UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby member_26622 » 28 Dec 2014 21:28

^ In my opinion this has little to do with MTCR, just a smoke creen to delay our UAV development and force us to buy US drones. This is how the world works - that's why we should not import platforms from countries\companies who supply us components (France\UK\Germany).

Not counting that we just cannot afford to import sufficient numbers (of platforms) to reasonably defend ourselves (except Delhi corridor).

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Gyan » 28 Dec 2014 21:36

HAL has always blamed others for their own delay. Like Russians for HJT-36. How come they suddenly realized that they need Khan actuators after so many years?

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2523
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby abhik » 28 Dec 2014 22:35

^^^
AFAIK,its being developed by the DRDO not the HAL.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby NRao » 28 Dec 2014 23:06

nik wrote:^ In my opinion this has little to do with MTCR, just a smoke creen to delay our UAV development and force us to buy US drones. This is how the world works - that's why we should not import platforms from countries\companies who supply us components (France\UK\Germany).

Not counting that we just cannot afford to import sufficient numbers (of platforms) to reasonably defend ourselves (except Delhi corridor).


That is an argument being made at least fro the past 15 years (on BR). So, does it really matter?

The Moog actuator issue came up WRT the LCA too - some 15 or so years ago.

Also, from the LCA thread:

Image

Apparently they used to take models to be tested in wind tunnels in West Germany. Whenever that was (70-80?).


Every country/vendor will act in their own interest.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5556
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby vishvak » 28 Dec 2014 23:11

nik wrote:^ In my opinion this has little to do with MTCR, just a smoke creen to delay our UAV development and force us to buy US drones. This is how the world works - that's why we should not import platforms from countries\companies who supply us components (France\UK\Germany).

Not counting that we just cannot afford to import sufficient numbers (of platforms) to reasonably defend ourselves (except Delhi corridor).

+100. The latest invention is probably not released. No problem using indigenous actuators either.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Gyan » 30 Dec 2014 14:00

Hal won a tender to make ten Rustom-2 in 2009 for Rs. 1600 crores. So they wake up about missing actuator after 4-5 years, one year after deadline to fly the UAV passes? Who benefits? Israeli Herons?

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 30 Dec 2014 14:43

Everybody keeps talking about these "actuators". What are they? Some sort of magic wand, restricted technology, exotic material, super-duper fabrication process? Why cant you make your own, and why is the rest of the world never sanctioned?

Like what flies the JH7 or Comac C919? And why release this sanctioning news days ahead of obama? Is it grams/kg/tonnes? Newtons/Kilonewtons? Hot or cold? Does anyone know what it is, and why it has to be imported to India?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby srai » 30 Dec 2014 18:40


Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 30 Dec 2014 19:17

^^^^ Thank you. Does a road jcb not use these? Does MooG make hydraulic "actuators". If there are YouTube videos describing the article, " what exactly has been sanctioned and on what basis? Was hydraulic actuation really the plan -- for landing gear or control surfaces? Why? Mea culpa -- not reading the tender (easier to whine, and complain onlee).

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Thakur_B » 30 Dec 2014 19:35

Shreeman wrote:^^^^ Thank you. Does a road jcb not use these?


If you are willing to compromise of SWaP requirements of components then you can use almost anything.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Gyan » 30 Dec 2014 19:47

So Khan Uncle does not stop Rustom -1 kits and neither do they stop engines of Rustom-2 but only stop the actuators. Me smell something fishy in HAL. Perhaps IAF also leaves something unsaid when they abuse HAL.

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... india.html

Desi UAV efforts taking flight for India




As such the two existing 125 HP Rotax 914 engines (one on each wing) are slated to be replaced by new 200 HP class diesel engines supplied by Lycoming.

The other indigenous UAV bearing legendary Aerospace scientist and engineer, Rustom B. Damania's name, the Rustom-I is also set for interesting times ahead. As revealed by Dr K. Tamilmani, Director-General Aeronautical systems, DRDO, to Geek at Large, Rustom-I is likely to be India's first armed UAV and work is underway to integrate the Helina (which is the air-launched version of the Nag anti-tank missile) with it. Carriage trials are expected to begin this September. The Rustom-2 which will also carry munitions eventually will see weapon release trials in 2017.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Gyan » 30 Dec 2014 20:00

Servocontrols is the system house of closed loop controls started in the year April 2002 by two young entrepreneurs Mr. Deepak and Dinesh Dhadoti. Mr. Deepak has a rich experience in the global market and technology where he worked for Moog Incorporation in East Aurora, NewYork facility

Milestones

2002
Setting up of Distribution product line
Setting up of Servo valve Servicing Centre


2003
Establishing markets in Steel/Plastics/Powergen/Test equipments and Automation
Setting up of MTS Temposonics Repair Centre


2004
Delivery of 1st Hydraulic 6DOF Stewart/Motion platform


2005
State of art Servocontrols Plant I Inauguration at Industrial estate, Udyambag, Belgaum with 20 employees.
Setting up of Servo lab with clean room facility & anti static Electronics lab for sensors.


2006
Execution of 1st Closed loop Electro Hydraulic Actuator / Servo Actuator project and built Electronics Control Panel with Delta Controller & PLC.
Assembly and Testing unit for Manifold blocks


2007
Setting up of Machine Shop for Manifold blocks in Aluminum/Steel and special Alloys
Inauguration of Machine Shop by Mr. Chip Emery, CEO MTS Corporation, Minneapolis, USA.


2008
Setting up of Fabrication Shop with Tig/Mig/Co2 welding facilities
Delivery of large Hydraulic Power pack (1000HP) with Electronic Control Panel
Establishing ISO 9001:2000 Quality Certification from TUV-SVD, Germany.


2009
Setting up of Zeiss Metrology lab from Switzerland
Sales of 1st Electromechanical Actuator with Closed loop Position/Velocity/Load control
Establishing AS9100; RevB Certification for Aerospace components and systems
Bought 12 acres of land to setup Plant III


2010
Awarded major Aerospace Test Rig projects from global OEMS and HAL including electronics
Setting up of plant IV for Turnkey projects


2011
Setting up of Plant V for the Ultra Precision Machine Shop.


2012
Custom built Electromechanical Actuator setup for mass production.


2013
Best Entrepreneurial Awards from various Institutes/Commerce of chambers and Industries.


We make Products / Systems to specs and also made print in Servo Actuators with Servo Valve, Proportional Valve, Solenoid Valves, FCA,TVC Actuators, IGV Actuators, Electromechanical Actuator, Manifold blocks, Hydraulic power packs, Wire harnessing and Structural fabrication / Integration / On site commissioning.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Gyan » 30 Dec 2014 20:09

HAL has history of messing up deadlines and technology absorption. It has never made any serious attempt to develop indigenous vendor chain (say for ALH). Technology absorption for Su-30MKI was delayed for many years in various instances as it could not put up Civil Works.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 31 Dec 2014 04:45

Thakur_B wrote:
Shreeman wrote:^^^^ Thank you. Does a road jcb not use these?


If you are willing to compromise of SWaP requirements of components then you can use almost anything.


True.

But my exposing my own ignorance (and historic lethargy) had a few reasons -- a) what is it and why was it sanctioned, b) what makes this particular acutator so special (like the quartz radom, so to say)? , and c) the futility of talking in hushed tones what india has specified to furriners in so specific terms that they can be made from the requirements but no one wants to talk turkey in public domain except play blame game.

Hydraulics/panu-e-matic devices also are supposed to leak like an 80 year old man according to every military aviation forum post that talks about them, so much that they carry extra consumables for every flight to compensate and double extra soap and water for those that check thing like swing wing mechanisms.

Answers here have hinted at what hydraulic "actuators" do in principle without saying what is wrong with an electrical ones for a drone that wont be doing aerobatics. No one has even confirmed this hydraulic pneumo-super-electro-mechatronics was what was denied.

I am better informed about theory-e-operashun like a khan academy video, but damned if I get any understanding of what they (US/India) are really fighting over due to what feels like a routine cheap part.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 31 Dec 2014 04:50

Gyan,

One reads from your sources that domestic suppliers are building some of these gizmos. So they dont meet the Mach 5 speed at 54 watts while weighing 19 kg spec (ASR?) that was lkaid out so first prototype had to be Moog? or is it that while they sounbd the same thing, what they make is not what rustom needed? Not enough information.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 31 Dec 2014 05:34

Shreeman, ECIL is making the actuators for the Rustom program. The Moog imports are at best temporary as ECIL has experience in the area & has delivered other complex programs in the same field, successfully.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 31 Dec 2014 05:36

>>>But my exposing my own ignorance (and historic lethargy) had a few reasons -- a) what is it and why was it sanctioned, b) what makes this particular acutator so special (like the quartz radom, so to say)? , and c) the futility of talking in hushed tones what india has specified to furriners in so specific terms that they can be made from the requirements but no one wants to talk turkey in public domain except play blame game.

Sanctions. Nobody wants to brag about achievements when they can be used to map our technological ability and who does what. Now of course, in the brave new world, vendor lists are open, vendors advertise for offsets so secrecy is reduced.


Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 01 Jan 2015 12:07

Karan M wrote:>>>But my exposing my own ignorance (and historic lethargy) had a few reasons -- a) what is it and why was it sanctioned, b) what makes this particular acutator so special (like the quartz radom, so to say)? , and c) the futility of talking in hushed tones what india has specified to furriners in so specific terms that they can be made from the requirements but no one wants to talk turkey in public domain except play blame game.

Sanctions. Nobody wants to brag about achievements when they can be used to map our technological ability and who does what. Now of course, in the brave new world, vendor lists are open, vendors advertise for offsets so secrecy is reduced.


Karan: this is naive at least, outright silly at best. Sanctions are not placed based on tonnage or speed or size or a part as small as an "actuator" -- whatever that is. Even beyond, no one in the right mind would consider NDTV types as their source -- much as I appreciate Vishnu's hard work (he seems to have been promoted/grown older anyway).

Do you think the Moog debacle recently had anything to do with a TV report, by Indian DDM? The only people fooled are indians themselves. There is nothing in terms of equipment that is secret about India (or china by the way) to your sanctioning best friends. And there is nothing much to brag about here, its still catch up time in every domain. Those that do brag, will do so more in absence of hard data.

Tactics, strategy, planning, and use are different. Yes, there are SOP for a reason. No one talks those. And civilians would be bored asleep even if there right to information-ed it down their throats.

This mythological approach does not work for anything. Its like telling the world you have a super duper muti filter physical separation electromagnetically shielded, robot guarded firewall for all desi oracle databases. And all you have is NAT. Neither the DOOs nor the hackers are fooled. Normal people though might well light candles around the news report or bash coconuts with garlands or read it during namaz, whatever. Xenophobia is an effective divide and conquer strategy. Keep it for the real scary stuff only.

Moog was told exactly what was needed. There is nothing secret in this "actuator" business. They wanted a particular model of a product whose brochure/manual with all specifications is likel on the internet for anyone to read.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 01 Jan 2015 12:17

Karan M wrote:Shreeman, ECIL is making the actuators for the Rustom program. The Moog imports are at best temporary as ECIL has experience in the area & has delivered other complex programs in the same field, successfully.


OK, so if it was a one-time buy of a small item thrn why the rejection of the export license? HAL is not a sanctioned entity as far as I know (for now). Is this planning ahead for Obama's visit? Is it saying, make the 226t and we wont even sell you tea bags?

For a country exporting F16s by the 100 to pakistan, an "actuator" for a small drone certainly does not pass the smell test. If anything, they would export by the hundreds so ECIL parts are never needed and die unused.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 01 Jan 2015 23:43

Shreeman wrote:
Karan M wrote:>>>But my exposing my own ignorance (and historic lethargy) had a few reasons -- a) what is it and why was it sanctioned, b) what makes this particular acutator so special (like the quartz radom, so to say)? , and c) the futility of talking in hushed tones what india has specified to furriners in so specific terms that they can be made from the requirements but no one wants to talk turkey in public domain except play blame game.

Sanctions. Nobody wants to brag about achievements when they can be used to map our technological ability and who does what. Now of course, in the brave new world, vendor lists are open, vendors advertise for offsets so secrecy is reduced.


Karan: this is naive at least, outright silly at best. Sanctions are not placed based on tonnage or speed or size or a part as small as an "actuator" -- whatever that is. Even beyond, no one in the right mind would consider NDTV types as their source -- much as I appreciate Vishnu's hard work (he seems to have been promoted/grown older anyway).


When you don't know something, why do you further compound it with an arrogant dismissal? "naive, outright silly".
Is civility too hard or is everyone beholden to give you answers which must and should fit your own pre-decided POV?

So you don't know what actuators are and how critical they are and then claim "sanctions are not placed on tonnage or speed or size or a part as small as". Have you worked in Indian military procurement or have first hand info about the topic or from any Govt control authority to determine how & where sanctions are applied and how they are applied?

First, get some more info yourself before shooting from the hip (and missing).

I was referring to "what makes this particular actuator so special.."

Its for the Rustom-2. Does even that need to be spelt out as why its special?

In short why there is only going to be limited information available about a) how it is to be sourced b ) who is to make it per SOP in India c ) how Moog fits into the objective.

Instead of getting that, off you went on your hobby horse.

Sanctions can be of many kinds - the official blanket ones when India conducts nuclear tests. Or the unofficial kind. Wherein folks get to know a certain Indian program has reached a certain level of maturity and hence is reliant only on one or a few critical components.

These are either then unavailable from the open market OR have their price marked up to humongous amounts and need all sorts of approval or are tied to other programs. The suppliers that make these products are also monitored.

Next, when I said sanctions, clearly you neither understood nor attempted to, when I gave out enough information. The answer is that India clearly does not want its subsystem vendors to be open and exposed to worldwide glare and publicity when, and if further political issues crop up, these particular civilian vendors are targeted for being suppliers to the Indian program as has oft happened in the past.

The second part of my post which you didnt understand either, was about how the horse in terms of privacy has bolted since a lot of these vendors have to now go public to get offsets. So the Govt albeit reluctantly, is letting that information out.

I wouldnt even have mentioned the vendor but for the fact some folks assumed the "#$%^guys putting the developing the Rustom etc had no plan but imports etc etc."

Do you think the Moog debacle recently had anything to do with a TV report, by Indian DDM? The only people fooled are indians themselves. There is nothing in terms of equipment that is secret about India (or china by the way) to your sanctioning best friends. And there is nothing much to brag about here, its still catch up time in every domain. Those that do brag, will do so more in absence of hard data.


Clearly you have are either joking and have a very benign view of the media.

DDM releasing unecessary info about national programs is an issue and will remain an issue.

The asinine attacks by a sold out media on national institutions prompted them to go public about a host of programs which they shouldn't have. These organizations did this because they felt under siege by a media which was completely into propaganda & also because the Govt of the day was tacitly encouraging this behaviour. This sort of stuff was NOT in Indian national interest either.

Next, the claims that everything there is, is already known about India and China!

There is a LOT which is secret about India and China and which many agencies worldwide would love to know.

And what exactly is a debacle about India seeking actuators from Moog anyhow?

Tactics, strategy, planning, and use are different. Yes, there are SOP for a reason. No one talks those. And civilians would be bored asleep even if there right to information-ed it down their throats.

This mythological approach does not work for anything. Its like telling the world you have a super duper muti filter physical separation electromagnetically shielded, robot guarded firewall for all desi oracle databases. And all you have is NAT. Neither the DOOs nor the hackers are fooled. Normal people though might well light candles around the news report or bash coconuts with garlands or read it during namaz, whatever. Xenophobia is an effective divide and conquer strategy. Keep it for the real scary stuff only.

Moog was told exactly what was needed. There is nothing secret in this "actuator" business. They wanted a particular model of a product whose brochure/manual with all specifications is likel on the internet for anyone to read.


You are going on a completely irrelevant tangent.

Yes Moog was told the specifications. And those specifications are online. Because the decision has been made that there is a lot of information which can no longer be avoided from the public glare because the vendor will communicate that information to their establishment.

Thats different from mentioning what the long term plan for those actuators is & what India intends to do next. How and where we ourselves are in terms of actuator development will be ringfenced to a degree and that is what I referred to.
Last edited by Karan M on 02 Jan 2015 00:03, edited 2 times in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 01 Jan 2015 23:44

Shreeman wrote:
Karan M wrote:Shreeman, ECIL is making the actuators for the Rustom program. The Moog imports are at best temporary as ECIL has experience in the area & has delivered other complex programs in the same field, successfully.


OK, so if it was a one-time buy of a small item thrn why the rejection of the export license? HAL is not a sanctioned entity as far as I know (for now). Is this planning ahead for Obama's visit? Is it saying, make the 226t and we wont even sell you tea bags?

For a country exporting F16s by the 100 to pakistan, an "actuator" for a small drone certainly does not pass the smell test. If anything, they would export by the hundreds so ECIL parts are never needed and die unused.


Shreeman ji, figure it out. Rustom-2 is not a "small drone" and if its delayed etc, then cui [url=bono?
ECIL wont die unused because LCA program has given us "buddhi" about components and their sourcing to an extent.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 02 Jan 2015 02:56

^^^ if rustom us delayed then eitan or herons. israel needs friends and is no cheese eating surrender monkey (to quote american lawmakers).

there are hundreds of herons now, presumably one could sit for a while like the sindhu-something submarine that sat at HSL.

But you are still making a bigger deal of rustom-2. china has global hawk class drone, so pakistasn has them and hosts the US ones as well.

This is no LCA. In a year or two the sriperambadur medical and trechnological university will make and send one to the new NASA competition like another school did for the smaller ones. No bums have been tested to warrant any new sanctions (actually why not?, best way to get the border problem under control).

The original question was "what was the actuator". Moog knows, we still dont.

The delay cycle has nothing to with moog. moog has nothing to do with tech. denial to adversaries. indians have sweet teeth. handing one cadbury bar will make no difference and that's why there is no cui bono here. no widow maker, no other obsolete planes, plenty to fly for another ten years, and no commitment from the forces to buy X nos Mk-I nor complaints that tibet goes unwatched. There are no plans to drone the maoists like taliban.

So nothing fits, except some low level preet bharara action.

India needs to publish its plans for "actuators" if they have them. This is ISRO class development. No that is glorification. This is a chemical filter to be able to drink water like a straw from the narmada. But next people will be calling for a burka for the PSLV. And they will blame me for calling for cannisterization of rustom (while intending to say PSLV).

And if this only is a "delay tactic", why not a bigger noise from the folks who are supposed to keep up the " we are now partners not just friends" charade.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 02 Jan 2015 06:19

This "discussion" is merely making the case for the argumentative Indian stereotype. I really don't have time to waste on this intellectual exercise I will bow out and give you the last word post this missive.

>>^^^ if rustom us delayed then eitan or herons. israel needs friends and is no cheese eating surrender monkey (to quote american lawmakers).


Not just Eitan (which BTW is not available for purchase) or Herons. There are other products out there. Rustom being delayed, Indian programs et al getting egg on their face BTW is always a plus for all sales vendors.

>>>But you are still making a bigger deal of rustom-2. china has global hawk class drone, so pakistasn has them and hosts the US ones as well.


Irrelevant. China had hydrogen bombs. Why did India get sanctioned when it blew up piddly fission bombs?

Rustom-2 is India's first MALE UAV. In its own way, its a huge step forward and as much of a breakthrough as is the LCA, for its segment. There are only 2 countries (Israel and US) with truly successful MALE UAVs. PRCs stuff is largely unknown at this point.

>>>This is no LCA. In a year or two the sriperambadur medical and trechnological university will make and send one to the new NASA competition like another school did for the smaller ones. No bums have been tested to warrant any new sanctions (actually why not?, best way to get the border problem under control).


A college making some stuff and sending locally put together stuff with COTS assemblies is not equal to aviation grade milspec gear developed for aircraft. Which is the reason why Moog dominates the business worldwide. Look up which actuators fly on the Rafale, EF as well.

PS: The LCA programs's key achievement is also indigenizing certain actuators for which we'd otherwise be reliant on Moog/Hispano for.

>>>The original question was "what was the actuator". Moog knows, we still dont.


If you'd have tracked ADE RFIs and chances are you will find the specs.

>>>The delay cycle has nothing to with moog. moog has nothing to do with tech. denial to adversaries. indians have sweet teeth. handing one cadbury bar will make no difference and that's why there is no cui bono here. no widow maker, no other obsolete planes, plenty to fly for another ten years, and no commitment from the forces to buy X nos Mk-I nor complaints that tibet goes unwatched. There are no plans to drone the maoists like taliban.


And who says the delay had something to do with Moog as versus those who decide whom Moog can sell to. There is definitely cui-bono involved in terms of delaying any peer competitor from advancing in a critical space & yes, India does have plans to weaponize the Rustom-2.

>>>>So nothing fits, except some low level preet bharara action.


So you say.

>>>>India needs to publish its plans for "actuators" if they have them. This is ISRO class development. No that is glorification. This is a chemical filter to be able to drink water like a straw from the narmada. But next people will be calling for a burka for the PSLV. And they will blame me for calling for cannisterization of rustom (while intending to say PSLV).


Why should India publish ANY plans for actuators or anything in its defence roadmap? Its none of anybody elses business to know what India is or is not doing and what it wishes to do and where it is in terms of technology until & unless India for its own reasons decides to release x info. As regards water filters etc, hilarious. Somehow, the fact that there are only 5-6 odd countries which can & do make plus supply actuators for worldwide military programs speaks volumes.

>>>>And if this only is a "delay tactic", why not a bigger noise from the folks who are supposed to keep up the " we are now partners not just friends" charade.


Those people will continue to make noise and keep BS'ing about how Russia-China-Pak axis is now a threat to India irrespective of what the facts on the ground are. If transfers of billions of $ to TSP, F-16s/P3s etc dont sway them, a delay in getting some actuators hardly matters.

To that gang, Indian interests are subordinate to "xyz country where they reside"'s interests.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1457
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Thakur_B » 02 Jan 2015 06:40

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/11797/ ... KX6NCuUd0H

MoD is inviting private firms to build Rustom-2. A few inaccuracies in that article, but good news.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Shreeman » 02 Jan 2015 09:10

Karan,

You had the last word. But you could have included the tech. specs of the "actuator" but didnt. @Thakur has reported good news, lets move on.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7769
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Indranil » 09 Jan 2015 20:47

Another Heron has crashed. This time in Rajasthan. That's 2 is 2-3 months!!!

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby rkhanna » 10 Jan 2015 00:06

^^^ Read somewhere it was a Searcher

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3632
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Neela » 13 Jan 2015 10:51

On this LRDE page, there is a mention of "Maritime Patrol Airborne Radar for UAV" .
Is this intended for Rustom2?
Will the platform be similar to MQ=4C Triton?

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby koti » 16 Jan 2015 03:13


VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2251
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby VinodTK » 19 Jan 2015 03:18

India to seek other drone suppliers if US hesitant
WASHINGTON, Jan 18 — India may buy unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones, from other countries if the United States does not ease current export restrictions on such aircraft, a key Democratic senator said on Friday.

Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, who will join President Barack Obama during a trip to India on Jan 26, said he was concerned that other countries could rush in to sell India the equipment it desires if the United States drags its feet.

“This is going to be a space... where other countries are moving very quickly too,” he told an event hosted by the nonprofit Atlantic Council. “If the Indians can't find a partner with the United States, they'll find one somewhere else.”

US aerospace and arms companies have been pressing the US government for years to ease current tight restrictions on foreign sales of unmanned vehicles, arguing that other countries such as Israel are overtaking the United States in drone sales.

India, which is modernising its military, is a big and growing market for US weapons makers who are seeking foreign sales to help offset declines in US defence spending.

Warner said he hoped that unmanned aircraft would be included as part of a broad US push to expand defence ties with India but said he was not aware of any specific initiatives to be announced during Obama's visit.

US and Indian officials are trying to work out pilot projects for joint production of drones and other weapons as part of the US-India Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI), a source familiar with the effort said.

One drone project involves the RQ-11 “Raven” built by AeroVironment Inc, a small US firm, but Northrop Grumman Corp, Textron Systems, a unit of Textron Inc and General Atomics, a privately held firm, are also seeking permission to sell their unmanned systems to India.

The US government strictly controls foreign sales of larger UAVs but has approved sales of unarmed systems such as the Raven, which are used purely for surveillance to a range of countries, including Uzbekistan, according to a US source.

Warner said he expected some announcements about joint defence projects during Obama's visit but said he had not been briefed on specific deals.

US officials are weighing options as they seek to expand defence ties with India as Washington grows concerned about the extent of Pakistan's efforts to crack down on militants. — Reuters

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby koti » 06 Feb 2015 06:11


brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby brar_w » 06 Feb 2015 06:16

Was approved in October as per the report.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5223
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karthik S » 06 Feb 2015 06:34

koti wrote:http://www.financialexpress.com/article/economy/us-nod-to-export-of-predator-xp-uav-to-india/38700/

Predator XP approved for Sale


Are we planning to buy these things from foreign vendors? I thought our Rustom-2 was being developed for this purpose.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Victor » 06 Feb 2015 07:57

Thakur_B wrote:http://www.defenseworld.net/news/11797/India_To_Partner_With_Private_Firms_To_Build_Combat_Drone#.VKX6NCuUd0H

MoD is inviting private firms to build Rustom-2. A few inaccuracies in that article, but good news.

This picture of Rustom 2 was taken from Bharat Rakshak and was made by me when I had suggested making the engines upside-down like the An-32. :mrgreen:

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18657
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Karan M » 06 Feb 2015 08:10

Neela wrote:On this LRDE page, there is a mention of "Maritime Patrol Airborne Radar for UAV" .
Is this intended for Rustom2?
Will the platform be similar to MQ=4C Triton?


Its probably intended for Rustom 2. Currently we are totally dependent on imports for this segment (UAV class MPRs) with Israels EL/M-2022 being the radar of choice. On the plus side, LRDE does have a MPR to leverage, its XV-2004 which has been developed and trialed by and (passed IIRC) Naval qualifications. About XV-2004, haven't seen reports of it being in series production (which is surprising) because trials were ok & it could be used to cue Brahmos at range. Probably Navy will ask for another even higher power variant since most of our platforms already have Israeli radars before this one was developed.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Victor » 06 Feb 2015 08:13

Karthik S wrote:
koti wrote:http://www.financialexpress.com/article/economy/us-nod-to-export-of-predator-xp-uav-to-india/38700/

Predator XP approved for Sale


Are we planning to buy these things from foreign vendors? I thought our Rustom-2 was being developed for this purpose.

XP version is unarmed and "stripped down" probably with less powerful engine. Rustom 2 will be weaponized I think. No harm in learning a thing or two from the top dog.


rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1159
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby rkhanna » 06 Feb 2015 09:53

XP version is unarmed and "stripped down" probably with less powerful engine. Rustom 2 will be weaponized I think. No harm in learning a thing or two from the top dog.
'


The XP's sold to the UAE have 35 hours of endurance. But are specifically designed so that they cannot be weaponised even by third parties (dont know how they achieve that)

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7769
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: UAVs, Drones, Remote Surveillance Tech

Postby Indranil » 19 Feb 2015 10:47

HAL's new 8kg mini UAV. Must be from HALBIT. I guess it is Skylark repackaged in a new airframe.

Image

But I had one question to ask from a very long time. Who designed the engine-nacelle-cum-MLG-fairing to be a cuboid on the Rustom 2. I can tell you from other tenders that this fairing is going to stay for a while. But really a flat face?
Image


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Vivek K and 49 guests