Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

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.
shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby shukla » 24 Jul 2011 03:11

Eurocopter and HAL sign cooperation agreements

Eurocopter, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited to strengthen industrial cooperation, links

"This association will focus on increasing existing collaboration and exploring new potential business areas to serve both Indian and international markets", Eurocopter said.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Shrinivasan » 24 Jul 2011 10:35

HAL is manufacturing 100 shipsets of these assemblies per year for the AS550/AS350 helicopters, and contributes to Eurocopter global supply chain.
What is the "100 Shipsets" thing, is it a composite shell of a helo?Google Chachu is not of much help

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Airavat » 28 Aug 2011 10:50

Mahindra gears up for military march

The Indian Army’s future infantry combat vehicles programme, a $12-billion order to supply 2,600 vehicles, may actually see this playing out on the ground. Mahindras are among the four shortlisted entities, and if selected will actually see group entities Mahindra Satyam and Mahindra Systech collaborating with the defence division.

Mahindra Engineering Services, a part of Mahindra Systech, is working on the automotive design aspects, while Mahindra Satyam is creating the information technology backbone, or “battlefield management systems” in the defence parlance. Systech’s role as a key component vendor will increase, once the entire supply chain is put in place.

In fact, the Mahindras’ defence play is now becoming far more evolved. Defence Land Systems India (DLSI), Mahindra’s 74:26 joint venture with global defence and security company BAE Systems, has reached an inflection point, with the commercial roll-outs of its mine protection vehicles (MPVs), a first for the Indian private sector. From its Faridabad facility, the first batch of six MPV-I vehicles will be headed for Jharkhand to assist armed forces in counter insurgency operations. Already, states like Maharashtra, Jammu & Kashmir, West Bengal and Chhattisgarh have shown interest. “We are also expecting follow-on orders from Jharkhand,” said Khutub Hai, managing director and chief executive officer of DLSI. “The ministry of home affairs has a requirement of around 300 MPVs, for which request for proposals will be issued shortly.”

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 30 Aug 2011 07:07

A Russian view on the delay in the supply of Series 2 of the Project 1135.6 frigates Teg, Tarkash and Trikand by the Yantar Shipyard:

The bright side of the delayed frigate delivery to India

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kmkraoind » 30 Aug 2011 09:39

Post-protest, govt rethinks US gun deal - Indian Express

Back to square one :shock: .

India's plans to urgently purchase M777 ultra-light howitzers from the US for deployment along the China border in the east have hit a roadblock as the Defence Ministry has developed second thoughts following an Army report that the gun may fall short of desired specifications.

While the Army, sources said, also took the line that these “deviations” were not that significant and could be waived, the Defence Ministry is taking no chances given the anti-corruption onslaught the government is under.

It is learnt to have asked the Army to further re-examine the deal as these specifications were drawn up by the Army itself.

The problem over this order of close to 150 guns, in fact, has to do with another global tender that the Army had issued for light howitzers. That tender process had run into a tangle after one of the key competitors — Singapore Technologies (ST) — had come under the CBI scanner in the ordnance factory scam. ST’s Pegasus gun at the time was the lead contender in the trials.

Ads by Google

The government had then decided to go for a direct government-to-government deal with the US, under the Foreign Military sales route.

The deal is important because India wants to significantly upgrade its presence and capabilities on the India-China border, particularly in the eastern sector. The light howitzer gun was assessed to be the most appropriate artillery equipment in the hilly terrain.

The US gun on offer, M777, was accordingly considered. At that point, sources said, the Defence Ministry had made it clear that the specifications ought to be the same as those issued while floating the earlier global tender.

The Army, on its part, had pointed out that using the same yardstick could result in deviations.

As a result, the US gun, which is made of titanium and weighs about 4 tonnes, does fall short on some counts:

The angle of depression is not enough for it to fire at tanks.

There is no automatic loading facility as it does not have an auxiliary power unit, which would increase the weight.

It lacks a safety catch mechanism.

At the same time, sources pointed out, the gun has other positives like being simple to operate and proven in battle. The Army top brass is said to be of the view that this order should therefore be delinked from the original tender, and that the M777s be purchased to fill the gap now. The tender can be pursued as and when blacklisted firms are allowed to participate in trials, the Army feels.


With some of these blacklisted companies obtaining a stay from the Delhi High Court, delinking the two deals may be the only way out, except that the same specifications have been used in both cases. The entire issue, sources said, will only get more complicated in the days ahead.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9995
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sum » 30 Aug 2011 10:40

If there there is ever a generic term to be adopted in english language for a monumental f(uk-up of Himalayan proportions, it should be "Indian arty procurement"

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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Singha » 30 Aug 2011 11:27

a 155mm towed gun of any hue is too unwieldy imo to fire at tanks unless the tanks are heading right down its throat in a straight line. even the feared german Flak88 looked a bit too large to me.

I guess that req came from a need to provide a last ditch defence if the arty position was in danger of being overrun by a armour column the "firing over open sights" walong redux thing....in which case imo its better to arrange for pulling the guns out or atleast the troopers out than commit suicide attempting to duel with nimble IFVs and tanks with a line a static large guns...tanks will finish that contest in 5 mins esp at night and win 99% of the time - tall odds.

time have changed and we need to move with it. Nag/Javelin/Milan2T present a far suitable option for such overrun situations than a line of big targets for the nearest troop of MBTs

D Roy
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby D Roy » 30 Aug 2011 11:32

This same point comes up every time there is a discussion about artillery in the mountains. there is always this concern about the angle of depression because of fears that air-dropped Special forces and or light armour may catch gun positions unawares.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7717
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby rohitvats » 30 Aug 2011 13:31

A small point - firing at tanks requires barallel to be parallel to the ground most of the time or slightly depressed. IMO, this depressed angle requirement seems like being able to fire downhill from positions of elevation along a valley or a ridge.

Now coming to the requirement - it seems that the RFP was made keeping Singapore Pegasus LWH in mind - it is heliportable, comes with APU and limited SP capability like Bofors and has semi-automatic loading capability. I guess, the CBI complaint put spanner in the induction of the system and IA was forced to go for US system. The one advantage that US system has is that it is lighter still than Pegasus.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Indranil » 30 Aug 2011 14:06

^^^ Rohit sirjee ... I don't understand artillery much ... but it looks to me (a layman) as that the RFP was for best of all worlds ... light and battle proven as M777, having the ability to auto load etc like the Pegasus (which adds weight).

Get a damn gun ... to modify a popular saying: a gun in the hand is worth two in the bush!

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7717
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby rohitvats » 30 Aug 2011 14:10

^^^There are only two guns in LWH category in the world as of today. So surely, IA did not want to ask for something that no one could fulfill. Weight of M777 is not possible with features of Pegasus - the addition of APU itself will kill the weight advantage of M777. Considering that how the Services are paranoid about US maal, IMO, Pegasus was the gun of choice. But either ways, M777 or Pegasus LWH, just get the gun. Them guns are excellent improvement in 105mm LFG, APU or no APU not withstanding.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9995
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sum » 30 Aug 2011 14:31

to modify a popular saying: a gun in the hand is worth two in the bush!

He he...true words..

Slight modification could be:
"a gun in the hand is worth two in the manufacturers factory waiting to be delivered"!

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Shrinivasan » 30 Aug 2011 21:47

This Article smells of Lifafa all around

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Nikhil T » 01 Sep 2011 09:30

Ajai Shukla: MoD flouts offset rules; favours foreign vendors

Whistleblowers in the defence ministry (MoD) have briefed Business Standard about the ministry’s flagrant violation of rules in almost every recent offset contract. Some of these striking offset irregularities relate to contracts for upgrading the IAF’s MiG-29 fighters by RAC MiG of Russia; the purchase of C-17 Globemaster III transport aircraft and P8I Neptune long-range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft from US giant, Boeing; and the procurement of AW-101 helicopters, from Anglo-Italian company, Agusta Westland, for VVIP’s including the prime minister.

MoD officials say that rules are being flouted with impunity because of a nexus between global arms vendors and the MoD’s Acquisition Wing (which procures arms for the military). Both would like India’s arms purchases to proceed unhindered. For the vendors profits are at stake and the Acquisition Wing must meet procurement targets. Both see the strict implementation of offset rules as an inconvenient hurdle to procurement; for vendors, it also adds to the cost. And so, the vendors submit token offset proposals and the Acquisition Wing clears those without too many questions.

Offsets were intended to boost Indian defence industry by requiring vendors that supply defence equipment worth Rs 300 crore or more to source 30% of the contract value in defence products from India. But an examination of recent offset contracts points to violations of both the letter and spirit of offsets. Consider the following:

1. Russian company, RAC MiG, won a $964 million contract to upgrade India’s fleet of sixty-nine MiG-29 fighters, incurring an offset liability of $289 million (30% of the contract value). Six MiG-29s were to be upgraded in Russia and the remaining in India, for which MiG charged hefty licence fees in the contract. But MoD officials reveal that the Acquisition Wing permitted RAC MiG to also claim the licence fee as an offset.

RAC MiG was also irregularly allowed to claim the cost of training IAF personnel as an offset. Training costs can now be claimed as offsets, but this was not permitted in the rules under which the contract was signed. Asked for a reaction, the MoD has not responded.

2. The Boeing Company, signed a $2.1 billion deal to supply eight P8I Neptune Long Range Maritime Reconnaissance (LRMR) aircraft to the Indian Navy. The MoD decided that ultra-secret electronics --- e.g. Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system, which differentiates friendly from hostile targets --- would be procured from Bharat Electronics Ltd and Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. This was done to keep US components out of these sensitive systems. But the Acquisition Wing then permitted Boeing to claim their cost as an offset, as if it had indigenised them.

Furthermore, Boeing is being allowed to claim the cost of Transfer of Technology (ToT) as a P8I offset even though ToT is ineligible for offsets.

Asked for their response, Boeing replied, “Boeing does not comment on specific offset proposals and we will have to refer you to the MoD on your queries. We continue to engage with our customers on optimal offset solutions that offer India the right technological capability for a strengthened aerospace industry.” The MoD did not respond to a request for their comments.

3. The Boeing Company has also benefited enormously, say MoD officials, from the Acquisition Wing’s “sweetheart clearance” of half a billion dollars worth of offsets arising from the IAF’s purchase of ten C-17 Globemaster III transporters for $4.1 billion. The Acquisition Wing has okayed Boeing’s proposal to supply the DRDO a “tri-sonic wind tunnel”, which can develop wind speeds of Mach 3.7 (one Mach = the speed of sound). Indian industry sources point out that this is vintage technology, with the US having built a tri-sonic wind tunnel in the 1950s. Indian company, L&T, has recently built a Mach 12 wind tunnel for the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

The Acquisition Wing has also allowed Boeing offset credit for a super-expensive “high-altitude jet engine testing facility” for the DRDO, which has just one engine under development. Having finished high-altitude testing in Russia of its unsuccessful Kaveri engine, the DRDO is now developing a jet engine with French company, Snecma, which already has its own high-altitude testing facilities. But now, after the Acquisition Wing cleared these offsets, the DRDO will get an old toy in new wrapping and Boeing will get offset credit worth dozens of millions of dollars.

4. Agusta Westland AW-101 VVIP helicopters. This high profile $800 million (Rs 3700 crore) purchase of twelve AW-101 VVIP helicopters from Agusta Westland has violated multiple provisions of the Defence Procurement Procedure, according to MoD officials. The DPP does not permit the purchase of civilian aircraft, but the PMO pushed the MoD into the purchase, arguing that the IAF flies the helicopters. No relaxation was sought under para 75 of the DPP.

The offsets for the VVIP helicopter deal are especially irregular, say MoD officials. They include indirect offsets (i.e. non-defence expenses), and ineligible offsets, such as the expenses of holding project committee meetings. The MoD has ignored a request for comments.

MoD officials say that a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) audit would reveal that thousands of crore have already been lost in offsets that violate the ministry’s own rules and guidelines. So far, the CAG has never audited offsets, even though the MoD revealed in 2009 that Rs 8000 crore worth of offsets had already been finalised. That will rise to Rs 30,000 crore this year, assuming that Rs 35,000 are spent each year on foreign arms.

Foreign vendors have resisted offsets, ever since they were first imposed in the DPP of 2005. They have argued, in multiple presentations to the MoD, that Indian industry is incapable of manufacturing defence equipment in the quantities needed; and that tough offset conditions would stall India’s military modernisation programme. The MoD has responded by incrementally diluting offset norms. The latest DPP-2011 has permitted vendors to discharge offsets in the non-defence areas of civil aerospace, internal security and training.

Business Standard had reported last December on the MoD’s violation of defence offset rules, while okaying Lockheed Martin Corporation’s US $275 million (Rs 1266 crore) offset proposal, which related to the purchase of six C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft. Neither the MoD, nor Lockheed Martin, denied that report; but that contract still stands.

(Tomorrow: MoD set to dilute offset requirements further)


Who needs enemies when you've got babus in MoD. Truly shocking. It still won't wake up the saint Anthony into action. Sigh.

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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Singha » 01 Sep 2011 10:08

three comments -
- some of this is not just specific to MOD & lobbies but the weak posture in bargaining with the US of GOI itself + the {TINA, "take it or leave it"} attitude of certain vendors. for example C17 was a TINA case if we didnt want to wait another 10 yrs for AN124 line to reopen and reach full steam.

- though I dont know anything about wind tunnels, the 12 mach tunnel for a spacecraft is likely not to the same need as a 3 mach tunnel for a aeroplane. fabricating the tunnel itself may not be issue but the test and measurement that goes with it may be. ISRO was itself using facilities in germany and russia when it discovered why the GSLV failed due to issues in vacuum.

- kaveri or kaveri-snecma is not the end of story. to be a player at high table we will be doing more engines for sure, including cruise missile and hypersonic engines. so mach3 tunnel and "Gromov type stuff" is not a luxury, its a basic necessity. what may be trailing edge stuff for boeing or GE is cutting edge in the sino-pak context we have to deal with, so its ok as long as it meets our contextual needs and programs - nobody is going to be sharing darth vader tech or "bird of prey" aerodynamic data for sure.

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4474
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby gakakkad » 01 Sep 2011 15:50

^^^ The example of DDM's and a bunch of accountants jumping the guns . Why on earth would someone subject a C-17 or even fighter jet through Mach 12 wind tunnelling , when it is expected to fly much slowly. These jack mushrafs can only understand numbers and according to them 12>3 so an inferior wind tunnel equipment must have been bought. :eek: :eek: :-? :roll: .
No country has a 100% indigenous defence or space program.

The cryogenic engines for the American launch vehicle Atlas are Russian .Yet no one claimed a shady deal between Putin and Bush. (the same ones we got for GSLV )
More than half of the lab equipment of American space shuttle are sourced from Oirope and else where.
F-35 and Craptor both have components sourced from an Australian company now owned by Mahindra :D .


vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vic » 03 Sep 2011 10:36

Who needs enemies when you've got babus in MoD. Truly shocking. It still won't wake up the saint Anthony into action. Sigh.


Sometimes a competent corrupt is better than incompetent honest man. Foolish Friend vs intelligent enemy thingie

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1275
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Nikhil T » 03 Sep 2011 10:56

vic wrote:
Who needs enemies when you've got babus in MoD. Truly shocking. It still won't wake up the saint Anthony into action. Sigh.


Sometimes a competent corrupt is better than incompetent honest man. Foolish Friend vs intelligent enemy thingie


Very true, fits both MMS and Saint Anthony.

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby jai » 03 Sep 2011 14:12



I am beginning to get worried about aka'a fetish about his "clean" image - all these frequent statements that he will stop acquisitions on the first allegations of corruption.

He needs to put the forces need of getting the equipment they need on time before his own needs of a clean image.

He needs to understand that equipment denied due to delay by babus or any "ambush" allegations he allows as cause for induction delays would be a criminal neglect of his ministry's duty - IMHO that's what he should be more worried about.

By these statements he may be unwittingly passing on the wrong message to trouble mongers on how to stall Indian defense modernization.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8152
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Pratyush » 03 Sep 2011 14:28

^^^

The thing that I find interesting is that of all the major defense purchases being done by India. The 155 mm is the one afflicted with the ghost of corruption.

The same allegations are never made in case of any other project.

Also WRT, the statement from the saint. What makes people think that it is an unwitting statement. This seems to me a deliberate statement, telling others how to stall purchases by the MOD.

Were the allegations of corruption against ST or for that matter any other vendor ever proven.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Indranil » 03 Sep 2011 16:15

I am actually with Mr. Antony here ... he is setting the ballpark straight here ... we have the money ... compete fair and square and you will have a chance to win.

May be this is a hindrance for a couple of years ... but in the long run this is going to be helpful.

I feel the following reforms might be useful:
1. Ban the company from the tender where a misdeed is found and not forever ... there are only so many def. companies.
2. If there is only one competitor left in the fray and their product is worth buying, then please go FMS.

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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Singha » 03 Sep 2011 17:19

er, there is no FMS possible with non-US products. afaik nobody else has the FMS system in place where in you buy from their Govt and not the vendor or exim agency like rosboronexport.

in the past we have seen when only one vendor is left, the circus begins again and a new tender is floated.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7984
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Indranil » 03 Sep 2011 18:55

Singha wrote:er, there is no FMS possible with non-US products. afaik nobody else has the FMS system in place where in you buy from their Govt and not the vendor or exim agency like rosboronexport.

in the past we have seen when only one vendor is left, the circus begins again and a new tender is floated.

Thank you Singha ji for pointing out the mistake. I was wondering about it while typing ... but was lazy to check.

What I mean by FMS was avoid the circus and get the needful.


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 23 Sep 2011 12:50

Rosoboronexport says India remains Russia's largest strategic partner

India remains Russia's largest strategic partner in military-technical cooperation, the head of Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport said.

"India, China, Algeria, Vietnam and Venezuela are our leading partners," Anatoly Isaikin told the Kommersant daily, adding that India is "client No.1" for Russia "for years ahead."

Isaikin said Russia is taking part in 20 tenders in India, with which it has a military-technical cooperation agreement until 2020.

"Winning at least half of these tenders is huge luck for any state," he said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 30 Sep 2011 16:41

India tops weapons purchase table, outspends China

New York: India was the biggest buyer of conventional arms among developing nations in 2010 and had global defence giants lining up to capture $5.8 billion in new deals, said a report for the US Congress.

Worldwide arms sales in 2010 totalled $40.4 billion, a drop of 38 percent from the $65.2 billion in arms deals signed in 2009 and the lowest total since 2003, the Congressional study found.

India, which is growing its military muscle, was followed on a shopping spree last year by Taiwan, which sealed $2.7 billion in deals and Saudi Arabia which negotiated $2.2 billion in sales. Pakistan also received $2.2 billion worth of arms shipments, according to the report.

The 75-page report found that developing countries were the heaviest buyers in 2010 and the total value of arms transfer deals with developing nations last year was $30.7 billion, or 76.2 percent of worldwide deals.

The report said defence budgets in most developed countries, especially in Europe are undergoing massive cuts. In the early going of the financial crisis, defence budgets were under little pressure and indeed were often seen as part of a wider economic stimulus effort. But with the focus shifting to austerity and rebalancing books, that dynamic has changed.

As a result, developing nations continued to be the primary focus of foreign arms sales. US, Russian and European suppliers made a beeline for wealthy oil producing countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and high-octane economies like India, China, and South Korea.

“Worldwide weapons sales declined generally in 2010 in response to the constraints created by the tenuous state of the global economy,” wrote Richard F. Grimmett, a specialist in international security at the Congressional Research Service and author of the study.

“As new arms sales have become more difficult to conclude since the global recession began, competition among sellers has become increasingly intense,” said Grimmett, noting that suppliers were sweetening deals with flashy incentives, flexible financing and co-production agreements.

The report also listed Saudi Arabia, India and China as by far the heaviest buyers over the 2003-2010 period covered in the report. Over this eight-year period, Saudi Arabia was the developing world’s top recipient of arms shipments having received some $29 billion worth of weapons, followed by India at nearly $17 billion; China at $13.2 billion; Egypt at $12.1 billion and Israel at $10.3 billion.

America and Russia have been the dominant arms sellers to developing countries over the past eight years, according to the report. Moscow actually beat out Washington in the value of arms deals it inked between 2003 and 2006, only to be overtaken by Washington over the next four years.

In actual arms deliveries to developing countries, however, Washington has dominated its competitors over the past eight years, with about $60 billion worth of transfers, compared to Russia’s $38 billion. Britain delivered $19 billion, France $12.3 billion, China $11.6 billion, Germany $6.2 billion and Israel $3.5 billion.

The report noted that India has begun to modernise its old, Soviet-era military equipment and technology and diversify its weapons supply base. “In 2008, India purchased six C130J cargo aircraft from the United States. In 2010, the United Kingdom sold India 57 Hawk jet trainers for $1 billion. In 2010, Italy also sold India 12 AW101 helicopters,” it said.

“This pattern of Indian arms purchases indicates that it is likely that Russia will face strong new competition from other major weapons suppliers for the India arms market, and it can no longer be assured that India will consistently purchase its major combat systems.”

New Delhi is aware that many of its purchases are big-ticket items so under current Indian rules, foreign companies that win orders in excess of about $62 million, must draw at least 30 percent of that order from domestic suppliers or make a similarly sized investment within India, in what is known as an offset.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 02 Oct 2011 14:03

X Posted from the Indian Naval Discussion thread.

Economic Times reports the Indian Navy has signed a contract with GRSE for 8 LCU’s:

Navy signs Rs.2,170 crore deal for 8 assault vessels

PIB discloses that the LCU will displace 800 Tons and be propelled by twin diesels:

Navy Orders Eight Amphibious Assault Vessels

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 02 Oct 2011 15:14

X Posted from the Indian Naval Discussion thread.

Fincantieri built Deepak Class replenishment tanker INS Shakti commissioned:

INS Shakti inducted into Indian Navy

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 02 Oct 2011 15:29

X Posted from the Indian Coast Guard Discussion thread.

GRSE’s Rajbagan Yard launches 3 vessels namely Rajkiran, Rajkamal and Rajratan for the Indian Coast Guard.The vessels are the 3rd,4th and 5th of the class. The first two vessels in the class, Rajashree and Rajtarang were launched on March 21, 2011:

GRSE launches three ships

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

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby SriSri » 03 Oct 2011 13:09

IAF Chief: 214 FGFAs, HAL Tejas Clearance Delayed, MRCA Deliveries by 2014 and more..

2011-10-03 In a press conference in New Delhi, the Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne revealed the following:

* Indian Air Force has the funds for the MMRCA programme. There will be a realignment in committed liabilities and MMRCA deliveries should begin around by 2014.

* Final operational clearance for HAL LCA Tejas has been delayed by one year.

* Indian Air Force plans to induct the FGFA / PAK-FA as 166 single-seaters and 48 twin-seaters.

* The Kargil runway to operate all aircraft types, including all fighters and strategic lift aircraft. The Kargil airfield will be made fully operational for Lockheed Martin C-130J, Boeing C-17s and Ilyushin Il-76s.

* Indian Air Force will maintain 34 fighter squadrons. Squadron No. 17 will be phased out.

* First four Mil Mi-17-V5s delivered last week. More deliveries expected in the coming days. By March 2012, the Indian Air Force will have 25 units and they will be based at Suratgarh.

* Six additional Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules ordered. These will be based in the eastern theatre.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arun » 04 Oct 2011 21:16

X Posted from the Indian Naval Discussion thread.

Nerpa to be delivered to India around Mid-November:

Russia to lease troubled nuclear sub to India in November

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 05 Oct 2011 17:01

India to get delivery of INS Vikramaditya by Dec. 2012: Antony

India will get delivery of its much-awaited aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya from Russia by December next year, Defence Minister A.K. Antony has said, amid reports that Moscow will hand over the leased Nerpa nuclear submarine next month.

The vexed issue of the delivery of these frontline advanced weapon systems was resolved after crucial parleys between Antony and his Russian counterpart Anatoly Serdyukov on Tuesday night.

“We hope that the induction (of INS Vikramaditya) will take place, on schedule, by December 2012,” Mr. Antony told Indian reporters in Moscow, saying the Indian navy is “keenly awaiting the induction of the aircraft carrier.”

“We also hope that activities on the MiG-29K are completed to achieve synchronisation with the aircraft carrier,” said the Defence Minister, who co-chaired the 11th session of the India-Russia Intergovernmental Commission on military-technical cooperation (IRIGC-MTC) on Tuesday with Serdyukov.

“Our bilateral military-technical cooperation is now on the even track,” Mr. Antony declared as the two Defence Ministers dwelt at length on New Delhi’s concerns in delay in export clearance for the spare parts of weapon systems procured from Russia.

The supply of spare parts, which include ammunition for main Indian battle tanks like T-90 and SMERCH multi-barrel rocket system, has been a major issue as reports have said that Indian army formations are running short of critical war reserves.

“This (delayed export clearance) has been affecting supplies of defence equipment and spares,” Mr. Antony, who is here on a three-day visit, said.


The Defence Minister skirted a question about the delivery of Akula II class nuclear attack subamrine, but the local media here said the Nerpa nuclear submarine to be leased to India for 10 years, will be delivered next month.

With the delivery of the Nerpa, Indian navy would be deploying a nuclear submarine after a gap of more than two decades. New Delhi is also simultaneously carrying out tests of its indigenous nuclear submarine INS Arihant.

Mr. Antony said that concerns over delay in some naval projects like the construction of three Talwar Class stealth frigates were expressed during the meeting and the Russian side has assured to address them.

The minister, however, said “distinct improvements” have taken place in the pace of progress of many critical projects in the last one year.

Mr. Antony expressed satisfaction at the “wholesome outcome” of Moscow parleys.

“The project for joint development and production of the Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, BrahMos missile system, licensed production in India of T-90 tanks and SU-30 MKI aircraft are proud examples of our strong relationship.

“We are sure that the success of these projects would be models for the implementation of several other projects of mutual interest,” he said, describing the defence relationship with Russia as unique.

Russia is the only country with which India has a long-term programme of military-technical cooperation till 2020.

“Where in a foreign visit, except in Moscow, you see the Defence Minister travelling with Defence Secretary and Secretary Defence Production,” Mr. Antony said, impressing on the scope and significance of defence cooperation with Russia.

“The area of cooperation is so wide that issues of different kinds are normal. We have our concerns and they have their concerns. But there is a desire on both sides to address them,” he said.


srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4402
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srai » 05 Oct 2011 23:44

sum wrote:
to modify a popular saying: a gun in the hand is worth two in the bush!

He he...true words..

Slight modification could be:
"a gun in the hand is worth two in the manufacturers factory waiting to be delivered"!


More appropriate would be:
"a gun in the hand is worth two in the babus' desk waiting to be signed" :D

OR

"a gun in the hand is worth two in the IA's never ending gun trials & competition" :D

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby krishnan » 06 Oct 2011 00:15

"A gun in the hands of a soldier ......."

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vic » 07 Oct 2011 09:33

SriSri wrote:IAF Chief: 214 FGFAs, HAL Tejas Clearance Delayed, MRCA Deliveries by 2014 and more..

2011-10-03 In a press conference in New Delhi, the Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne revealed the following:

* Indian Air Force has the funds for the MMRCA programme. There will be a realignment in committed liabilities and MMRCA deliveries should begin around by 2014.

* Final operational clearance for HAL LCA Tejas has been delayed by one year.

* Indian Air Force plans to induct the FGFA / PAK-FA as 166 single-seaters and 48 twin-seaters.

* The Kargil runway to operate all aircraft types, including all fighters and strategic lift aircraft. The Kargil airfield will be made fully operational for Lockheed Martin C-130J, Boeing C-17s and Ilyushin Il-76s.

* Indian Air Force will maintain 34 fighter squadrons. Squadron No. 17 will be phased out.

* First four Mil Mi-17-V5s delivered last week. More deliveries expected in the coming days. By March 2012, the Indian Air Force will have 25 units and they will be based at Suratgarh.

* Six additional Lockheed Martin C-130J Hercules ordered. These will be based in the eastern theatre.



I would have preferred that we should develop infrasturture for manufactering around 300 PAKFAs rather than give piece meal orders of 214 and then additional orders

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Shrinivasan » 07 Oct 2011 19:48

vic wrote:I would have preferred that we should develop infrasturture for manufactering around 300 PAKFAs rather than give piece meal orders of 214 and then additional orders
AN order of 214 PAK-FA is by no means piecemeal, this is a huge order considering the fact that our original order for SU30s were just 40 and we have only got 140 odd SU30s after a decade of building them (plus the original 18 which we returned to the Bear).

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Cybaru » 07 Oct 2011 20:37

SriSri wrote:
[b]* Indian Air Force plans to induct the FGFA / PAK-FA as 166 single-seaters and 48 twin-seaters.

[/b]


Wait, when did this change, weren't we looking to add more twin seaters versus single seaters ? I thought DRDO/IAF was funding money to develop the twin seater re-config and bigger engine to meet the twin seater requirement.


vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vic » 08 Oct 2011 15:52

We are looking at 272 Su-30MKIs. On this comparision alone, we should plan for 300PAKFAs


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests