India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 04 Nov 2010 14:24

Raghavendra wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfwktqCnbE0

India's first laser guided bomb - Sudarshan
...

At 5:18 the guy mentions that a rocket boosted version is also under developmet

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2010 02:04

More Diwali good news:

1,500-horsepower FMBT to replace T-72 tanks beyond 2020

T.S. Subramanian of Hindu.

CHENNAI: The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is working on India's future main battle tank (FMBT) with a 1,500-horsepower (HP) indigenous engine. This tank will replace beyond 2020 the imported T-72 tanks, renamed Ajeya, with the Army. Various specifications for the FMBT have been finalised.

“For engine development, we have formed a national team comprising members from the academia, the user, industry and the DRDO. We have also gone in for an international consultant,” said S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller (Armaments and Combat Engineering), DRDO. The first prototype of the indigenous engine would be ready in four to five years.

The DRDO is launching a project to develop the transmission for the tank; the indigenous engine and transmission will together be called Bharat Power Pack and it will meet the FMBT's mobility requirements.

“We are confident that we will be ready with the FMBT prototype in five to seven years,” Mr. Sundaresh said. “We are trying to involve all the stakeholders — the user [the Army], quality control personnel and the production agency — in this project and the industry will be our partner. We will go for a modular design so that we can always upgrade the tank when new technology comes in.”

The FMBT will weigh only 50 tonnes compared to Arjun-Mark II's 62 tonnes. The DRDO is simultaneously working on Arjun-Mark II. The volume occupied by the electronics package in the FMBT will be less. The FMBT's engine will be two-thirds the size of Arjun-Mark I's, but will generate 1,500 HP compared to Arjun-Mark I's 1,400 HP.

Improved technologies

Improvements in material, fuel injection and filtration technologies will contribute to the reduction in the engine size without compromising on power.

“The immediate task for the CVRDE [Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment] is to develop the Arjun-Mk II tank and demonstrate it to the user and go for the production of 124 numbers in the HVF (Heavy Vehicles Factory],” Mr. Sundaresh said. The CVRDE and the HVF are situated in Avadi, near Chennai.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 05 Nov 2010 06:11

ramana wrote: “For engine development, we have formed a national team comprising members from the academia, the user, industry and the DRDO. We have also gone in for an international consultant,” said S. Sundaresh, Chief Controller (Armaments and Combat Engineering), DRDO. The first prototype of the indigenous engine would be ready in four to five years.

ramana wrote: “We are confident that we will be ready with the FMBT prototype in five to seven years,” Mr. Sundaresh said.

Overconfidence?? or DDMITES??
Safe to assume 7yrs going by the amount of new technolgies involved and well let's not say the past track record! Would be a victory of sorts if they can accomplish this 7 years!

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 05 Nov 2010 08:58

Craig Alpert wrote:
Overconfidence?? or DDMITES??
Safe to assume 7yrs going by the amount of new technolgies involved and well let's not say the past track record! Would be a victory of sorts if they can accomplish this 7 years!

It's being done well. They have broken down deliverables in to phases. I'm always an optimist.

DRDO Reveals Specifications of Arjun Mark-II, Future Main Battle Tank (FMBT)

FMBT's engine will be two-thirds the size of Arjun Mark I MBT's engine and will generate 1,500-horsepower. First prototype of the indigenous engine would be ready by 2016. FMBT will weigh 50 tonnes.

Project to develop the transmission for the tank is being launched. Engine and transmission ( aka "Bharat Power Pack") will meet the FMBT's mobility requirements.

Volume occupied by the electronics package will be low.

A total of 93 upgrades, including the advanced air defence gun system for firing at attack helicopters. Missiles firing capability to destroy long-range targets and bring down attack helicopters.

Panoramic sight with night vision for the tank's commander. An automatic target tracking system to add accuracy when firing on a moving target.

Explosive reactive armor panel which will comprise explosives in metallic brick form. These bricks will be mounted all round the MBT. When the enemy ammunition hits these bricks, they will explode and retard the energy of the projectile. Tanks armor will not be penetrated.

Improvements in material, fuel injection and filtration technologies will contribute to the reduction in the engine size without compromising on power.

Indian Army has placed an intent for production of 124 Arjun-Mk II tanks.

Phase I, 45 tanks will roll out with 56 upgrades, including the missile firing capability and the commander's panoramic sight with night vision.

Phase II, the remaining 79 tanks, with all the 93 improvements, will come off the assembly line. “By 2013-14, the first batch of around 30 tanks will go out,” Dr. Sivakumar said.

124 Arjun-Mk II tanks would cost Rs.5,000 crores.

vic · Post by **vic** » 05 Nov 2010 14:24

I think that India defence news has mixed FMBT and Arjun Mark-2, trying to make sense of it, it seems

The FMBT prototype will come with an Indian power pack in 2015-16 and production will start by 2020. In the meanwhile, the next batch of 124 tanks of Arjun seem to be Mark-2 (after 124 Mark-1s). There is some upgrade mainly in electronics so that Mark-2 will be in two parts Arjun Mark-2 Phase-1 & Arjun Mark-2 Phase-2.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 05 Nov 2010 16:53

Rs 5,000 crore!! That's $9 million each. Either we need different tanks or we need different journos.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 05 Nov 2010 16:54

vic · Post by **vic** » 05 Nov 2010 17:04

The sad news from the above articles is that - it seems - that 2010 to 2020 will see production of only 124 more Mark-2 (apart from some remaining Mark-1) before DRDO is supposed to go for 50 tons FMBT. The uber latest tank developed most recently in the world is Korean K-2 (with french, German, US, Israeli help & no sanctions) which is still 55 tons inspite of latest german engine (indian engine specifications are less & size is more than this german engine) and auto loader. Hence, 50 tons target is unachievable by current standards unless Indians as usual want to go where no man has gone before while continuing to import T-90s alias T-72s. Even Turkish tank under development is said to be heavier at around 55 tons.

I think that is equally important to develop indigenous upgrade package for T-72/90s like indigenous power pack to replace Russian ones, as all these tanks (around 4000) will require massive upgrades.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 05 Nov 2010 18:27

Obama trip prompts rethink on FDI

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 08 Nov 2010 09:26

Hyderabad to be the Tata aero-defence hub

Tata Group Chairman, Ratan Tata, on Sunday announced that all their businesses in aerospace and defence will be centered in Hyderabad. Yesterday saw TATA handing over the first Indian built cabin for Sikorsky S-92 helicopter for US-based Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 09 Nov 2010 16:31

Post U.S. ban lifting, India's DRDO guns for offsets contracts
Defenseworld

A source told Defenseworld.net that DRDO’s diverse expertise, from land systems to air assets to naval equipment, would help position it as a prime executor of offsets contracts. In the past few years, the DRDO has been trying to commercialize its technology developed for India’s defence forces.

If it receives offsets contracts, the DRDO can improve its R & D and commercialize specific high tech defence products to the Indian industry.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Nov 2010 21:09

Need to be careful here and not reduce DRDO to an outsourcing shop. For IA they willb e doing SOTA work,. For the offsets they will get crumbs on the periphery. Unless they envison new weapons systems and try to go for joint development.

What Israel did was come up with their own new weapons which everyone wanted and thus got to be a co-developer.

Doing offset work is a far cry from Kalamsaab's dreams.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Nov 2010 22:55

maybe we need to split DRDO into two
1. to do offsets and master manufacturing techniques
2. pure r&d labs

later the two can be combined

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 10 Nov 2010 19:08

Defence Production and Procurement Policy Out In January 2011; Drastic Steps for Indigenization Promised

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 10 Nov 2010 19:24

SriSri wrote:Defence Production and Procurement Policy Out In January 2011; Drastic Steps for Indigenization Promised

No sign of increase in FDI until A K is in the house..

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 10 Nov 2010 19:29

@Shukla .. Let me dig out a link for you ..

BAE Systems accepts System Integration Facility Clause enabling 74 per cent FDI in Defense
http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4575

It is originally a PTI report ..

So there is a proposal on the table which raises FDI to 74 per cent ... and industry has already showed positive signs.

Will it be a part of the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) to be released in a few months .. that's the billion dollar question!

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 10 Nov 2010 20:18

SriSri wrote:Defence Production and Procurement Policy Out In January 2011; Drastic Steps for Indigenization Promised

This is major major news. At least good news for the Private sector as far as the navy is concerned. At least its a start.The L&T MD telling a few truths in front of Pranab da a while backs seems to have worked.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 Nov 2010 21:08

i can imagine that many of the western corps are looking at india for cheap bulk manufacturing opportunities - get the cost advantages without worrying about china

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 11 Nov 2010 06:15

SriSri wrote:@Shukla .. Let me dig out a link for you ..

BAE Systems accepts System Integration Facility Clause enabling 74 per cent FDI in Defense
http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4575

It is originally a PTI report ..

So there is a proposal on the table which raises FDI to 74 per cent ... and industry has already showed positive signs.

Will it be a part of the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) to be released in a few months .. that's the billion dollar question!

Thanks a lot SriSri! That helps.. Does seem like a step in right direction. I must admit I thought I wouldn't even see a hint of that under AK's rule.

I always thought that restricting the FDI limit to 49% (from 26%) in the first instance would be a good first step and do just enough to attract the big players in the market. Knowing India's potential in the future for defense procurement, even that minor rise would suffice to do the trick and leave 74% rise 'subject to approval' if the company assures high-tech manufacturing and assembly facilities so that it doesn't impact domestic players.

wig · Post by **wig** » 11 Nov 2010 08:15

Compete with pvt sector, Antony tells DPSUs
In keeping with his oft-repeated line of seeing the “made in India” tag to military equipment, Defence Minister AK Antony today announced a radical shift from the past.

In a significant statement, Antony stunned slow-paced Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) saying “from now on, there will be no hand holding and no nominations” for the DPSUs to participate in defence projects.

“They will have to compete with the Indian private sector,” Antony announced at a function where he was to give away awards for Excellence to Ordinance Factories (OFs) and the DPSUs.

In a way, Antony signalled one of the most important shifts in Indian defence production that is restricted only the DPSUs controlled by the Ministry of Defence. “From next year, there will be open competition and Indian private sector will participate”, Antony said.

Later, he explained to reporters that from January 2011 the ministry was bringing in a new “defence production policy”. The ministry already has a defence procurement policy. From the next year the shipbuilding (for Navy and the coast guard) will not be nominated to one of the DPSU shipyards. There will be open competition. Sources said the private shipbuilding industry can take the load.

The Navy has been persistently asking for speedier construction and adding newer technology to ships. China is producing some five to six ships a year while in India it is one ship a year.

Antony said “We are going to take some more drastic steps to achieve our goal of speedy indigenisation. Our aim is to have a strong defence industrial base in India.”

The Defence Minister reminded that at the time when India was seeking a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), heavy dependence on foreign companies for defence acquisition is not good.

He clarified that whatever money was needed for modernisation of the DPSUs will be given and they will be prepared to compete with the private sector. For long the DPSUs are seen as slow-paced developers of equipment.

The DPSUs alone will not be able to meet the requirements of the armed forces which are increasing, the Defence Minister remarked while adding “…..There was no option, but to remain globally competitive and efficient and not rest on past laurels

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101111/nation.htm#1

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 11 Nov 2010 08:50

shukla wrote:
SriSri wrote:@Shukla .. Let me dig out a link for you ..

BAE Systems accepts System Integration Facility Clause enabling 74 per cent FDI in Defense
http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4575

It is originally a PTI report ..

So there is a proposal on the table which raises FDI to 74 per cent ... and industry has already showed positive signs.

Will it be a part of the Defence Procurement Policy (DPP) to be released in a few months .. that's the billion dollar question!
Thanks a lot SriSri! That helps.. Does seem like a step in right direction. I must admit I thought I wouldn't even see a hint of that under AK's rule.

I always thought that restricting the FDI limit to 49% (from 26%) in the first instance would be a good first step and do just enough to attract the big players in the market. Knowing India's potential in the future for defense procurement, even that minor rise would suffice to do the trick and leave 74% rise 'subject to approval' if the company assures high-tech manufacturing and assembly facilities so that it doesn't impact domestic players.

I'm with you here. While I'll reserve further comment on this until the DPP is actually released; it must be noted that the goal should be to make India an R&D and manufacturing destination for a whole range of defence, aerospace and naval products even when the MoD / Indian Armed Forces isn't the end customer.

vic · Post by **vic** » 11 Nov 2010 09:46

No amount of policy chnage will help till the idiot babu does not assign money to R&D + prodn. If the moron babu assigns only US$ 89 million to kaveri engine programme will the pvt sector make it run? If the bloodsucker corrupt babu order T-90s over indigenous Arjun made by pvt sector, how will they survive? yes, pvt sector is important but way more important is funding. I disagree with all BRFites who find deficiencies in system (including with GTRE) as we never gave them the funds to be successful. how will Pvt sector make HT-40 if IAF does not allow HAL to develop one for 20 years and then suddenly wants one by import in one week? The only thing Pvt sector can compete in with foreign parties is bribing babus but not defence R&D till the budget is raised 10 times. If we can give Rs. 70,000 crores to corruption games then why not Rs. 100,000 crore one time outlay for Defence R&D seed money. How will you prevent bribed babu from giving US$ 12 Billion to PAKFA and only US$ 1 billion to AMCA??

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 11 Nov 2010 10:07

@vic What is stopping the Defence PSUs from refusing the low funding?

Just say: "Sorry, can't be done."

These babus exist both in the Government and the DPSUs. And *that* is the problem.

Fair competition from the private sector will either reform our Defence PSUs (which mind you have tremendous potential) and make them competitive or will render some of them as a liability to the taxpayer.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 11 Nov 2010 12:20

X-Post

In Major Shift, DRDO Looks at Building Arms with America

Business Standard

In Major Shift, DRDO Looks at Building Arms with America
Ajai Shukla
New Delhi November 11, 2010, 0:12 IST

India is co-developing and building missiles and military aircraft with Russia; it is co-developing missiles with Israel. But targeted American sanctions, and a Washington licence raj that stifles the outflow of military technology, has ensured that India's Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) has never co-developed weaponry with the world's most evolved and high-tech defence industry - that of the United States.

The US, in turn - even while selling billions of dollars worth of military aircraft to India - has failed to mine the richest lode of the Ministry of Defence (MoD): Joint development contracts like the Indo-Russian Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA), which will be signed next month with a corpus of $12 billion, which could rise to over $20 billion. Or, like the $2-billion partnership between DRDO and Israel Aerospace Industries to co-develop an anti-aircraft missile.

But that seems likely to change with Washington agreeing, during the run-up to President Obama's just-concluded visit, to relax controls on technology and defence exports. Top DRDO officials now believe that, given the growing closeness between the US and India, the two defence establishments would be jointly developing high-tech military weaponry by 2020.

DRDO's chief controller, Prahlada, told Business Standard just ahead of the US president's visit: "Within a decade, we will have major joint collaboration. Maybe in aeronautics, maybe radars… something will click. We are working with Israel and Russia in missiles; with the US, we may work on something else. Both countries are moving towards that."

DRDO, aware of the US defence industry's technological self-sufficiency, believes India's key attraction would revolve around lowering the cost of a product through cheaper development and testing costs. And, as the US defence budget plateaus and even reduces, the assured custom from India's Military would Add Significant Economies of Scale.

DRDO's chief, V K Saraswat, is explicit about the military projects the US and India could undertake jointly. He says: "We have discussed this many times. India has an excellent base in IT, especially computer simulation, virtual reality, and robotics. In any contemporary military platform, you need command and control and communications software. We have some of the best brains in this area and we can develop these systems for both India and the US. If these Indian strengths are harnessed with American technologies, we could build the best and the cheapest military systems in the world.

As DRDO notches up successes in high-tech fields like missiles, aerospace, electronic warfare systems and command networks, its senior officials are confident that their laboratories have much to offer. Prahlada says: "American and European companies earlier believed that the Indian defence R&D was at some lower level. But now they listen and observe because they know we have developed systems of complexity and that… if they do not work with us, we will somehow find a solution. So, that is not there. Definitely there is an improved way of looking at India."

While the Indo-US Defence Policy Group (DPG), a joint deliberative body that meets regularly - has long provided a forum for exploring research areas, Saraswat complains that US legal restraints have hamstrung its work: "We have identified areas where we can work together. But the US legal framework - regimes such as the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR); and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) - require many permissions and raise legal issues on dual-use technology."

Now, after Obama's unambiguous promise to reform export controls, DRDO expects that many of these difficulties will ease.

According to Saraswat, the US technology regimes have permitted cooperation in fundamental research, but not in developing specific technologies or military systems. The DRDO chief explains: "If we wanted to do research on, say, bio-medical engineering, then it is okay (with the US). But there would be hesitation on their part for research on, say, hypersonic technology, which is used in missiles."

Washington's technology safeguard regimes have hindered not just joint military R&D, but also Indian academics researching in US institutions. Saraswat says: "A large number of Indian scientists go and work in the US universities, etc, but when it comes to really doing research in application areas, these US laws are not permitting cooperation in application-oriented research."

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 11 Nov 2010 17:41

Sorry for posting late...Was out of town and did not get the time and a proper connection

Some of the pics of DRDO brochures from Raipur exihibition... (Sorry for poor resolution, wasnt carry my cam and was by chance in Raipur, hence had to take thru my mobile)

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 11 Nov 2010 18:49

Just a couple of years ago, when the Indo-US nuclear deal was in the works, it was said on BR that it is just a matter of time before India and the US co-operate in the nuclear weapons field. It was also said that the person saying this was a dreamer thinking wishfully. Does not quite seem so categorical now, does it ...

It's going to happen, if it isn't happening already.

vic · Post by **vic** » 13 Nov 2010 09:29

The problem with our engine projects like Kaveri and Arjun engine project is utter lack of understanding in a Babu as to how R&D is done and the complexity of a project. Add to it the incapacity of corrupt Babu to understand the financial benefits of indigenous R&^D and we have inability of India to address defense R&D and production inspite of 1000 years of servitude. Now let me explain.

Problem Uno- There is an idiotic motto that simple things we will import (why reinvent the wheel) but complicated things DRDO should make. Hence we try to make Nuke subs while importing pistols, shoes etc. Though the actual reason is that strategic items have political push but for small items nobody cares. The IAF ignored HTT-40 for 20 years before creating emergency requirement.

Problem – Duo- Refusal to pay for technology import. Even when technology is available, the idiotic Babu will refuse to pay for it. For instance, for Su-30MKI import/indigenous manufacture the requirement was that indigenous manufacture + tech transfer + capital equipment should be less than the cost of imported products. So Whisky and candy industry in India gets protection by customs duty but not defense manufacture.

Problem and Problem – Inability to understand the financial benefits. For instance India would need say around 4000 tanks plus 1000 variants plus get benefit of offshoots of indigenous manufacture. It means that order book of US$ 10 Billion plus say around 15 Billon for spares and upgrade. Which means that around US$ 2 Billion is justified to build an indigenous tank. But the budget allocated will be only US$ 100 million which would be 1/20 th of the required amount. If you look at allocations to Barak, Brahmos etc then they are way above what is given to DRDO.

Last but most important:- R&D budget is calculated by estimating cost of assembling few prototypes from imported components, basic manpower and constructing administrative offices. Hence nothing is done for basic research like building codes for functioning & CFD, or metallurgy, nor optimizing components, nor advanced labs, nor test stands for individual components etc. That is why we get budgets like US$ 89 million for Kaveri while at the same time France was spending around US$ 2 Billion on M88. We get budget (today) of US$ 10 million for FMBT Engine when it should be something like US$ 500-1000 million. Hence the so called research would be just importing a few components, screwing them together, wasting 10 years and then wondering as to why it does not work. It seems that FMBT engine research is going in the same absurd method. The so called industrial partners are component suppliers who will largely be disinterested as they will be asked to supply Rs. few lakhs of material. Most of the money will go for administrative expense while no basic research will be done on metallurgy, building fuel injections system, turbos, refining design, test stands for each component separately to study its behavior in isolation, high tech labs, high tech cad cam design labs etc. We will end up a failure as one cannot have a MBT engine for US$ 10 million. The costing is basically done on the basis that say 10 prototypes need be assembled and it will cost around US$ 10 Million. I am at a loss of words to explain this lunacy of low budgeting our R&D.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 13 Nov 2010 10:31

Vic , either you dunno how babu's work or you pretending not to. Babu's known everything , thats why they are acting the way they are. Self reliance will only make it harder for them to earn money , so why allow it?

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 13 Nov 2010 13:51

nrshah wrote:Sorry for posting late...Was out of town and did not get the time and a proper connection

Some of the pics of DRDO brochures from Raipur exihibition... (Sorry for poor resolution, wasnt carry my cam and was by chance in Raipur, hence had to take thru my mobile)

As the pics were not visible, correcting the same....

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 16 Nov 2010 06:06

Indigenous integrated life support system for fighter aircraft pilots:

An important constituent of the ILSS is the onboard oxygen generation system (OBOGS), which keeps the pilot's oxygen status at sea-level despite flying at high altitudes. The ILSS has another system called the Demand Oxygen Regulator (DOR) which will ensure that the breathing gas is delivered to the pilot as per the altitude requirements and also during anti-G straining manoeuvres that the pilot will undertake during combat missions. Defence Bioengineering and Electromedical Laboratory (DEBEL) along with L&T as development-cum-production partner, will manufacture the ILSS.

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 16 Nov 2010 08:32

Defence Expenditure Review Recommends Greater Private Sector Involvement

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 16 Nov 2010 09:39

Ministry of Defence Comments

Defence Expenditure Review

The system of compilation of expenditure does not capture the country-wise details. Therefore, the desired information is being collected from the Service Headquarters and shall be laid on the Table of the House in due course.

Defence Expenditure Review Committee headed by Shri V.K. Misra, former Secretary (Defence Finance) was constituted to recommend measures that would bring about:
i) Optimal efficiency in the system, with greater focus on Information & Communication Technology (ICT);
(ii) Greater efficiency and economy in supply services through outsourcing and reorganisation;
(iii) Greater transparency and accountability in regard to management of defence expenditure;
(iv) Higher efficiency in logistic supply chain management;
(v) Outcome orientation in defence spending;
(vi) Enhanced self-reliance by tapping the strength of the vibrant private sector;
(vii) High levels of preparedness/serviceability of weapon systems;
(viii) Greater efficiency and economy in training.

The main recommendations made by the Committee relate to greater use of Information & Communication Technology; Streamlining of Acquisitions and Procurement; Empowering Defence Industrial Base and enhancing private sector participation; and, improvement in logistics and maintenance management, support services, training, infrastructure, financial management and project management.

Various officers in the Ministry of Defence have been assigned the responsibility of looking into the recommendations of the Committee for further action on the same. This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri S. Semmalai and Shri Sivasami C in Lok Sabha today.

Irregularities in Purchase of Arms

Procurement of equipment/weapon systems under the Capital Head for the Army are done as per the provisions of Defence Procurement Procedure. The said Procedure contains, stringent provisions aimed at ensuring the highest degree of probity, public accountability and transparency.

As and when any irregularity comes to notice, appropriate action is taken as per rules. This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Prof. Ram Shankar in Lok Sabha today.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 16 Nov 2010 10:22

Gary Locke to lead high-tech trade mission to India from February 6-11, 2011

Removal from Entity List facilitates more opportunities for ISRO and DRDO
Machinist

DRDO, with approximately 40 laboratories under it, could take up offset contracts for defence equipment manufacturing from U.S. companies.

US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke will lead a high-tech trade mission to India. The February 6-11, 2011 business development mission will promote the export of high-technology products from leading U.S. firms and make stops in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Bangalore. The second trade mission led by Locke, it will highlight export opportunities for U.S. businesses in a broad range of advanced industrial sectors, including civil-nuclear trade, defense and security, civil aviation and information and communication.

Exports represent a critical part of the American economy and are a key component of the Obama administration’s efforts to spur new job creation. Earlier this year, President Obama outlined his National Export Initiative (NEI), which seeks to double exports by 2015, in support of several million new U.S. jobs. "We will work to reform our controls on exports. Both of these steps will ensure that Indian companies seeking high-tech trade and technologies from America are treated the same as our closest allies and partners," Obama said.

"We have agreed on steps to deepen cooperation on nuclear, defence and other high-end spectrum," said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. DRDO has already separated it's military satellite programme from ISRO's civil satellite development and launch programme. Soon DRDO will set up an exclusive organisation for military satellites.

The United States could outsource lightweight satellite launches to India. Lockheed Martin is also interested in cooperating with ISRO on India's manned space flights. Senior executives from Lockheed Martin had visited Bangalore in August and held discussions with ISRO and Antrix. Some of the US satellites assigned to Lockheed Martin could be outsourced to India. There is a dearth of low-cost launching facilities in the world and ISRO has a good track record in this regard. ISRO could soon be a global leader in commercial launches.

This will benefit ISRO, VSSC (Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre), SDSC (Satish Dhawan Space Centre) and other associated organisations. ISRO's satellite launchers are made at VSSC and launched from SDSC. However it remains to be seen how this would affect the current focus on the indigenous development of technology. To a certain extent, it was the denial of technology that bolstered the introduction of various indigenous research, design and development programmes in the country.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 17 Nov 2010 01:28

BEL To Double Investment In R&D

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 17 Nov 2010 08:34

Kemrock, HAL Partner For Carbon-Fiber Pre-Pegs

India’s Kemrock Industries and Exports Ltd. (KIEL), which makes reinforced polymer composites, signed a partnership with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) on Nov. 16 for a joint venture. The new firm will develop, manufacture and market aerospace-grade carbon fiber pre-pegs, along with its associated pre-pegs for defense and aerospace programs in India.

Announcing the venture, Kalpesh Patel of KIEL said that both companies have identified opportunities for development and marketing of pre-pegs. “It has immense potential in aerospace and defense programs in India, as well as globally,” Patel said.

In May, KIEL commissioned India’s first carbon-fiber manufacturing facility in Vadodara in a technological tie-up with the National Aerospace Laboratory. The fully integrated plant has an initial capacity of 400 tons annually.

...
...

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 17 Nov 2010 22:21

BEL Developing Advanced, Software Driven Communication Radios for Indian Armed Forces

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 17 Nov 2010 22:25

DRDO Sanctions Rs. 1000 Crore for Development of Missiles, Scramjet Engines

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Nov 2010 01:16

^ from that article

* Around Rs 600 to Rs 650 crore will be spent on missile manufacturing augmentation,
* Rs 300-Rs 350 crore will be spent on hypersonic wind tunnel programme for testing scramjet engine, which will be six times faster than sound velocity, and
* the remaining will be invested on RF (radio frequency) testing centre

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 18 Nov 2010 01:50

RamaY wrote:^ from that article

* Around Rs 600 to Rs 650 crore will be spent on missile manufacturing augmentation,
* Rs 300-Rs 350 crore will be spent on hypersonic wind tunnel programme for testing scramjet engine, which will be six times faster than sound velocity, and
* the remaining will be invested on RF (radio frequency) testing centre

Good , for it means they will be expanding the missile production capacity.And they are also serious about hypersonics.

Investment in RF might have something to do with electronic warfare.Experts please enlighten.

aditya.agd · Post by **aditya.agd** » 18 Nov 2010 03:37

Everything in defence must be handed over to private sector ... for accountability