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

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1152
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 11 May 2007 19:21


Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

Postby Tilak » 14 May 2007 07:49

Originally Posted in the Iraq Thread :

In my view the following has a wider message, If anybody has objections, will delete it..

-------------------------------

Outsourcing the War
Jeremy Scahill
Jeremy Scahill, bestselling author and investigative reporter for The Nation, testified May 10 before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense on the impact of private military contractors on the conduct of the Iraq War. This is the full text of his remarks.

Video [YouTube]


My name is Jeremy Scahill. I have submitted my full remarks and request they be entered into the record. I am an investigative reporter for The Nation magazine and the author of the book Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. I have spent the better part of the past two and a half years researching privatized warfare. I have interviewed scores of sources, filed many Freedom of Information Act requests, obtained government contracts and private company documents of firms operating in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

As this Committee is well aware, we are now in the midst of the most privatized war in the history of our country. This is hardly a new phenomenon, but it is one that has greatly accelerated since the launch of the "global war on terror" and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Many Americans are under the impression that the US currently has about 145,000 active duty troops on the ground in Iraq. What is seldom mentioned is the fact that there are at least 126,000 private personnel deployed alongside the official armed forces. These private forces effectively double the size of the occupation force, largely without the knowledge of the US taxpayers that foot the bill.

But despite the similarity in size of these respective forces in Iraq, there are key differences with the way our government approaches the active-duty military and these private war contractors. For instance, we know that nearly 3,400 US soldiers have been killed in Iraq and more than 25,000 wounded. We do not know the exact number of private contractors killed or wounded. Through the US Department of Labor, we have been able to determine that at least 770 contractors had been killed in Iraq as of December 2006 along with at least 7,700 wounded. These casualties are not included in the official death count and help to mask the human costs of the war. More disturbing is what this means for our democracy: at a time when the administration seems unwilling to subject its war strategy to oversight by the Congress, we face the widespread use of private forces seemingly accountable to no effective system of oversight or law.

While tens of thousands of these contractors provide logistical support, thousands are heavily armed private soldiers roaming Iraq. We do know that there are some 48,000 employees of private military companies in Iraq alone.

These forces work for US companies like Blackwater, Triple Canopy and DynCorp as well as companies from across the globe. Some contractors make in a month what many active-duty soldiers make in a year. Indeed, there are private contractors in Iraq making more money than the Secretary of Defense and more than the commanding generals. The testimony about private contractors that I hear most often from active duty soldiers falls into two categories: resentment and envy.

They ask what message their country is sending them. While many soldiers lack basic protective equipment--facts well-known to this committee--they are in a war zone where they see the private soldiers whiz by in better vehicles, with better armor, better weapons, wearing the corporate logo instead of the American flag and pulling in much more money. They ask: [color=darkblue]Are our lives worth less?[/b]

Of course, there are many cases where war contractors have hoarded the profits at the top and money has not filtered down to the individual contractors on the ground or the armor to protect them.

The second reaction is that the active-duty soldiers see the "rock star" private contractors and they want to be like them. So we have a phenomenon of soldiers leaving active duty to join the private sector.

There is slang in Iraq now for this jump. It is called "Going Blackwater." To put it bluntly, these private forces create a system where national duty is outbid by profits. And yet these forces are being used for mission-critical activities. Indeed, in January Gen. David Petraeus admitted that on his last tour in Iraq, he himself was protected not by the active-duty military but by private "contract security."

Just as there is a double standard in pay, there is a double standard in the application of the law. Soldiers who commit crimes or acts of misconduct are prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There have been some 64 courts martial on murder-related charges in Iraq alone. Compare that to the lack of prosecution of contractors. Despite the fact that tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, have streamed in and out of Iraq since March of 2003, only two private contractors have faced any criminal prosecution. Two. One was a KBR employee alleged to have stabbed a co-worker, the other pleaded guilty to possession of child ***** images on his computer at Abu Ghraib prison. In four years, there have been no prosecutions for crimes against Iraqis and not a single known prosecution of an armed contractor.

That either means we have tens of thousands of Boy Scouts working as armed contractors or something is fundamentally wrong with the system. Brig. Gen. Karl Horst of the 3rd Infantry Division became so outraged by contractor unaccountability that he began tracking contractor violence in Baghdad. In just two months he documented twelve cases of contractors shooting at civilians, resulting in six deaths and three injuries. That is just two months and one general.

They have not been prosecuted under the UCMJ, under US civilian law or under Iraqi law. US contractors in Iraq reportedly have their own motto: "What happens here today, stays here today." That should be chilling to everyone who believes that warfare, above all government functions, must be subject to transparency, accountability and the rule of law.

These are forces operating in the name of the United States of America. Iraqis do not see contractors as separate from soldiers--understandably, they see them all as "the occupation." Contractor misconduct is viewed as American misconduct.

While there is currently a debate in Congress about how to hold these private forces accountable, the political will to act remains shockingly absent.

Given the vast size of this private force, spread across the most dangerous war zone in the world, it is not at all clear how effective oversight would work. We already know that auditors cannot visit many reconstruction sites because of security concerns. Journalists are locked in the Green Zone. The army is stretched to the max. So what entity then is supposed to have the capacity or ability to oversee the men who have been brought to Iraq to go where no one else will?

Members of Congress tell me they have been stonewalled in their attempts to gain detailed information about the activities of these companies. I think it is a disturbing commentary that I have received phone calls from several Congress members asking me for government documents on war contractors and not the other way around.

In the current discussion in the Congress on this issue, what is seldom discussed is how this system, the privatization of war, has both encouraged and enabled the growth and creation of companies who have benefited and stand to gain even more from an escalation of the war.

In closing, while I think this Congress needs to take urgent action on issues of oversight, accountability and transparency of these private forces operating with our tax dollars and in the name of the United States, there is a deeper issue that often gets overlooked. This war contracting system has intimately linked corporate profits to an escalation of war and conflict. These companies have no incentive to decrease their footprint in the war zone and every incentive to increase it.

As the country debates current and future Iraq policy, Congress owes it to the public to take down the curtain of secrecy surrounding these shadow forces that often act in the name and on the payroll of the people of this country. Thank you for your time. I am prepared to answer any questions.

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1532
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Postby Sumeet » 16 May 2007 20:50

Committee's Rec:

The Committee are pleased to note that the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited(HAL) has attained commendable manufacturing capabilities, which operates through its five companies, consisting of 16 divisions and 9 R&D centres spread across the country. Starting from Jaguar, Su-30, AJT to ALH and Cheetah Helicopters and upgradation of various MiG series aircraft, the Organisation is involved in multifarious production system.
The Committee feel that, with the present organizational set-up, it is
difficult for the HAL to cope with the ever-increasing assignments
involving cutting-edge technologies. The Committee, therefore, recommend that to bring about better and efficient management of the Organisation and competitiveness among its five companies, the HAL should be converted into full fledged separate PSUs with independent
Boards of Management. The Committee also stress that wherever required, HAL must resort to outsourcing of various sub-systems to private agencies so as to achieve costeffectiveness to the
manufacturing activities.



Action taken by Govt:

1.1 Presently, HAL is working as five Business Groups as detailed below:

(a) Bangalore Complex: Comprising all the Production Divisions situated in Bangalore(except Helicopter Division) for manufacture & overhaul of Western and Indigenous aircraft.

(b) MIG Complex: Comprising all the production Units and R&D Centres at Nasik and Koraput for manufacture and overhaul of Russian designed aircraft.

(c) Accessories Complex: Comprising all the production units and R&D Centres at Lucknow, Hyderabad, Korwa and Kanpur, supplying Accessories & Avionics Systems to other complexes.

(d) Design Complex: R&D Centres in Bangalore for indigenous
development of aircraft.

(e) Helicopter Divisions: also forms part of Design Complex for
implementation of ALH project.

These Complexes are headed by Managing Directors and have
independent Committees of Management to oversee the performances of the Divisions / R&D Centres working under them. Divisions of HAL are organized functionally into Aircraft, Engines, Helicopters, Avionics &
Accessories (Mechanical & Instrument Systems). The operations between various units are closely inter-related. Divisions in the Accessories Complex supply systems to all Aircraft & Engine Divisions. Engine Divisions supply engines to Aircraft Divisions. There is continuous
interaction between the R&D Centres and the production Units to implement the development of such projects. Such close coordination can be ensured only by having all the Units under one organization. Aviation Industry is capital intensive because of the sophisticated equipment required for the high and technological processes involved. It is therefore desirable that such facilities are established within the same organization to meet the requirements of all the business groups. For instance, the Single Crystal Directionally Solidified Blade casting facilities being established at Koraput will cater to the requirements of both MiG and Bangalore Complexes.

It is because of the need for such close cooperation and synergy and the high costs of investments that major Aerospace Companies are forming conglomerates to implement their programmes. United Technology Corporate in USA, EADS, SAFRAN, Fin Meccanica in Europe are some of such conglomerates which have wide range of Aerospace products in their production area. This arrangement of working under one umbrella gives them the benefit of availability of wide range of resources, economies of scale and deployment of best practices of technology, engineering and
business over a range of programmes.

It may also be mentioned here that HAL has absorbed a wide variety of technologies from Russia, Europe & USA through transfer of technologies for its products. The present organizational structure is conducive to exchange of the best technological practices for its programmes in different production units. The present system of these business groups has been working well with the synergy between all the constituent production Units and R&D Centres. The Company is managed by a Management Committee which includes the Chairman, the Managing
Directors of each Complex and three functional Directors for Corporate Planning & Marketing, Finance and Personnel and Administration. The Company is governed by a Board of Directors, which includes all the members of Management Committee, Government representatives and
independent Directors. Thus, Restructuring HAL into separate PSUs would not be desirable.


2.0 HAL has been one of the forerunners in involving Private Sector in the areas of Defence Production. The Committee’s recommendation on outsourcing of various sub-systems to achieve cost effectiveness has been given priority. In new programmes like SU-30, ALH, LCA etc., outsourcing has been expanded substantially from initial component manufacturing stage to Assembly Modules as well HAL has over the years increased its outsourcing value as indicated below towards the
objective.

Code: Select all

                                 (Rs. Crores)
                            Value of Outsourcing
2003-2004                          98.7
2004-2005                          181.9
2005-2006                          262.1

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 16 May 2007 21:16

DRDO AEW&C

The Programme for the devlopment of
Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C)
system is progressing well and has reached
the stage of Critical Design Review (CDR)
of the Mission Avionics. The procurement
action for the Executive Jet (aircraft) is in
progress. Private industry is also
participating in this development
programme since the beginning of the
project.


DRDO and Private Sector PSUs are in the
process of intensifying R&D efforts to make
radars indigenously side-by-side with purchase
of radars from foreign countries.
DRDO has proposed the following programmes
in this direction in the XI Plan such as Fire
Control Radar for Combat Aircraft, Low level
Transportable Radar, Medium Power Radars,
3D Tactical Control & Short Range Radars, etc.
DRDO will make all efforts to involve Defence
Public Sector Undertaking (DPSU)/Private
Industry for design & development.

Ananth
BRFite
Posts: 346
Joined: 16 Mar 2002 12:31

Postby Ananth » 17 May 2007 00:03

Sumeet wrote:Single Crystal Directionally Solidified Blade casting facilities being established at Koraput


JC:

Is that screw-driver tech at Koraput or do we have some insights into the process along with datasheet. How far are MIDHANI and co away from single crystal tech. Besides the process and after machining capabilities, the most important things are the data sheet containing variation alloys and their capabilities. Also what was holding up Kaveri?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 17 May 2007 01:58

Ananth wrote:
Sumeet wrote:Single Crystal Directionally Solidified Blade casting facilities being established at Koraput


JC:

Is that screw-driver tech at Koraput or do we have some insights into the process along with datasheet.


Screwdriver tech is generally assembly from SKD/CKD components..in this case we will be casting the blades, machining them, casting/forging all the rest of the components, building them...its definitely process intensive. The problem though is that this is specific to the AL-31 FP, we cannot just use the same blade for the Kaveri..this process is tailored to the FPs specs. So it will take time and effort for us to learn from this..for our own..


How far are MIDHANI and co away from single crystal tech. Besides the process and after machining capabilities, the most important things are the data sheet containing variation alloys and their capabilities.


DMRL can make a single crystal blade, but certifying it, productionizing it, will easily eat up a few years at the minimum .. but the issue is to what design? The issue right now is not of the blade or growth path, but of finalizing the basic design and getting it to the 97-100% level..then we can implement the newer tech..

Also what was holding up Kaveri?


Vibration issues which were resolved. The engine acc. to DRDO has been run at its RPM, and met around 80-85% of its requirements. They hope to get a production release version with a partner, by 2011...lets see.

SriSri
BRFite
Posts: 545
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 15:25

Postby SriSri » 17 May 2007 10:38

DRDO To Setup Scientific, Defense Research Labs in Faridabad, Haryana
http://www.india-defence.com/reports-3203

The Haryana government Monday approved a proposal to allot 407 acres of land in industrial city Faridabad to the ministry of defence for setting up a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) scientific laboratory there.

The land will cost the ministry only Rs.730 million. The decision for allotment of land was taken at a state cabinet meeting here chaired by Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda. The ministry had requested the Faridabad municipal corporation for allotment of about 700 acres of land initially and another 1,100 acres later to set up a DRDO laboratory near village Badhkal.

The local body of the city passed a resolution recently authorising the state government to give the 407-acre land to the ministry. The revenue for this land will be used for developing infrastructure in Faridabad.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is one of Asia's largest defense contractors and a leading aerospace manufacturer based in Bangalore, India. It was formed in 1958 by the merger of Technical Development Establishment and the Directorate of Technical Development and Production (DTDP) with the Defence Science Organisation (DSO).

DRDO has a network of 51 laboratories which are deeply engaged in developing defence technologies covering various disciplines, like aeronautics, armaments, electronic and computer sciences, human resource development, life sciences, materials, missiles, combat vehicles development and naval research and development. The organisation includes more than 5,000 scientists and about 25,000 other scientific, technical and supporting personnel.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Postby merlin » 17 May 2007 11:05

The engine acc. to DRDO has been run at its RPM, and met around 80-85% of its requirements.


FWIW, at AI07, people manning the GTRE stall said that dry thrust had been achieved "more or less" but augmented thrust still showed a shortfall.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Postby merlin » 17 May 2007 11:33

The engine acc. to DRDO has been run at its RPM, and met around 80-85% of its requirements.


FWIW, at AI07, people manning the GTRE stall said that dry thrust had been achieved "more or less" but augmented thrust still showed a shortfall.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 17 May 2007 11:38

Cross Post

The biggest difficulty in Indian R&D is that funding is so low that the development speed does not attain "critical mass" to produce products within reasonable time leading to technology overtaking the efforts in many instances.

mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Postby mandrake » 20 May 2007 01:24

Cross posting,

on HAL's Engine developement, very nicely put, an end to thousand of speculations.

[quote]
CHAPTER –III
ENGINE DESIGN CAPABILITIES OF HAL
3.1 Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is engaged with Design, Manufacture and Overhaul of Fighters, Trainers, Helicopters, Transport Aircraft, Engines, Avionics and System Equipment. HAL has a long history of engine design and development. However, no concrete achievement has been registered by the Company in its endeavour. The Ministry has furnished the following note about the development history of engine design capabilities of HAL:
“Engine Design Bureau - EDB of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Bangalore subsequently renamed as Engine Test Bed Research and Design Centre (ETBRDC), started functioning in the year 1960. ETBRDC was re-structured under Design Complex in 1980 with only some of the young designers.
Before 1980:

Initially, in the 60s the task was to design engines and engine accessories for the indigenous aircraft designed by the Aircraft Design Bureau (ADB). The piston engine PE-90 was designed and certified for use on HPT –32. However, the engines did not enter into series production. A hydraulic pump (HHP) was also designed and certified. This unit was certified and HAL, Lucknow Division took up the manufacture. An Air Turbine Starter was designed, tested and certified for starting Orpheus engines and this was series produced. Another task assigned to EB in the late sixties was the design and development of a 11KN class (2500 Ib thrust) turbojet engine for powering Kiran MKII aircraft. The project HJE –2500 was taken up and with the limited resources available. One prototype was built and successfully tested on the test bed. However the project was closed before the engine was fully developed and certified.
After 1980:

Pilotless Target Aircraft Engine (PTAE-7)
In 1979, ADE proposed to design a pilot less target aircraft for airborne target training purpose. The design of the engine of 350 Kg thrust was entrusted to HAL. The project initially was to be completed by 1985. The usual route of an engine design involves elaborate component testing and component performance mapping. Since the funds allotted were meager even for those times and the Centre started the activities with virtually no infrastructure, no component testing was possible. Thus all components had to be used directly on the engine. Apart from this, the design team was young and inexperienced. A number of problems, which cropped up had to be addressed to by analysis, trial and error.

Some of the major problems faced were-withdrawal of M/s Dowty Fuel Systems (UK) from the programme and consequent redesign of engine control system, fuel pump, alternator and power control unit with the country; rotor dynamics problems leading to re design of shifting; sea water corrosion problems leading to change of materials for some major components; ADE increasing their thrust requirement to 380 kg leading to higher Turbine Entry Temperature operation; starting problem leading to redesign of starting circuit and introduction of enrichment circuit; compressor blade cracking leading to redesign of blade number and thickness; burning of turbine nozzle guide vanes leading to improvement of flame tube design; turbine blade cracking leading to redesign of turbine disc twice; withdrawal of M/s.Microfusion (supplier of turbine casting) from the programme; mist lubrication system problems leading to prolonged experimentation and redesign of the system; EMI/EMC problems of power output interfering with spend signal leading to additional electronic components.

The engine was test flown for the first time in May 1995. Since then 8 test flights have been carried out with the mist lubrication system. All the major problems have been overcome and now the engine is under production. 14 engines have been delivered to power the Lakshya PTA.

Gas Turbine Starter Unit (GTSU-110):
When LCA programme was conceived in mid 80s, EDB proposed to design and develop the gas turbine starter for starting the engine. GTSU is a small gas turbine engine of 110 KW capacity. The experience of PTAE-7 was useful in cutting short the development time considerably. The successful starting of GE 404 engine in the test bed was done in 1998 and the first flight of LCA with GTSU-110 took place on 4th Jan 2001. All the flights of LCA so far have taken place with GTSU –110 as the engine starter. The unit has been successfully productionised to meet all the future requirements of LCA.

Shakti Engine Co-development:
Indian Army and Air force wanted engines with power higher than TM333-2B2 for Dhruv helicopters. An agreement was signed with M/s Turbomeca, France in 2002 for the Co –development of Shakti engine ETBRDC was entrusted with the design and supply of the oil pumps, oil cooling system, the filter unit and the external dressing. Engineers of ETBRDC also took part in casing modelling, rotor dynamics and stress analysis at Turbomeca, France.
Test Beds:

An aero engine needs extensive testing on a test bed before installation on aircraft. ETBRDC has built various test beds and rigs for over-speed testing of discs, ‘g’ load testing, blade vibration testing for high cycle fatigue, fuel pump and oil pump testing and PTAE-7 and GTSU-110 test rigs. A small high altitude rig was also built to test GTSU-110 to check the starting capability up to 6 km altitude conditions.

The Centre also has acquired competence in the design and commissioning of test bed on “Turn Keyâ€

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 20 May 2007 14:27

DRDO Proposes New HR Policies to Retain Scientific Talent
Newindpress
If the Link asks for Login Information, whch it will after the Day it was posted online by the newspaper. Then

Username : stupid
Password : stupid

Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Postby Juggi G » 20 May 2007 14:32

DRDO to be Part of ISRO’s First Manned Space Mission
Newindpress
If the Link asks for Login Information, whch it will after the Day it was posted online by the newspaper. Then

Username : stupid
Password : stupid

MN Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 393
Joined: 27 Jan 2002 12:31

Postby MN Kumar » 20 May 2007 15:44


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Postby Singha » 21 May 2007 10:40

excellent move by ISRO. DRDO should also start MTech prog oriented
to DSP, radar, explosvies, armour....

url

IIST to start functioning at alternate campus in Kerala
From our correspondent

30 April 2007

TRIVANDRUM — The Indian Institute of Space Technology (IIST) proposed by Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) to meet its high technology requirements will start functioning at an alternate campus in the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre in Trivandrum from this academic year.

Isro Chairman G. Madhavan Nair told a private television channel that admissions will be made from the rank list being prepared for Indian Institutes of Technology. Initially there will be 200 seats for various courses.

The entire expenses of the course will be met by Isro in the form of scholarships and assistantships. The most talented lot would be directly absorbed by the ISRO for manning various space programmes.

The institute costing Rs2.7 billion was cleared by the federal cabinet early this week with the objective of meeting the acute shortage of space scientists in the country. The IIST being set up on the lines of IITs will provide high quality undergraduate and postgraduate education and research programmes besides integrated Masters in space science and technology.

The Isro chairman said that the work on the permanent campus and other infrastructure will begin soon and completed within two years.

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1152
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

Postby A Sharma » 22 May 2007 21:02

HAL News

HAL, Accessories Division, Lucknow and APPH, UK, sign MoU focusing on the joint development of Flight Control Actuator System (FCAS) for Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) programme.

The Sukhoi Engine Division, Koraput, has outsourced a significant portion of AL31-FP Engine (SU-30 project) components. The Division has been educating the vendors on requirements of aeronautical quality systems.

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) and Infotech Enterprises Limited have formed a joint venture (JV) company to offer world class engineering design services for the aerospace sector.

Accessories Complex, HAL and IIT-K have entered into an MoU for carrying out collaborative technology development activities.

mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Postby mandrake » 24 May 2007 22:19

Can be a very old news but interesting none-the-less.

Do India's armed forces possess IT edge over Pak?

Work on all these must have progressed substantially on these.

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 25 May 2007 18:52

Just a side note, compared to Indian R&D budget of Rs. 5700 crores, the Chinese budget is Rs. ~75,000 Crores.

Looking at OFB with turnover of Rs. 6000 crores their R&D is pathetic Rs. 6 crores budget.

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 25 May 2007 21:34

Raj Malhotra wrote:Just a side note, compared to Indian R&D budget of Rs. 5700 crores, the Chinese budget is Rs. ~75,000 Crores.

Looking at OFB with turnover of Rs. 6000 crores their R&D is pathetic Rs. 6 crores budget.


Even if OFB's budget is increased, it's doubtful if they'd be able to "absorb" it without radical restructuring/corporatization ...

For those who crib about about HM changing the grille to make Ambassador Mark 1, 2, 3, 4... case in point is Vehicles Factory, Jabalpur and the ShaktiMAN 3-tonner... VFJ would make HM proud of the Amby :evil:

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 26 May 2007 20:09

I have suggested a budget of Rs. 400 crores for the engine of Arjun. Let me try to justify it:-

Estimated cost of powerpack of 893 series would be around US$ 2 million or 8 crores. Let us say engine if worth Rs. 5 crores out of it. If the engine is used for 500 tanks i.e. production of 50 tanks per annum for 10 years then the value of production would be around Rs. 2500 crores. Let us 10% is R&D budget which would be Rs. 250 crores.

Such engine can be rated from 4 cylinders upto 24-36 cylinders i.e to say from 500hp to 3000-4500hp and can be used for IFV, marine powerpacks, industrial and power applications. The spin-offs would also have benefits in commercial heavy truck applications. Say the production value is around Rs. 2500 crores and core engine is 5% R&D part which would be Rs. 125 crores.

So one can justify a cost of Rs. 375 crores for the engine and around Rs. 600 corers for developing the whole powerpack which is the engine, tranny, fuel injection system, computer controls, cooling pack etc.

Let us see the benefit, the indigenous engine would cost (as projected 40%) or even 60% of the imported engine. This means a cost benefit of Rs. 2000 crores for the investment of Rs. 375 crores.

This is apart from the fact that domestic production normally gets a custom duty tax protection of 15%-25%. On the said basis we can spend almost Rs. 500 crores on the engine R&D or Rs. 800 crores on the powerpack.

Further some of the infrastructure created would be generic and would come useful in actual production as also in other R$D projects which means that R&D budget can be further augumented to say RS. 600 crores for the engine and Rs. 1000 crores for the powerpack.

I think the present budget of RS. 40 crores is absurd and probably babus based it on the value of metal rather than the engineering effort required to produce such a complex machine.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 26 May 2007 22:07

Kartman wrote:
Raj Malhotra wrote:Just a side note, compared to Indian R&D budget of Rs. 5700 crores, the Chinese budget is Rs. ~75,000 Crores.

Looking at OFB with turnover of Rs. 6000 crores their R&D is pathetic Rs. 6 crores budget.


Even if OFB's budget is increased, it's doubtful if they'd be able to "absorb" it without radical restructuring/corporatization ...

For those who crib about about HM changing the grille to make Ambassador Mark 1, 2, 3, 4... case in point is Vehicles Factory, Jabalpur and the ShaktiMAN 3-tonner... VFJ would make HM proud of the Amby :evil:


OFB has ambitious plans to hike R&D...plans are what they are.

Amongst one of the better things they are doing is to leverage on being a low cost manufacturer and tie up for JVs:

IAI for 155mm CARGO- OFB makes the rest of the round, IAI makes bomblets
Directed at IA and for export

JV with BEL to upgrade AA guns, BEL provides the new FCS and optics, motors, OFB integrates with BEL help

JV with TATA to upgrade the Bofors

TOT for tech--

-T-90 program sees OFB getting a massive (per plan) upgrade in manufacturing capabilities, including modern FCS @ OLF
-BMP mod program ditto
-New ammo for 125mm FSAPDS from Israel and India
..etc etc

All this is well and good. But OFBs critical failure is lack of R&D which could enable it to absorb tech cost effectively and properly. BEL has a strong R&D base in its own right so it can make the best of TOT and absorb it from DRDO/ Abroad and do concurrent engineering.

saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 350
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Postby saumitra_j » 26 May 2007 22:58

For those who crib about about HM changing the grille to make Ambassador Mark 1, 2, 3, 4... case in point is Vehicles Factory, Jabalpur and the ShaktiMAN 3-tonner... VFJ would make HM proud of the Amby :evil:


You have hit upon an issue which is rather sensitive personally, as my maternal uncle was a supplier of small engine parts to VFJ (for Shaktimaan) in the early 80s and he had had to go through hell.

In the late 80s/early 90s the local VFJ boss wanted to do something things different - he had a proposal to supply MPSRTC with cheaper buses - sort of variants of Shaktimaan but Tatas "met" the powers that be and got a deal leaving the VFJ without orders....:(

Sparsh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 12:57

Postby Sparsh » 27 May 2007 01:44

All,

Does anyone know what the Sagardhwani and Samvahak projects are? The latter project is some kind of an EW system and the former project has been completed.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 27 May 2007 02:07

Sagardhwani as far as I remember, is a surveying project for the Navy, ship with surveying eqpt etc

Ok, here it is:
http://www.drdo.org/products/sagardhwani.htm

Samvahak is a C3I project, Corps Level Information and Decision Support System. It includes all the communications hardware, which include modified STARS-V radios from BEL, encyrption etc etc. Its fairly complex and designed to be scalable. The Samvahak program has also been completed.

MOD Report-07 states:

Command Information Decision Support
System (CIDSS), Samvahak: It is a Corps
to Battalion level decision support system
to collect, collate, process and disseminate
information between commanders of
various formations. The project has been
successfully completed on December 31,
2006.Technology has been transferred to
Bharat Electronics Limited which is porting
the system on the designated
Army Formations.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 27 May 2007 02:35

The entire report deserves to be here, so that Paklurks can realise the scale of work in India..and realise that green paint alone wont work for equal equal..

[quote]PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS
8.11 DRDO had made great strides towards
making the country self-reliant in the areas of
military technology. A number of systems and
equipment have been developed, productionised
and inducted into the Services in the past
categorized broadly into major disciplines, like
missiles, aero-systems, electronic systems,
combat vehicles, armaments, naval systems,
advanced materials, and life sciences. Progress
of some of the leading programmes and projects
during the current financial year is given in
succeeding paragraphs.


(A) Missile Programmes: Integrated Guided
Missile Development Programme (IGMDP)
was sanctioned in 1983 for design,
development and productionisation of
different types of state-of-the-art missiles toprovide self-reliance in this
high technology field.
Technological goal of this
Programme was to ensure
that the systems will be
contemporary at the time of
their induction into the
Services. The Programme
envisaged the design and
development of missile
systems, Prithvi, Trishul,
Akash and Nag. In addition,
development of Dhanush,
Agni, BrahMos and Astra
series of missiles have also
been taken up.

The status of various
missiles is as under:
(a) Prithvi Missile: Prithvi, a tactical battlefield
Surface-to-surface missile, has two
versions of ranges 150 km & 250
km with about 1 tonne and 500 kg
payloads, respectively. Army
version of Prithvi has already been
inducted into the Indian Army. Air
Force version of Prithvi missile is
under induction. Design and
development of composite
warheads for Prithvi missile
consisting of pre-fragmented
incendiary, blast cum earth shock
submunition have been completed.
Production order for these
warheads has been placed on
Directorate General of Ordnance
Factories (DGOF).

(b) Agni-I Missile: With a range of 700 km,
surface-to-surface Agni-I missile has single
stage solid rocket motor and can carry onetonne warhead. It can be configured to fire
from road/ mobile launcher. With the
development of Agni-I, the range gap
between Prithvi-II & Agni-II has been
bridged. Agni–I has been inducted into
Services.

(c) Agni-II Missile: The range for Agni-II is
more than 2000 km. The salient features of
the test firings are mobile launch capability,
multi-staging, state-of-the-art control and
guidance, re-entry technology and
sophisticated on-board packages including
advanced communication. Agni–II has also
been inducted into Services.
(d) Dhanush Missile: It is a Naval version of
Prithvi missile with a range of 250 km
and a payload of about 500 kg. It can carry
both conventional as well as nonconventional
warheads. Indian Navy has
accepted to have Dhanush on its off shore
Patrol Vessel (OPV). The process of
weaponisation of INS Suvarna with the
Dhanush missile is now
complete.


(e) Akash Missile: Medium
range (25 km), surface-to-air
missile, Akash has multiple
target handling capacity with
digitally coded command
guidance system. Electronic
Warfare trials evaluation
have been completed.
Battery Level Radar – III on
T-72 chassis are under
various stages of fabrication.
Development of Akash
weapon system is now
complete. The technology transfer
documents with quality norms are also
ready and the weapon system can be
productionised after Users’ trials and
induction phase.

(f) Trishul Missile: It is a low level quick
reaction surface-to-air missile for the Indian
Army, Air Force and Navy. So far, 82
successful developmental flight trials have
been conducted, including 3 trials during the
current year providing warhead
performance, repeated guidance
performance capability and salvo firing
capability. With the completion of above
flight trials, the design and development of
the Trishul Missile is complete.

(g) Nag Missile: Nag is a third generation antitank
missile with “top-attackâ€

mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Postby mandrake » 27 May 2007 02:43

Jcage I believe not all projects are noted there, say the spin offs and technologies established fro the ATV project alone will fill pages :D

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 27 May 2007 02:47

These projects are only the public ones delivered. Several strategic systems as well as the projects being worked upon will not be mentioned.

Sparsh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 12:57

Postby Sparsh » 27 May 2007 03:22

JCage,

Thanks! I was going through the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence reports and found references to those two projects that I was unaware of.

As an aside, I never realized how truly massive the Samyukta project really is until I saw the amount of money involved: ~1300 crore for the Samyukta vs. ~1700 crore for the entire IGMDP.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 27 May 2007 06:43

Sparsh,

The Samyukta is massive. In a nutshell, it is capable of intercepting, analysing *any* RF emission by the Pakis, whether by comms/C3I or by radars. It can also jam these emissions.

There are a range of vehicle mounted jammers, each directed against different frequencies and for com and non com segments.

The program also covered the development of key hardware, and most importantly the development of EW techniques.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4850
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Neshant » 27 May 2007 11:19

> *any* RF emission by the Pakis, whether by comms/C3I or by radars. It
> can also jam these emissions.

I wish they would not give it so much publicity. It only aids the enemy.

That being said, frequency hoppers and encrypted communications make the work of EW all the more difficult.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 27 May 2007 14:12

Some degree of publicity is essential- for people routinely assume that the DRDO does nothing, even when it delivers on projects of such magnitude, thanks to the media campaign run by sensationalist unethical twits like Aroor.

The Samyukta can track frequency hopping systems. And there is provision for recording and post interception analysis of comms. And of course, there is always the ability to jam.

Sparsh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 78
Joined: 30 Jan 2007 12:57

Postby Sparsh » 28 May 2007 00:39

JCage,

Any more info on the Samrat project. It seems directed towards developing the basic building blocks of the next generation of Indian EW systems rather than any specific EW system.

Staying on the Samyukta for a moment: I knew it was big (a system mounted on ~150 Tatra trucks is big by any standard) and ambitious but the amount of money put into it completely blew me away. That being said, any idea on the geographical coverage it provides? I seem to remember something about it being 100x100 km or 150x100 km or something in that general region. More importantly, any idea of the depth of geographical coverage provided by it? There are some extremely nifty things that you can do if you are able to passively build an electronic orbat on the fly.

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 28 May 2007 01:27

Sparsh wrote:JCage,

Any more info on the Samrat project. It seems directed towards developing the basic building blocks of the next generation of Indian EW systems rather than any specific EW system.


Think of it as TD for iterative improvement. Currently DRDO is riding on an EW order boom, so they need to keep researching and improving upon current performance. This will dovetail into the Sujav system for CSM.

Staying on the Samyukta for a moment: I knew it was big (a system mounted on ~150 Tatra trucks is big by any standard) and ambitious but the amount of money put into it completely blew me away. That being said, any idea on the geographical coverage it provides? I seem to remember something about it being 100x100 km or 150x100 km or something in that general region. More importantly, any idea of the depth of geographical coverage provided by it? There are some extremely nifty things that you can do if you are able to passively build an electronic orbat on the fly.


http://www.hindu.com/2004/01/20/stories ... 721300.htm
[i]It is mounted on ground mobile vehicles and covers HF to Millimetre wave frequencies range. The Coverage of the electronic spectrum of frequencies is done in two segments — communication segment and non-communication segment — which are finally integrated with the master control centre (MCC) through appropriate transmission stations.

It is capable of handling both ground-based and airborne threats. It has the capability to intercept, detect, search, identify and locate complex communication and radar signals. It monitors and analyses communication and radar activity across Forward Edge of the Battle Area (FEBA) and many other sophisticated features. Once deployed, the system has operational frontal coverage of 150/70 km. [i]

PradyD
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 12
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 02:52

Postby PradyD » 28 May 2007 01:46

not sure if this has been posted before:


http://www.iisc.ernet.in/researchhigh/electrode.shtml

Aerodynamic drag at hypersonic speeds (Mach 9) can be reduced by ~50%, demonstrated first time in IISc Hypersonic shock tunnel

Using concentrated upstream electrical energy depostion, the aerodynamic drag around bodies at hypersonic speeds (Mach 9) can be reduced by ~ 50%. This concept has been experimentally demonstrated for the first time in the IISc hypersonic shock tunnel.

- Dr. G. Jagadeesh, Aerospace Engineering


The effect of energy deposition using an electric arc discharge, upstream of a 60° half angle blunt cone configuration in a hypersonic flow stream has been studied. Investigations involving drag measurements and high speed Schlieren flow visualization have been carried out in IISc hypersonic shock tunnel HST2 at Mach 9 using both air and argon as the test gases. An unsteady drag reduction of about 50% (maximum reduction)has been observed in the energy deposition experiments carreid out in argon environment. These studies also show that the effect of discharge on the flow field is more pronounced in argon environment as compared to air, which confirms that thermal effects are mainly responsible for flow alteration with discharge.

The research findings have been published as a letter in the forth coming issue of Physics of Fluids, Vol.19,031701, March 2007.

mandrake
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 23 Sep 2006 02:23
Location: India

Postby mandrake » 28 May 2007 02:13

What is interesting is upon reading the full article, the project was fianced by DRDL :wink:

I wonder that they publishes such projects in journals are they the result of the whole experiment?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 28 May 2007 13:55

The Aero India Long EZ..

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2007/05/27/sto ... 190700.htm

Soaring high


Pavan Kaula has built a plane of his own for personal travel. And he believes there should be many more of them out there. K. JESHI


Image



Photo: S. Siva Saravanan

Beyond the blue sky: Pavan Kaula with the Long-EZ.


IF he had a magic wand he would fill the sky with innovative aircraft. “We are one billion people and look at the sky, it is always empty, where are the aircraft?â€

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 30 May 2007 07:05

About a month old..........

Small Supplier
CLOSE UP
India's Bharat Capitalizes on Electronics Growth
Aviation Week & Space Technology
04/16/2007, page 81

Neelam Mathews
New Delhi

Bharat Electronics, already on the growth track, could benefit from India's defense buildup

Printed headline: Inward Bound

When they hear stories about stodgy government-owned businesses, exectives at India's Bharat Electronics Ltd. respond with a story of their own: They are in their sixth year of compound growth that's averaged 15%.

Bharat Electronics (BEL) dominates India's defense electronics industry, a point driven home when it closed its fiscal year Mar. 31 with revenues of $909 million, up $106 million from 2005-06. Major orders last year included supplying the Flycatcher, Reporter and Surveillance radars for India's P-17 ships, as well as the Ellora electronic warfare system, hand-held thermal imagers and an integrated shipboard data network.


Bharat Electronics is upgrading its manufacturing facilities across India as it seeks foreign contracts under the government's offset policy.

"We have set a target of increasing turnover [revenues] to $2 billion by 2012," says Chairman and Managing Director V.V.R. Sastry. To keep up the pace, the company expects to invest $22 million in the next five years improving its research and manufacturing facilities.

"Our focus will remain research and development as we try to shift from reactive to innovative research, preempting market needs," Sastry commented recently to Aviation Week & Space Technology. "Besides, customers are now looking at total system requirements."

As in the past, while the majority of sales have been from its largest stakeholder--the Indian government--BEL has increased its civil sales to 18% from 14% over the past year. The company declared a 40% interim dividend of $5.6 million to its shareholder--the government--for 2006-07. In 2005, BEL was a winner in this magazine's Top-Performing Companies survey (AW&ST June 6, 2005, p. 52).

Long a sleepy defense market, India has stepped up the pace since the turn of the century, particularly in missile defense and naval- and land-based aviation. The air force's pending contract for a multirole fighter has drawn interest from industry's biggest U.S. and European contractors. Coupled with the government's mandatory offset requirements, the buildup bodes well for BEL's expansion. Under Indian law, foreign contract winners must invest 30% of the value of their contract with Indian companies.

BEL's strategy includes an aggressive push to capture offset revenues. The biggest prize on its horizon is the multirole fighter. Toward that end, BEL has ongoing talks with Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Sagem, Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

"We consider BEL our peers in India," says Northrop Grumman Vice President Katie Gray. "Together we have the potential to produce or develop just about any kind of defense electronics." Northrop Grumman builds the APG-68 (V)9 radar for the Lockheed Martin F-16, a multirole fighter candidate.

Northrop Grumman has sent a team to India to hold supplier qualification talks. "The team [carried] candidate work packages for build-to-print projects supporting several of our existing contracts, including one of our F-16 radars," Gray said.

"We can offer build-to-print as well as build-to-spec solutions," says Sastry.

Meanwhile, BEL has signed a preliminary agreement with Israel's Elbit Systems Electro Optics for a joint venture to develop, produce and market thermal imaging cameras and forward-looking infrared radar for India and export markets. Formal agreement is expected within six months.

BEL officials are declining comment on reports of a $265-million deal to produce secure radio systems for the Indian army. However, Sastry does say the company is expecting orders for digital radio trunk systems.

Of course, the defense buildup also is bringing with it more competition. Sastry acknowledges that as a government-owned entity, BEL will face challenges as India opens its defense research and development to the private sector. His response is to stress R&D and customer support.

The company recently lost out to an Elta-led team to supply radar components for the Indian air force.

BEL spreads its work in radars, military communications, naval system, electro-optics, electronic warfare equipment and other systems among campuses in Bangalore, Ghaziabad, Pune, Machilipatnam, Panchkula, Kotdwara, Navi Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad.

A steady revenue from in-house development work has allowed BEL to boost its R&D budget to 7% of revenues, compared with 5% last year.


Image

Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Postby Raj Malhotra » 30 May 2007 11:08

updated

I have suggested a budget of Rs. 400 crores for the engine of Arjun. Let me try to justify it:-

Estimated cost of powerpack of 893 series would be around US$ 2 million or 8 crores. Let us say engine if worth Rs. 5 crores out of it. If the engine is used for 500 tanks i.e. production of 50 tanks per annum for 10 years then the value of production would be around Rs. 2500 crores. Let us 10% is R&D budget which would be Rs. 250 crores.

Such engine can be rated from 4 cylinders upto 24-36 cylinders i.e to say from 500hp to 3000-4500hp and can be used for IFV, marine powerpacks, industrial and power applications. The spin-offs would also have benefits in commercial heavy truck applications. Say the production value is around Rs. 2500 crores and core engine is 5% R&D part which would be Rs. 125 crores.

So one can justify a cost of Rs. 375 crores for the engine and around Rs. 600 corers for developing the whole powerpack which is the engine, tranny, fuel injection system, computer controls, cooling pack etc.

Let us see the benefit, the indigenous engine would cost (as projected 40%) or even 60% of the imported engine. This means a cost benefit of Rs. 2000 crores for the investment of Rs. 375 crores.

This is apart from the fact that domestic production normally gets a custom duty tax protection of 15%-25%. On the said basis we can spend almost Rs. 500 crores on the engine R&D or Rs. 800 crores on the powerpack.

Further some of the infrastructure created would be generic and would come useful in actual production as also in other R&D projects which means that R&D budget can be further augumented to say RS. 600 crores for the engine and Rs. 1000 crores for the powerpack.

Further for a period of life cycle of engine, the spare parts cost almost 100% to 300% of the value of original engine. Assuming that in present case the spare parts will cost 100% of the value of the engine and there will be saving of 50% in their cost, would give us another saving of around Rs. 2000 crores.

So from any angle an investment of Rs. 400-800 Crores in a project that not only helps in developing a strategic project and industrial infrastructure across the board which also results in saving of Rs. 2000-5000 and crores makes a lot of sense to me, but does it make any sense to a MoD babu?

I think the present budget of RS. 40 crores is absurd and probably babus based it on the value of metal rather than the engineering effort required to produce such a complex machine.

Kartman
BRFite
Posts: 107
Joined: 15 May 2007 20:53

Postby Kartman » 31 May 2007 18:39

Could someone please clarify the IP issues, esp. how HAL/DRDO got around them, in the following sample of projects ?

- MiG-27 upgrade
- CI-Ajeya upgrade
- Tank-Ex
- Uprating of T-72 powerpack to 1000HP
- BLT, Rajendra, etc on T-72 chassis
- BMP-related mods such as Akash/Trishul/Nag

Specifically with the T-72, IIRC it was reported that even for the common components (between the T-72 and T-90), the previous agreement precluded the existing lines from making them without a new agreement with the OEM. So what is the legal status of all the T-72 mods, when the IP issues were so stringent ?

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 31 May 2007 18:47

The IP agreement was signed after all these projects were well underway. The Russians mind us modifying their equipment, but they can live with it- rather, they cant force us to stop doing it. What they are absolutely paranoid about is the Israelis or any other foreign third party vendor modifying it without russian involvement and succeeding in sales, killing an OEM Russian attempt. They want a lockdown on the Indian market.
A litmus test will be the Pechora upgrade. If it goes to Poland, the Russian reaction will tell us what we can expect in the future.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests