Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 06 May 2016 00:22

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 ... 107  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2013 13:49 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2155
Location: NullPointerException
Assorted Shuklas writing this is all fine but do the services know the first thing about supporting indigenous R&D in the defence sector? Judging by the import friendly nature of the beast, the answer is a resounding no.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2013 02:15 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
The pdf in DRDO thread blames the lack of fail safe mode for the fuzes and that DRDO/OFB fuzes are not used by IAF any longer. OFB webpage does not show any fuzes being made. Old DRDO Techfocus which used to mention fuzes designed by them is also no longer there.


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

Air launched weapons


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



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2013 02:23 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
ARDE page:

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

Quote:

Retarder Tail Unit

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



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2013 02:52 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
A News account of a CAG report on ARDE dated 6 Dec 2012:

13 of 46 projects completed by ARDE Pune

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

{IOW the lab does not agree and chose to ignore the wrong information put out by CAG. CAG should have given teh ARDe a chance to rebut its audit findings. Otherwise it all becomes a slanging match and does nobdy any good.}



So 55 projects in 15 years sought by services: IA, IAF and IN.
46 taken up and closed to completion
13 were successful at a cost of Rs. 67.83 crore ie Rs 5 crore on the average.

Its too bad they dont give success criteria. Is it those that are in production?
Completion could be successful tech demo but not productionised for various reasons.
Another interesting bit is:

Quote:
of the 46 staff projects, 37 projects did not adhere to the original time schedule. It also mentions that many projects were not successful, due to the frequent extensions in the date of completion.


And the main reasons are changes in requirements. I think the customer also has to be accountable.

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

Anyway to get the original CAG report?

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

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


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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 20 Feb 2013 03:11 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
Ind Express has another take:

CAG raps ARDE for delays that cost Govt

Quote:
'Time overruns in projects forced Centre to import expensive ammo'

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

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

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

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


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

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


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

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

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

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


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



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

No 24-12. Chapter 7 on ARDE Project Mgt


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 21 Feb 2013 07:29 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Posts: 2022
BAE Pulls Out of Joint Venture With India’s Mahindra
Quote:
NEW DELHI — In a setback to joint ventures in India’s defense sector, the U.K.’s BAE Systems and domestic automobile company Mahindra & Mahindra ended their equity partnership, formed in 2009, called Mahindra Defence Systems.

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

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

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

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

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

An executive of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the lobbying agency for Indian industries, said the pullout is bad news for the private-sector defense market, which is still in its infancy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 22 Feb 2013 07:22 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
Gp Capt Bhanoji Rao was wanting this one to be made by OFB:

FAB M62

in 250 kg and 500 kg models.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013 09:10 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56
Posts: 7687
Defence deals figure on Tata Motors radar
Quote:
After having developed a first-of-its-kind multi-axle truck, which can carry and launch the supersonic BrahMos and Prahar missiles and the subsonic Nirbhay missile, the Mumbai-based company is working on future infantry combat vehicles (FICV).
Quote:
Tata Motors' product line-up include bullet-proof troop carriers, armoured buses, mine protected vehicles, mobile hospital, water bowser and even unmanned aerial vehicle launchers, amongst others.

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

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013 13:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Posts: 1068
Location: Baudland
Professors At IIT-Delhi have proposed a method to increase the speed of VLF communications with submarines

http://www.aame.in/2013/02/iit-delhi-pr ... 0-per.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013 18:49 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 1621
This is the smoking gun, Jai ho CAG maharaj ki ....

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


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

However, the fact remains that due to unrealistic GSQR framed by the Army
and DDRD’s pursuance of it, the Staff project could not come to fruition even
after an expenditure of ` 10.37 crore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013 19:18 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48
Posts: 536
GSQR-Client Requirement
Ministry-Manager
CAG-QA/Tester
DRDO-Developer.

a typical case of IT field.

:mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013 22:34 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
X-Posting only relevant part....


Deccan chronicle :

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

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

.......

Saraswat: India’s tech gap with other countries widening

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

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

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

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

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

How about defect free steel casings for dumb bombs and fuzes for them?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 03:31 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1687
From the January 12, 2011 Tarmak007 article:

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

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

Setting the bar a bit high.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 05:33 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
ramana wrote:
Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------

Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 21:19 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
It is better to have direct import rather than fake JV or screw driver license assembly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 21:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Jun 2012 20:26
Posts: 1676
Location: Chaprasi and Bawarchi third gilass, South East corner, aka Agneya
shiv wrote:
ramana wrote:
Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------

Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?


Impossible

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

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

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

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

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


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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 21:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31
Posts: 1621
It's because the joker's mandate limited them to only assembling CKDs/SKD. Only in 2006 OFBs were given mandate/permission to do R&D for new product development.

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

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

Saala system hi kharab hai kisko dosh de sakte hain


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 21:52 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I agree adequate funds are not assigned for R&D. Chinese R&D budget is 10 times that of India.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Mar 2013 22:29 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Jun 2012 20:26
Posts: 1676
Location: Chaprasi and Bawarchi third gilass, South East corner, aka Agneya
Ok bhetrenee jawab then why did pvt sector auto giant Tata nano reach out to global village

Yehi tho maar kha Gaya Hindustan Katare Saab ji sir ji


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 09:05 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 43684
shiv wrote:
ramana wrote:
Dr Saraswat pointed out that Indian war tanks had no engine manufactured in India and the defence forces had to rely on foreign technology for it.
----------------------

Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?



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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 09:58 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
pentaiah wrote:
shiv wrote:
Infosys, Reliance, Mahindra and Tata would do it in 2 months flat no?


Impossible

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

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

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


Pardon me for making a pisko point here. Not only have we not produced an engine, we have an educated Indian population that has so far believed that this inability is only in government enterprises and that private enterprises in India are busy doing all those wonderful wonderful things that Public sector is not doing.

That is like getting a blindfold for a blind man. As a nation we simply have not put in the effort required because we imagine that there is already someone out there (in the private sector) who can do it and it is only the blinkered government that is preventing this tremendous private pressure from exploding out. In reality even our education and national technological level has not reached the heights that our imagination has reached. Saraswat is right in stating things like they are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 10:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 8107
On top of Myths like 50% of scientists in NASA are Indian scientists, SIlicon valley is flooded with Indians etc.

The time it takes to develop technologies and Beaucratic efforts to torpedo it are quietly kept away from the media.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 10:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
Aditya_V wrote:
On top of Myths like 50% of scientists in NASA are Indian scientists, SIlicon valley is flooded with Indians etc.

That has become part of the mythology - the folklore that the world of hi tech is being run by Indians, except in India where it is being suppressed by the government and politics.

The real story is far more sobering than that, and we need to get out of mythology into the reality that India is wide open for entrepreneurs who can take the country beyond Fiat/Ambassador jugaad repair depot. As a nation parents and teachers make children think that mugging up equations is the route to a great engineering future.

Sorry for the rant, but take 100 Xth or XII std kids and ask them how to fill the electrons in different orbits of an atom, they will tell you. Ask them to build a model aeroplane and most will fail. This is what we are doing here. Ask them to recite Krebs Citric Acid cycle like a poem they will tell you. Ask them to do first aid CPR on man who collapses on street and they won't have a clue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 11:12 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Nov 2010 15:30
Posts: 366
Location: Stuck between a rock and a hard place
From personal experience most kids who do actually want to do something different are put down by their parents in the name of India has too much competition, you don't have the option of working like Americans! You have to compete according to the system or perish!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 12:05 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25
Posts: 322
i dont know about this lack of education on making machines being paraded here. i studied in a private college in the early 90s and we were encouraged by profs/lecturers to do all sorts of circuits on bread boards, form our own simple PCBs for simple computers (there were many shops to fabricate simple 2-D PCBs in chennai), and we even prototyped our library management system out of our unix machine at that time. my electronics group batch-mates fabricated our college c-band dish antenna and receiver from scratch and made it work. my electrical/mechanical batch-mates installed a solar water heater for the cafeteria. all in a small dinky college campus. i think it is all up to student and his interests in the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 13:40 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2007 06:29
Posts: 612
Location: The Netherlands
Quote:
merlin wrote (Page 85):

Assorted Shuklas writing this is all fine but do the services know the first thing about supporting indigenous R&D in the defence sector? Judging by the import friendly nature of the beast, the answer is a resounding no.

The answer to that is this bit from Shula's article:

Quote:
The army must be goaded into working with this coalition, and told its only option is an indigenous gun.


That is how it works in most countries, the government brings together the customer (armed forces of that country) and the developer(s)/manufacturer(s) and they agree on the design specifications, then the government okays it and releases the money to start the project. But in India, not only is the government clueless, worse still the original sin of relying on imports lies with the politicians: every arms import deal is an opportunity to enrich themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013 20:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
manish.rastogi wrote:
From personal experience most kids who do actually want to do something different are put down by their parents in the name of India has too much competition, you don't have the option of working like Americans! You have to compete according to the system or perish!!


Manish I can give you the student's side and the parents and teachers side of the story.

Indian parents look for "good employment" for their children and pay college fees for education that promises "good employment". Employers in India, including multinationals are not looking for innovation. They are looking for "employees"/coolies

So good employment means ability to be a good coolie for a handsome salary with least risk. Parents will pay good money for colleges that groom kids for what the employers want. At the end of 4 years the kid and parent has to be able to say "I got a placement in college in 7th semester and will join Accenture/Infosys"

This will anyway be the fate of 95% of graduates. The innovators and risk takers are in the 5%. India has to search for them and pay them and make it attractive for them. But India consists of parents/teachers/leaders who belong to the 95% and are unable to even recognize the value of the 5%.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Mar 2013 22:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Nov 2010 15:30
Posts: 366
Location: Stuck between a rock and a hard place
Exactly...trying to change the mindset won't help now when it is already too late!!
The government needs to take steps, they need to assure them good employment, cause with this much pressure out of those 5% risk takers barely 0.05% are able to go for research, innovation etc!!
No body in the government gives a sh!t for research, for god's sake copy the American system if you have to, bring research and projects in colleges and high school level!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2013 00:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00
Posts: 726
shiv wrote:
The real story is far more sobering than that, and we need to get out of mythology into the reality that India is wide open for entrepreneurs who can take the country beyond Fiat/Ambassador jugaad repair depot. As a nation parents and teachers make children think that mugging up equations is the route to a great engineering future.

Sorry for the rant, but take 100 Xth or XII std kids and ask them how to fill the electrons in different orbits of an atom, they will tell you. Ask them to build a model aeroplane and most will fail. This is what we are doing here. Ask them to recite Krebs Citric Acid cycle like a poem they will tell you. Ask them to do first aid CPR on man who collapses on street and they won't have a clue.

Shiv,
I don't claim to have any special knowledge of this subject. I'm not sure the US is very different in that aspect. A college education is very important. That means there is quite a bit of pressure to get one. Doesn't matter what for a lot of cases. The country (that I know of) where learning doesn't necessarily mean a degree is Germany. Apprenticeship in Germany. We have the ITI too. But having 18 million engineering colleges means that the ITI degree has no value per se.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2013 05:10 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
manish.rastogi wrote:
Exactly...trying to change the mindset won't help now when it is already too late!!

No. "Too late" for my generation. But not too late to change the mindset of a generation that is between 15 and 25 years old today. They can ensure that their children are able to make better choices. That means that (in my view) we will start seeing major changes in about 10 to 15 years time.


Last edited by shiv on 08 Mar 2013 08:02, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2013 05:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
KrishnaK wrote:
The country (that I know of) where learning doesn't necessarily mean a degree is Germany. Apprenticeship in Germany. We have the ITI too. But having 18 million engineering colleges means that the ITI degree has no value per se.

One recent change for the better is a "lateral entry" into Engineering college for suitable ITI graduates where they have a 3 years course or some such thing


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Mar 2013 10:02 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 2155
Location: NullPointerException
shiv wrote:
KrishnaK wrote:
The country (that I know of) where learning doesn't necessarily mean a degree is Germany. Apprenticeship in Germany. We have the ITI too. But having 18 million engineering colleges means that the ITI degree has no value per se.

One recent change for the better is a "lateral entry" into Engineering college for suitable ITI graduates where they have a 3 years course or some such thing


Not very recent. It has been there from the early nineties at least in Maharashtra.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 00:56 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00
Posts: 726
shiv wrote:
KrishnaK wrote:
The country (that I know of) where learning doesn't necessarily mean a degree is Germany. Apprenticeship in Germany. We have the ITI too. But having 18 million engineering colleges means that the ITI degree has no value per se.

One recent change for the better is a "lateral entry" into Engineering college for suitable ITI graduates where they have a 3 years course or some such thing

That's for Diploma Graduates I think. Diploma graduates were often more capable with their hands from what I remember.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 06:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
Here is something I wrote in Oct 2012

There is an article by former CAS OP Mehra (1973-5 IIRC) in the latest Vayu. He reminisces of a visit to the residence of German Aircraft designer Kurt Tank and saw that every room had a fully equipped drafting table. He asked Tank why there were no IAF/HAL engineers in his sign team and Tank replied that it was related to India's caste system. On asking what this had to do with the caste system, Kurt Tank is said to have replied, "Don't you know that engineers in India discard their drafting tables as soon as they qualify because there are draughtsmen to do the job?"

This gels in with something I had read years ago about trainee engineers and engineering courses not taking welding and lathe work skills seriously because there would be welders and other men to do the job. The engineers considered themselves the "brains".

Hopefully this is changing. At least design is all computers now and no drafting board. Another welcome step IMO is the "lateral entry" to engineering college for young men who have undergone 2 or 3 years technical training courses.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 07:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1687
By prototyping mould inserts out of 3D-printed objects, the process of generating smooth, precise and accurate moulds for small objects would also become simpler. Unless one is building the likes of a submarine hull, precision is usually required on small components anyway. So 3D-printing as the step after CAD, and as a cheaper alternative to a full-blown n-dimensional CNC machine, will lessen the mazdoori component of making prototypes and hopefully shorten the think-create-learn-think again cycle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 07:17 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
PratikDas wrote:
By prototyping mould inserts out of 3D-printed objects, the process of generating smooth, precise and accurate moulds for small objects would also become simpler. Unless one is building the likes of a submarine hull, precision is usually required on small components anyway. So 3D-printing as the step after CAD, and as a cheaper alternative to a full-blown n-dimensional CNC machine, will lessen the mazdoori component of making prototypes and hopefully shorten the think-create-learn-think again cycle.

As I see it - there are 25,000 low tech workshops n Bangalore that will do little repair jobs for you and fashion small items - mostly crudely. If you require some fine work, out of unusual materials (eg extra hard steels) it is difficult to find someone who can do it. The knowledge and skill required to make precise measurements and choose special steels for a particular job requires expertise that is greater than leaning on the job workshop experience.

Most developed western nations have plenty of people who have both the skill and the engineering/technical knowledge. That is how you have small workshop size concerns making blisks. We do have a workshop caste and an engineering caste. Private engineers do run workshops in India, but most engineers do not train to start up a workshop. Things don't work that way in India, Young engineers are training for salaried jobs. while the many Muslim kids in Bangalore will not go to college but will simply gain experience in a workshop and perform low tech repairs for cars/lorries/tractors. You need a good education to do high quality design and fashioning work, but that education will not fill your stomach in India unless you get a salaried job. You can earn a subsistence at a low tech workshop without that education.

India does not yet have an "ecosystem" where small private concerns can take on medium to high tech engineering tasks. A large company that makes aircraft or engines should be able to get 4 or 5 small firms who will manufacture nuts, bolts, rivets rings etc of the right material and sizes for small and large orders.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 14:30 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I completely dis-agree with this beating ourselves up with our lack of ability on R&D. We have to give adequate funds for R&D. Chinese R&D budget is 10 times ours, so they get better results. Our current budget is too low. As China is facing difficulties on engine front, they assign USD 16 Billion dollars to the problem, what do we do?????


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2013 17:26 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47583
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
Looks like finally a desi sosus in the works plus coastal surveiilance. Pleasing to hear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Mar 2013 11:07 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28231
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
I got the link to the following enchanting video from a retired Air Marshal, no less, with the comment:
Quote:
Amazing glider!Why can't we have something like this in our country? You cannot because DGCA inspectors will be breathing down your neck in no time !


http://player.vimeo.com/video/39325401


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Mar 2013 13:11 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56
Posts: 7687
Farewell to foreign arms?
Quote:
Recovering from the initial embarrassment of the revelations, the government seems to have finally accepted that the long-term solution to rampant corruption is an urgent and immediate turn towards aggressive indigenisation in military manufacturing. And indications emerging from the Ministry of Defence are that such a new course of action is under preparation, and could soon be unveiled. However, the transition from being a heavy importer of military wares to creating a robust military-industrial complex within is a stroll in an unmapped minefield.
Quote:
This is mainly because China has aggressively pursued indigenisation over the past couple of decades . As a result most of its current defence budget — officially estimated at $119 billion for this year — will be spent on purchases from within the country. As such, a massive amount of money flows into its domestic military-industrial complex which has a multiplier effect — on R&D, employment generation, and battlefield surprises for adversaries.

The fact is that India's present efforts, and systems , are not up to the task of creating a robust military-industrial complex. The vested interests of the defence public sector units (DPSUs), ordnance factory board (OFB) and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) actually symbolise what is stopping India from creating such a thriving complex, even though the country has one of the world's most dynamic manufacturing sectors. By keeping private sector on the margins of defence procurement, India has allowed itself to be caught in a vortex of imports and public sector inefficiencies.

Yet many Indian private sector players have exhibited their manufacturing capabilities, innovative leadership and growth ambitions across various segments. Several Tata group companies, L&T, the Mahindra group, Reliance and others continue to remain optimistic of a breakthrough. Whenever called in to meet a challenge these companies have shown they are capable of it. Larsen & Toubro built the hull for India's indigenous nuclear submarine and is now ready to build conventional submarines. However, the navy and the MoD do not seem to be very enthusiastic. Tata Power SED (Strategic Electronics Division) recently exhibited a 155mm/52 calibre truck mounted howitzer, developed in partnership with Denel of South Africa. The company says it is presently 50 per cent indigenous. However, the Army doesn't seem to be very excited, arguing that Denel is blacklisted in India.

The story doesn't end there. Reliance Industries Limited has committed its intent to invest about $500 million to $1 billion (approx Rs 2,750 crore to Rs 5,500 crore) in developing an aerospace centre. Reliance claimed it would hire about 1,500 people for the division. The number of such private firms with big ambitions is not limited to these few. Mahindra, Punj Lloyd, other Tata firms, and several others too have made their intent rather clear.

The challenges

But standing in the way of a turn towards aggressive indigenization are two specific challenges — DRDO's monopoly (in conjunction with public sector companies ) and the powerful influence of arms agents. "It is easy to talk about indigenisation. But in practice it is going to be extremely difficult. From Antony shedding his own Nehruvian obsessions with public sector to forcing armed forces to appreciating the need for indigenisation, it is a complicated scenario ," says the CEO of a leading Indian private sector player.

The biggest challenge would actually from the DPSUs, ordnance factories and the DRDO. They together account for around 30 per cent of the annual defence procurement, and almost 100 per cent of military research. Beyond the numbers and tall claims, these groups are today clearly bloated, inefficient monopolies. Worse, they are all directly or indirectly promoting India's heavy dependence on foreign suppliers, and this remains the worst-kept secret of Indian defence procurement.

DRDO's lofty claims do not mean much today to the Indian military, which also has to meet the challenge of insurgencies. Most of the major weapon platforms that the research agency — on its own or with other government partners — set out to make are still far from being inducted by the forces.

DRDO is no longer a robust research agency capable of catering to the growing demands of 21st century warfare. The Rama Rao Committee's recommendations for reforming DRDO were a telling story of just what's wrong. The committee said the DRDO brand was "wilting" . It pointed out that just 3 per cent of DRDO scientists had PhDs. The committee had also identified the lack of interaction with end users (the military) at all levels of project execution as among the problems. And yet, the committee's recommendations for overhauling DRDO are woefully inadequate, admits a senior MoD official.

DPSUs and ordnance factories (OFB) have also become liabilities. While the long-pending recommendation for corporatising ordnance factories (in which these government departments are turned into PSUs) has been in cold storage because of employee resistance, OFB has failed to evolve into a modern factory network. Consider the INSAS (Indian Small Arms System) rifle, meant to be the primary personal weapon of the Indian soldier; it has now been dumped by the Army. Nothing better captures the OFB problem. Today, the Indian Army and other arms of the military are scouting the global market looking to place huge orders for personal rifles.

And then there are the powerful arms dealers, who have been partnering with foreign firms to sell wares to Indian armed forces. "Middlemen are thriving because foreign companies do not have the wherewithal to navigate the Indian military-bureaucratic and political systems. We are extremely corrupt, inefficient and biased," says a senior military officer, who got himself out of an important posting in procurements after he came face to face with the ugly underbelly of Indian defence procurement.

Battlefield uncertainties have exponentially gone up in recent decades. Everything from unmanned combat vehicles to stealth technology is redefining the way we fight. The challenge, then, is to find a new architecture to create a robust military research and development culture; and an industrial complex in India. The private sector cannot be kept out of such an effort.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4280 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 ... 107  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BharadwajV, Bheeshma, Google Feedfetcher, Hemanth, Kakarat, prahaar, RajKM, Yahoo [Bot] and 25 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