, especially those involving the supply of “strategically important” equipment, the vendor has the leverage to ignore his contractual obligations. Russia’s shakedown of India over the cost of the Gorshkov is an example of the limitations of any contract. Linking the Gorshkov sale with the transfer of nuclear submarine technology, Russia dismissed the initial price as “unreal, a mistake”, and demanded a renegotiated price. But, in most defence procurements, a good contract guarantees satisfactory supply as well as a healthy buyer-seller relationship.

US defence companies are confident that the experience of contracting with them --- with no hidden costs, superb product support, and a “partnership” approach towards the Indian users --- will make a big impact on the Indian military. So far, contracting with the US has been relatively smooth, but it is still too early to tell.

The MoD’s lack of capability in defence contracting is just one, especially worrisome, dimension of a broad systemic incompetence in procuring defence equipment. As a Group of Ministers in April 2000, numerous committees and, most recently, an excellent CAG report pointed out, the MoD has failed to put in place a functionally specialised acquisition organisation to handle a task that is clearly far beyond current capabilities.

But instead of a coherent system, procurement continues under 13 different agencies, each reporting to a different functional head. Contracts, after they are concluded, are managed by four different agencies with very little co-ordination among them.
Source : Ajai Shukla: Stealing lollipops from babies

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
As per the Defence Procurement Guidelines, when ever the Armed forces require something, the DRDO is first asked if they can provide it. The moment they say yes, there is no outside vendors that are invited. So, they cannot go back to the OEM. And as always, the goods never come on time!
So let me get this straight, Defense Forces don't go to OEM's first who should be servicing their own equipment rather they go to those who are unfamiliar with the aircraft ?. I am sorry I find this very hard to digest, as the rhetoric is not good enough, kindly back that up with facts and also name any institution out there which services EOL and unsupported aircrafts like Jaguar.




Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
I'm getting tired of saying this, but, again factually wrong! The ASP crash happened due to the external radome breaking up in flight. The radome was designed by DRDO!
If you are sick and tired then back up your ridiculous and IMHO spurious claim.
Looking at how confidentiality AWACS are though there aren't many articles on it, following is an article which refutes your claim and concludes that crash was due to engine failure.

Quote:
India's project to develop an indigenous airborne early warning (AEW) aircraft has been dealt a severe blow with the crash on 11 January of a British Aerospace 748 Airborne Surveillance Platform, about 50km (27nm) from Chennai (Madras), which killed all four crew and four scientists on board.

The loss of the aircraft and scientists "-is a bad blow" dmits Hindustan Aeronautics, which had hoped soon to start a new phase of the project, set up in the early 1990s to develop local technology, partly to overcome failures to obtain either Western or Russian airborne early warning technology.

The aircraft crashed while approaching the Indian naval air stationat Arakonam, Tamil Nadu, from where it was being used for experimental work in support of the AEW demonstrator programme.

After leaving Arakonam for Tambaram air base, the aircraft encountered a problem and made a distress call. According to an Indian navy official, "-the undercarriage was lowered and it was in the final stages of the approach" when it crashed in countryside, 2km from the base.

Although there is no immediate explanation for the crash, fire or engine failure are possible causes. The drag from the large dorsal radome would have meant that maintaining height after an engine failure would be difficult.

The dead scientists, from the Centre for Airborne Systems and the Electronics and Radar Development Establishment, had been carrying out trials work on the aircraft, which was a demonstrator for systems that India hopes to install in an operational
Source:Indian AEW project set back by fatal crash-20/01/1999-Flight International

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
What about the Jaguar? Last known, it was stellar strike fighter!
And yet you overlooked the fact you have mentioned quite often in this very discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The reasons for the poor serviceability of the subs has already been explained.
Never short of excuses for the poor record of imported equipment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And as far as the Mirage upgrade goes, it is stuck up for a clause in the MOD which says that any upgrade that costs more than 50% of the cost of the equipment will not be authorised. Hence the problem is political and the forces have little to do with it! And to suggest that DRDO will be called in to upgrade the Mirage?!! Let them build a proper fighter first!!
I see that you are quite fine with upgrades-maintenance which costs more that 50% of equipment cost. I see this as another reason to support indigenization.




Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Nothing lasts for ever. The equipment was bought decades ago. Surely you want your Forces to be better equipped!!
Another excuse to defend the shoddy quality of imported arms, we don't spend billions on equipment which wears out in years. It is supposed to be in usable condition for a long period of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
You do have a point, but again, the only point of contention for me is that the forces should get the kind of stuff they require. Any thing should not be thrust upon them in the name of indigenisation.
I am sorry I don't know of any example where Defense forces accepted just any indigenous equipment in the name of indigenization, though there are various incidents where Defense Forces have changed the goal post in order to help purchase of foreign equipment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
A very serious allegation!! And how do you quantify this statement sir?
Do I have to mention of numerous cases of Defense-Ministry babus openly favored the foreign equipment for very obvious reason ?

How about the very recent case where very confidential MMRCA contract file ended up in the office of Indian head of Lockheed Martin.

And can you tell me why CBI is probing Ex Naval Chief Admiral Susheel Kumar ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
And do what with those tanks in the China/India context? Use it to climb over the Himalayas? Get real! And read about warfare!
That is why we are buying C-17A Globemasters, and kindly heed your own advice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
At the cost of repetition, read about warfare!
I am sorry, with all your wisdom when it comes to warfare you have failed to explain what stopped Russia and US to enter even a small direct conflict involving two nations armies(If not the threat of nuclear bombs destroying cities of two nations).

I would request you either to accept my argument of disprove it with facts. Or else don't bother.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Not sure about Russia and China, but in America and France, the equpment supplied to the forces are tested by the manufacturers themselves and not by the forces. Dont see why the same cannot apply to the DRDO!
This is again a ridiculous, IMHO all the mentioned nations Defense forces provide input and help in testing of the equipment. Kindly back up your claim.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
It is only when people have died that reservations have come up!
I am sorry you have given an example where the Aircraft flown was NOT MADE BY DRDO. It was made by SPECAT also it is Defense Forces mistake if the OEM didn't provide support for EOL product.

Also where are the reservations for the MiG crash that took place day before Jaguar crash and took life of four civilians ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Not sure of how many are looking for your sympathy, but, don't you think that the chances of the possibility needs to be examined before putting the lives of people at risk. And this is where the MTBF factor that I talked about earlier comes in.
Then what is stopping Defense Forces to compare the MTBF of Arjun Tank and T-90 tank in comparative trials ? If not the bribes ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Having referred to someone with economic background and not having found an answer, I would request you to enlighten me.
Because Government doesn't have unending supply of cash, though the RBI can print as much Rupees as possible but they don't do so. In fact one of RBI's job is the regulate the liquidity in the market. Failure to do so can destroy the economy(Germany's hyperinflation).

Long story short we have limited money and even large portion of money that we spend is through debt so bailing out projects as you have suggested is not possible without bankrupting the nation.(Look at Russia for, the are selling their family silver for not managing economy properly). Recent case would be Iceland.

Also when people buy our money to buy our stuff, that increases our purchasing power. When we buy Russian stuff using their money we increase their purchasing power while we reducing our own. That is why I support indigenization as it improves Quality of life in India not Russia or France etc etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The Army is already in the lookout for its next generation MBT which it hopes to have by 2020. This could be a reason for the Army not wanting to induct the Arjun in large numbers.
Another example of shamelessly wasting tax payers money.


Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
Firstly, it is the Su 30 MKI (FACTS??), and, secondly, the DRDO has nothing to do with it. Thank God!!
I am sorry my mistake, it was a long post and I got confused. But isn't it manufactured in India by HAL ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The defence forces try and get what they require. If they get it from the Russians, then so be it!!
Again you have overlooked one of the most important factor :- bribes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neel385 View Post
The point is, it is very hard to convince someone whose basis of argument is rhetoric. See the facts, maybe things will change.
Well from my POV in many areas of this discussion, you too were short on facts and long on rhetoric :- "read about warfare!"

BTW as I see that you are of belief that you have all the facts and I have only rhetoric, therefore there is no reason to carry on this discussion. Therefore this is my last post defending the competency of our scientists.

p.s. sorry for spelling/grammar mistakes and other mistakes like MiG31MKI.

Also: In Brahmos JV, DRDO have the responsibility for guidance Russian have the responsibility for Ramjet. Brahmos JV CEO have hinted that they will soon use indigenously developed ramjet to get around MTCR and extend range of Brahmos.

Last edited by anmol2k4 : 4th November 2009 at 23:25.
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2009, 23:28   #104
BHPian
 
anmol2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Gr. Noida Aka Gurrator Naveda
Posts: 193
Thanked: 5 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gshanky View Post
Finally does DRDO deserve any credit for Brahmos?
Quote:
Originally Posted by windiesel View Post
Pl. be informed that the Brahmos (from Brahmaputra and Moskva) is a carbon copy of an operational russian missile the p-800 Yakhont just the navigational algorithms have been tinkered with. Brilliant marketing effort though!!
In Brahmos JV, DRDO have the responsibility for guidance and Russians have the responsibility for Ramjet. Brahmos JV CEO have hinted recently that they will soon use indigenously developed ramjet to get around MTCR and extend range of Brahmos.
anmol2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2009, 01:23   #105
BHPian
 
gshanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Coimbatore / Bangalore / New York
Posts: 718
Thanked: 13 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anmol2k4 View Post
In Brahmos JV, DRDO have the responsibility for guidance and Russians have the responsibility for Ramjet. Brahmos JV CEO have hinted recently that they will soon use indigenously developed ramjet to get around MTCR and extend range of Brahmos.
From what i read, the future aim is to develop a hypersonic cruise missile since brahmos is supersonic only (it is the first supersonic cruise missile in the world ). - The Hindu : News / National : India, Russia to develop new hypersonic cruise missile

Though brahmos has been developed for only 290 km range, what is stopping us from doing a brahmos-i that can go more than 290 km? Why is there no news about this development? Is it something that could be conceived and developed in secret for obvious reasons?
gshanky is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pre-War Military Vehicles in India harit Vintage Cars & Classics in India 69 18th December 2017 13:16
Government to launch indigenously developed electric vehicle platforms Rajeevraj The Indian Car Scene 11 15th November 2015 17:05
Military Registration Problem xtreme power Shifting gears 15 2nd October 2013 15:43
Military Green not allowed for private vehicles? satyamenon Modifications & Accessories 64 26th August 2013 16:47
WorldWar Jeep/Truck/Military Vehicles Manuals Twinn 4x4 Technical 4 19th April 2012 11:37


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 22:44.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks