Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 17 Sep 2014 08:15

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2235 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 56  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2012 22:25 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10
Posts: 2971
Sagar G wrote:
RoyG wrote:
I'm not discounting the role of government. I just feel that we've reached a point where privatization can help us bridge the gap in both manufacturing and R&D. Privatization isn't going to happen all at once.


Agreed.


What exactly is the issue you're having with privatization then?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 26 Nov 2012 20:16 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 1840
Location: Learning Advanced Tactics in Hindoo Terrorism from Sh. Sushilkumar Shinde
RoyG wrote:
What exactly is the issue you're having with privatization then?


None, I am all for privatization but I am against it's misdirected glorification as if making each and every thing pvt. will solve all of India's problem. The private industry also has to chip in to develop the ecosystem required to maintain R&D and I don't think they have done the needful. R&D requires patience and a lot of money which in time gives results, just for the sake of saying that privatization will make this happen more quickly doesn't make it true. PSUs have a lot of talent but are bogged down by the system in place, private companies have their own issues and associated evil in the form of connections to manipulate the system for their own good. So instead of chanting a blind privatization charm people should try and learn how the system works and use the best of both worlds for achieving the goal of indigenization. Instead of doing that posters here indulge in mindless abusing of PSUs and Babus and paint Pvt. industry as the saviour, which is far from the truth.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2012 14:18 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Posts: 3248
Location: Loud, Proud American
Here's an example of true-blue American ingenuity:
DIY: Shovel AK
This gent not only has a flair for improvising, but he can also write in entertaining style. :rotfl:
Quote:
I said to shovel, I will re-unite you with your handle
...
Receiver came out as straight as Liberace in drag thumbing through gay pr0n magazines. I do not however discriminate between straight AK receivers and those that chose different orientation.
...
...
This receiver turned out to be stiffer than me watching full-featured film of Michael Kalashnikov doing Polina Porizkova in a heavy KVI tank on board of a navy destroyer in a midst of a battle.


To top it off, he attaches a picture of a 10-shot grouping with his home-build at 50 yards using 40 year old ammo. Pure awesomeness.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2012 20:09 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Posts: 1138
Location: mumbai
Sagar G wrote:
No sir the production agency's only interest is in to see the proper production of the product and any design change will come from the design agency. What you are saying is true if the design agency is integrated in the production unit even then unless and until the design department doesn't approve of the design changes the production guys wouldn't dare to change a thing. Design change means change in the production process which can be small to large depending upon the design change implemented. So sir all the user feedback, evolving operational requirements will be conveyed to the design department which will then implement the design changes and then pass it to the production guys who then accordingly plan the production process. A communication link exists between both the departments and consultations are carried out to implement any design change but be very clear about it that the production agency doesn't tinker with the design on it's own.
Once a piece of equioment has been productionized, the developer is no longer involved, unless there is some major flaw. Major flaws is occurring in production phase is unlikely if the testing has been rigourous before induction. Hence designer/developer involvement is low in that phase.

Sagar G wrote:
Sir OFs are production agencies only they are allowed to do very little amount of research on their own. DRDO is actively involved in improvements of the weapon system and till they don't pass it on OFs can do little about changing design.
Not quite correct. In India, there is ABSOLUTELY NO prohibition on anyone doing R&D. IN developed the APSOH sonar. OFB developed the CRN-91 Gun without any assistance from DRDO or anyone else, that has replace the OTO gun with Coast Guard, and close to 100 units manufactured & deployed on IN ships.

As I said earlier, its the quality of the R&D as well as the manufacturing process that decides how good the output turns out to be, whether government or private sector.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2012 22:46 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
Drdo was trying to obtain permission for developing a follow on of INSAS since 2000 but was prevented by Army. This permission/GSQRs were released only in 2010. The FINSAS was to begin bench test firing in sept-oct 2012, though I don't know the current status. The honesty of Army procurement system is legendary- T-90, TATRA, Adarsh, ARVs, Air Defence Gun etc


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 06:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 1048
Location: Land of the free
vic wrote:
Drdo was trying to obtain permission for developing a follow on of INSAS since 2000 but was prevented by Army

What do you mean by DRDO trying to obtain permission?
My memory says Insas Excalibur developed by DRDO was envisioned to replace Insas AR but IA declined it. I am not sure whether AK 7 and Trichy Assault Rifle are from DRDO or the OFB alone.

And what about the Air Defense Gun? I think I missed something on that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 10:09 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 1840
Location: Learning Advanced Tactics in Hindoo Terrorism from Sh. Sushilkumar Shinde
tsarkar wrote:
Once a piece of equioment has been productionized, the developer is no longer involved, unless there is some major flaw. Major flaws is occurring in production phase is unlikely if the testing has been rigourous before induction. Hence designer/developer involvement is low in that phase.


Testing is different thing than production, even after successful testing one can still mess up production if not properly handled. IIRC DRDO has blamed OF more than once for botching up their successful designs.

tsarkar wrote:
Not quite correct. In India, there is ABSOLUTELY NO prohibition on anyone doing R&D.


If you are talking about the pvt. sector then maybe you are right but in case of government sectors I guarantee you sir my info is pretty pukka especially if we talk about OFs. They are not allowed to do R&D out and out but modifying is kosher. OFs are heavily bureaucratized and they aren't allowed to do much more than what they are supposed to do. One thing more saar when vina garu was criticizing IAF for not supporting LCA properly then an ex IAF guy who is also a BRF member had answered him and during that he had said that IAF wanted to do R&D on aircraft's but HAL had stonewalled it. So saar governments organizations are not that independent as you think they are but yes some exceptions are there, but OFs are not on that list.


tsarkar wrote:
IN developed the APSOH sonar. OFB developed the CRN-91 Gun without any assistance from DRDO or anyone else, that has replace the OTO gun with Coast Guard, and close to 100 units manufactured & deployed on IN ships.


Didn't one of the IITs also played a huge role in developing the sonar ??? I am pretty sure IN must have done it's time in MoD to get the required approvals, you can better tell us about that.

Searching for info about CRN-91 tells me that it is modification of a Russian licensed manufactured gun (correct me if I am wrong here) so I don't think sir we can say that OF developed the gun on it's own. Again sir I guess you have better access to such info so please tell us more about it.

tsarkar wrote:
As I said earlier, its the quality of the R&D as well as the manufacturing process that decides how good the output turns out to be, whether government or private sector.


Absolutely right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 13:08 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Posts: 1138
Location: mumbai
Sagar G wrote:
tsarkar wrote:
Not quite correct. In India, there is ABSOLUTELY NO prohibition on anyone doing R&D.
If you are talking about the pvt. sector then maybe you are right but in case of government sectors I guarantee you sir my info is pretty pukka especially if we talk about OFs. They are not allowed to do R&D out and out but modifying is kosher. OFs are heavily bureaucratized and they aren't allowed to do much more than what they are supposed to do. One thing more saar when vina garu was criticizing IAF for not supporting LCA properly then an ex IAF guy who is also a BRF member had answered him and during that he had said that IAF wanted to do R&D on aircraft's but HAL had stonewalled it. So saar governments organizations are not that independent as you think they are but yes some exceptions are there, but OFs are not on that list.
On the contrary, private firms were explicitely prohibited under law to do defence R&D or manufacture. It is only recently that certain areas have been opened up for them. However no such statutory or legal prohibitions exist for any government entities for either R&D or manufacture. For example, BHEL manufactures naval guns when its original mandate was to build power generation equipment.

Regards to IAF vs DRDO on aircraft R&D, it is similar to whether IAF or IA should operate attack helicopters. There was no law, and IAF had entered into an arrangement with IA. IA opted out of that arrangement. IAF raised a hue & cry but could do nothing legally. Similarly, for IAF to get into aircraft R&D, it could have fought that battle more aggressively politically, like it did for operating attack HCs

Similarly, OFB & DRDO have a mutually convenient arrangement that OFB will not try to eat DRDO's lunch ie., budgetary allocation from MoD. In GoI universe, budgetary allocation is that unit's reflection of power. More allocation more power. And it shows how powerful their management are.

Political correctness is a key character trait for any PSU management, and rather then get into doing something positive like R&D, they would very meekly stay out. Of course, the same mice turn into tigers when going on strike for overtime.

Sagar G wrote:
Didn't one of the IITs also played a huge role in developing the sonar ??? I am pretty sure IN must have done it's time in MoD to get the required approvals, you can better tell us about that.
The full story is there in Adm Hiranandani's book, from Transition to Eminence.

Sagar G wrote:
Searching for info about CRN-91 tells me that it is modification of a Russian licensed manufactured gun (correct me if I am wrong here) so I don't think sir we can say that OF developed the gun on it's own. Again sir I guess you have better access to such info so please tell us more about it.
Its a system & not just the gun. The stabilization, marinizing & integration with EOFCS was far more important than just the gun.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 18:31 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 1840
Location: Learning Advanced Tactics in Hindoo Terrorism from Sh. Sushilkumar Shinde
tsarkar wrote:
Similarly, OFB & DRDO have a mutually convenient arrangement that OFB will not try to eat DRDO's lunch ie., budgetary allocation from MoD. In GoI universe, budgetary allocation is that unit's reflection of power. More allocation more power. And it shows how powerful their management are.


I find this info hard to digest than what I know from my source would try and dig more to find something solid about it.

tsarkar wrote:
Political correctness is a key character trait for any PSU management, and rather then get into doing something positive like R&D, they would very meekly stay out. Of course, the same mice turn into tigers when going on strike for overtime.


Welcome to the world of unions.

tsarkar wrote:
Its a system & not just the gun. The stabilization, marinizing & integration with EOFCS was far more important than just the gun.


And OF did all on it's own without any help from outside ???


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 23:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Posts: 1138
Location: mumbai
Sagar G wrote:
tsarkar wrote:
Similarly, OFB & DRDO have a mutually convenient arrangement that OFB will not try to eat DRDO's lunch ie., budgetary allocation from MoD. In GoI universe, budgetary allocation is that unit's reflection of power. More allocation more power. And it shows how powerful their management are.
I find this info hard to digest than what I know from my source would try and dig more to find something solid about it.
And the other part of the bargain is that DRDO will give first right of refusal of production to OFB. Mind you, its not a formal documented arrangement, its just the way things have evolved. Coming back to the point, if you want to check, you'll find no law or regulation preventing OFB from doing R&D. And they do. OFB put a 105 mm howitzer on a BMP2 as a SPG while DRDO developed Bhim SPG with Denel gun on Arjun chassis.
Sagar G wrote:
tsarkar wrote:
Its a system & not just the gun. The stabilization, marinizing & integration with EOFCS was far more important than just the gun.
And OF did all on it's own without any help from outside ???
As far as I know, none, other than end users.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 23:59 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 1840
Location: Learning Advanced Tactics in Hindoo Terrorism from Sh. Sushilkumar Shinde
tsarkar wrote:
And the other part of the bargain is that DRDO will give first right of refusal of production to OFB. Mind you, its not a formal documented arrangement, its just the way things have evolved. Coming back to the point, if you want to check, you'll find no law or regulation preventing OFB from doing R&D. And they do. OFB put a 105 mm howitzer on a BMP2 as a SPG while DRDO developed Bhim SPG with Denel gun on Arjun chassis.


I found some data regarding what are the duties of OFB from there site and R&D seems a very low key affair

http://164.100.107.12/index.php?wh=manuals&lang=en

From the first manual titled "Particulars of Indian Ordnance Factories Organisation - its function & duties" 4th page has a diagram in which R&D is shown to be the duty of DRDO but then in the portion below which reads

Quote:
Main functions at the Head Quarters are as follows:

• Receiving of Orders from various indentors.
• Fixation of Annual Targets by mutual agreement in meeting.
• Conversion of Orders to Extracts for the factories, the production units.
• Distribution of targets to factories.
• Getting required Budget from Govt. on various heads.
• Allotment of Budget to factories.
Monitoring production and issues, expenditure of allotted budgets by the factories
and allied matters like administration, material management, engineering, quality, HRD,
R&D, security, safety, welfare etc.

• Reporting achievements to Ministry, Indentors, Quality Assurance establishments
etc.
• Replying to queries of Parliament, Standing Committee, Audit etc.


and then at last line it says

Quote:
Other activities include
interaction with customers for getting feedback about supplied products as well as their
new requirements, assimilation of technology for the requirement of upgraded/ new
products by importation of technology or using technology of DRDO or develop the
product by in-house R&D.


Which shows that you are right but then in the fourth manual titled "Norms set by the Indian Ordnance Factories for the discharge of its functions" it says in the very first line

Quote:
The declared mission of the Ordnance Factories is “production of state of the art
battle field equipments".


So saar it seems like R&D is a low key affair with some tidbits only to show and mainly as I was told it's duty is production. Read both the PDFs they are pretty small and hardly there is any mention of R&D.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 30 Nov 2012 10:57 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Posts: 3816
Location: Somewhere Else
Image

Strange new colours for INSAS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 30 Nov 2012 12:35 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Posts: 3248
Location: Loud, Proud American
^^^^
Pretty nice paint job there. It blends very well with the bushes. Only spot that the paint job missed is the butt plate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 30 Nov 2012 13:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00
Posts: 6070
Faulty tank ammo caused Rs. 687 crore loss to Govt


Quote:
More than Rs. 408 crore worth of tank-fired ammunition - 1,02,014 rounds - that made its way into army depots in 2009-10 were found to be faulty, much before completing the prescribed shelf life of 10 years, a latest CAG report has revealed.

While no thorough investigation and
analysis was conducted to find out why and how this took place, to meet the army's shortfall, ammunition worth Rs. 279 crore (16,000 rounds) had to be imported from Rosoboronexport, a Russian company.

As a result, the losses to the public exchequer due to unserviceable ammo and consequent imports totalled Rs. 687 crore.

The ammo defects included flimsy propellant material, cracks in combustible cartridge case, sticking of cartridge case in packing container, etc - considered critical for effective and safe firing.

In 2010, a task force exploring the possibility of rectifying the faulty consignment had opined that the ammo was beyond repair.

While the Army attributed the defects to insufficient quality control during manufacture, the ordnance factory that produced the ammunition attributed the 'faults' to design deficiencies, a charge denied by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), the indigenous designers of the ammunition.

While the Army accepts ammunition only after appropriate quality assurance tests at various levels, any defect noticed during periodic test firing or otherwise during storage, is required to be thoroughly investigated, responsibility fixed and loss statements prepared for writing off the value of defective ammunition.


From 1997-2005, the Army had received about 3.5 lakh rounds of this ammunition valued at about Rs. 1400 crore.

"Contrary to the prescribed procedure, no serious investigation was concluded to ascertain the reasons for defects in the ammunition and to fix responsibility for such failure," the CAG report said.

In another finding in the CAG report, intervention by audit led to a saving of about Rs. 169 crore that would have been spent on 5.56mm bullets for INSAS rifles and .22 Rim Fire Tracer bullets, despite the defence ministry holding surplus stocks of such ammunition.

Recommending strengthening of internal controls in the ministry to ensure that procurement decisions are made based on available stock positions, CAG said, "The episode of placing of indent and obtaining approval for import when surplus stock of ammunition existed reveals deficiencies in monitoring inventory levels at ammunition depots."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2012 08:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 3811
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3
Rifle-cramped army sets sights on five

Quote:
...
New Delhi, Dec. 2: The army is now evaluating five rifles, any which will become the standard issue firearm for the Indian soldier.


...
The five competitors are well-known names, each inspiring movies and stories and each used in small and big wars around the globe. But none is as widely used as the original Avtomat Kalashnikov, designed by the eponymous Soviet General in 1949. The Insas itself is a derivative of the Kalash.

Beretta, Colt, Sig Sauer are among the American and/or US-Swiss weapons makers. Israel Weapons Industries’ two rifles — the Galil ACE and the Tavor TAR 21 — are in the fray. The TAR 21 is in limited use in the Indian Army’s special forces and some units in Jammu and Kashmir. The Ceska Brena, from the Czech Republic firm, has a new version of its Bren.

The army’s first order is likely to be for 66,000 rifles. The order is part of a programme called F-Insas — Future Infantry Soldier as a System. It has stipulated that the rifles must have inter-changeable barrels for both 5.56mm and 7.62mm rounds.

...


click on the small image below to open bigger image...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2012 10:25 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Posts: 767
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road
ArmenT wrote:
^^^^
Pretty nice paint job there. It blends very well with the bushes. Only spot that the paint job missed is the butt plate.


Actually, these could also be dummy rifles used in practice. I remember seeing a MARCOS pic posted not too long ago with orange colored rifles.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 10:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 May 2009 12:33
Posts: 178
Location: LOC
so we are going to dump the INSAS , and importing the standard rifle for the second largest army in the world from foreign countries...... shame
http://idrw.org/?p=16696


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 12:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
We will be importing almost all small arms:-

Assault rifles
Carbines
LMGs
HMGs
Sniper rifles etc

Importraj Jindabad


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 12:17 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6699
The article talks about 65K direct imports + license manufacture 112K. Hardly enough to meet our requirements, this seems more than adhoc election buy rather than a strategic buy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 13:18 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 May 2009 12:33
Posts: 178
Location: LOC
can experts explain.. what are the primary reasons we are dumping INSAS ......
is the army is not satisfied ...or it is not futuristic...?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 14:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
jimmy_moh wrote:
can experts explain.. what are the primary reasons we are dumping INSAS ......
is the army is not satisfied ...or it is not futuristic...?


Not an expert. I think it is getting old and outdated. I met a serving colonel yesterday and asked him some specific questions about INSAS but got no new answers that we have not hear here. The finish is poor because of the material used to make it light, but it is very accurate. Also it was made for war but ever since it got inducted we have faced only insurgency. The difference is that in war a 5.56 mm bullet injuring a soldier puts stress on the enemy's system even if it does not kill him. With jihadis/insurgents who expect to die - boring a 5.56 mm hole though them is not good enough. They keep coming.

So I think the IA is now looking for multi caliber weapons with changeable barrels. And I guess the ability to hold modern sights and laser sights.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 15:33 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 May 2009 12:33
Posts: 178
Location: LOC
if that is the case i will go for TAR , because its service is already enjoyed by our SF and RR , and i believe we already have the licence for local production.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 16:16 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Nov 2011 18:59
Posts: 450
There is nothing wrong with buying an import as long as it is locally manufactured. Right now, it would be important to quickly begin the production of the MSMC, this rifle should be the standard for all state and central police units, sure QRT and commando units can use weapons like the TAR and other rifles but the MSMC should be standard for most of the regular units since it has already met the 97% reliability requirment. Infantry can have the imported rifle.

Units like the RR, BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles, SSB should have the Trichy Assault Rifle, this thing needs to be finished asap and preped for mass production. The design looks ok, it just needs a retractable butt stock instead of what looks like a ill-designed folding one. The retractable butt stock would make it look cleaner. Should also work on slowing its rate of fire. Add a lot more rails for added attachment options. If these issues are addressed, it could be ideal for SF units as well due to its useful AK round. I think this one can use even AK mags.

The KRISS Pistol should be the secondary weapon of choice for SF units, its hard hitting .45 acp is ideal for CQB and ideal second weapon with the primary that SF units carry.

http://www.google.be/imgres?q=trichy+as ... ,s:0,i:105


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 16:18 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6699
jimmy_moh wrote:
if that is the case i will go for TAR , because its service is already enjoyed by our SF and RR , and i believe we already have the licence for local production.....


TAR fires5.56 is not multi caliber.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 18:00 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03
Posts: 3330
So we can not even design and produce a decent small arm for our forces now. All things are to be improted. Why we need OFB and lakhs of people working there and why we need DRDO is we need to to that??? Why not we ask some private sector people in India to produce a decent firm arm for Army??? Surely we have the capabilities for that???

We are doing too much importing and this is a serious problem which need to be addressed. What happend to the self sufficiency slogan of having 70% of defence needs made in India??? Army is simply interested in imports. Why not use AK47s which we already have to counter insurgency??? Surly we have numbers for that or we need a millon guns for anti insurgency operations.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 18:42 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Narayana Rao wrote:
So we can not even design and produce a decent small arm for our forces now.


No. We cannot produce the cheapest and best in the shortest time. For that we hold an international competition/mela and choose the cheapest/best available immediately. If we decide to use what is made at home. Indian soldiers, civilians and observers will be the first to complain and say how useless the weapon is compared to someone else's weapon. So we simply eliminate that step and get the weapons made by someone else since he is begging to sell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 22:16 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21
Posts: 2884
^^^ While there is truth to that ... there is truth in the fact that OFB does really shoddy work of serial producing weapons ... We can't just place a blame on the jawans ... It is a fact that we don't have the best rifles in the world ... May be we have the design, but certainly the end product is not!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2012 23:53 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
The only multi caliber rifle to go into production in the world was FNSCAR and then it was dumped after few hundred guns. Instead of costly clunky multi caliber for USD 2500 one can buy three different caliber rifles and still save money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 00:45 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31
Posts: 2139
Before we start claiming that "we" cannot produce acceptable weapons because (..fill in favorite lame excuse here..), let's be clear about what that "we" includes--is it all Indian companies or just the PSUs, which anyway are proven duds?

What stopped our "leaders" from opening up our defense requirements to all companies in India, private and public, on a competitive basis and offering them all the same support, knowledge and expertise gained by our defense PSUs over the past century? After all, this knowledge and experience does not belong exclusively to a small coterie of government-run outfits but is the property of every tax-paying Indian entity, including private Indian companies.

It is the height of irresponsibility, incompetence and stupidity to suddenly say "whoops, OFB can't produce xyz so now we must buy from a foreign company since China may attack tomorrow". Does it strike any of these nincompoops that ALL the foreign companies they are now dependending on are PRIVATELY OWNED and to ask "why" this is so? One should be excused for suspecting that the entire defense supply chain is corrupt, starting from the management of the PSUs and ending at the very top of government. Nothing else explains the total and inexcusable failure of Indian defense production.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 05:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
Victor wrote:


It is the height of irresponsibility, incompetence and stupidity to suddenly say "whoops, OFB can't produce xyz so now we must buy from a foreign company since China may attack tomorrow".


In fact it strikes me that this is a post-cold war attitude. It was not possible to take this attitude during the cold war because our manufacturing base/industry was not good enough but we had to depend on single countries for suitable items - mostly USSR, and never USA. There were all these stories of how sanctions during war had this ir that crippling effect.

Suddenly now I look around me and I find that all those fears of sanctions from foreign entities is gone. Our manufacturing base is not that much better but we are no throwing open bids to all and sundry and picking and choosing. No one can put any blame on anyone (babu/neta/jawan/mango man) who says "I want the world's best at the cheapest rate and I want it now!" How can anyone call that an irresponsible attitude?

Unless Indian companies private/public/gay/straight whatever can produce "world's best, at cheapest rate right now" they will lose out to a company that can fulfill those requirements. So we are now part of the "global village". And we buy our arms from the global village in a free and competitive market. A far cry from the Nehruvian socialism and Gandhian self help khadi/Dandi. Isn't that what we all want? We get the best at the cheapest rates and punish incompetent local industries and invite private companies who are proving to be as incompetent as the public sector. So we use our dollar reserve to buy arms. Why should anyone be unhappy? What can go wrong with this arrangement? Hain?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 12:23 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 6699
Well , Its aldready gone wrong, German suppliers Hekler and Koch are aldready dictating we can't use arms procured from them for Anti-Maoist operations. Its only a matter of time all and sundray start dictating to us.

Why does the US - the Top Dog in capitalism or Western Europe take such an approach, surely its cheaper to make a submarine in Russia than make one in USA or Europe, Why can't manufacturing of small and Artillery be outsourced like textiles?

Why do USA and Europe want a MIC While we brilliant Indians think other wise?

In fact, I liked the practical approach after 26/11, there is no way we can independantly attack Pak, we just don't have the ability to fight. Onkly 1971 did we have no dependence on the west to take war to its logical conculsion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 15:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03
Posts: 3330
We can not be really free if we need every nut and bolt to be imported. Where we are going to end if we need to take permission from US Congress every time we take a pin out of the granade or start a Zeep. This import thing is a crazy ideal.

But the options with OFB is also quite bad. In long term we need to close down OFB units or make them private and allow new private players of India into arms design and production immediately. I am sure we have the ability and facilities in private sector to produce most of the weapon systems which we are now importing. The others will follow with India aquiring tach base. We already have example of Tatas coming out with their product in Artilary and Bharat forge is also there. Likewise I am sure in some 10 years we will be mostly producing our systems in India - from private sector of course.

But we need atitude change - Arjun example shall not be repeated.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 20:36 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I think we should end alll R&D, production and manufacturing. Sell our children into slavery and call it globalization


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 21 Dec 2012 20:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
The problem is even if Indian companies compete they cannot become as good as the best in the world. Statistically they may produce something that is fairly good but it is unlikely to be the best every time all the time. There will always be something better and cheaper that incorporates things that the Indian item/gun does not have, or will come at a price cheaper than the Indian one.

When the government pours in tax money into Indian companies, we complain that its a waste of time and money because other countries are producing better things that are cheaper. So when the government stops pouring in that money and starts spending it on imports that we all agree are better and cheaper where is the need to complain or worry?

We have only two choices. One is to accept Indian stuff that is just OK but more or less indigenous (barring imports of raw metal/alloys or machine tools or computers and software to control those machine tools). The other is to screw the local stuff and import wholesale. We can't have both. Can we?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 22 Dec 2012 12:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Posts: 3248
Location: Loud, Proud American
shiv wrote:
The problem is even if Indian companies compete they cannot become as good as the best in the world.

That is a pretty defeatist attitude to take sir. There is no reason why an Indian company cannot become world class with proper management, procedures and training.

shiv wrote:
Statistically they may produce something that is fairly good but it is unlikely to be the best every time all the time. There will always be something better and cheaper that incorporates things that the Indian item/gun does not have, or will come at a price cheaper than the Indian one.
....
....
We have only two choices. One is to accept Indian stuff that is just OK but more or less indigenous (barring imports of raw metal/alloys or machine tools or computers and software to control those machine tools). The other is to screw the local stuff and import wholesale. We can't have both. Can we?

No one produces the best firearm in the world, just by the nature of requirements, political decisions etc. However, it is the desire of most manufacturers to produce a product that meets *most* of the requirements of the end-user in acceptable fashion. Requiring the end-user to do his own machining work is generally not considered acceptable.

Why not go with a model where the design copyright is held by GoI and contracts for manufacturing are given out every few years or so to multiple competitors. The original designer can get royalty payments for ToT and for every unit manufactured. That way, no company can get away with shoddy construction practices.

And make it a requirement that the factory should be located somewhere in India. The US military does this and they use an Italian designed pistol (Beretta M9) as the standard sidearm. And for the last few years, the maker of the M16A4 has been a Belgian owned firm (FN) because Colt charged too much (though Colt still gets paid royalties because they owned the design around when the US military adopted the M16). In both cases (pistol and rifle), even though the parent firms are foreign, the products are manufactured in facilities located in the US, with American workers making them and sub-components sourced from US companies (for example, the M9 magazines are made by a couple of US companies), because US military rules specify this as a requirement. If the amount of money involved is large enough (and it will be large, as we're talking orders for the entire Indian military), every manufacturer of firearms, domestic or foreign, will have no problem with this requirement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 22 Dec 2012 23:57 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I think we should soley depend on Chinese arms. China will never attack a much valued customer and everybody can live happily ever after.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 05:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
vic wrote:
I think we should soley depend on Chinese arms. China will never attack a much valued customer and everybody can live happily ever after.

Well we are already buying Chinese chips for secure communication, so China is becoming synonymous with security. When we have people with good business sense we can make the whole world interdependent - and then we will have peace forever.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 12:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
We are buying Chinese radars too. China imposes impicit sanctions against Japan on a hint of border dispute but we never fall into that trap. China can kick our ass as much as it wants but we will happily import everything Chinese. Normally Chinese imports are under invoiced upto ten times to help Chinese military controlled companies against devious yindoos/baniyaas.

I say we should actually use Chinese soldiers to man chinese weapons. Or what the hell, invite Chinese army to take care of our security, afthey all they are better and it would be more cost efficient.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 13:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 22866
Location: Embarrassed by fresh-off-the-boat Indians
vic wrote:
I say we should actually use Chinese soldiers to man chinese weapons. Or what the hell, invite Chinese army to take care of our security, afthey all they are better and it would be more cost efficient.

Been there. Done that. Bought that T-shirt. Chinese technicians man the Chinese CNC machines in HAL.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Small Arms Thread
PostPosted: 23 Dec 2012 13:27 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Sep 2008 22:04
Posts: 313
Location: New Delhi
shiv wrote:
vic wrote:
I say we should actually use Chinese soldiers to man chinese weapons. Or what the hell, invite Chinese army to take care of our security, afthey all they are better and it would be more cost efficient.

Been there. Done that. Bought that T-shirt. Chinese technicians man the Chinese CNC machines in HAL.

:-( true 100%
chines just forward the tender To Bhel for cnc machine. but it is open tender no restriction country wise


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2235 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 56  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Arun Menon, prasannasimha and 15 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