India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Nitesh
BRFite
Posts: 903
Joined: 23 Mar 2008 22:22
Location: Bangalore
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Nitesh »

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/com ... 388593.ece
Bharat Forge Ltd has informed BSE regarding a Press Release dated February 07, 2013 titled "Bharat Forge and Elbit Systems Establish a JVC for Artillery Systems in India"
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Vipul »

Tata Defence Vehicles - Tata Sky.

Let’s face it: we’re not exactly in the friendliest part of the world. Sure, it’s a good thing that unlike Africa or West Asia, we don’t have a stupid civil war every time someone as much as burps. But we aren’t exactly in lovey-dovey terms with two of our biggest neighbours. As a senior US government official said, Pakistan is an international headache – well, they are always up to something, aren’t they? And if our neighbour to the East doesn’t run us over with $10 iPads, Diwali fairy lights and fake Ray Bans, they have the potential to run us over with their overwhelming military might. Either ways, we need military power, lots of it. Imagine what will happen if one day a Chinese general misreads ‘Hello! Greetings from India!’ as ‘Bring it on, Manchurian 65!’ and decides to go all out on us? Mind you, they’re not great with their English (for the moment), so that is a distinct possibility.

In case you’re wondering what this multi-million wheel behemoth does, it’s a gigantic transporter that hauls missiles and rockets intended to obliterate a destination of your choice. Of course, you need to be within range for optimum performance; for example, if you’re carrying our home-grown ballistic nuclear-capable Prahaar missile, you’ll need to be within 150 km of the target but if you forego the nuclear bit – tough task, I know – you can plonk on our newest cruise missile, the BrahMos. This oddly-named projectile is no joke: it’s the fastest cruise missile in the world. On the other hand, the Prahaar can strike a target 150 km away in all of 250 seconds within 10 metres of error. In the bigger scheme of things, in the event of a subcontinental war, these tactical defence systems could take out targets even before airstrikes start. Used correctly, it’s a big tactical advantage and if this missile carrier isn’t up to scratch, the missiles will never be at the right place at the right time, our defence strategy would have a serious shortcoming and we’d all be forced to eat authentic (for a change) Sichuan cuisine for a long time to come. So, for the love of Indian-Chinese cuisine, this, the Tata 5252c 12x12 carrier should work flawlessly in the most testing of times.

Because it’s customary with ultra-large vehicles to begin by feeding raw, unbelievable numbers into your noggin, that’s exactly what I shall do. Firstly, the 5252c was developed right here at home in association with various defence research agencies like DRDO. And it’s a big deal. Quite literally so. With the trailer attached, it’s long enough to have different time zones for the front and aft. It’s got 12x12 all-wheel drive, a steering system that articulates both the front two and the last two rows of wheels and a 15-litre Cummins diesel that churns out 203 kgm of torque. Phew! And that’s just for starters. The main course is when you fire it up in a cloud of black smoke accompanied by a turbo whistle loud enough for a factory to think that their shift is over. But holy lord, once you get used to the fact that you have half of the Tata factory attached, it’s easier to drive than an Indica! Oh yes, you heard that right. But first, you have to climb to the first floor where your cabin is located. With interior bits that closely resemble those used on their Prima series, it’s a comfortable, if a bit large, place to be with terribly efficient air-conditioning, a 7-speed Allison auto tranny that’s a doddle to use and pneumatic seats that are better than a lot of luxury cars out there! Rest assured, when the world around them is being pulverised, the crew would hardly notice. In the midst of the hundred-odd buttons inside, they even have a button that seemingly summons a hare. ‘Dinner?’ I thought out loud, pointing at the button but the Tata chap wasn’t amused. It is in fact the electronic brain managing this complicated drivetrain with which you can customise how the vehicle responds to the terrain. Nifty, we must say, though the Dinner Summoner button isn’t a bad idea either.

As I tell the Allison gearbox to get us going, it’s frankly a bit baffling to discover just how easy it is to drive. Sure, on a test track, the size was more or less out of the equation and even then, it comes to me so naturally. Obviously, the 12x12 is in 12x10 mode on the road and it’s best for hauling massive loads through terrain where everything else would get stuck or sink entirely. Gradeability? Hah. 30 degree at full load. Fordability? Hah again. Up to 1400 mm. Ground clearance? 400 mm! Levels of respect demanded? Yoda league. The message put forth is simple: whatever it is, bring it on. The shifting is done seamlessly, so unlike regular trucks, you’re not stumped when you’re instructed to start off in 6th. I think to myself - ‘Hmm. This is sprightly. Probably because there’s nothing in the back there.’ but I was so completely wrong because there was a massive load in the back being used for the prototyping tests. Stunning, especially for a prototype.

As anyone in the BSM bay will tell you, I’m a sucker for these massive army haulers primarily because they’re gigantic and awesome, awesomely gigantic and every point in between. It’s the stuff of dreams, really. No wonder then, that as a tiny 6-year old Army kid, the only reason I used to run out of the house in the scorching 48-degree heat of the desert – in not much clothing, as my mother would point out – was to catch a sight of those giganormous Tatras that used to haul T-72s to the sands. With the ground underneath rumbling, my feet scorching and the unmistakable sound of that massive diesel echoing across the dunes, I was convinced that nothing in this world could possibly be more awesome. And only once in my life has that been proven wrong. How? Well, put simply: T-72 onboard, full-clip, miles of desert, tears of joy in my eyes.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

dinesha wrote:....

no fancy technological stuff is causing the delay.
The delay and long indigenization process is because of same-old service vs DRDO and highly ambitious GSQR story. Following 2010 paper by Group Captain Bhanoji Rao answers the intricacies..

http://www.aerospaceindia.org/Air%20Pow ... er%202.pdf
Very sorry state of affairs. The DRDO, OFB and IAF should get together and solve the problem. The whole setup is siloed and are impacting IAF effectiveness.

This article came out in 2010 and am sure its the same even now.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

Odd that OFB doesn't make fuzes for the aircraft delivered materials.

http://ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh=A-E-P-C&lang=en

The above writer is correct.
nikhil_p
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 378
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 19:59
Location: Sukhoi/Sukhoi (Jaguars gone :( )Gali, pune

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by nikhil_p »

IIRC the fuses are made by BEL (radio proximity type)...remember reading it somewhere, will try to dig it up.
A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1206
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by A Sharma »

HAL Connect

Russian Firm to Buy HAL Radar Computers Worth Rs 65 Crores

Indigenously designed and developed Radar Computer I and Radar Computer II are being manufactured since 2004 at HAL's Avionics Division, Hyderabad. These are integrated into airborne system in Su-30 MKI A/C. Radar Computers are critical for mission operation on the A/c. RC-1 is used for accomplishing coordinated mission operations among related avionics systems in the A/c, whereas RC-II is used to accomplish the co-ordinated operations within the Radar systems. Till date, about 300 of these computers are produced by the Division for various aircraft programmes of Indian Air Force and Algerian Air Force through Rosobornexport.

Delivery schedule commences from January 2014. The total value of the contract is $ 12.2 million (Rs 65 crore). Currently, these radar computers are being manufactured at Kasargod Unit of HAL which was recently inaugurated by the Defence Minister, Shri A. K. Antony.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Karan M »

For the Russian Su-30 SMs no doubt. Interesting to observe that the Russians replaced all the other systems sourced from multiple nations, but kept these critical ones for the radars intact.

Interestingly, Take Off (Andrei Fomin, recently at AeroIndia) mentions that for the PAKFA AESA radar as well, negotiations are underway with India to decide design workshare for the radar systems. The IAF may well have specified a more updated system than what the Russian AF has asked for.

Another interesting thing in the PDF is that the final upgrades for the Su-30 MKI radar were just delivered in 2012!! Could well be that the radar has already been upgraded above and beyond what was initially planned.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20773
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Karan M »

ramana wrote:
dinesha wrote:....

no fancy technological stuff is causing the delay.
The delay and long indigenization process is because of same-old service vs DRDO and highly ambitious GSQR story. Following 2010 paper by Group Captain Bhanoji Rao answers the intricacies..

http://www.aerospaceindia.org/Air%20Pow ... er%202.pdf
Very sorry state of affairs. The DRDO, OFB and IAF should get together and solve the problem. The whole setup is siloed and are impacting IAF effectiveness.

This article came out in 2010 and am sure its the same even now.
Not the same anymore at least in some respects. Please see aeroindia seminar video on Akash by DRDL to see the amount of care & effort given to design data documentation, and TOT of process/technology etc to the manufacturing agencies. Lessons have been learnt and already implemented.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

KaranM and Indranil, A dated chapter of a book.
Chap 6

Rest of the book on knowledge management and HRD in labs
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by VinodTK »

70 per cent of defence machinery imported while Indian defence companies find government a hindrance
When drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles, of the US Army fly over enemy territory, they use a technology developed by a little-known Bangalore company to send back crystal clear images to their command centre. This technology is used by armed forces around the world, except in India — the home of its developer ArvindLakshmikumar, who founded Tonbo Imaging four years ago.


Tonbo developed this technology for Europe's biggest defence company which, in turn, sold it to various armed forces. Lakshmikumar, 36, had been keen to sell such innovations to the Indian armed forces, but gave up after he realised the futility of trying to convince the authorities here that his products were among the best in the world.

He shifted his headquarters to Singapore, as he felt that he could crack the global market for his technologies better from the Southeast Asian city state. Lakshmikumar's ordeal is just another example of the difficulties and frustrations that small Indian aerospace and defence companies have to go through, facing a hostile bureaucratic set up on the one side and a colonial mindset on the other.

"There is a serious colonial hangup for foreign products," says Lakshmikumar. "For an Indian bidder they have millions of questions." The milieu is skewed so against the local players that while an Indian bidder is asked to pay a security deposit, a foreign bidder is not.

"The system is structured in such a way that even if we need a pin, we prefer to import it rather than make it ourselves," says Smita Purushottam of the New Delhi-based think tank Institute of Defence Studies & Analyses.

India imports more than 70 per cent of its weapons and technology for its defence needs, making it a sitting duck for security threats during wars. In contrast, even Pakistan has a more proactive policy that encourages domestic manufacturers. China is in a different league altogether. The mindset of those in power is also hurting the economy. India will spend $100-150 billion (about Rs 5.4-8.1 lakh crore) on defence modernisation programmes by 2022, according to consulting firm Frost & Sullivan. It will also become the fourth biggest defence spender in the world by 2020, behind the US, China and Russia, according to IHS, a US-based information and analytics provider.


A number of Indian companies have developed advanced technologies for the defence sector but find that the government is being a hindrance, not a help, say Peerzada Abrar and Biswarup Gooptu


"The best of our minds are utilised by other countries for their progress," says A Sivathanu Pillai, a scientist and CEO of BrahMos Aerospace, the maker of BrahMos missile. "Put them on the same level field, and they will compete." The government said its intention was to promote local companies when it unveiled its offset policy in 2005-2006, requiring foreign firms winning defence contracts to ensure that at least 30 per cent of the contracted value is invested in India. But most of it is still on paper.
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by VinodTK »

India's defence ambitions hinge on 'over-extended' firm Hindustan Aeronautics Limited
Bangalore: India wants to throw off the tag of world's biggest arms importer and produce its own top-class weaponry, but its ambitions hinge on a state-run group renowned for its inefficiencies.

HAL, or Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, has a near-monopoly in the country's aerospace industry and its presence was unmissable at this year's India air show, which wrapped up in Bangalore on Sunday.

Its huge stand and ubiquitous branding underlined the scale of a company that already produces under licence the British-supplied Hawk trainer aircraft, Russia's SU-30 multi-role fighter jets, and European helicopters among others.

It is also the crucial player in the world's biggest arms deal for 126 Rafale fighter planes, the first of which will be made in France by Dassault Aviation with the remaining 108 to be assembled by HAL in India until 2018.

The government is forcing foreign arms suppliers to share their technology with HAL in the hope that it can one day manufacture its own products of the same calibre.

But an Indian industrialist, speaking to AFP on condition of anonymity, was scathing in describing the management culture of the heavily unionised public sector giant and its 35,000 employees.

"What could be done in 10 minutes may take 10 months. Nobody takes responsibility," he said.

Unrealistic expectations?

James Hardy, an analyst at the defence consultancy IHS Jane's, says that HAL is "overextended", expressing an opinion largely shared by observers at home and abroad.

The group posted sales of 142 billion rupees ($2.6 billion) last year but is aiming to almost quadruple this to $10 billion in the next seven years, chief executive R.K. Tyagi told reporters at Aero India.

Tyagi, who took up the job in March 2012, detailed new plans for the company to expand into airport infrastructure, as well as plane and drone maintenance.

But Dipankar Banerjeee, a retired army general who founded the New Delhi-based Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS), says HAL's "deliveries are too slow and indigenous development has been less than satisfactory.

"The Indian public and Indian armed forces are not very happy with HAL," he says.

India's reliance on foreign weapons is due to the inadequacy of its own sector, which comprises HAL, the state-run Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), its affiliates and a few smaller private players.

One notoriously late and over-budget project was for home-grown light combat aircraft called Tejas, which have taken more than 25 years to develop and are still several years away from being inducted by the airforce.

HAL's helicopters are also seen as inferior to foreign products, leading India to negotiate with European, American and Russian manufacturers for hundreds of new choppers.

The only show in town

But the group represents the doorway into the huge Indian market and foreign groups queuing for business for New Delhi know they must embrace it.

"It's a client and a partner which cannot be ignored, with very significant volumes," said Eric Lenseigne, the head of Indian operations for French group Thales which has been in India for the past 60 years.

Eurocopter, which sold its helicopter licences to HAL in the 1960s, praised the group. "If you have a happy marriage, why would you divorce?" said chief executive Lutz Bertling.

The heads of the Indian armed forces are known for their more frank assessments.

"Unfortunately there is no other big aircraft company," said IPCS's Banerjee, who hopes that private companies will play a bigger part in future.

"The armed forces are very keen that the private sector takes a bigger role in research, development and production in collaboration with foreign firms," he said.

The chief executive of Dassault Aviation, Eric Trappier, has signed a partnership with one of India's biggest private companies, Reliance, which despite having no prior experience will be brought into the Rafale deal.

Its role is set to be defined in the ongoing negotiations for the sale, which Dassault is striving to sign this year after several delays since the company was chosen as preferred bidder in early 2012.

The purchase and amount of technology that will be transferred to India in the deal are issues set to be taken up by French President Francois Hollande during a trip to India on Thursday and Friday.
Asit P
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 14 May 2009 02:33

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Asit P »

70 per cent of defence machinery imported while Indian defence companies find government a hindrance
When drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles, of the US Army fly over enemy territory, they use a technology developed by a little-known Bangalore company to send back crystal clear images to their command centre. This technology is used by armed forces around the world, except in India — the home of its developer ArvindLakshmikumar, who founded Tonbo Imaging four years ago.


Tonbo developed this technology for Europe's biggest defence company which, in turn, sold it to various armed forces. Lakshmikumar, 36, had been keen to sell such innovations to the Indian armed forces, but gave up after he realised the futility of trying to convince the authorities here that his products were among the best in the world.

He shifted his headquarters to Singapore, as he felt that he could crack the global market for his technologies better from the Southeast Asian city state.
A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1206
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by A Sharma »

Certificate for Provisional Clearance for Limited Series Production of Wankel Engine for Nishant UAV


Certificate for Provisional Clearance for Limited Series Production of Wankel Engine for Nishant UAV
- A CSIR-DRDO Partnership

The auditorium at ADE “Sameeksha” was witness to a significant event that took place on 7th February 2013 at 8.00pm. The provisional clearance certificate was issued to the indigenous 55hp wankel rotary combustion engine which was developed under a joint program between CSIR- NAL and DRDO for the Nishant UAV built by ADE, DRDO. This event attains significance due to the fact that very few engines developed in the country have been issued flight clearance by CEMILAC, the certification wing of the DRDO. The occasion was chaired by Dr V K Saraswat, SA to RM, DG DRDO. Dignitaries who attended the event included Shri G Elangovan, CC R&D (Avionics & Aero), Shri PS Krishnan, Director, ADE, Shri Shyam Chetty, Director, NAL, Dr Manmohan Singh, Director, VRDE, Dr. C.P. Ramnarayanan, Director, GTRE and Dr K Tamilmani, CE CEMILAC. Representatives from NAL, CEMILAC, VRDE & ADE were present for the occasion. The SA in his key note address spoke on the importance of collaborative work culture.

The Wankel engine has been actively considered for powering light aircraft and UAVs in view of its unique advantages such as a relatively small size and a correspondingly high specific output. In view of the salient features of the engine which makes it a suitable power plant for light weight aviation, an indigenous wankel engine development program was initiated by DRDO. The program to design and develop a flight worthy wankel engine was jointly taken up by CSIR-NAL, VRDE, and ADE. NAL, with its earlier exposure while working on Wankel engine for hang glider, took up the development of core engine for DRDO.

NAL designed and developed the core engine, VRDE and ADE were in-charge of peripheral systems and flight testing respectively. As per the MOU two flight worthy proto type engines were delivered. The first engine successfully completed a 40 min maiden flight on 31st march 2009 at the Kolar airfield. The UAV was recovered safely at the intended place at the dried-up Muduvadi Lake. The flown engine underwent 20 hours and 10 hours of pre and post flight tests respectively. The post-flight test was carried out confirmed that the engine’s performance was matching with the pre-flight performance.

Based on the NAL Design, DRDO initiated fabrication of 20 engines with help of a Hyderabad based private firm.

The second flight test of the engine was carried out on 20th June 2012 .The flight took off at 1430 hrs in the afternoon and climbed to an altitude of 1.9 km. The total mission duration was 1 hour 45 min.

The first three engines produced by DRDO based on NAL design, also flight tested and the flight tests were up to requirements of the mission. Subsequently, CEMILAC accorded Certificate for ‘Limited Series Production’ on 7th February 2013.

The Wankel engine is the first of its kind that was totally designed and developed in the country. This type of engines are used for powering smaller air vehicles, UAVs, target drones and also in automotive (Mazda, and Racing Cars), out-board motor for boats and other industrial applications in particular for power generation, typically up to 80 kW.

Steve Mithran
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/pub/techfoc ... /large.htm

Old news report with come interesting uses
LARGE CALIBRE FLEXIBLE LINEAR-SHAPED CHARGES

. Conventional cutting techniques are not suitable for cutting hard metallic and non-metallic targets in milliseconds, especially in hostile conditions. To perform the cutting of targets in adverse environment, directed explosive energy systems preferably in the form of Flexible Liner Shaped Charges (FLSCs) can be deployed.

The FLSC essentially consists of an explosive core enclosed in a linear ductile metal sheath. On detonation, the shock-wave collapses and transforms the inverted ‘V’ section (called linear) into high velocity metallic jet, which performs the task of progressive linear cut in the target plate. DRDO has already developed a number of low calibre FLSCs with explosive loading ranging from 0.8 to 25 g/m length of charge.

DRDO has now developed the design of high calibre FLSC with an explosive core of hexagonal shape with inverted ‘V’ in contrast to half-moon shape explosive core of low calibre FLSCs. The machinery required for the extrusion of large calibre FLSCs has been designed and fabricated indigenously. Large calibre FLSCs with RDX loading from 65 to 250 g/m, were extruded and evaluated for their cutting capability in mild steel plates. These systems have been successfully tested for cutting of different weight class of Air Force bombs. The lengths up to 1 m, which meet all operational requirements, can be extruded using this facility.

This development will considerably improve the capability of rapid action forces entrusted with the task of quick cutting of strategic targets encountered in offensive operations.
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by kshirin »

VinodTK wrote:70 per cent of defence machinery imported while Indian defence companies find government a hindrance
When drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles, of the US Army fly over enemy territory, they use a technology developed by a little-known Bangalore company to send back crystal clear images to their command centre. This technology is used by armed forces around the world, except in India — the home of its developer ArvindLakshmikumar, who founded Tonbo Imaging four years ago.


Tonbo developed this technology for Europe's biggest defence company which, in turn, sold it to various armed forces. Lakshmikumar, 36, had been keen to sell such innovations to the Indian armed forces, but gave up after he realised the futility of trying to convince the authorities here that his products were among the best in the world.

He shifted his headquarters to Singapore, as he felt that he could crack the global market for his technologies better from the Southeast Asian city state. Lakshmikumar's ordeal is just another example of the difficulties and frustrations that small Indian aerospace and defence companies have to go through, facing a hostile bureaucratic set up on the one side and a colonial mindset on the other.

"There is a serious colonial hangup for foreign products," says Lakshmikumar. "For an Indian bidder they have millions of questions." The milieu is skewed so against the local players that while an Indian bidder is asked to pay a security deposit, a foreign bidder is not.

"The system is structured in such a way that even if we need a pin, we prefer to import it rather than make it ourselves," says Smita Purushottam of the New Delhi-based think tank Institute of Defence Studies & Analyses.

India imports more than 70 per cent of its weapons and technology for its defence needs, making it a sitting duck for security threats during wars. In contrast, even Pakistan has a more proactive policy that encourages domestic manufacturers. China is in a different league altogether. The mindset of those in power is also hurting the economy. India will spend $100-150 billion (about Rs 5.4-8.1 lakh crore) on defence modernisation programmes by 2022, according to consulting firm Frost & Sullivan. It will also become the fourth biggest defence spender in the world by 2020, behind the US, China and Russia, according to IHS, a US-based information and analytics provider.


A number of Indian companies have developed advanced technologies for the defence sector but find that the government is being a hindrance, not a help, say Peerzada Abrar and Biswarup Gooptu


"The best of our minds are utilised by other countries for their progress," says A Sivathanu Pillai, a scientist and CEO of BrahMos Aerospace, the maker of BrahMos missile. "Put them on the same level field, and they will compete." The government said its intention was to promote local companies when it unveiled its offset policy in 2005-2006, requiring foreign firms winning defence contracts to ensure that at least 30 per cent of the contracted value is invested in India. But most of it is still on paper.

i have heard similar stories- SMEs face serious hindrances in selling their products in India. It is a travesty that they have to first sell abroad before being accepted in their own country. We need to change this mindset.
sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by sourab_c »

^ it all starts at home. Start by buying Made in India goods if possible. Teach your family and relatives to buy Indian. You won't believe how many times I have snapped at my dumb, rich relatives for buying overpriced Chinese crap for their homes and then boasting about it. I have even embarrassed a lot of them in mixed company.

Making trips to China by local businessmen to look for manufacturers has become common practice despite having Indian manufacturers for the same.

We are our own biggest enemies. 200 years of colonialism has done a lot of damage to our psyche and I fear that it wont change anytime soon.

/ot /rant
Varoon Shekhar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2178
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Varoon Shekhar »

Way to go, Sourab! There are lots of made in India products. In Canada, the US and elsewhere, many of the items that are almost always imported from China, Mexico et al, are made and used in India. Things like fans, furniture, linen, clothing, shoes, utensils, lamps, lightbulbs, light tubes, buckets, water heaters, room air conditioners, bathroom fixtures etc. Lots of day-to-day objects are all made in India. I'm glad to say I didn't have to embarrass my elderly relatives ;-) Their only real Chinese product is a fly swatter, which was available for about 50 rupees less than the comparable Indian one. And they certainly were not "proud" of having bought it. Cost was the main consideration. They are not the types to go around proudly flaunting anything, let alone a non-Indian item.
JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7127
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by JE Menon »

And almost all of the made in India items are better quality. Remember that it is not only buying Indian items. I recall that the old slogan used to be "Be Indian, Buy Indian"... While that still remains true, we should not forget that for the 21st century "Be Indian, Sell Indian" might be more appropriate - a slogan I believe coined by shiv on BRF a long time ago. Make it a point to buy Indian made, or products of Indian owned companies as much as possible. Be conscious of it and it won't be so difficult over time. It is satisfying. In the old days it used to be impossible because we did make a lot of crap and it simply did not compare. Those days are gone.

Sorry for OT :)
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

And also "Be Indian, dont buy Paki" should be a corollary.
member_22906
BRFite
Posts: 305
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by member_22906 »

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2013/02/v ... -them.html
India leads the world in corruption in arms imports and the gap is widening as we import more and more weaponry. But in taking action against the guilty we content ourselves with political bluster and self-defeating bans. Defence Minister AK Antony’s “strong action” against Italian defence giant Finmeccanica, and its Anglo-Italian helicopter subsidiary AgustaWestland, is aimed at making him sound like a man of steel but is, in fact, a short-sighted reaction that is meant to --- but will fail to --- defuse the opposition’s equally motivated criticism.


Mr Antony has unilaterally “initiated action for cancellation of contract for procurement of 12 AW101 helicopters for the use of VVIPs”, by sending AgustaWestland a show cause notice asking why New Delhi should not cancel the Rs 4,000 crore contract signed in 2010. Just three of the twelve helicopters ordered have been delivered so far while India has already paid at least 40 per cent of the contract amount, according to knowledgeable persons, including former IAF boss, Air Chief Marshal Fali Major.


There is no proof yet of any wrongdoing. New Delhi has acted on the basis of an investigation report, filed by Italian prosecutors in Milan. The report alleges payment of Euro 51 million (Rs 350 crore) by Finmeccanica to secure the Indian contract. The case has not yet come to trial, though the evidence has persuaded an Italian magistrate to allow the arrest of Finmeccanica head, Giuseppe Orsi. The Italian judiciary has refused to release the investigation report; we know of the case only from media leaks, which the Italian authorities have not denied.


Until there is a conviction by the Italian judiciary, or until the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) determines prima facie wrongdoing (Antony referred the case to the CBI only last week) any move towards terminating the contract with AgustaWestland would be legally untenable. On Saturday, the company flatly denied wrongdoing and said that would reply accordingly to the show cause statement. On what legal basis then would Antony be proceeding?


Might the CBI succeed in actually obtaining proof of malfeasance, if it occurred? Going by its record in such cases, that seems unlikely. The CBI has little expertise on defence procurement, and the agency has repeatedly proved unable to obtain responses to letters rogatory, investigate money trails and hawala networks, or direct investigations towards the influential political figures that are often the recipients of defence payoffs.


So what might AgustaWestland do if Antony unilaterally cancelled the contract? If this were the United States --- where the Department of Defense has the financial clout to ensure that companies like BAE Systems have paid $400 million fines for apparent bribery --- AgustaWestland and its parent company, Finmeccanica, might have quietly fallen in line in the interests of future business. But India’s defence ministry does not have the weight to unilaterally cancel such a large contract, even though Finmeccanica subsidiaries like Selex, Wass, Oto Melara and MBDA do substantial business with our import-loving military. In 2009, Selex Sistemi Integrati (a Finmeccanica subsidiary) dragged the MoD to court in 2009, charging that the Tata group had been favoured over Sistemi in a Rs 1,000 crore contract for modernization of air field infrastructure (MAFI) in 30 IAF bases.


With the AW101 contract four times as large as the MAFI one, AgustaWestland would almost certainly challenge any cancellation by dragging it into arbitration. Since the Indian payment for the AW101 is currently ahead of helicopter delivery, New Delhi would end up a major financial loser by freezing the status quo. And the IAF would not want to be left with the unenviable task of operating two types of VVIP helicopters; and sourcing lifetime spares and overhaul for three AW101s from AgustaWestland.


Such embarrassments would continue for as long as India remains a major buyer of defence equipment. The only way out of the MoD’s downward spiral of purchases, scams, cancellations and blacklistings is the systematic and relentless indigenization of defence equipment. But a militarily and strategically illiterate MoD has, in the absence of any counter-narrative, bought into the military’s fiction that if “modernization” were not pursued (i.e. quick buys from overseas), national security interests would be severely threatened. In fact, the most serious challenge to our military preparedness is not any external threat, but the regrettable absence of home built defence systems and our crippling reliance on rapacious overseas suppliers.


It is time to end all but the most pressing overseas procurements. The defence ministry needs to form purpose-structured consortiums of companies --- chosen from both public and private sectors --- and task them to develop specific defence systems. For example, the elusive chimera of importing artillery guns must be buried forever. Instead, the government should task the DRDO’s Armament R&D Establishment (ARDE), Bharat Forge, Tata Power and L&T to produce a working gun by 2017. The army must be goaded into working with this coalition, and told its only option is an indigenous gun.


The Make category of the Defence Procurement Policy permits such consortiums. Only two defence systems are currently being developed under the Make procedure – a tactical communication system (TCS) and a future infantry combat vehicle (FICV). There should be at least a hundred.


If operational preparedness suffers in the short or even medium term, that price must be paid. This strategic decision must be backed by cross-party political consensus, obtained with an agreement that the network of industrial structures that will arise from serious indigenization will be shared across ruling party and opposition constituencies. Ending this spiral of shameful scandals through indigenization is essential for national pride; strategic autonomy; and for building the defence capability that must backstop any bid for great power.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by merlin »

Assorted Shuklas writing this is all fine but do the services know the first thing about supporting indigenous R&D in the defence sector? Judging by the import friendly nature of the beast, the answer is a resounding no.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ramana »

The pdf in DRDO thread blames the lack of fail safe mode for the fuzes and that DRDO/OFB fuzes are not used by IAF any longer. OFB webpage does not show any fuzes being made. Old DRDO Techfocus which used to mention fuzes designed by them is also no longer there.

Following 2010 paper by Group Captain Bhanoji Rao answers the intricacies.. in AriPower Journal:

Air launched weapons


......The fuzes for the aviation bombs were developed by ARDE. However,
their usage has been discontinued as incidents of air burst occurred due to
certain design deciencies. The ARDE was initially reluctant to accept that
there were deciencies in design. However, by the time ARDE accepted
the need to design the fuzes in the fail safe mode, the IAF had stopped
using these fuzes and adapted a Russian origin fuze as the common fuze
for all bombs.
Regarding the live ammunition for aircraft guns, OFB is
unable to make this due to difculties in quality assurance problems for
fuzes. Therefore, the live ammunition is being imported and the practice
ammunition is being made in India
.......
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Flight Safety

Post by ramana »

ARDE page:

http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/ARDE/Engli ... chieve.jsp

Retarder Tail Unit

Low-level bombing attack has become inescapable in order to evade detection by the enemy radar and consequent missile and AD gun fire. With conventional free-fall gravity bombs, however, the mother aircraft is still in the danger zone when the bomb impacts. RetARDEr Tail Unit (RTU) and fuze system developed by ARDE for the 450 kg (1000 lb) bomb enables high-speed low-level release of this bomb by our strike aircrafts. The fall-velocity of the bomb is retARDEd by a drogue parachute and the aircraft flies ahead of the
danger zone before the bomb impacts. A sophisticated fuze provides the necessary safeties. Our front-line strike aircraft are now equipped with RTU fitted with 450 kg bomb
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

A News account of a CAG report on ARDE dated 6 Dec 2012:

13 of 46 projects completed by ARDE Pune
The 2011-12 Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) report on the union government (Defence Services) Army and Ordnance Factories has heavily criticised defence research organisations for their high rate of failure in completing projects. The CAG reports reveal that the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune completed only 13 projects of 46 closed projects in the last 15 years.

The report also points out that in many cases, delay and failure of the projects led to dependence on imports.

The audit further points out that of the total 55 staff projects taken up on the basis of specific demands from the armed forces in the last 15 years, only 46 projects have been closed. The 13 projects were completed at a cost of Rs67.83 crore.


The audit has pointed out lack of coordination between the laboratory and the armed forces, and mentions that both the laboratory and the armed forces are parts of the Ministry of Defence and yet there is no authority to reconcile their differences. The autonomous functioning of these organisations was responsible for the slow progress of these projects according to the audit.

The report has also revealed that of the 46 staff projects, 37 projects did not adhere to the original time schedule. It also mentions that many projects were not successful, due to the frequent extensions in the date of completion. The CAG report mentions that before taking up such projects, the formulation of General Staff Qualitative Requirements (GSQR) should have been done, as in some cases, the projects were taken without these qualitative requirements or frequent changes were made in the qualitative requirements.

{Ill formed requirements and scope changes. So the CAG has inquired if the cutomer mandeted those changes or ARDE increased the scope themselves!. I note on the ARDE awards pages there are quite a few armed services people getting awards as team members and leaders. So what gives?}

The report also states that ARDE has no mechanism to relate success or failure of projects with personnel deputed on them, which could facilitate the assessment of the output of scientists or the technical officers.The report also states that the credibility, which Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) needs, will be at risk due to the high failure rate of staff projects.

The report also mentions that the ministry in its reply on February 2011 has broadly agreed with the facts brought out in the report, though it differed in some cases. Despite repeated attempts, ARDE spokesperson Kashinath Deodhar couldnt be contacted.

{IOW the lab does not agree and chose to ignore the wrong information put out by CAG. CAG should have given teh ARDe a chance to rebut its audit findings. Otherwise it all becomes a slanging match and does nobdy any good.}
So 55 projects in 15 years sought by services: IA, IAF and IN.
46 taken up and closed to completion
13 were successful at a cost of Rs. 67.83 crore ie Rs 5 crore on the average.

Its too bad they dont give success criteria. Is it those that are in production?
Completion could be successful tech demo but not productionised for various reasons.
Another interesting bit is:
of the 46 staff projects, 37 projects did not adhere to the original time schedule. It also mentions that many projects were not successful, due to the frequent extensions in the date of completion.
And the main reasons are changes in requirements. I think the customer also has to be accountable.

BTW the INSAS, the Pinaka, the 120 mm Arjun gun are all ARDE products and if they cost on average Rs 5 crore each it is awesome!!!!

Anyway to get the original CAG report?

CAG press release points out successful means production started. Many were unsuccessful as users did not accept the product.

http://www.saiindia.gov.in/english/home ... ort_24.pdf

Staff projects taken up by Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) for
delivery of products required by Defence Forces during the last 15 years met with varying
success. Out of 46 projects scrutinized in audit, only 13 underwent production while in the
remaining either no production was required or claims of success could not be substantiated
in audit.
Many of the projects failed as those were taken up without firming up the General
Staff Qualitative Requirements (GSQR) or due to frequent changes in Qualitative
Requirements made by the users. Excess time overrun and non-acceptance of the final output
by the users also led to closure of the projects.
In many cases delay and failures led to
dependence on imports.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

Ind Express has another take:

CAG raps ARDE for delays that cost Govt
'Time overruns in projects forced Centre to import expensive ammo'

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India has come down heavily on the city-based DRDO lab — the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pashan — for its "failures and delays on various projects which forced the central government to import arms equipment worth crores".

In its 17-page report, the CAG has raised questions regarding the laboratory's functioning. "There was no mechanism in place to relate success or failure of projects with personnel deputed on them, which could facilitate the assessment of output of scientists/technical officers... Though ARDE claimed that all the project-related information regarding the achievement of technologies established and manpower involved is documented in Technical Closing Report of projects, ARDE could not furnish this information even for the past five years," the CAG said in the report.

Saying that time overrun/extension was the norm rather than exception in staff projects, the report said: "Eighty per cent — which is 37 out of 46 closed projects reviewed by the audit — did not adhere to the original time schedule. The number of extensions granted to projects ranged from one to 10 and in terms of number of months — between eight and 146 months. In many cases, extension to probable date of completion (PDC) did not lead to the success of the project."

Of 46 closed projects over 15 years valuing Rs 387.35 crore, only 13 were completed at Rs 67.83 crore, while in the rest, either no production was required or claims of success could not be substantiated in the audit, the report said.


The report (No 24 of 2011-12) has referred to six projects which ARDE could not complete on time resulting in losses worth crores. "DRDO in 2002 sanctioned a project for undertaking design and development of ammunition for rocket launchers at an estimated cost of Rs 6.35 crore over four years. The Directorate General of Infantry in April 2011 stated that the rocket launchers developed by ARDE were evaluated four times and after each trial, there were defects to be rectified, modifications to be carried out...These rocket launchers along with the ammunition were procured by the Army from Sweden at 859.90 million SEK," the report said.

{DGI says its the launchers that needed changes after trials. So what gives? And seeing its Sweden how do we know its not a scam to import the foreign maal?[/url]


In another project related to development of an electronic component for ammunition, which was initiated at a cost of Rs 1.86 crore, delays in development led to the Ministry of Defence entering into a contract with a US firm at a cost of Rs 12.13 crore. "The imported equipment was superior to the one developed by DRDO in terms of reliability and technology," said the report. :((

In yet another project involving indigenisation of ammunition C, the report said reliability of the fuse could not be achieved in 12 trials between May 2000-April 2006. "Mass production of the ammunition was expected to result in Foreign Exchange (FE) saving of Rs 760 crore...but the Army ended up spending Rs 340 crore in importing 37,50,000 rounds of ammunition," the report said. :eek:

Besides the delays, the report has pointed at failure in delivering the projects, taking up projects without GSQRs (a prerequisite), change of GSQRs by users — which in this case are the three services and project closures without users' acceptance as other reasons for failure of projects with ARDE. The report concludes, "ARDE had no mechanism in place to assess the output of its human resource deployed on project activities, it also indicated lack of accountability of personnel towards success or failure of the projects."

{This is nonsense. The ARDE Director is responsible for all projects in his lab. He must have a periodic review with the users. How were the 46 projects got time extension without reviews? Projects accepted without GSQRs is naiviety of scientists and changes to GSQRs by users cannot be blamed on ARDE. }

Manish Bharadwaj, scientist and spokesperson, DRDO said, "We are yet to see the report. The director is out of Pune and will not be able to comment unless the DRDO authorities concerned are consulted. :lol:



Digging far enough found the exact report at the CAG site:

No 24-12. Chapter 7 on ARDE Project Mgt
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by VinodTK »

BAE Pulls Out of Joint Venture With India’s Mahindra
NEW DELHI — In a setback to joint ventures in India’s defense sector, the U.K.’s BAE Systems and domestic automobile company Mahindra & Mahindra ended their equity partnership, formed in 2009, called Mahindra Defence Systems.

BAE will forgo its share of 26 percent in Mahindra Defence Systems; no details are known on the purchase price of BAE’s share.
:
:
:
:
Setback on JV With Israel

In April, Mahindra Defence Systems received a setback when its proposal to forge a joint venture with Israel’s Rafael was denied by India’s Foreign Investment Promotion Board. While no official reason was given, Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) sources told Defense News the proposal was shot down for security considerations.

Mahindra Defence Systems and Rafael had proposed setting up development and production facilities to make anti-torpedo defense systems in India. Khutub Hai, retired Indian Army brigadier and current CEO of Mahindra Defence Systems, expressed frustration at the rejection of the joint venture.

“Both Mahindra and Rafael are surprised at the decision as both are reputable companies which have extensive engagement with the government of India on projects related to defense and homeland security,” Hai said.

BAE’s decision to pull out of the Mahindra Defence Systems joint venture will create doubts about the Indian defense market, said Nitin Mehta, defense analyst.

An executive of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the lobbying agency for Indian industries, said the pullout is bad news for the private-sector defense market, which is still in its infancy.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

Gp Capt Bhanoji Rao was wanting this one to be made by OFB:

FAB M62

in 250 kg and 500 kg models.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by pankajs »

Defence deals figure on Tata Motors radar
After having developed a first-of-its-kind multi-axle truck, which can carry and launch the supersonic BrahMos and Prahar missiles and the subsonic Nirbhay missile, the Mumbai-based company is working on future infantry combat vehicles (FICV).
Tata Motors' product line-up include bullet-proof troop carriers, armoured buses, mine protected vehicles, mobile hospital, water bowser and even unmanned aerial vehicle launchers, amongst others.

With increased focus now laid by the defence forces on procuring products developed within the country as against the earlier practice of imports, thus allowing them to save on buying and servicing costs, Tata Motors is eager to cash in on the growing demand. Tata vehicles carry an overall cost advantage of 30-40 per cent over BEML-Tatra trucks.
The multi-axle Tata LPTA5252 (12X12) with a nine-speed automatic and manual gearbox showcased last year at the Defence Expo in New Delhi is the only vehicle of its kind developed by an Indian company capable of carrying missiles.

"The field trails for the 6X6 and 8X8 is over and we have told the Army that our 12X12 is ready and this will be initially required for the BrahMos programme and they have sent across people to have a look at the vehicle and we expect the trails to start this year. It took us two and half years to develop that vehicle," added Noronha.
The company is also investing Rs 600 crore for the development of FICV and a new manufacturing unit in Dharwad, Karnataka, with a capacity to produce 200 vehicles a year. Over the next six months, the company is hopeful of the government inviting tenders for the FICV project, which has the potential for deliveries of around 2,000 units. Mahindra & Mahindra is also amongst the companies short-listed for the FICV.
Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1130
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Hiten »

Professors At IIT-Delhi have proposed a method to increase the speed of VLF communications with submarines

http://www.aame.in/2013/02/iit-delhi-pr ... 0-per.html
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Katare »

This is the smoking gun, Jai ho CAG maharaj ki ....

The LRM developed by DRDO could not achieve the GSQR parameters as the
desired range and rate of fire or burst fire capability could not be met with a
low weight Mortar which was an inconsistency in the GSQR framed by the
Army. Director General (DG) Artillery, decided against going ahead with the
project. As a result, DRDO foreclosed the main project from December 2004
after incurring expenditure of ` 9.29 crore. Subsequently the other project for
Smoke and Illumination ammunition was also foreclosed in December 2005
after incurring an expenditure of ` 1.08 crore. Army HQ while asking for
foreclosure of the project in December 2004 accepted that the range of 10000
meters was not achievable with the low weight stipulations. It was also
accepted that a mortar system with such QRs is not available in the world
market and therefore a fresh GSQR was being initiated.


Ministry in its reply agreed with audit and stated that decision has been taken
to procure the item through global tenders by diluting the GSQR parameters.

However, the fact remains that due to unrealistic GSQR framed by the Army
and DDRD’s pursuance of it, the Staff project could not come to fruition even
after an expenditure of ` 10.37 crore.
nash
BRFite
Posts: 946
Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by nash »

GSQR-Client Requirement
Ministry-Manager
CAG-QA/Tester
DRDO-Developer.

a typical case of IT field.

:mrgreen:
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

X-Posting only relevant part....


Deccan chronicle :

Desi engine to power GSLV
DC | N. Arun Kumar | 22nd Feb 2013

S. Ramakrishnan.
Chennai: The Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) has plans to launch GSLV with its indigenous cryogenic engine in May this year.

.......

Saraswat: India’s tech gap with other countries widening

Scientific advisor to the defence minister and DRDO’s director general V.K. Saraswat on Thursday lamented that India had to depend mostly on foreign nations for technology and the ap between India and other developed nations had widened in the recent past.

Delivering the inaugural address at the national propulsion conference at Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Madras, Dr Saraswat said even though India had made greater advancements in technology based on solid and liquid rocket propulsion it needs to develop a lot in tactical missile propulsion system.

“The present state of engine technology in our country is not up to the mark and the aerospace industry in our country is at crossroads. We have achieved partial success with Kaveri engine flight tested in flying test bed abroad”, he said.

Raising concern over the dependence on foreign technology in aircraft, both defence and civilian, Dr Saraswat said the import cost of technology would cripple national economy and endanger national security, if the country’s scientists didn’t’ develop indigenous technology. :((

“We don’t have state-of-the-art indigenous system worth mentioning. Even simple fuel injection systems are not made on par with international standards”, he added.
Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------

How about defect free steel casings for dumb bombs and fuzes for them?
PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by PratikDas »

From the January 12, 2011 Tarmak007 article:

I am for international collaboration and don’t believe in 100% indigenous development, which is not possible in the current scenario. I don’t believe in reinventing the wheel. Development has to be collaborative,” Saraswat tells Anantha Krishnan M., Aviation Week’s Senior Aerospace and Defense Correspondent (India), in a one-on-one interview for the India Thought Leaders (ITL) series.
-----------------

So, I suppose Dr. Saraswat doesn't want 100% indigenisation but only indigenisation of the high value "state-of-the-art" components :mrgreen:

Setting the bar a bit high.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by shiv »

ramana wrote: Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------
Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by vic »

It is better to have direct import rather than fake JV or screw driver license assembly.
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by pentaiah »

shiv wrote:
ramana wrote: Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------
Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?
Impossible

60 yrs of IITs the temples of modern India can't make a single cylinder engine for scooter/ motor cycle

If they can develop a good carburetor in two years it will be a great achievement forget CRD fuel injectors with out German inputs via BOSCH

Proof ask how much of Tata Nano engine tech came from outside

The simplest way to tank engine or diesel Sub as I often repeated here for is via ALCO engines of WDM2 or WDM 4 engines made at DLW Varanasi
The jokers at Jabalpur factory assemble TATA and Ashoka Leyland vehicles even though they had MAN multi fuel engine technology since 1960s

Even the jokers in BMEL have been making engines for Czech Tech US tech Russian tech but nothing but CKDs or the same foundry Makhi ka Makhi copy that's about it
Sorry I am taking my BP medication now

“Frugal Engineering” was a term coined in 2006 by Renault Chief Executive Carlos Ghosen to describe the design process behind the Tata Nano. This type of design concept was designed to better the those at the bottom of the pyramid. [6] However, “A Study on Consumer Perceptions & Expectations for Tata Nano” shows that the bottom of the pyramid is not very aware of what they are getting when purchasing a Tata Nano. [7] While that paper may seem to focus on the Indian contribution, the Nano was a truly international effort. “Tata turned to Germany’s Bosch for a new engine-management system; Italy’s I.D. E. A. Institute and Trilix for styling and exterior design; India’s Sona Koyo for lightweight steering shafts; America’s Johnson Controls for the seating system; Japan’s Toyo for the engine-cooling Germany’s Behr for the heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning system; and India’s Madras Rubber Factory for tougher than normal rear tires.” [8] So to call it the Indian Car is understandable, but misleading. The Nano is an excellent example of LAPD. The "LAPD (lean principle applied product development) process is implemented with utilization of external sources of knowledge and utilization of the digital technology that support the product development process in order to complement the weakness of technological capability." [9] While the Nano is engineerd from the bottom up, the existing economies of scale from other manufactures are not to be ignored. For the Nano, Tata motors chose to "outsource 85% of the Nano’s components and use 60% fewer vendors than normal to reduce transaction costs and achieve better economies of scale".[10]
Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2579
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Katare »

It's because the joker's mandate limited them to only assembling CKDs/SKD. Only in 2006 OFBs were given mandate/permission to do R&D for new product development.

If you were not supposed to, not designed to and not allowed to do something, how can you be blamed for not getting it done?

The story of private sector is not much different either......

Saala system hi kharab hai kisko dosh de sakte hain
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by vic »

I agree adequate funds are not assigned for R&D. Chinese R&D budget is 10 times that of India.
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by pentaiah »

Ok bhetrenee jawab then why did pvt sector auto giant Tata nano reach out to global village

Yehi tho maar kha Gaya Hindustan Katare Saab ji sir ji
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ramana »

shiv wrote:
ramana wrote: Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------
Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?

You should take it up with Dr Saraswat. Those are his own words. 8)
Post Reply