Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 24 Oct 2014 21:35

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4346 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 109  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 11 Apr 2012 20:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58
Posts: 5518
Exactly. He does not seem to be even bothered about defence preparedness or how local programs get affected. His only concern is his image and hence that of the UPA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Apr 2012 22:10 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Posts: 1385
^^^

IMO, even if a company is blacklisted, only new contracts should be barred. Existing contracts and work should continue as per agreement signed.

It is very stupid of the GoI/MoD to blacklist all the major defense players out there in the international market. Defense contracts, by their very nature, are all susceptible to "corruption" (or influence) of some sort. No where in the world are there a "clean" defense deal :!:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 04:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49
Posts: 4880
x-posting from Army thread

Nikhil T wrote:
Government on overdrive to tide over tanks’ ammunition crunch

Quote:
NEW DELHI: With Army chief General V K Singh ominously warning his entire tank fleet is ``devoid of critical ammunition to defeat enemy tanks'', the government is fast-tracking orders to arm the T-90S main-battle tanks with missiles and specialized ammunition for a greater punch on the western front with Pakistan.

Top sources say contracts for 25,000 Invar missiles and 66,000 APFSDS (armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) rounds for the Russian-origin T-90S fleet as well as 10,000 Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), at an overall cost of around Rs 6,000 crore, are in the final stages.

This comes after Gen Singh wrote a confidential letter to PM Manmohan Singh on March 12, which found its way into the public domain, detailing the critical ``hollowness'' in his 1.13-million-strong Army's war-waging capabilities.

Defence minister A K Antony, incidentally, is slated to hold the third review meeting on Gen Singh's concerns on April 17-18. While the procurement process for the new contracts was initiated quite sometime ago, their swift conclusion has become a top-priority over the last few weeks.

There are two big contracts for the 3UBK-Invar missiles, which are potent anti-tank weapons with a five-km strike range, in the pipeline. The first is for 10,000 missiles for Rs 1,386 crore from Russia for which a ``draft'' CCS (cabinet committee on security) note has already been prepared and circulated, say sources.

The rest 15,000 missiles will be ordered from defence PSU Bharat Dynamics Ltd, at a cost of over Rs 2,000 crore, for which the contract negotiations committee (CNC) is in progress.

Another over Rs 2,000 crore contract will be for the 66,000 APFSDS rounds fired from the 125mm smooth-bore guns of T-90S tanks. The reserve stocks for this specialized ammunition is down to only four days, as Army vice-chief Lt-Gen S K Singh told the parliamentary standing committee on defence on Monday.

The Army is also going to get the 10,000 Konkurs-M ATGMs directly from Russia for over Rs 1,200 crore. ``All these contracts should be inked within the next few months,'' said a source.

The T-90S fleet, incidentally, has grappled with glitches in its missile and thermal imaging systems right since its induction after India first ordered 310 of these tanks for over Rs 3,625 crore under a February 2001 contract with Russia.

India went in for T-90S tanks since Pakistan was inducting T-80UD tanks from Ukraine as well as `Al Khalid' MBTs developed with China's help, and the indigenous Arjun tanks were then nowhere on the horizon.

Initially, India had plans to manufacture another 1,000 T-90S tanks at the Avadi Heavy Vehicles Factory, but Russia, eager to squeeze out more money, put several roadblocks in the transfer of technology (ToT) promised.

It was only after India signed another Rs 4,900-crore deal with Russia in November, 2007, to import another 347 of these tanks, coupled with Antony pushing the ToT case with his Russian counterparts, that Moscow eased controls.


Since then, the Avadi factory has built 170 T-90S tanks, with the annual production slated to touch 100 tanks in 2012. Moreover, the Army has ordered 124 more Arjuns after the initial order of 124 in 2004.


And after all that, we still seem to be unable to manufacture the ammo for the T-90 with stocks down to four days worth.

Things were probably better even in the 70s and 80s when our defence budget was a fraction of what it is now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 05:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25
Posts: 377
What?? only 170 T90s produced locally till now? I thought Avadi was producing them in three shifts, one beast rolling off after another.. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 09:58 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12
Posts: 2461
Karan M wrote:
Exactly. He does not seem to be even bothered about defence preparedness or how local programs get affected. His only concern is his image and hence that of the UPA


Actually I am of the opinion that players know exactly what they are doing. There are several benefits with emergency phoren made purchase 30% offsets to players, guarantee that critical national programs like Arjun are delayed, disrupt and bring uncertainty to partnership....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 10:22 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33286
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
yes indeed. the end result of each cycle of chaos is emergency purchases, often with zero offsets, zero TOT and higher prices.

political parties still get their cut, and also get to preserve their "clean image"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 13:05 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 17 Nov 2008 13:10
Posts: 808
Location: वसुधैव फ्रेंडकम
Now we understand who would have leaked the Chief's letter to PM. Someone who wanted this rush deal to happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 13:19 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23
Posts: 254
nachiket wrote:
x-posting from Army thread

Nikhil T wrote:
Government on overdrive to tide over tanks’ ammunition crunch
NEW DELHI: With Army chief General V K Singh ominously warning his entire tank fleet is ``devoid of critical ammunition to defeat enemy tanks'', the government is fast-tracking orders to arm the T-90S main-battle tanks with missiles and specialized ammunition for a greater punch on the western front with Pakistan.

Top sources say contracts for 25,000 Invar missiles and 66,000 APFSDS (armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) rounds for the Russian-origin T-90S fleet as well as 10,000 Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), at an overall cost of around Rs 6,000 crore, are in the final stages.

This comes after Gen Singh wrote a confidential letter to PM Manmohan Singh on March 12, which found its way into the public domain, detailing the critical ``hollowness'' in his 1.13-million-strong Army's war-waging capabilities.

Defence minister A K Antony, incidentally, is slated to hold the third review meeting on Gen Singh's concerns on April 17-18. While the procurement process for the new contracts was initiated quite sometime ago, their swift conclusion has become a top-priority over the last few weeks.

There are two big contracts for the 3UBK-Invar missiles, which are potent anti-tank weapons with a five-km strike range, in the pipeline. The first is for 10,000 missiles for Rs 1,386 crore from Russia for which a ``draft'' CCS (cabinet committee on security) note has already been prepared and circulated, say sources.

The rest 15,000 missiles will be ordered from defence PSU Bharat Dynamics Ltd, at a cost of over Rs 2,000 crore, for which the contract negotiations committee (CNC) is in progress.

Another over Rs 2,000 crore contract will be for the 66,000 APFSDS rounds fired from the 125mm smooth-bore guns of T-90S tanks. The reserve stocks for this specialized ammunition is down to only four days, as Army vice-chief Lt-Gen S K Singh told the parliamentary standing committee on defence on Monday.

The Army is also going to get the 10,000 Konkurs-M ATGMs directly from Russia for over Rs 1,200 crore. ``All these contracts should be inked within the next few months,'' said a source.

The T-90S fleet, incidentally, has grappled with glitches in its missile and thermal imaging systems right since its induction after India first ordered 310 of these tanks for over Rs 3,625 crore under a February 2001 contract with Russia.

India went in for T-90S tanks since Pakistan was inducting T-80UD tanks from Ukraine as well as `Al Khalid' MBTs developed with China's help, and the indigenous Arjun tanks were then nowhere on the horizon.

Initially, India had plans to manufacture another 1,000 T-90S tanks at the Avadi Heavy Vehicles Factory, but Russia, eager to squeeze out more money, put several roadblocks in the transfer of technology (ToT) promised.

It was only after India signed another Rs 4,900-crore deal with Russia in November, 2007, to import another 347 of these tanks, coupled with Antony pushing the ToT case with his Russian counterparts, that Moscow eased controls.


Since then, the Avadi factory has built 170 T-90S tanks, with the annual production slated to touch 100 tanks in 2012. Moreover, the Army has ordered 124 more Arjuns after the initial order of 124 in 2004.

And after all that, we still seem to be unable to manufacture the ammo for the T-90 with stocks down to four days worth.

Things were probably better even in the 70s and 80s when our defence budget was a fraction of what it is now.

WE are unable to manufacture the ammo for T-90 because DRDO has no such project for smoothbore gun. For arjun DRDO has it own APFSDS ammunition(which works very well in all trials) but the scary part is IA and MOD ordered 1000 plus T 90 but for its ammo we still totally depend on russia.
Now the interesting part is now MOD is ordering APFSDS and 3UBK-Invar missiles on fast track after some allegation that IA is running with shortage of these ammos. contracts for 25,000 Invar missiles and 66,000 APFSDS (armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) (I still dont get why we not have any project on smoothbore APFSDS when IA has already declared T 90 as their MBT with such a big order and we have a very good performing APFSDS for rifled gun of arjun which has a mere order of 248 till now. And as per SKS comment on ammo shortage, he was mainly and only pointing APFSDS rounds for t90)rounds for the Russian-origin T-90S fleet as well as 10,000 Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), at an overall cost of around Rs 6,000 crore.
Plus a fresh contract for 25000 3UBK-Invar missiles (15000 direct from russia rest 10,000 Via TOT from BDL). .But as per the reports NAG ATGM is also in final stage of trials with Two totally modified versions with advance hit facilities, built by the private sector L&T and public sector BEL, will be put through trials in June-July as the objective is to get it cleared for initial induction into the Army.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 13:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58
Posts: 5518
Gentlemen,

Check out this report from October 2011 - five months back in the Indian Express. So much for "leaked reports". So the MOD sat on it for five months, and on a deal which due to its own decision making, and blacklisting everyone, it has not even developed alternate sources of supply.

http://iofsbrotherhood.org/site/forum/m ... sg=19329.1

Quote:
Running Short Of FSAPDS
4 Oct 2011
from The Indian Express

The Army has officially conveyed to the government that its war reserves for certain ammunition have fallen below critical levels. This has led the Defence Ministry to kickstart emergency procurement in some cases by exempting them from the offsets policy. This policy requires that in any purchase of over Rs 300 crore, the company or firm involved must re-invest 30 per cent back in India.

The instant case is that of tank ammunition called the Armoured Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS). The Army is learnt to have put it down in writing that it needs about 66,000 APFSDS rounds as an “immediate operational necessity”. Similar is the problem with ammunition for the Smerch multi-barrel rocket launcher systems.

The APFSDS is vital for the Armoured Corps to take down enemy tanks in a tank-to-tank battle. India had a long-term arrangement with Israel for the ammunition but with Israel Military Industries (IMI) now blacklisted — facing a CBI probe — the Army has had to scout for fresh suppliers.

A Russian entity is said to have come forward but has quoted a price that is roughly 400 per cent higher than usual taking the cost beyond Rs1000 crore. This high quote had the Defence Acquisition Committee in a spot since the Russian firm is said to have been unwilling to accept the offset policy’s 30 per cent condition.

Result: the government last week exempted the deal from the offsets policy.


Defence Minister A K Antony, who left for Russia this morning on a bilateral visit, is expected to take up the issue of high cost with the Russian government at a political level.

Meanwhile, in a similar case, the government has decided to float tenders to urgently import Bi-Modular Charge (BMC) systems. Without this charge in their ammunition, the upgraded 130-mm artillery guns can only fire a range of 18 to 23 km, which is half their range of 38-40 km. The BMC systems were to be made in the new Nalanda Ordnance Factory, but that has failed to take off because IMI and South African technology partner Somtech, a subsidiary of Denel, are in the blacklist.


And Gen Singh was being blamed for the leak of a letter, when news media has been reporting this from much earlier. Why is the MOD not held accountable for the stupidity of blacklisting each and every critical supplier without the supplier having to honor preexisting contracts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 13:46 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11425
Those report are quite routine , pick up any news paper in of past 10 years and you would find such deficiencies of IA , Navy and Airforce listed ....after all how many times have we havent heard of depleting combat strength of airforce and submarines of navy.

Its just the controversy sorrounding VKS and MOD makes such report special and highlighted


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 14:15 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33286
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
India had a long-term arrangement with Israel for the ammunition but with Israel Military Industries (IMI) now blacklisted — facing a CBI probe — the Army has had to scout for fresh suppliers.

A Russian entity is said to have come forward but has quoted a price that is roughly 400 per cent higher than usual taking the cost beyond Rs1000 crore. This high quote had the Defence Acquisition Committee in a spot since the Russian firm is said to have been unwilling to accept the offset policy’s 30 per cent condition.


this is exactly as per the plan. the political money will come to offshore accounts and flow in via track2 channels when needed like election time horse trading and TA/DA.

pretty much all the indian political class are in cahoots with the wheeler dealers...they probably target rival cos and honest cos on a daily basis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Apr 2012 18:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Mar 2008 04:47
Posts: 773
How can a country with 1/300th India's population produce tank ammo that India cannot :?: Clearly the necessity of imports is only because it greases so many palms. National security be damned. What hope can there be for a country so devoid of nationalism :cry:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 01:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 790
Why are they blacklisted ? What happened ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 01:38 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Posts: 10199
Location: Hamari chai bahut kadvi hoti hai..
Well the ones in power have nice big albatrosses (HDW and Bofors) around their neck so it makes perfect sense to pull others into the muck by making a scapegoat out of private players like IMI specially when the latter got their foothold during the NDA's tenure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 01:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 790
But what caused the blacklisting ? What did they do to deserve such a listing ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 02:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Posts: 1385
It would seem the whole T-90S deal was poorly planned, negotiated, executed, and operationalized. Even after 10 years in service with the IA (600+ tanks in service), there are still huge shortcomings with the fleet and licensed production, such as shortages in imported ammunition, no local ammunition production, incomplete TOT on vital parts, TOT needing to be renegotiated, key electronics malfunctions, etc.

Maybe this is a lesson for the IA as well -- more support for indigenous programs, integration of foreign seller w/ domestic vendors in supplying parts in support of the acquisition for the long-term, better inventory management w/ acquisition of parts in bulk (instead of piece-meal orders) and frequency of intervals clearly communicated with the production agencies, overall lifecycle management, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 02:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 11004
Location: Illini Nation
What is all this hullabaloo about Russians asking for 400% of the cost? IMI did things under the table and got kicked in the shin, so the Russians learned from that - they are doing it above the table!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 03:06 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Posts: 10199
Location: Hamari chai bahut kadvi hoti hai..
In 2009 IMI had signed a deal with OFB for manufacture of Tank ammo; apparently then Director Sudipto Ghosh was pulled up on corruption charges later that year and IMI was made the scape goat.

Wierd thing is maharaj Anthony banned 3 other companies for malpractice around the same time, STK ltd.,Rhienmetall AD and Russia's corporation Defence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 05:20 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Posts: 68
Location: Mumbai
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 629279.cms

Quote:
NEW DELHI:With Army chief General V K Singh ominously warning his entire tank fleet is ``devoid of critical ammunition to defeat enemy tanks'', the government is fast-tracking orders to arm the T-90S main-battle tanks with missiles and specialized ammunition for a greater punch on the western front with Pakistan.

Top sources say contracts for 25,000 Invar missiles and 66,000 APFSDS (armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) rounds for the Russian-origin T-90S fleet as well as 10,000 Konkurs-M anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), at an overall cost of around Rs 6,000 crore, are in the final stages.



The Number of ATGMs and APFSDS round is mind boggling. And this order would be in addition to the existing inventory of "War reserve of upto 4 days" for the Tank Fleet + existing Inventory of Nag ATGMs/Milan/Milan 2T/ Spike ....

And then the above report talks about this massive induction for "a greater punch on tthe western front with Pakistan" ...

Well, how many Tanks do the Pakistanians have anyway ?
:eek:

I also went through BDLs Annual Report for 2010-2011, which gave (some) product wise information.
It mentioned having an order backlog of 20,000 crores out of which Akash SAM would take a significant portion (Assumption on my part, as orderbook break up isnt given and IIRC Akash Orders were split between BDL-BHEL(?) and were quite massive).
The other major products being Invar,Milan 2T and Konkurs-M ATGMs. The numbers of ATGMs keep adding up.

Can the Tank gurus please throw some light on this, as to why so many ATGMs and APFSDS are needed ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 14:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Nov 2011 22:31
Posts: 2893
Location: Jambudveepe Bharatvarshe, Bharatkhande, Sakabde, Mero Dakshine Parsve
^^^
Think in terms of Anti Tank weapon density per sq km of tank territory or even per running km of attack fronts. Then make reasonable allowances/adjustments for successful attacks by the opponents on our own tank formations which could take out a certain percentage of our Anti Armour capability.

Think logistics of moving ATGM/Tanks into these areas, in the face of an attack, which needless to say the Pakis or Cheeni are not going to tell and Indians are going to face an uphill task trying to figure out.

My personal view is that these numbers actually very small. 4 day war reserve basically means only one attack getting taken out. Pakis would give up after that . But what can be said about the Cheeni. Certain people or group of people want our capability to take out the opponent's armour at say a Recessed Capability Level. Which perhaps helps certain other countries to do what they want without regard to the cost that we Indians have to pay or may have to pay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 16:01 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 1071
Location: Land of the free
66,000 rounds for 1600 tanks will be 41 rounds for a tank by the time the ammo and the tanks will arrive. Is that like two ammo replenishments for a tank? Not a lot it seems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 16:05 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 1071
Location: Land of the free
nirav wrote:
Well, how many Tanks do the Pakistanians have anyway ?

Well, we don't plan to have only 500 SAMs to take care of PAF as it has only 500 birds do we?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 16:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23
Posts: 254
It's good that we are inducting ammos ( 25,000 Invar missiles and 66,000 APFSDS) in such a large numbers for around 6000 tanks but what the shelf life of these fancy procurements? (Or these will work out just as reserve ammos)...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Apr 2012 16:40 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11425
I think the 66K round of APFSDS and Invar is for the T-90 only and right now we have around 700 - 800 odd T-90 in service both imported and OFB ones , so these round should be for these many tank and not the the other 800 that would probably take a decade to come at OFB rate of working.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2012 11:00 
Online
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11425
Some information on Technical Characteristics AMK 339 shells from this RFI

http://www.ciidefence.com/pdf/RFI/RFI-P ... DS-AMN.pdf

Quote:
Caliber. The ammunition should be capable of being fired from 125 mm Smooth Bore Tank Gun of T-90 and T-72 tks.

Shelf Life Not less than 15 (fifteen) years under Indian Tropical Conditions. Specification with regard to explosives fillings with test procedures to evaluate the shelf life be made available to DGQA (Indian QA Agency). Literature substantiating the claim that explosive fillings would give stipulated shelf life need to be made available.

Technical Characteristics
4. The major technical characteristics are as under:-
(a) Round Designation of Mark - 3BbM17
(b) Projectile Designation or Mark- 3bM-42
(c) Mass of Shell or Shot (kg) - 7.05 kg
(d) Mass of Round (kg) - 20.4 kg
(e) Primer - GUV-7
(f) Designation of SCC - 4>K 63
(g) Increment Propelling charge - 9.50 kg
(h) Muzzle Velocity (m/s) - 1700
(j) Effective Range (M) - Not less than 2700
(k) Consistency group of Rds - HSD & VSD ≤ 0.35 mil
(l) Tracer - 3YPZM
(m) Armour Piercing Characteristic. The depth of perforation (piercing) in mm.
-
Prospective vendors to state details.
(n) Nominal Pressure - 440 M Pa
(o) Maximum Pressure - 530 M Pa


Seems like the life of APFSDS rounds are around ~ 15 years plus and effective range needed is around ~ 3 km , plus these rounds are not limited to T-90 but can be fired from T-72


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2012 13:04 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25
Posts: 377
apparently, 3bm42 was first introduced in 1986. Why are we planning to buy rounds that are 28 years old tech? From the looks of it, it appears to be yet another scam in the making..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2012 16:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1173
[quote="sudeepj"]What?? only 170 T90s produced locally till now? /quote]
:D :D :D :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2012 16:53 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1173
Cybaru wrote:
Why are they blacklisted ? What happened ?


They are eating into Rodina's business !!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Apr 2012 16:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1173
srai wrote:
It would seem the whole T-90S deal was poorly planned, negotiated, executed, and operationalized. Even after 10 years in service with the IA (600+ tanks in service), there are still huge shortcomings with the fleet and licensed production, such as shortages in imported ammunition, no local ammunition production, incomplete TOT on vital parts, TOT needing to be renegotiated, key electronics malfunctions, etc.

Maybe this is a lesson for the IA as well -- more support for indigenous programs, integration of foreign seller w/ domestic vendors in supplying parts in support of the acquisition for the long-term, better inventory management w/ acquisition of parts in bulk (instead of piece-meal orders) and frequency of intervals clearly communicated with the production agencies, overall lifecycle management, etc.


I DO NOT AGREE, TO ME

The whole T-90S deal was SUPERBLY planned, negotiated, executed, and operationalized. TO ENSURE THAT Even after 10 years in service with the IA (600+ tanks in service), there are still huge shortcomings with the fleet and licensed production, such as shortages in imported ammunition, no local ammunition production, incomplete TOT on vital parts, TOT needing to be renegotiated, key electronics malfunctions, etc.

TO ENSURE THAT RUSSIA GETS CONTINOUS BUSINESS THROUGH A JUNK BULLOCK CART CALLED T 90Sxyw


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 08:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 11092
Location: India
Kersi,you're being perhaps a bit too harsh.We've gone through this whole tale before.After Pak quietly acquired T-80UDs from Ukraine on the cheap,the IA/MOD's knee-jerk response was to acquire a large batch of T-90s in response.Arjun by that period in history had not been perfected .Keeping in mind the future perspective ,follow on orders were made and the IA had decided that the T-90 would be its MBT for this decade as no western tank was also available to us at that time.This was the best and most affordable tank that we could acquire at that time.One must remember also the import content of Arjun,engine,etc. which was also adding to its cost.For better or worse the T-90 was what the IA wanted, "a bird in hand",rather than one in "the bush". You know the reluctance that not only the IA but also the IAF have with licence built/desi products,peferring for years direct imports.It is only in the not too distant past that JVs,offsets,etc., have become the norm.

The issue of further orders for Arjun have come up only in recent times after the tank proved itself in T-to-T trials with the T-90,where Arjun came out with flying colours.However,we have seen it time and time again,the shabby method in which defence procurement is made and I agree with you here that suspicion must arise whether deliberate shoddy acquisition of ammo ,spares,setting up of ammo factories,etc., is the norm or just cretinous MOD bungling,or even both,or deliberate mischief ! Controversies with the OFB and now other PSUs like BEML are emerging from the box that Gen.VKS opened. Today's I.Exp. has a report "truckloads of dirt..." unearthed about Tatra.As a report some time ago said,the IA/def. PSUs .esp. HVF Avadi,have a crisis with too many orders for T-90 assembly,T-72 upgrades and Arjun Mk-1/2 production.It simply cannot manage the lot.It is why some reports (DTI) recently said that the IA will get 1650 tanks + new Arjuns by 2020.

Of course the Russians are smiling ..all the way to the bank!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 08:50 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31
Posts: 4648
Nope and we have soundly thrashed that fallacy

Even with its problems the Arjun was better than the tin can
while you may have fig leaf for the first batch
There is zero justification for subsequent orders for tin junk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 09:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 11092
Location: India
Surya,I did speak about the reluctance of the IA/IAF in accepting desi products,based upon long experience of "tall talk and short achievements",the LCA/Kaveri for example,is well documented.Unlike the IN,which realised thanks to the wisdom of its chiefs decades ago,that with such a paltry slice of the budget it would have to build its own navy, has its own naval design bureau and has produced designs based upon its own requirements.Even here it has had to seek some ships,missiles,and subs from abroad due to the inefficiency of the PSU shipyards which the "saint" pulled up just a few days ago. The naval ALH just failed to deliver and we now have a huge "75" strong acquisition for shipboard multi-role medium sized helos.The Scorpene delay is mainly because MDL cannot absorb the high-tech of the sub says the last report! Even the IN is still buying subs and warships from Russia and abroad-tankers from Italy,minesweepers from SoKo.

The same significant development of weapon systems has not happened with the IA and IAF and the reasons for that should be the subject of a white paper.It is sometimes as if a war exists between HAL and the IAF and the same with the IA and PSUs. It is why Arjun took so long to be accepted,no dispute here at all.The lack of faith in desi products,barring our strategic missiles,has taken along time to soften and has yet to be fully dispelled with. However, if the T-90 is so bad,then surely,at least one honest chief in recent times must've put in on record like Gen.VKS about the Tatras? Secondly,the IA just cannot dump its old tanks,just as the IAF cannot number-plate sqds of legacy aircraft,hence the T-72 upgrades as well.

A few years ago I mentioned that what the IA needed to do was to design/obtain designs for a "family" of armoured vehicles and IFVs for the future,which would incorporate,keep options,to fit in new tech being developed.I do not know why the DRDO and the end user in this case,the IA have not thought in visionary manner in a combined attempt.One needs to ask a number of past chiefs about this for their views.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 09:39 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00
Posts: 6295
negi wrote:
In 2009 IMI had signed a deal with OFB for manufacture of Tank ammo; apparently then Director Sudipto Ghosh was pulled up on corruption charges later that year and IMI was made the scape goat.

Wierd thing is maharaj Anthony banned 3 other companies for malpractice around the same time, STK ltd.,Rhienmetall AD and Russia's corporation Defence.


At this rate, only the paki ordinance factories will be eligible to supply the required stuff!! :lol:

Even antony will not dare to ban them


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 12:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Posts: 1385
Philip wrote:
Surya,I did speak about the reluctance of the IA/IAF in accepting desi products,based upon long experience of "tall talk and short achievements",the LCA/Kaveri for example,is well documented.Unlike the IN,which realised thanks to the wisdom of its chiefs decades ago,that with such a paltry slice of the budget it would have to build its own navy, has its own naval design bureau and has produced designs based upon its own requirements.Even here it has had to seek some ships,missiles,and subs from abroad due to the inefficiency of the PSU shipyards which the "saint" pulled up just a few days ago. The naval ALH just failed to deliver and we now have a huge "75" strong acquisition for shipboard multi-role medium sized helos.The Scorpene delay is mainly because MDL cannot absorb the high-tech of the sub says the last report! Even the IN is still buying subs and warships from Russia and abroad-tankers from Italy,minesweepers from SoKo.

The same significant development of weapon systems has not happened with the IA and IAF and the reasons for that should be the subject of a white paper.It is sometimes as if a war exists between HAL and the IAF and the same with the IA and PSUs. It is why Arjun took so long to be accepted,no dispute here at all.The lack of faith in desi products,barring our strategic missiles,has taken along time to soften and has yet to be fully dispelled with. However, if the T-90 is so bad,then surely,at least one honest chief in recent times must've put in on record like Gen.VKS about the Tatras? Secondly,the IA just cannot dump its old tanks,just as the IAF cannot number-plate sqds of legacy aircraft,hence the T-72 upgrades as well.

A few years ago I mentioned that what the IA needed to do was to design/obtain designs for a "family" of armoured vehicles and IFVs for the future,which would incorporate,keep options,to fit in new tech being developed.I do not know why the DRDO and the end user in this case,the IA have not thought in visionary manner in a combined attempt.One needs to ask a number of past chiefs about this for their views.


IMO, there has been a lack of national vision and synergy in the past. When you look at American, European, and Russian military industrial complex and the history of its activities in R&D of tanks, artillery, ships, submarines, missiles, and combat aircrafts, it is obvious why India is lagging behind in indigenization. These countries have had a long head start (70 years to 100+ years) and have sustained R&D efforts through government and armed forces support, and fighting many major wars to help them refine their technologies. It has taken them many decades to get to where they are now.

In India's case, real investment in indigenous R&D did not take place until the late 1970s. Some of these efforts were started and then stopped, such as the nuclear bomb, HF-24 Marut, etc. Then there were others stopped due to scandals: Type-1500 submarines and Bofors 155mm howitzers. From the mid 1980s, sustained national efforts got under way. These have finally bore fruit after 30 years of sustained effort, and in the process have created a national infrastructure for further advancements. Here are some of the major initiatives of the 1980s:
  • Integrated Guided Missile Development Program -> Agni BM (I/II/IIA/III/V), Prithvi SSM (I/II/III/Dhanush), Akash MR SAM (Mk.1), Nag ATGM (Mk.1/HELINA)
  • Helicopter -> Dhruv ALH (Mk.1/2/3/Rudra), LCH
  • Combat Aircraft -> Tejas LCA (Mk.1/2/NLCA), Kaveri engine, MMR radar
  • Main Battle Tank -> Arjun MBT (Mk.1/2), Karna MBT (Arjun turret/T-72 chasis)
  • Combat Ship -> P-15 class (P-15/A/B), ATV
  • Small Arms -> INSAS


Yes, it took around 30 years for these to succeed, but the next enhancements, i.e. Mk.2/3, have been delivered relatively quickly--within 3 to 5 years. Then, new programs, such as the IJT, Astra AAM, AMCA, etc., have subsequently benefited from the capacity that was built. It has also allowed for Joint Ventures, such as Brahmos SSM, Barak-8 SAM, FGFA and MTA, with foreign companies to take place.

However, in order to sustain the continual growth of indigenous efforts there has to be a long-term national vision together with the synergy between GoI, Armed Forces, DRDO, PSU, Private industry, and Universities. Key technologies and know-hows need to be identified, acquired and capacity developed. It cannot be achieved with half-hearted support, or by stifling growth potential. There must be patience--an understanding that indigenization takes many decades to be fully realized.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 17:07 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18
Posts: 676
Philip wrote:
Keeping in mind the future perspective ,follow on orders were made and the IA had decided that the T-90 would be its MBT for this decade as no western tank was also available to us at that time.This was the best and most affordable tank that we could acquire at that time.


Not exactly true, the Indian Army could have got the Merkava 4 from the Israelis but they didn't even bother asking or approaching the Israelis for it because the IA was so drunk on "Soviet power supreme" that they choose to go with a souped up T-72 called T-90 rather than look beyond the obvious and past the mundane!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 18:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12494
Location: In a sad place
Brando wrote:
Not exactly true, the Indian Army could have got the Merkava 4 from the Israelis


Has there been discussions on this ever, between Israeli's and Indians or is it more like "India must cancel MMRCA to order F 35" type of "possibility"?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 18:50 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12494
Location: In a sad place
Surya wrote:
Even with its problems the Arjun was better than the tin can


Except that OFB can still not manufacture enough of them with the required QC, what to talk about the past.

Come on, the problems here are systemic problems, for better or for worse, the defence production is just not able to step up, and unless that is fixed, there is no hope for the picture to change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 19:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13
Posts: 5864
^^^

The OFB can make the t 90 with total QC. If they can't make the Arjun?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 19:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31
Posts: 4648
OFB cannot manufacture T 90s either in great numbers with QC either


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Apr 2012 19:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12494
Location: In a sad place
Surya wrote:
OFB cannot manufacture T 90s either in great numbers with QC either


True and that is the core issue.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4346 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 109  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austin, Google Feedfetcher, SanjayC, sooraj and 42 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group