India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
With the Defence Trade & Technology Initiative (DTTI) turning a new page, it is time for a new thread to discuss all the upcoming joint developments between India and the US. Let me start off with this interesting (and exciting) news.
Mods, if another similar thread exists...kindly close this one and move these posts to that thread. Thanks.
Mods, if another similar thread exists...kindly close this one and move these posts to that thread. Thanks.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
India, US join hands for making warfighting gear: drone swarms, virtual reality training aids, ultralight small arms
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... aking.html
25 Oct 2019
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... aking.html
25 Oct 2019
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
India seeks US help for drone swarm technology to prepare for warfare of the future
http://www.sps-aviation.com/news/?id=59 ... the-future
23 Oct 2019
http://www.sps-aviation.com/news/?id=59 ... the-future
23 Oct 2019
Sources indicated that India and the US could take forward a US Air Force Research Laboratory concept on small unmanned systems which could be launched from C-130J and C-17 military transport aircraft which are used by both countries. The proposal is for "ground up" development of drone swarm technology.
Significantly, India is also seeking counter-UAS technologies to detect and defeat swarms. The kill solutions India is looking at include electro-magnetic lasers. The American aerospace giant Lockheed Martin claims to have progress in this area with the Q-53 radar and a high-powered laser beam.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
US-India co-development flop show forces new approach to DTTI
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... -show.html
31 October 2019
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... -show.html
31 October 2019
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
We should also run a poll on which of the three time frame projects will materialize?
I suspect these will lead to US raiding any Indian engineers involved in these areas.
I suspect these will lead to US raiding any Indian engineers involved in these areas.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
I have been following the budget bread crumbs in support of the DTTI in the US OSD budgets and I have yet to figure out what each side is trying to achieve here. What constitutes success? I saw that a few in the IAF and MOD S&T community were at US labs a few months ago discussing some of these capabilities but I have yet to figure out what the end goal is. It appears that these are just some basic probing S&T initiatives that are geared towards maintaining and sustaining a given S&T profile and exchange. Besides really big ticket items, there is very little that comes out of joint cooperation (in the US system) that is not US Service led but rather OSD led.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Surely. Please advise on poll questions (in the cave) and we can add them in the first post of this thread.ramana wrote:We should also run a poll on which of the three time frame projects will materialize?
I suspect these will lead to US raiding any Indian engineers involved in these areas.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Honestly, I would begin taking these programs seriously only when there is genuine collaboration between MOD and the US services with alignment on technologies and requirements for current or future systems. OSD specific programs (That is how Ash. Carter set it up as well) that are not aligned or backed by a service quite often don't end up going very far. Until then, this is not going to be anything more than just a way to keep the conversation going and keeping the lights on with some small scale S&T and R&D investments..Most of the collaborative R&D or even EMD activities that have been successful as joint efforts in the US, have involved either a direct service need or direct service to service or service to MOD/DOD investment. For example, Japan's work with the US Missile Defense Agency on the SM-3 missile and high performance GaN radars for BMD, The AEGIS program, or the US-Israeli cooperation on Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow programs...In the past, direct work between the UK, DARPA and the US Deptt. of Navy on the ASTOVL program for example...Numerous other examples. I draw a blank when I try to compile a list of successful R&D projects which were exclusively OSD led with little or no service backing or defined need...Having said that, the OSD works on some very cutting edge and exciting technologies that are often developed for the purpose of developing them. They also have some significant leverage over DARPA...but in the end, unless there is alignment with a service those technologies are often developed for the sake of developing and advancing tech. and not neccesarily aimed at one specific near term application.Rakesh wrote:brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
It would help if some of these acronyms are expanded/explained. What is OSD? What is EMD?
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
OSD - Office of Secretary of Defense. A small subset of US programs are created and managed by the OSD as opposed to the end user (a service or another agency). EMD - Engineering Manufacturing and Development.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Well said. Folks look at the projects named and discuss each one. Not being skeptic but be realistic.brar_w wrote:Honestly, I would begin taking these programs seriously only when there is genuine collaboration between MOD and the US services with alignment on technologies and requirements for current or future systems. OSD specific programs (That is how Ash. Carter set it up as well) that are not aligned or backed by a service quite often don't end up going very far. Until then, this is not going to be anything more than just a way to keep the conversation going and keeping the lights on with some small scale S&T and R&D investments..Most of the collaborative R&D or even EMD activities that have been successful as joint efforts in the US, have involved either a direct service need or direct service to service or service to MOD/DOD investment. For example, Japan's work with the US Missile Defense Agency on the SM-3 missile and high performance GaN radars for BMD, The AEGIS program, or the US-Israeli cooperation on Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow programs...In the past, direct work between the UK, DARPA and the US Deptt. of Navy on the ASTOVL program for example...Numerous other examples. I draw a blank when I try to compile a list of successful R&D projects which were exclusively OSD led with little or no service backing or defined need...Having said that, the OSD works on some very cutting edge and exciting technologies that are often developed for the purpose of developing them. They also have some significant leverage over DARPA...but in the end, unless there is alignment with a service those technologies are often developed for the sake of developing and advancing tech. and not neccesarily aimed at one specific near term application.Rakesh wrote:brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Rakesh wrote:India, US join hands for making warfighting gear: drone swarms, virtual reality training aids, ultralight small arms
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... aking.html
25 Oct 2019
Discuss each of these seven projects.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.
So USG cannot force any private entity to share its IP or Technology with India or any other country , There are many laws too governing it besides the fact of ownership of private companies.
Hence expecting any thing in terms of technology sharing or JV to come out of Indo-US deal is a long shot unlike Israel or Russian type , All past program from Narsimharao era has ended with High on Talk and nothing on Ground.
Even during MMRCA race , US was not willing to share source code of radars etc but only a way where modules can be added if you want to fit in a new weapons or other stuff.
It is possible we *may* get a JV/TOT from small stuff like hand held drone or something similar where the resistance to transfer technology wont be high from US MIC.
So USG cannot force any private entity to share its IP or Technology with India or any other country , There are many laws too governing it besides the fact of ownership of private companies.
Hence expecting any thing in terms of technology sharing or JV to come out of Indo-US deal is a long shot unlike Israel or Russian type , All past program from Narsimharao era has ended with High on Talk and nothing on Ground.
Even during MMRCA race , US was not willing to share source code of radars etc but only a way where modules can be added if you want to fit in a new weapons or other stuff.
It is possible we *may* get a JV/TOT from small stuff like hand held drone or something similar where the resistance to transfer technology wont be high from US MIC.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
That is not universally true. There are extensive examples of technologies and programs, related to the themes covered in the graphic above, where the Technical baseline of a system, or the underlying technology developed by the industry, is owned by the US government. Even the US services buy or require TB ownership of systems when desirable, because they like to compete future upgrades and sustainment, though many legacy systems from the past are more restrictive compared to modern systems.In fact, most modern RFP's now have an extensive Technical Baseline and IP transfer requirement which is almost always in the top 4-5 things that the proposal will be evaluated on ( in some areas even ahead of things like schedule or cost). Similarly, there are many parallel efforts that are S&T, and in some cases, even R&D related, that don't involve industry or an industry lead proprietary solution. Plenty of work on all or most of those listed above, is farmed out to organizations like Lincoln Labs, Sandia, JHAPL and even the individual service run labs where industry participation requires TB sharing or transfer. Given that they are collaborating on technologies, and not programs, I don't think IP is going to be a significant issue. If this were a full up program collaboration then yes, they could have run into those issues but not with something this specific and small.Austin wrote: AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.
I'll try to cover the technology areas and projects unveiled in a later post, but it appears clear that these projects were chosen, in part because the underlying programs and technology is something the US OSD is currently working on at the moment and it sees its efforts as doing some basic S&T/R&D and advancing the technology to a level of maturity where it then becomes available to individual services as they choose fit. The same could perhaps be also available to Indian end users and OEM's if this entire thing pans out. This is the same fundamental restriction that applied to DTTI when Ashton Carter championed it - The Secretary of Defense and his immediate staff want to keep these programs closer to themselves which to me suggests that there are really no takers in the services. Post S-400, I don't think that there is any near-mid term possibility of a US service - Indian MOD lead Brahmos, or MRSAM level of R&D or even JV so they are being realistic and starting small with the hope to grow it over time. Till then, this will be tightly controlled by the civilian leadership as opposed to a more enduring collaboration that is driven via a bottoms up process that starts from each operator/end-user and aligns on capability, need, sharing etc etc
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 10046
- Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
- Location: The rings around Uranus.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Well said. The US government through collaborations with academia and industry by funding R&D programs in the fundamental sciences and engineering yields results. If anything, this is a great model which must be studied in India to develop its own MIC.brar_w wrote:That is not universally true. There are extensive examples of technologies and programs, related to the themes covered in the graphic above, where the Technical baseline of a system, or the underlying technology developed by the industry, is owned by the US government. Even the US services buy or require TB ownership of systems when desirable, because they like to compete future upgrades and sustainment, though many legacy systems from the past are more restrictive compared to modern systems.In fact, most modern RFP's now have an extensive Technical Baseline and IP transfer requirement which is almost always in the top 4-5 things that the proposal will be evaluated on ( in some areas even ahead of things like schedule or cost). Similarly, there are many parallel efforts that are S&T, and in some cases, even R&D related, that don't involve industry or an industry lead proprietary solution. Plenty of work on all or most of those listed above, is farmed out to organizations like Lincoln Labs, Sandia, JHAPL and even the individual service run labs where industry participation requires TB sharing or transfer. Given that they are collaborating on technologies, and not programs, I don't think IP is going to be a significant issue. If this were a full up program collaboration then yes, they could have run into those issues but not with something this specific and small.Austin wrote: AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.
The one thing I have to take exception of with brar_w-ji is that not all RFPs have an IP transfer requirement since the service or agency is unable to absorb the technology in a timely basis and or costs are too high. In other areas, the US government funds places like Los Alamos, Sandia, MIT Lincoln Labs, John Hopkins APL and others to develop technologies that can be shared with other defense contractors and agencies. Since we're early into this area, for India it would be best to get into academic network of these labs. We may not see immediate results, but in 20 years it will be quite valuable.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Actually the trend is almost exclusively headed in that direction. A sample of some of the very new top radar programs, or even full up aircraft programs shows that trend (look at the T-X RFP). In some cases, the Pentagon is now retroactively negotiating buying the TB of older systems that did not have this requirement. In fact, a frequent analyst asked questions in recent earnings calls to CEO's and CFOs has been to better understand the effect of this on long term franchise programs and IR&D investments.They obviously risk going too extreme (and throttling IR&D and innovation) but they'll eventually find a good equilibrium. You are right about the difficulties in absorbing this, and this is the reason that Pentagon leaders, over the last two administrations (Frank Kendall in the Obama administration, and Mike Griffin in the Trump administration) have dedicated resources on strengthing the labs, forming deeper partnerships with academia and building up numbers for the technical work-force that can handle the technical baseline loads associated with future programs.Mort Walker wrote:The one thing I have to take exception of with brar_w-ji is that not all RFPs have an IP transfer requirement since the service or agency is unable to absorb the technology in a timely basis and or costs are too high. In other areas, the US government funds places like Los Alamos, Sandia, MIT Lincoln Labs, John Hopkins APL and others to develop technologies
Hypersonic weapons are a perfect example of this. You have a technology initially developed by industry, brought in house and handed over to Sandia..refined over more than two decades, and now going back to industry for production. The TB in all instances stayed with GOTUS and they reserve the right to pass it on to an industry partner of their choosing. The latest Sentinel and PATRIOT radar replacement programs are again the same. As was the T-X RFP. So as of 2019, this is a fast developing trend as post "award" competition is being seen as an opportunity to reduce life cycle cost via competition. Another more notable example was the X-47Bs carrier landing, deck handling and autonomous in flight refuelling technologies. Northrop won the competition to pursue the N-UCAS effort but 100% of the technology developed by it under USN funding is usable for all who competed on the MQ-25 program for example. To enable this, the services and the DOD is proactively mandating TB transfer and flexible OP ownership as pre-condition. Not with the intention of just farming off full-fledged programs from OEM to another (this is bad for competition even if it were possible) but to compete future upgrades and sustainment. They want to break the trend of OEM's loosing a ton of money on development to win a competition and then trying to recover margins over lifetime via sustainment. This strategy, might seem logical, favors the Primes and is ultimately a barrier to entry for many of the smaller innovative firms the DOD has been trying to get into its acquisition and R&D pipeline (through organizations like DIU-X etc.).
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Here is the latest on IP from Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, signed off by Ellen M. Lord, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.
Since DTTI falls under her Office (-> INDPOL-> DTTI), I would expect this would apply to the DTTI projects.
Issued on Oct 16, 2019
DOD INSTRUCTION 5010.44 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) ACQUISITION AND LICENSING
It does not provide details on assertions, I guess they will either leave it to the individual service or issue an addendum.
Since DTTI falls under her Office (-> INDPOL-> DTTI), I would expect this would apply to the DTTI projects.
Issued on Oct 16, 2019
DOD INSTRUCTION 5010.44 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) ACQUISITION AND LICENSING
It does not provide details on assertions, I guess they will either leave it to the individual service or issue an addendum.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
https://twitter.com/arzandc/status/1327 ... 48737?s=20 ---> Ashley Tellis, a key architect of US policy towards India, has doubts that India can summon the economic & military wherewithal to compete with China. He's even more pessimistic about the substance of the partnership with the US.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Think of what “experts” on the lines of this gentleman would have said about the wherewithal of China to compete with the US a mere 10 years ago, or of the future of the Soviet Union a mere 2 years before it imploded. Taleb’s views on these type of experts is spot on.> Ashley Tellis, a key architect of US policy towards India, has doubts that India can summon the economic & military wherewithal to compete with China. He's even more pessimistic about the substance of the partnership with the US.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
These *EXPERTS* are what the "Induct F-21 or the IAF will be doomed onlee!!!" American apologists on BRF rely on.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 35776?s=20 ---> Biden Admin expected to offer India MQ-9B Sea Guardian as it's first approval to the country by it's DSCA under FMS.
https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 13825?s=20 ---> IMHO, the MQ-9B deal may have a EUA clause which will prevent their use in CI/CT ops.
https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/statu ... 13825?s=20 ---> IMHO, the MQ-9B deal may have a EUA clause which will prevent their use in CI/CT ops.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Rakesh How are these part of DTTI?
Sea Guardian unarmed drones was delayed as they are unarmed.
Even those 7 Mickey Mouse projects are not started.
I suggest closing this non starter thread.
Sea Guardian unarmed drones was delayed as they are unarmed.
Even those 7 Mickey Mouse projects are not started.
I suggest closing this non starter thread.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Compared to the Rafale bandwagon! But IAF will hopefully decide on what is best for national security - More LCAs of course!Rakesh wrote:These *EXPERTS* are what the "Induct F-21 or the IAF will be doomed onlee!!!" American apologists on BRF rely on.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
CDS and PMO.
IAF wants 114 MRCA for fly pasts
IAF wants 114 MRCA for fly pasts
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Closing thread Ramana-ji for now.ramana wrote:I suggest closing this non starter thread.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
India shares document outlining military tech cooperation with US
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 965405.cms
20 April 2022
https://twitter.com/Sootradhar/status/1 ... ZAShkaMGRw ---> India shares document outlining military tech cooperation with US;
- Raytheon will invest $100 million in research & manufacturing, creating 2,000 highly skilled jobs in India.
- Boeing will set up MRO for Navy's P-8I airplanes. Eliminating need to send them to USA.
- Indian Ship yards will bid for US Coast Guards upcoming bid for patrol vessels.
- US Navy also exploring MRO of their ships at Indian yards.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 965405.cms
20 April 2022
https://twitter.com/Sootradhar/status/1 ... ZAShkaMGRw ---> India shares document outlining military tech cooperation with US;
- Raytheon will invest $100 million in research & manufacturing, creating 2,000 highly skilled jobs in India.
- Boeing will set up MRO for Navy's P-8I airplanes. Eliminating need to send them to USA.
- Indian Ship yards will bid for US Coast Guards upcoming bid for patrol vessels.
- US Navy also exploring MRO of their ships at Indian yards.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... a3r-sPK-qw ---> Enormous opportunity for US to sell military equipment to India now, as Russian equipment did not perform well on battlefields of Ukraine, claims senior US Senator. Meanwhile a US official tell US Senate that India's offset requirements for defence deals is a big problem.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Setting politicians aside, most industry insiders I know aren’t very bullish on any dramatic increase in US defense sales to India over and above the current levels. Most of their projected growth is from US demand for new equipment and to increase stocks or existent kit via-a-vis China and that of other Asian markets like Japan and Australia. Germany is now a big mover as is going to be the case for other European nations with budgets but lacking programs that can deliver at scale. Even ME is expected to be largely flat after the rather dramatic increases seen in prior years. DTTI is also not very high on the list outside of those in the Pentagon and has never been an industry led government enabled effort which is what you need to succeed.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Not sure if this is the right thread, but nevertheless....
Indian defence attaché now has unescorted access to Pentagon
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... aign=cppst
16 Aug 2022
https://twitter.com/InsightGL/status/15 ... Bs5i-s2rCA ---> This is huge step from USA. USAF Secretary Frank Kendall: “As of Aug 15, Indian attaché team now has unescorted access in the Pentagon which is commencement with our close relationship with India’s status as a major defence partner.”
https://twitter.com/SandeepUnnithan/sta ... Bs5i-s2rCA ---> Putting this in context - Page 79 of a 2002 DoD report on Indo-US military-2-military ties - “Indians are easily slighted and easily flattered” … ergo, unescorted access is a huge step.
Indian defence attaché now has unescorted access to Pentagon
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... aign=cppst
16 Aug 2022
https://twitter.com/InsightGL/status/15 ... Bs5i-s2rCA ---> This is huge step from USA. USAF Secretary Frank Kendall: “As of Aug 15, Indian attaché team now has unescorted access in the Pentagon which is commencement with our close relationship with India’s status as a major defence partner.”
https://twitter.com/SandeepUnnithan/sta ... Bs5i-s2rCA ---> Putting this in context - Page 79 of a 2002 DoD report on Indo-US military-2-military ties - “Indians are easily slighted and easily flattered” … ergo, unescorted access is a huge step.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
This is exactly why protocol is there, to ensure that neither side makes it a habit to demonstrate its disregard for the other's value in a relationship. So for the Americans to say that Indians are sticklers for protocol, and very hierarchy conscious is the same, in fact, as saying that "these chaps are not prepared to be treated like underlings". Curious how the opposite is never an issue, i.e. of India sending a lower ranking general to meet with PACOM chief for instance.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Lt Gen PR Shankar (retd) shot an artillery round right back at Sandeep's tweet. See below...JE Menon wrote:This is exactly why protocol is there, to ensure that neither side makes it a habit to demonstrate its disregard for the other's value in a relationship. So for the Americans to say that Indians are sticklers for protocol, and very hierarchy conscious is the same, in fact, as saying that "these chaps are not prepared to be treated like underlings". Curious how the opposite is never an issue, i.e. of India sending a lower ranking general to meet with PACOM chief for instance.
https://twitter.com/gunners_shot1/statu ... mfaykiEAfA ---> This is one side of the story. I have even dealt with their Sergeants as a Major General…to get the work done…despite they being deliberate about it…on these issues…I will not trust the USA. Also their DA and his underlings have been given unescorted access to MOD since long….
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
India in advanced stage of talks with US for procuring MQ-9B drones
India is in an “advanced stage” of negotiations with the US to procure 30 MQ-9B Predator armed drones for over USD 3 billion to crank up its surveillance apparatus along the frontier with China as well as in the Indian Ocean region, people familiar with the developments said on Sunday.
The MQ-9B drone is a variant of the MQ-9 “Reaper” which was used to launch a modified version of the Hellfire missile that eliminated al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in the heart of Kabul last month.
Authoritative sources in the defence establishment said talks between New Delhi and Washington are underway for the government-to-government procurement of the General Atomics-built drones, and rejected reports that the deal is off the table.
The hunter-killer drones are being procured for the three services as they can carry out a variety of roles, including maritime surveillance, anti-submarine warfare and over-the-horizon targeting. The high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) drones are capable of remaining airborne for over 35 hours and can carry four Hellfire missiles and around 450 kgs of bombs.
The MQ-9B has two variants SkyGuardian and its sibling SeaGuardian.
The sources said the talks are focused on sorting out certain issues relating to cost, weapons package and technology sharing.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
oh and there is no momey for buying LCHs
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
A drone costing 100mil a pop, more expensive than a LCA Tejas. Does it come with adequate supply of hellfires and dumb bombs? Another project with money to Videshi but no money for desi systems.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Different use cases. From what I heard these are for IN a coastal surveillance plus other capabilities.bala wrote:A drone costing 100mil a pop, more expensive than a LCA Tejas. Does it come with adequate supply of hellfires and dumb bombs? Another project with money to Videshi but no money for desi systems.
No need to whine just for the sake of it.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Not quite, the Rustum 2 is already in production for 76 units.bala wrote:A drone costing 100mil a pop, more expensive than a LCA Tejas. Does it come with adequate supply of hellfires and dumb bombs? Another project with money to Videshi but no money for desi systems.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Ever since the Nuke deal and don't forget we have a export surplus with the US. Don't look at these deals in isolation, real politick demands we do a few deals worth a certain dollar amount, some deals like C17 have been very useful, so have C130, P8I, Apache, M777, MH60R , LM 2500 engines and quite a few deals over the last 14 years, some are perfect, others maybe not so perfect.bala wrote:A drone costing 100mil a pop, more expensive than a LCA Tejas. Does it come with adequate supply of hellfires and dumb bombs? Another project with money to Videshi but no money for desi systems.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 5360
- Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
God knows India needs all the surveillance capabilities it can get faced with an ambitious PLAN. The sea guardians will be super useful. Have no clue where the lca or lch fits in here. They aren't exactly hale ucavs.
Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion
Rustom 2 in production.Pratyush wrote:Not quite, the Rustum 2 is already in production for 76 units.bala wrote:A drone costing 100mil a pop, more expensive than a LCA Tejas. Does it come with adequate supply of hellfires and dumb bombs? Another project with money to Videshi but no money for desi systems.
When did that happen?
Was not the Rustom supplanted by the Tapas?