Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

subhamoy.das · Post by **subhamoy.das** » 16 Apr 2016 19:48

This will be good for make in india and IA will be forced to do more with little and order local equipment. Good move by NAMO. Kill 2 birds in one shot.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 16 Apr 2016 20:06

srai wrote:^^^

And the IA is raising more manpower for its Mountain Strike Corps and other divisions/brigades ... some news quote a figure high as 90,000 personnel. Imagine the pressure on its defense budget for the revenue portion in the near future. There would be hardly anything left for capital purchases.

Read this http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indi ... 04583.html

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 17 Apr 2016 09:42

Around Rs. 20,000 crore is returned each year because our Jairnals want to import stuff which does not exist in this Universe and RM also found USD 3 Billion of loose change. Hence, Govt got this year covered, let's see what happens next year.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 17 Apr 2016 18:21

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 17 Apr 2016 19:54

Dassault Rafale Fighter Production process

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Apr 2016 12:08

Miracle of Modi's Make in india project

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 27 Apr 2016 21:37

Simko Herbal Shampoo!

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Apr 2016 21:26

X Posted.

Austin wrote:Russia, India Sign Agreement on S-400 Defense Systems Deliveries - Official

New Delhi and Moscow have signed an agreement on the deliveries of S-400 air defense systems, Indian Minister of State Rao Inderjit Singh said Wednesday.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – The S-400 is Russia's next-generation air defense system, carrying three different types of missiles capable of destroying aerial targets at short-to-extremely long range. It is capable of tracking and destroying all existing aerial targets, including ballistics and cruise missiles.

"We've signed that agreement," Singh said.

When asked to give a date on the first deliveries of the defense system, Singh said, "It's hard to say, but as soon as possible."

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/2016042 ... z472rcd4N0

Rostec, the manufacturer of the S-400 has bluntly stated that no contract for delivering the S-400 has been signed. Possibly a repeat of the Dassault Rafale deal is happening with Rao Inderjit Singh here playing the role of the BJP Party in that case:

Russian official refutes reports on signed contract for S-400 supplies to India

srai · Post by **srai** » 30 Apr 2016 05:36

^^^

Still don't quite understand the need for S-400 at this point. By the time it comes, ABM (Phase-1), MRSAM and Akash Mk.2 would also be coming online. Lots of duplication for little gain. There are so many other acquisition/modernization programs that require a higher priority funding, IMO.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 30 Apr 2016 09:36

^ indeed there is no need for an abm type, which the s400 provides redundantly considering the pad, aad combo; however the s400 is in a class of its own when it comes too taking out maneuverable targets at long range. . Mod under mp is setting up the pieces in case there is an issue in the next few years. Deliveries should begin within 18 months our so, possibly earlier.
In case of a two front war, these assets will certainly be useful in keeping the western neighbor in check giving the iaf some flexibility to move against the north.

Jmho

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Apr 2016 10:30

^^ Seems more like the case of GOI want to keep the deal under wraps and MOD State either deliberately or mistakenly spelt it out , Since Rostec is denying it more like the latter , They even denied the Akula deal for a long time.

S-400 to me more likely to primary deal with all type of air breathing targets and secondary Ballistic ones , Having something that can hit you at 380 km can put a lot of rethinking in adversary planning and since SAM are layered and mobile and they fight in their own turf likely with 600-800 km BADZ provided by Air Cover , Any adversary that still plans to attack VP/VT which ofcourse they will do will have to face a lot of attrition.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 02 May 2016 04:39

Defence ministry lists out 23 projects for private industry

NEW DELHI: In a first, the defence ministry has listed out 23 major projects from the three armed forces— from UAVs, glide bombs to underwater systems and tank engines — it will earmark for the Indian companies under the Make in India category.

The list, which has recently been drawn up by the ministry in consultation with the three armed forces, for the first time shares details of the requirements in the coming years as well the schedule for acquisition, things that were shrouded in secrecy in the past. The new-found openness is being driven by defence minister Manohar Parrikar who has stepped up outreach and is in regular touch with industry bodies and major companies indulged in military manufacturing.

Among the projects that have been listed out are 125mm smooth bore gun barrel for battle tanks, targets for torpedo firing, advance pilotless target aircraft, mine layers and diesel engines for naval boats. Besides technical specifications of the equipment, the ministry has also specified quantities to make it easier for the industry to plan investments into technology. For example, the IAF has listed its requirement of long-range glide bombs thousand per year and it wants to acquire them at the earliest. Similarly, the Army wants to annually acquire 5 pilotless target aircraft starting next 2-3 years.

"Interested Indian companies are requested to carry out preliminary assessment regarding their technical capability to undertake these projects and economic viability of the project," a ministry of defence concept note reads.

srai · Post by **srai** » 02 May 2016 07:08

1000 Glide Bombs per year!!! Now we are talking

Kakkaji wrote:Defence ministry lists out 23 projects for private industry

...

Among the projects that have been listed out are 125mm smooth bore gun barrel for battle tanks, targets for torpedo firing, advance pilotless target aircraft, mine layers and diesel engines for naval boats. Besides technical specifications of the equipment, the ministry has also specified quantities to make it easier for the industry to plan investments into technology. For example, the IAF has listed its requirement of long-range glide bombs thousand per year and it wants to acquire them at the earliest. Similarly, the Army wants to annually acquire 5 pilotless target aircraft starting next 2-3 years.

"Interested Indian companies are requested to carry out preliminary assessment regarding their technical capability to undertake these projects and economic viability of the project," a ministry of defence concept note reads.

arun · Post by **arun** » 03 May 2016 10:11

X Posted from the "Indian Military Aviation" thread.

Kartik wrote:India to get Longbow radars for Apaches

And so of the 22 AH-64E Apache on order, a little more than half the Apache’s ie: 12 will be Longbow equipped.

Meanwhile for good order the Lockheed Martin press release informing order for the Longbow:

India becomes 11th International Customer for LONGBOW LLC’s Apache Radar

ORLANDO, Fla., April 30, 2016 – The U.S. Army awarded LONGBOW Limited Liability Company (LLC) a $57.1 million foreign military sale contract to provide the Indian Air Force with LONGBOW Fire Control Radar (FCR) systems for their new Apache AH-64E helicopters. LONGBOW LLC is a joint venture of Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) and Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC).

Under this contract, $57.1 million is obligated to LONGBOW LLC with a total value not to exceed $116.7 million. The contract covers the production of 12 LONGBOW FCR systems and spares for India. Production will extend through early 2019 at Lockheed Martin’s Orlando and Ocala, Florida, facilities and at Northrop Grumman’s Baltimore facility.

“With LONGBOW FCR, the Indian Air Force will receive a rapid all-weather targeting capability,” said Jim Messina, LONGBOW LLC president and director of LONGBOW programs at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. “The FCR’s air over-watch mode provides aircrews with 360-degree situational awareness, improving survivability and mission success.”

“Our highly reliable LONGBOW FCR has been repeatedly proven in combat, protecting warfighters around the globe at an affordable cost,” said Ike Song, vice president, Mission Solutions, Northrop Grumman’s Land & Avionics C4ISR Division.

For more than a decade, the LONGBOW FCR has enabled Apache aircrews to automatically detect, locate, classify and prioritize targets. It enables rapid, multi-target engagement in all weather, over multiple terrains and through battlefield obscurants.

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 03 May 2016 13:20

arun wrote:X Posted from the "Indian Military Aviation" thread.

arun, this is one forum. There's no need to advertise the product by posting the same news in several threads.

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 May 2016 09:15

JTull wrote:
arun wrote:X Posted from the "Indian Military Aviation" thread.
arun, this is one forum. There's no need to advertise the product by posting the same news in several threads.

JTull, This is a moderated forum. There’s no need for advertising one’s own self by arrogating mantle of the Moderator and interpreting rules as mood suits.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 05 May 2016 06:33

Tata Power scrip's rise anticipates major army order

...
Army sources say the HHTIs chosen by the BSF are superior to, and significantly cheaper than, the equipment it has been evaluating since 2010. The department of defence production (DDP) has been pushing the army to buy the HHTI offered by the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), and built by Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL), both work under the DDP.

The DRDO-BEL devices use Israeli infra-red (IR) tubes, with a 320 x 280 format, and a 20 um pixel pitch. In comparison, the Tata Power device, which the BSF has selected, uses a 640 x 480 format, with a 15 um pixel pitch. Like common digital cameras, a smaller pixel size enables the more detailed information to be packed into the same size of photograph.
..
Tata Power SED sources say their breakthrough stems from indigenising the data fusion algorithm, obtaining sharper, clearer images of the surveillance area.

In the BSF trials, Tata Power competed against two other offerings. One, by a highly-regarded Indian imaging start-up called Tonbo Imaging, which provided high-quality images but failed on the radio equipment needed to transmit it. The other competitor, BEL, provided adequate radio equipment, since it builds most of the army's requirement of radios, but its HHTI failed to develop a passable image.
...
Tata Power's HHTIs incorporate IR tubes from French company, Sofradir. However, company sources indicate that, if it wins the large army order, there will be a compelling business case for a joint venture with Sofradir to manufacture IR tubes in India.
...

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 05 May 2016 22:32

Two competing screwdriver technologies.

srai · Post by **srai** » 08 May 2016 17:57

...
Tata Power's HHTIs incorporate IR tubes from French company, Sofradir. However, company sources indicate that, if it wins the large army order, there will be a compelling business case for a joint venture with Sofradir to manufacture IR tubes in India.
...

How many times the IA has been told exactly that for Arjun MBT regarding its engines and other items but to no avail? Let's see if the IA will start to change.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 08 May 2016 18:52

TATAs are trying to get into NVG and HHTI. As is obvious, there is competition between who will do the screwdrivergiri, TATAs or BEL? This is fit case for Govt to step in provide seed capital as the project cost for setting up production line for sensors/detectors of NVG and HHTI is around USD 1 Billion dollars.

My personal estimate is that we need around 40,000 cooled thermal detectors for military, para military and other security forces for use with HHTI whether the are hand held, or vehicle mounted, or based on air-sea platform. Estimated cost at the rate of Rs 25 lakhs per detector means around Rs. 10,000 crore, say, spread over 5 years.

Similarly personal estimate is that we need around 100,000 uncooled thermal detectors for military, para military and other security forces for use with HHTI whether the are hand held, or vehicle mounted, or based on air-sea platform and as sensors of missiles. Estimated cost at the rate of Rs 5 lakhs per detector means around Rs. 5,000 crore, say, spread over 5 years.

I feel that we need around 400,000 NVG devices for military, para military and other security forces . Estimated cost at the rate of Rs 1 lakhs per sensor tube means around Rs. 4,000 crore, say, spread over 5 years.

Estimated Initial Investment in production line Rs. 5,000 crores.

Therefore, to conqueror the night, we need to spend around Rs. 5,000 crore per annum which is way better spend and in any case should be prioritized over things like Rafales.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 09 May 2016 15:07

From torpedoes to missiles and radars, a Finmeccanica boycott would cast a long shadow over defence procurement.

Blacklist blues

Suresh S · Post by **Suresh S** » 09 May 2016 19:04

I urge everyone on this forum to watch the victory day parade in moscow , it is going on right now live on RT. Even if someone is stone hearted it will melt your heart.

srai · Post by **srai** » 10 May 2016 00:06

Austin wrote:From torpedoes to missiles and radars, a Finmeccanica boycott would cast a long shadow over defence procurement.

Blacklist blues

What's with the separate deal for weapon systems? It should all have been part of a package from the get go. It's a pattern repeated in other deals as well. Doesn't make sense other than more opportunities for bribes.

It seems every major/minor Indian import defense deal have bribery involved. Says a lot about the system itself. Most of these deals have become "too big to fail" or "too critical to fail".

All future import defense deals need to be G-2-G like the US FMS and should be comprehensive under one contract--platforms, weapons, training, infrastructure and 10-year support contract. No more dealing directly with individual companies for piecemeal contracts.

srin · Post by **srin** » 10 May 2016 06:50

srai wrote:
Austin wrote:From torpedoes to missiles and radars, a Finmeccanica boycott would cast a long shadow over defence procurement.

Blacklist blues
All future import defense deals need to be G-2-G like the US FMS and should be comprehensive under one contract--platforms, weapons, training, infrastructure and 10-year support contract. No more dealing directly with individual companies for piecemeal contracts.

The problem with G2G is knowing the fair price. For instance, what is the fair price of U214 or S400?
FMS doesn't have this problem because the price is anchored to the price that US armed forces got. Unless all the G2Gs are similar to FMS, it would be hard to get cheap imports.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 May 2016 08:59

G2G is just a government to government transaction which assures integrity of contract and indemnified by government , Price discovery is made via bidding be that be formal or informal types.

Fair price can vary from country to country , what HAL makes and sells to MOD would be a fair price from GOI pov or FMS does to US Government but HAL might be happy to work with lower profit margin and cost of production/materials might be lower in India so would be R&D cost but Boeing might want a bigger profit and the cost of production in US and material cost , R&D cost etc will be much higher.

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 10 May 2016 13:49

The one problem with the FMS route is delivery timeline particularly with newer systems. Non FMS customers have more flexibility in adjusting the requirements and getting stuff delivered ahead of the regular cycle. An added benefit of FMS is that it extends to beyond just buying systems that the US buys or operates. They have mechanisms built into it the system if a nation wants something the US does not operate, but wants it to be built and tested DOD standards using their extensive test infrastructure. ME nations do this a lot with their bespoke F-16's and F-15's etc.

Also, there are Offset clauses that will obviously involve breaking up the deal into an FMS and commercial component since the costs of a deal with OFFSETS is higher than a pure FMS one. I believe the AH-64/Chinook, and the C-130/C17 deal had commercial components to it to accommodate the offset clauses. There are instances where an OEM actually offers significantly lower commercial cost for the sake of business continuity. I remember in the South Korea fighter competition Boeing put together a commercial deal to possibly sell their F-15's at very low prices and kept the weapons packages and engines as FMS. In the end it all depends what you are buying. If it is something that is operational, and mature and a firm fixed price FMS contract then yes its much less of a headache, but if its something new and negotiated under an FMS fixed cost incentive then its obviously not as straight forward.

Fair price can vary from country to country , what HAL makes and sells to MOD would be a fair price from GOI pov or FMS does to US Government but HAL might be happy to work with lower profit margin and cost of production/materials might be lower in India so would be R&D cost but Boeing might want a bigger profit and the cost of production in US and material cost , R&D cost etc will be much higher.

That really doesn't apply to the deals we see typically. A few dozen Apache's, a few C17's, 36 Rafales etc etc. In each cases, moving the end-end production to HAL would have resulted in higher overall cost (of course there are benefits to doing so but lower cost for small orders isn't one of them). These lines operate with economies of scale and this trickles down to the component level suppliers as well. However, you are correct there is and will be a difference in the economics of making a defense product in India and the US and one really needs to understand this and promote this advantage to obtain greater MII work. When you get into R&D and S&T costs, those really are economy dependent so one must adjust when comparing X to Y. With capacity and cost it all depends upon system maturity and what product you look at. The F-18E/F program's unit level fly-away cost average for the production was between $60-65 Million ($BY-2000). Thats below $2000 per pound and very competitive given the size of the US economy and the aerospace labor market (supply, demand and wages). Raw material costs remain largely the same unless one is subsidizing these things for aerospace and defense usage.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 May 2016 15:52

brar_w wrote:those really are economy dependent so one must adjust when comparing X to Y. With capacity and cost it all depends upon system maturity and what product you look at. The F-18E/F program's unit level fly-away cost average for the production was between $60-65 Million ($BY-2000). Thats below $2000 per pound and very competitive given the size of the US economy and the aerospace labor market (supply, demand and wages). Raw material costs remain largely the same unless one is subsidizing these things for aerospace and defense usage.

HAL makes MKI with most locally produced parts at $60 million MOD price , the Russians do the same at $40 million or so. So you cant really have a fair pricing in True Sense as some one will have to sell at lower cost or make better profit that the other. Government Companies have a mandate to limit its profit while Private companies are responsible to its share holder

Raw material cost will also vary depending on if its procured locally or imported , the same goes for labour cost , electricity cost etc hence its not really possible to come up with a fair pricing for products developed in different country , Reason why Industry have moved to China as its cheaper to build the same good and export from China compared to do the same in US and same is case with India where its cheaper to build.

The price discovery is any way done during competitive bidding process , the G2G just ensures the integrity of the contract and sovereign guarantee provided by state.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 23 May 2016 05:06

India and Oman sign four key defence agreements

New Delhi: India and Oman on Sunday vowed to deepen bilateral defence ties as the two countries signed four key agreements in the critical sector with focus on enhancing military cooperation.

The agreements on defence cooperation, marine crime prevention, maritime issues and flight safety information exchange was signed following the maiden visit of Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar to Oman, considered one of the closest country in the middle east.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 07 Jun 2016 06:02

Army goes to industry directly after tweak in purchase policy

The Indian Army is now directly engaging with industry after the defence ministry revised the procurement procedure to encourage indigenous players to take up contracts.

The army, through a series of direct industry programmes, wants Indian firms to come up with futuristic technologies and products to cater to the army's needs.

"The needs of the army are two-fold. We want to procure defence equipment and products which cater to the present needs indigenously, but also want the Indian companies to develop futuristic technologies for our needs," Lt General Subrata Saha, deputy chief of army staff of planning and systems, said here on the sidelines of a conference.

The revision in the Defence Procurement Procedure 2016 (DPP 2016), in line with the government's Make in India initiative, encourages indigenous design, development and production of defence-related equipment, he said. The army itself needs to engage directly with the industry to make them understand about the immense monetary potential for the Indian industry.

A crucial revision under the DPP 2016 is classification of Make-1 and Make-2 companies. While Make-1 firms will receive 90 per cent funding from the government to take up critical technological research and develop products (requiring larger infrastructure), Make-2 firms will have to get funding and make products for import substitution.

This category of companies will cater to the current needs of the army.

The DPP also has provisions to reimburse the balance 10 per cent self-funding for Make-1 companies if the request for proposal (RFP) for the product is not issued within two years of the successful development of the prototype.

"We have good capability at home to develop the necessary equipment. The ball has started rolling and there is room for further development. Products designed, developed and manufactured in India will have the highest priority," he said.

Asked if this provision will encourage more government investment in the larger companies having joint ventures with foreign defence players, Saha said there was a threshold limit which will promote smaller companies where the larger ones would not be able to bid.

To encourage the micro-small-medium enterprises, projects with an estimated cost of development of up to Rs 10 crore under Make-1 and Rs 3 crore under the Make-2 category will be earmarked exclusively for them.

The army has been using industry associations' interfaces to connect directly with the industry. Besides, it is also on the lookout for collaboration with various IITs to carry out research and product development. "On one hand, we need products while on the other we are in need of integrated solutions.

We are letting the industry know about these," he added.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 15 Jun 2016 02:49

[url=http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... 1394/India Explores Alternative to Italian Weaponry in Germany.[/url]

After virtually freezing all defense business with Italy, the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has begun exploring alternatives to meet its dire weaponry requirements.

In an unexpected move, MoD has dispatched Defence Secretary G Mohan Kumar to Germany to actively participate in the 10th annual India-German Higher Defense Committee Meeting, according to an MoD source. The event began June 13 and concludes Wednesday.

“We are exploring averting — from torpedoes, network-centric capabilities, naval gun solutions to submarines — with Germany," the source said. "We will only know the outcome when Kumar returns later this week."

The source said India could either buy weaponry from Germany through a government-to-government deal or via a single-vendor source.

MoD spokesman Nitin Wakankar confirmed to Defense News earlier this month that the ministry had decided to cancel a more than $200 million deal with WASS, a subsidiary of Leonardo-Finmeccanica of Italy, for the purchase of 98 Black Shark torpedoes for Scorpene submarines. The cancellation process is still taking place.

India is instead looking at buying SeaHake torpedoes from Atlas Elektronik of Germany, but details of a potential deal were not made available.

India also wants to buy six conventional submarines with air-independent propulsion technology under the Make in India policy. ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems of Germany, which produces Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft-class (HDW) submarines, is in talks with India's MoD.

India also procured two and licensed two HDW-class diesel electric submarines in the 1980s.

“In addition, India is also quietly exploring possibilities of building six nuclear submarines with German help at a cost of $10 billion. It is a strategic program and we cannot reveal details," the MoD source said.

India and Germany signed an agreement on bilateral defense cooperation in September 2006. The agreement envisages that the main forum for guiding the defense relations between India and Germany will be the High Defence Committee, which meets once a year.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Jun 2016 12:13

http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns ... 346825.ece

Consider the monies at stake. Let’s take the example of Brazil, our BRICS partner. For 36 Rafales the acquisition cost, according to Brazilian media, was $8.2 billion plus an additional $4 billion for short-period maintenance contracts, amounting to nearly $340 million per aircraft in this package and roughly $209 million as the price tag for a single Rafale without maintenance support. Brazil insisted on transfer of technology (ToT) and was told it had to pay a whole lot extra for it, as also for the weapons for its Rafales. But the Brazilian air force had doubts about the quality of the AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar enabling the aircraft to switch quickly from air-to-air to air-to-ground mode in flight, and about the helmet-mounted heads-up-display. Too high a price and too many problems convinced the government of president Dilma Rousseff that the Rafale was not worth the trouble or the money and junked the deal, opting for the Swedish Gripen NG instead.

The bureaucratic interest of the IAF prompts it to exaggerate wrong threats and talk of declining fighter assets. But it will not tell the defence minister about the logistics hell routinely faced by frontline squadrons in operations owing to the mindboggling diversity of combat aircraft in its inventory, a problem only the Rafale acquisition will exacerbate and, hence, about the urgent need to rationalise the force structure, ideally to Su-30s, the indigenous Tejas Mk-1 for short-range air defence, Tejas Mk-II as MMRCA, and the Su-50 PAK FA as fifth-generation fighter. Nor will the department of defence production officials disclose to Jaitley that the ToT provisions in arms contracts are a fraudulent farce because, while the foreign suppliers pocket billions of dollars, no core technologies, such as source codes (millions of lines of software) and flight control laws, are ever transferred. And that the local defence industry monopolised by defence public sector units (DPSUs) is incapable of absorbing and innovating even such technology as is, in fact, relayed to it because it only assembles aircraft from imported kits.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /74415116/

Saab is in dialogue with a number of Brazilian defense-engineering companies, including Embraer and Akaer, to finalize production arrangements and identify possible new areas for cooperation and capital investments in Brazil. It is expected that about 29 of the 36 aircraft on order will be fully manufactured in Brazil.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 15 Jun 2016 12:20

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a ... 919437.ece

Interestingly, five of the same aircraft that participated in the Indian MMRCA competition were simultaneously bid for in a similar Brazilian tender. The head of the Brazilian Air Force (FAB), Juniti Saito, has recently stated that they chose the Swedish Gripen NG after an exhaustive evaluation emphasised its performance, the degree of technology transfer and price. The FAB estimated that it would cost $4,000 per flying hour rather than about $14,000 for the heavier Rafale. SAAB quoted $4.5 billion as the initial acquisition cost of the Gripens plus $1.5 billion for maintenance support over 30 years while the Rafale was $8.2 billion, plus $4 billion.

The Rafale’s quoted unit cost was thus 82 per cent more than that for the single-engined Gripen while the Brazilians estimated that the Rafale’s two engines and expensive maintenance would make it cost a full 250 per cent more to keep in the air.

The largely Indian designed and developed Tejas multirole light combat aircraft (LCA) is not in the same class as the Rafale, but it is far more capable than the MiG-21s it was designed to replace. Modern radar and ground targeting systems, both coupled to a helmet-mounted display and sight, confer superb target acquisition and missile launch capability. Advanced beyond visual range and close combat missiles, along with precision guided munitions, make it more potent than the more powerful MiG-23s and -27s. Even if unit prices rise to $30 million by the time it attains full operational capability, 126 Tejas fighters would still cost well under $4 billion, or a fifth of an equal number of Rafales.

The IAF has been far more demanding of the Tejas than it has been with respect to the MMRCA contenders whether on the hot and high airstrip at Leh or during Jaisalmer’s dusty summers. The service also seems to have forgotten that the Mirage 2000 was armed only with a cannon for three years after it entered service; largely ineffectual during the dangerous “Operation Brass Tacks” of 1986-87.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jun 2016 13:44

The largely Indian designed and developed Tejas multirole light combat aircraft (LCA) is not in the same class as the Rafale, but it is far more capable than the MiG-21s it was designed to replace. Modern radar and ground targeting systems, both coupled to a helmet-mounted display and sight, confer superb target acquisition and missile launch capability. Advanced beyond visual range and close combat missiles, along with precision guided munitions, make it more potent than the more powerful MiG-23s and -27s.

Exactly the point I've made in the past as have select IAF commentators who evaluated the aircraft.
The one thing "missing" was an EW pod which can be retrofitted, especially the EL/L-8222 - some of which should be available for even the first 20 odd Mk1 aircraft and compatibility challenges should be less (with Elta involved)

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 Jun 2016 15:13

Karan M wrote:The largely Indian designed and developed Tejas multirole light combat aircraft (LCA) is not in the same class as the Rafale, but it is far more capable than the MiG-21s it was designed to replace. Modern radar and ground targeting systems, both coupled to a helmet-mounted display and sight, confer superb target acquisition and missile launch capability. Advanced beyond visual range and close combat missiles, along with precision guided munitions, make it more potent than the more powerful MiG-23s and -27s.

Exactly the point I've made in the past as have select IAF commentators who evaluated the aircraft.
The one thing "missing" was an EW pod which can be retrofitted, especially the EL/L-8222 - some of which should be available for even the first 20 odd Mk1 aircraft and compatibility challenges should be less (with Elta involved)

BR had a stall during the earlier AEs, eons ago maybe 2003/2005 at Bangalore. A number of "interesting" people would visit us. We were discussing about LCA (no Tejas) at that time with some of the test pilots. At that time one of the pilots who had flown LCA regularly saiud that it is any thing but "light". He said that LCA can carry a heavier armament load than MiG 27 and much more than a match to MiG 21 in air-to-air combat. Considering the various new armament tried/ to be tried, Tejas would be a mean beats by now, not the one to be met alone on a lonely road at night.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Jun 2016 15:59

Thanks Kersi! Interesting details as always.
Once FOC'ed, the Tejas will be a capable bird, no doubt.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 15 Jun 2016 16:26

But paki Bunder is super powerful like superman, iron man, batman, and Jihadi man combined. What to do?

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 15 Jun 2016 17:53

Yagnasri wrote:But paki Bunder is super powerful like superman, iron man, batman, and Jihadi man combined. What to do?

MiG 21FL is good enough to bring it down !!!!!!!

srin · Post by **srin** » 16 Jun 2016 15:29

Vipul wrote:[url=http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... 1394/India Explores Alternative to Italian Weaponry in Germany.[/url]

“In addition, India is also quietly exploring possibilities of building six nuclear submarines with German help at a cost of $10 billion. It is a strategic program and we cannot reveal details," the MoD source said.

I wonder which specific nuclear sub construction expertise that Germany has that we want to use ...

Kersi D · Post by **Kersi D** » 16 Jun 2016 15:47

srin wrote: “In addition, India is also quietly exploring possibilities of building six nuclear submarines with German help at a cost of $10 billion. It is a strategic program and we cannot reveal details," the MoD source said.

[/quote]

I wonder which specific nuclear sub construction expertise that Germany has that we want to use ...[/quote]

Could be related to the non nuclear part of the sub e.g. pressure hull material and welding, diesel engines - MTU, electric motors PERMASYN motors. PEM fuel cells for back-up, sonars, torpedo launchers etc.

Everything non nuclear can be got from Germany, if thye give us the 1500 hp EURO diesel engine for Arjun !!!!!

member_29378 · Post by **member_29378** » 17 Jun 2016 08:22

http://www.janes.com/article/61483/indi ... it-systems

India's Ministry of Defence (MoD) is finalising price negotiations with Israel's Elbit Systems for 747 12.7 mm naval remote weapon stations (RWSs), worth an estimated INR19 billion (USD282 million), for the Indian Navy (IN) and Indian Coast Guard (ICG).

Industry sources said the MoD is expected to complete the RWS deal, which it quoted was "substantially lower" than that of British rival EMDigital.

The deal includes importing 136 RWSs with electro-optic modules off the shelf and the remaining 611 systems in kit form for assembly by the state-run Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) unit at Tiruchirappalli, southern India. Ammunition for the 12.7 mm RWSs would be manufactured at the OFB plant in Kolkata.