Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 20 Apr 2014 23:17

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2357 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 ... 59  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2012 13:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58
Posts: 4311
Saras is still on, and a LSP level indent exists from the IAF. But yes, we do khadi gramudyog funding of such projects. The Civil transport porgram is now in disarray, it was ambitious, ecosystem oriented (develop industrial base) - but Shri Nair helming it ran into troubles with Govt., and there is little about the program thereafter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2012 13:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Jun 2012 20:26
Posts: 1735
Location: Chaprasi and Bawarchi third gilass, South East corner, aka Agneya
Boss all I ask is a piston engine trainer to replace pushpak, instead of buying from Swiss or Koreans.

One rotax type engine is all beg of Tatas Ambanis Mahendras and even Mulayams

Long back RC Cage promised we will have piston driven UAvs , till date we importing from Israel only.

I have ideas but no funding .... what to do


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2012 14:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Nov 2011 18:59
Posts: 393
The C-27 is indeed a great bird, it is the ideal replacement for the An-32 and Avro, The AVRO replacement contest is for 56 aircraft, I think we should combine that with the eventual An-32 replacement and just order around 120 - 150C-27Js, this is the ideal bird to replace both the AVRO and An-2, it's payload, volume and performance make it the best out there.

That said we need just about 30 to 40 C-17, 30 to 40 C-130J and about 60-80 MTA in order to ensure we can have superior air lift abilities.

I think we need at least 10 battalions of IA Para SF, 10 battalions of SFF, 10 Battalions of Garuds and 10 battalions of Marcos, having a special forces strength of around 50K units is a minimum requirement if we want to take on both china and pak.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2012 14:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39
Posts: 1283
I think we need the MTA badly. Khan plays nice only when he sees that the opponent has options. Giving up alternatives and leaving yourself to Khan's mercy is a mistake even Pakistanis try to avoid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Sep 2012 19:19 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 9956
Location: Illini Nation
Russia is a problem.

Like anyone else they have two funding streams: the development and the purchase. The Government of Russia (GoR) has been a rather reluctant funding source for development and even more so for purchase. GoR would love a vendor to fund the development and a foreign country to fund their purchase.

Case in point is the IL-476 (a plane very dear to my heart - or lack there of?). The first test plane has been ready to fly for about 6+ months, but have not taken to the skies!!! Issue? GoR is not willing to pay the price that the vendor wants for the finished product. They are low balling it seems. My feel is that everything will fall into place if China (as an example) purchases some 30 of these pups. The price paid by China would allow to compensate for the low balling from GoR.

But, since China has not provided any direction (they are also busy building their own heavy lifter) + GoR not willing to pay the price asked for, etc, the test schedule for the IL-476 gets postponed. (It is supposed to make its first flight in Spet, 2012!!!)

I can almost see the same happening with the MTA, with a major diff: India has funds to purchase the plane and a need for it too.

The ONLY way I would like India to get involved with the MTA: Russia and India SHARE the development (which is close to happening, if not already happened), this includes funding and shared technical development. THEN India establishes a production line (or two) IN India - which has NOTHING to do with ANY Russian efforts for producing the MTA. NOTHING. Zilch. India should operate as though Russia does not exist as far as production - India can source parts and have supply chain within Russia, that is fine. BUT no sub-assemblies, etc from Russia.

I hope that is the case with the FGFA too.

For production Russian timelines should be Russian timelines.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 00:50 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Nov 2009 08:25
Posts: 512
The new production IL-76MD-90A or IL-476, built in Russia, made its maiden flight on Sept 22.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/russia-signs-deal-for-new-generation-il-76-transports-377334/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 06:30 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
I think IAF will be very much interested in this to augment out IL76 fleet, particularly for our refuellers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 06:42 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
Gilles wrote:
The new production IL-76MD-90A or IL-476, built in Russia...

if this helps desh improve the uptime of its IL76/78/Phalcon fleet, it would be a god sent gift... Hope we buy atleast 10-15 airframes and couple years of spares.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 11:10 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
IL76 is not suitable for refuelers or AWACS role, wherein its volumetric fuselage, point load floor strength capability and rough field capability are not that useful or elegant.
the A330 is a better fit there. it trounces the 76 in tanker role and is the std layout for all other AWACS in the world - passenger cabin and some racks above, more racks below, accessed by staircases.

for cargo hauling its a good platform though and given the sheer cost of C17 we can look to get more IL476.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 11:20 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 10200
In peace time A330 or 787 may be great value for money but what happens in war if the main air field is inoperable for some reason and one has to look at rough field capability or short take off and landing would a military aircraft like Il-76 or C-130 do more justice to the job ?

Thats probably a dilemma many Airforce would go through before taking a decision other wise a A-330 would be equally good for AWACS or Cargo role see no reason one needs a military transport aircraft for these role as well


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 11:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 777
Time to overhaul over Il-76 fleet to new standards, new engines, new cockpit and perhaps add another 10 476 to the fleet to take the number upto 27/28 and add another 6 to the phalcon fleet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 11:50 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
A330 without a low continous floor (gondola for the wheels) cannot match the volume capability of a dedicated cargo plane. it can take pallets between concrete runways. unsuitable for wartime where transhipping from A330 to IL76/An32 for last leg just waste time. and since a il76 can fly across india, its ok. Khan needs big haulers for trans oceanic supply routes and bringing in pallets of food, water, burgers for expeditionary troops.

but for refuelers and AWACS I would expect them to fly from secure rear bases like kalaikunda, nagpur, pune only...even in wartime.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Oct 2012 12:53 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 1805
Location: NullPointerException
Yeah, no point putting precious assets within range of the enemy. For platinum assets, bases in the rear are the only option except for recovering in emergencies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 07:26 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
does anyone know how fighters rendezvous with tankers at night, esp over the ocean with no GCI available? is there a long range encrypted directional beacon in the tanker that is turned on for the fighters to latch on to , or is it just a simple voice radio call telling both parties to format on some GPS location at a certain time?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 12:01 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28
Posts: 11028
Location: Beneath the pleasure dome of the great khan
i think they have quite specific meet points and times and approach procedures - including codes. possibly directed by awacs in hostile territory. i think nowadays they use their FLIR or NVG's to find and hook up


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 13:04 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
FLIR/NVG is ok to find a bird from 5km away and come closer carefully ...the refuel boom has a blinking light on it I think.

but from 100s of km away, when fighters need to be radar silent, either the fueler has to call its flock in, or awacs has to arrange for the meeting imo.

the F16 here has a series of low intensity lights along its spine to help the boom operator find the hole . in probe based systems I guess the boom itself has guidance lights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GE7HbBjdCmY

pretty tricky imo.

and a very serene video of the oldie goldie KC135 tanker - spreading fuel, love, peace and democracy for decades now :mrgreen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M7A9vO3 ... re=related

I love that blacknose hawkish paintjob that most USAF heavies use.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 14:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Posts: 192
Location: J4
Singha,
In some of the older flight sims, when a refueling request is initiated, the AWACS provides vector of tanker along with approx range & altitude. Once the bird arrives near the tanker, communication is established and tanker guides the bird to the boom.

Refueling manaully is very tricky...sometimes would end up crashing in to tanker or damaging the boom LOL. A couple of times I have ran outta fuel trying to establish connection and ended up ejecting :) Luckily the game has auto refuel feature...not sure if the feature is available in real life though!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 18:59 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 22 Nov 2011 18:59
Posts: 393
I think 120 C-27 Spartans to replace the An-32, I think we should try and get the KC-777 it is bigger and carries more fuel out to longer ranges, may require some development but i think it makes for a bigger, better and longer range option than the Airbus. MTA should have some mid-range KC tanking versions. I think we need to boost the order of MTA to around 100 as well. We need around 50 C-130J and about 40 C-17s.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 19:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39
Posts: 1283
Russia and India Sign Transport Plane Deal

Quote:
India and Russia gave the green light on Friday to a long-delayed joint project to develop a Military Transport Aircraft, Russia's United Aircraft Corporation (OAK) said after the signing ceremony in New Delhi.

"A contract was signed by the client, the joint Indian-Russian MTAL venture, and the contractors, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and Russia's United Aircraft Corporation Transport Planes (OAK-TS)," OAK said.

The signing gives an official start to the project, the technical details of which have been approved by the Indian and Russian defense ministries.

"A long and complex preparatory phase in every sense has been completed for the project, the first Indian-Russian transport aircraft, which involves joint financing and workshare, and creation from scratch of a new plane for the air forces of both nations," OAK said in a statement.

A large group of Indian aerospace engineers will arrive in Moscow in the near future to start work on the program.

MTA will be a twin-engine light transport with a wingspan of around 100 feet (30 m), capable of carrying 18-20 ton payloads, with a maximum take-off weight of 65 tons, and speed of 500 mp/h. The aircraft is designed to replace the BAe 748 and Antonov An-32 in Indian service and An-12, An-26 and An-30 in Russian service.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 19:15 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 10200
I wonder how many times India and Russia signs MTA deal this is perhaps the 3rd time i am hearing that they are signing the deal and perhaps not the last time .

May be every time the DM of Russia visits India or vice versa and if they dont have any thing better to do they sign the MTA deal ....chalo phir se MTA sign kaar lete hai :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2012 20:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Posts: 1867
Location: Lone Star State
Austin wrote:
I wonder how many times India and Russia signs MTA deal this is perhaps the 3rd time i am hearing that they are signing the deal and perhaps not the last time .

May be every time the DM of Russia visits India or vice versa and if they dont have any thing better to do they sign the MTA deal ....chalo phir se MTA sign kaar lete hai :lol:

I was wondering exactly the same thing... i thought it was signed already... anyway this time they said, HAL engineers are going to go to Moscow to start the work... did they say the same thing last time too? wonder which stage the whole project is? any info gurus?


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

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 9956
Location: Illini Nation
Pravda, Oct 1, 2012 ::
Russia unveils new military transport aircraft Il-476


Quote:
The state trial of the new aircraft is to be completed in 2013.


Quote:
However, according to Vzglyad, sources at the Defense Ministry said that the IL-476 did not meet the requirements of the Russian Air Force, as the aircraft did not have several important systems. It goes about the equipment for setting active and passive noise, the rear fire point, the formation flight system, the warning system for the use of arms. In addition, the aircraft should be complete with handling equipment for dropping the cargoes with multy-canopy parachute systems.


On India acquiring them,

2011, Ilyushin 476 first flying prototype nearing completion

Quote:

Aviastar plans to launch production of the upgraded aircraft once the prototypes have completed their test programme. Manufacture of parts for the first three production planes started as far back as July of last year. The plant is going to make three production aircraft a year at first, with the subsequent output rate to grow up to seven planes per annum.


I have not checked how many Russia wants to order, assume 35, that means India will get the first IL-476 in 2019 or so.

I just do not see the IAF waiting that long when they have an alternative that is better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2012 07:33 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
Part2 of the beauty of flight - featuring KC10 extender
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4iALN9 ... ure=relmfu

one day soon mashallah we shall see 2 A330-MRTT + 4 Tejas + 4 PAKFA in close formation . HD with sound...soothing.

take a look at the size and number of heavies on apron at the base where it lands. true power.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2012 11:04 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 30589
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
part3: C17
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRdFzxkMpHo

looking at this ops from little more than hard packed dusty soil, I wonder if C17s could make into a chain of ladakh and north sikkim airstrips from POV of inducting troops and 1st line ammo in a buildup phase
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F22F0aQB ... ature=plcp


Last edited by Singha on 13 Oct 2012 11:16, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2012 11:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31
Posts: 5747
HAL Press Release on the MTA:

Quote:
HAL Signs MTA Follow-on Contract with Russian Partners

Bangalore, October 12 : Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), the aerospace major, signed the Preliminary Design Phase (PDP) Contract today in New Delhi with the United Aircraft Corporation — Transport Aircraft (UAC-TA), the Russian partner and their JV-Multirole Transport Aircraft Ltd (MTAL) for the Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) project as a follow on contract of the General Contract signed between the three parties in May 2012.

With this HAL and UAC-TA will start the preliminary design work immediately at Moscow. HAL design team consisting of 30 designers will be positioned at UAC-TA”, says Mr. R.K.Tyagi, Chairman, HAL who was present on the occasion. The primary objective of the project is to achieve self-reliance in design, development and production of aircraft of this size and also to manage the programme with international collaboration and large number of global suppliers, he adds.

The contract was signed by Mr. T. Suvarnaraju, HAL’s Director (Design and Development) and Mr. S.Velmozhkin, General Director, UAC-TA.

An Inter Governmental Agreement was signed on November 12, 2007 to design, develop and produce the multi-role transport aircraft in the 15-20 tonne class, jointly by the Indian and Russian agencies (HAL and UAC-TAS) to meet the requirements of 100 aircraft for the Russian Air Force, 45 aircraft for the IAF and 60 for other countries. The total requirement for the present is 205.

On completion of the agreed work share of the PDP Contract in 10 months, Detail Design Phase (DDP) Contract will be signed to complete the design and development of MTA. The aircraft will be designed for cargo / troop transportation, paradrop/air drop of supplies including ‘low altitude parachute extraction system’ and is to be co-developed by HAL, UAC, and Rosoboronexport of Russia, through MTAL.

HAL will carry out the design and development of its workshare of the MTA at the Aircraft R&D Centre (ARDC) at Bangalore while its Transport Aircraft Division (TAD) at Kanpur will manufacture the prototypes and subsequently the serial production will be undertaken at Kanpur where dedicated facilities are being set up.

HAL’s other R&D Centres and manufacturing Divisions will share development of systems and LRUs and manufacture of components, sub-assemblies and composite structure. HAL will showcase its expertise in design of aircraft as well as systems, manufacturing and flight testing while jointly working with the Russian team in Moscow as well as in India.

HAL has a dedicated Division for manufacture and support of transport aircraft at Kanpur which is the only proven facility in the country for transport aircrafts. This Division has a co-located R&D centre for transport aircraft

The production of 44 seater HS-748 (Avro) passenger/transport Aircraft commenced at this Division in early 1960s. Eighty nine Avro aircrafts were produced at this Division out of which 22 aircrafts were supplied to civilian customers. The Division is still supporting these aircrafts even after five decades inspite of obsolescence and non-availability of OEMs support thanks to R&D efforts in maintaining fleet serviceability. HAL has undertaken a number of upgrades and modifications to overcome obsolescence and performance enhancement.

Subsequently, production of 19 seater Dornier 228 passenger/utility aircraft started in early 1984. So far 116 aircrafts have been produced for various roles out of which 14 aircrafts were supplied to domestic civilian customers besides export of another two aircrafts. HAL is also exporting complete Dornier 228 aircraft structure to Ruag, Germany with EASA certification. Currently, the Division is supplying aircraft to various defence customers. One aircraft will be exported to Seychelles during this financial year. The Division is also expecting a number of bulk orders from domestic/foreign customers in near future.

HAL Press Release


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Oct 2012 06:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 10200
It seems like JV for 6 T transport aircraft is also on table.

Russia, India mull joint plane manufacture

Quote:
At the next session of its cooperation commission with India to be held in New Delhi Monday, Russia will propose joint manufacture of Ilyushin-112 light transport jets.

The announcement came from Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who heads the Russian delegation to the session.

The Ilyushin-112 can carry a cargo of up to 6 tons.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 Oct 2012 06:48 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 May 2012 22:34
Posts: 355
I hope not. Just focus on NAL RTA ans get saras but order a few Il-76's.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 07:52 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Jun 2009 09:31
Posts: 1124
IAF teams with Charleston for C-17 maintenance training

Quote:
The Indian air force has begun sending about 100 airmen to Joint Base Charleston to receive instruction from the 373rd Training Squadron Detachment 5, on how to operate the 10 C-17 Globemaster IIIs they recently purchased
. . .
The IAF expects to receive their 10 C-17s in June 2013.
. . .
The first group of students is slated to graduate Nov. 8.


The first of them in June or all 10 by June?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 10:13 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Posts: 719
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road
GeorgeWelch wrote:
IAF teams with Charleston for C-17 maintenance training

Quote:
The Indian air force has begun sending about 100 airmen to Joint Base Charleston to receive instruction from the 373rd Training Squadron Detachment 5, on how to operate the 10 C-17 Globemaster IIIs they recently purchased
. . .
The IAF expects to receive their 10 C-17s in June 2013.
. . .
The first group of students is slated to graduate Nov. 8.


The first of them in June or all 10 by June?


June 13 - end 2014.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 08:16 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12321
Location: In a sad place
http://newindianexpress.com/thesundayst ... 363163.ece

Quote:
Was Defence Minister AK Antony party to his ministry’s decision to waive rules in favour of US aerospace major Boeing to escape its obligation to plough back $1.74 billion as offset into the Indian defence and aerospace industry? India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has put the defence ministry on the mat over the $4.1-billion deal with Boeing to supply 10 C-17 Globemaster heavy lift cargo planes for the Indian Air Force (IAF) and eight P-8I Poseidon long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft for the Indian Navy.


BRF is ahead of the curve as before. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 09:18 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Sep 2011 07:22
Posts: 329
Sanku wrote:
http://newindianexpress.com/thesundaystandard/article1363163.ece

Quote:
Was Defence Minister AK Antony party to his ministry’s decision to waive rules in favour of US aerospace major Boeing to escape its obligation to plough back $1.74 billion as offset into the Indian defence and aerospace industry? India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has put the defence ministry on the mat over the $4.1-billion deal with Boeing to supply 10 C-17 Globemaster heavy lift cargo planes for the Indian Air Force (IAF) and eight P-8I Poseidon long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft for the Indian Navy.


BRF is ahead of the curve as before. :mrgreen:


Read the CAG report itself

Quote:
2.1.3.2 Contract with M/s Boeing, USA (C-17 Globemaster aircraft)
with TWT test facilities as offset

The offset contract for USD 195.00 million (`874.22 crore) concluded
(June 2011) with M/s Boeing, USA, in connection with procurement of
C-17 Globemaster aircraft, catered for establishment of a Transonic Wind
Tunnel (TWT) test facility at the Defence Research and Development
Organisation (DRDO) in the form of DFI. Of this, offset credit amounting to
90 per cent was for the initial setting up of above facility and 10 per cent for
subsequent purchase of testing services from the IOP.
As the TWT test facility was a DFI in kind, the offset was allowed by the DAC
even as it was not an eligible offset, though this was done on the basis of
Technical Offset Evaluation Committee (TOEC) recommendation, the decision
was taken without the mandatory certification by DOFA.
The Ministry stated (April 2012) that offset credit for investment by Boeing in
setting up the facility was accepted by the DAC in its meeting on
21 February 2011 and that approval in principle for setting up of the facility at
DRDO had also been accorded by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).
The reply is silent on whether specific waiver of the Raksha Mantri (RM) was
sought for the breach of the DPP provisions. It is also not acceptable because
the DAC in the same meeting had maintained that investment in kind through
non equity route was not permissible for offset and only purchase of goods and
services by OEM from IOP would so qualify.

2.1.3.3 Offset with M/s Boeing, USA (P-8(I) aircraft)
Against the offset contract concluded (January 2009) with M/s Boeing, USA
for procurement of P-8(I) aircraft for the Indian Navy, the vendor agreed to
provide DFI worth USD 153.90 million (`750 crore) in the form of safety,
reliability and air worthiness seminars; establishment of fire finder classrooms;
transfer of metallurgy and hydraulic lab facilities, composite manufacturing
assembly/tooling, mobile broadband, friction stir welding and aero structures
tools and processes.
The DFI proposals relating to safety, reliability and airworthiness seminars and
establishment of fire finder class rooms were not valid offset as there was no
value addition through the IOP. The remaining proposals relating to transfer of
metallurgy/hydraulic lab facilities, composite manufacturing assembly/tooling
etc. were also a kind of direct import without any value addition through the
IOP.
The Ministry while admitting the facts stated (April 2012) that these DFI
proposals do not qualify for offsets and the same has been conveyed to
M/s Boeing. It was further stated that the vendor had not claimed offset credit
so far. The reply, however, does not reckon the fact that the elements of offset
once included in the contract are liable to be claimed by the vendor. Moreover,
even if a claim by the vendor is not admitted by the Ministry, offset deficit of
USD 153.90 million (`750 crore) would still remain


I'm no fan of Antony, but the rhetorical question in the headline smells of DDM'itis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 09:26 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12321
Location: In a sad place
srin wrote:
I'm no fan of Antony, but the rhetorical question in the headline smells of DDM'itis.


Sure, there is a bit of sensastionalization involved, but the core point is not wrong. CAG has strictures against the deal for not following the policy prescription.

Would you disagree to that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 10:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 Sep 2011 07:22
Posts: 329
Sanku wrote:
srin wrote:
I'm no fan of Antony, but the rhetorical question in the headline smells of DDM'itis.


Sure, there is a bit of sensastionalization involved, but the core point is not wrong. CAG has strictures against the deal for not following the policy prescription.

Would you disagree to that?


I was just pointing to the facts. That was a DDM article that mixed facts and opinions, and I disagree with some of the opinions.

Personally, I think that Boeing tried to play games (helped by MoD) and has been caught. They got caught because this is the first time CAG audited offsets. They will now act suitably chastened till the next time they see an opportunity. I don't personally understand how they were planning to justify this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 10:32 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12321
Location: In a sad place
srin wrote:
Personally, I think that Boeing tried to play games (helped by MoD) and has been caught..


We agree then. Txs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 10:40 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08
Posts: 1136
Sanku wrote:
srin wrote:
Personally, I think that Boeing tried to play games (helped by MoD) and has been caught..


We agree then. Txs.


Actually - if you read further you will see that the CAG report also identifies M/s Rosoboronexport, Russia and M/s RAC MiG Corpn, Russia (along with Boeing and Lockheed) for for subverting the offset policy. But the former are not to be highlighted :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 13:34 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Posts: 12321
Location: In a sad place
arnab wrote:
Actually - if you read further you will see that the CAG report also identifies M/s Rosoboronexport, Russia and M/s RAC MiG Corpn, Russia (along with Boeing and Lockheed) for for subverting the offset policy. But the former are not to be highlighted :)


Why dont you do the honors then? It should be in the right thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 17:16 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19
Posts: 3099
Location: छिछला पानी में (In shallow waters)
What happened to big talk? There are less about 30 messages since Sep 01 2012 on this page.

By any standard, an aircraft needs to be better understood than a tank is it, it is flying in air after all?

So the only way to deal with behemoths of private military-industrial western complex is to be Top-Gun-Cool or GetTheFOff?

Did the requirements come from Top-Gun fans in India especially from defense forces?

We are not able to discuss various components too however we do tend to hold back in case of tech such as armor for tanks developed in house in case of issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 19:54 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 3698
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3
If one reads the CAG audit, it makes it apparent that the policy itself is not clear and is open to subjective interpretations. The CAG recommends that the polciy be made more disambiguous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2012 20:35 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19
Posts: 3099
Location: छिछला पानी में (In shallow waters)
putnanja wrote:
If one reads the CAG audit, it makes it apparent that the policy itself is not clear and is open to subjective interpretations. The CAG recommends that the polciy be made more disambiguous.

So this is how buyers should be very careful about all contracts with western multi-trillion dollar military industrial complex. A few billion dollars (never)here and (always)there is matter of little problem for such huge complexes anyways.

In fact the huge private military-industrial complexes are all about private corporations and not state-to-state obligations for USA. So obviously any drawbacks/change/reinterpretation in the middle of deal do not affect image of USA nation at all.

However CAG audits, policies & subjective interpretations are concerns at the level of national political deal making level. Any such 'subjective interpretation' that changes mid-way, even when Indians are paying, must be because of ambiguous negotiations/contracts/policies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 02:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 1889
Location: नशा भंग ते शराब दा उतर जाए परभात नाम खुमारी नानका चढ़ी रहे दिन रात !
Crossposting from Indian Military Aviation thread:

wig wrote:
IAF to shell out Rs 88 cr more for IL-76 overhaul
Quote:
For about two years, half of the IAF’s fleet of IL-76 strategic freighters remained grounded for want of overhaul and extension of the aircraft’s total technical life (TTL) because of delay on the part of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) in finalising a multi-million dollar contract with a foreign firm.

Out of the 17 IL-76 aircraft procured by the IAF, nine remained grounded between December 2007 and September 2009. Besides, the IAF had to shell out an additional Rs 88 crore as the contract had to be renegotiated, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has pointed out in its latest report.

The IAF had inducted these aircraft between 1985 and 1989, with a TTL of 20 years. In November 2005, the MoD concluded a $28 million (Rs 128 crore) contract with a Russian firm for the overhaul and life extension of six IL-76.

In April 2007, MoD negotiated a $33 million (Rs 139 crore) contract for the overhaul and life extension of another nine aircraft. The price was valid till December 2007. In the meantime, the MoD received two representations from other firms alleging irregularities in the contract process. The MoD disposed off the matter in March 2008, by which time the validity of the contract had expired.

A fresh limited tendering process had to be initiated and though it was again the same Russian firm that bagged the contract, the new price as quoted as $41.77 million. The CAG observed that the price difference worked out to about Rs 57 crore. In addition, the IAF had to spend another Rs 30 crore to procure minimum essential spares to make the grounded aircraft fly worthy so that these could be positioned at the overhaul facilities overseas.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20121204/nation.htm#12


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2357 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 ... 59  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aditp, Google Feedfetcher, rohitvats and 17 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