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.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3151
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kakkaji » 13 May 2018 07:55

A familiar story (of corruption) is repeated, and another procurement, this time for the Coast Guard, is in jeopardy: :(

Airbus whistleblower's graft leak scuppered chopper deal?

The Economic Times on Friday reported that Airbus Group has informed the Defence Ministry of an internal investigation into the allegations of the whistleblower over the tender for 14 twin-engine EC725 helicopters for the Indian Coast Guard. The deal is estimated to be worth Rs 2,000 crore.

According to the report, what has alarmed the government is that the whistleblower's letter making the allegation of graft had several highly classified documents attached to it

According to the ET report, the anonymous letter sent to the Defence Ministry alleged that "benchmarking norms were changed and spare engine price calculations were hidden to favour Airbus and named three top coast guard officers as beneficiaries


In several cases now, classified Government documents have been found in possession of vendors and arms agents. Hard to stop the leaks, if the top officials themselves leak them out. :evil:

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1137
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Vips » 13 May 2018 18:36

Unless and until you have an anti-graft fanatic and out and out nationalisic official/s making acquisition decision, you simply cannot stop this.For a soon retiring official lure of few tens of crores is hard to resist.

Ankit Desai
BRFite
Posts: 467
Joined: 05 May 2006 21:28
Location: Gujarat

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Ankit Desai » 14 May 2018 00:12

Indian Army’s new Rs 15,000 crore ammunition production project is a big leg up for Make In India

After years of deliberations, the Army has finalised a mega Rs 15,000-crore project under which a range of ammunition for its critical weapons and tanks will be produced indigenously to overcome long delays in imports and address the problem of a dwindling stockpile. Official sources told PTI that 11 private firms would be involved in the ambitious project, the implementation of which is being monitored by the top brass of the Army and the Defence Ministry. The immediate aim of the closely guarded project — said to be the biggest ever initiative for the indigenisation of ammunition — is to create an inventory for all major weapons to enable the forces to fight a 30-day war while the long-term objective is to cut dependence on imports.

“The overall cost of the project has been pegged at Rs 15,000 crore and we have set a specific target for the next 10 years in terms of the volume of ammunition to be produced,” a senior government official involved in the project said, refusing to elaborate further. Initially, ammunition for a range of rockets, air defence system, artillery guns, infantry combat vehicles, grenade launchers and various other field weapons would be produced under “strict timelines”, a source said.

The production targets would be revised based on the result of the first phase of the implementation of the programme. The sources indicated the broad contours of the project were discussed at a conference of the Army’s top commanders here last month. The initiative is seen as the first serious attempt by the government to address growing concerns voiced over the last many years by defence forces over the fast dwindling stockpile of key ammunition when China has been significantly ramping up its military capability, an issue that has been discussed by successive governments.

Army Chief General Bipin Rawat has been pushing for fast tracking the procurement of weapons and ammunition for the world’s second largest standing Army, considering the evolving security threats in the region. “The indigenisation of the ammunition project will be biggest such programme in decades,” said the official. In July last year, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG), in a report tabled in Parliament, said a stock of only 61 types of ammunition out of 152 varieties was available, and these would only last for 10 days in the event of a war.

According to laid down security protocol, the stockpile should be adequate for a month-long war. The sources said long delays in negotiations and subsequent procedural hurdles in the import of ammunition had adversely impacted the country’s defence preparedness and that was why the indigenisation programme had been initiated.

Last year, the government had empowered the Army to directly procure ammunition and spares for 10 types of weapon systems and equipment after an internal review found the optimum level of “war stores” was not being maintained. Considering the Army’s demand, the government has already finalised one of the biggest procurement plans for infantry modernisation under which large numbers of light machine guns, battle carbines and assault rifles are being purchased at a cost of nearly Rs 40,000 crore.


-Ankit

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2752
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby fanne » 14 May 2018 01:15

quick question gurus, I saw this number on Sjha article as well. chine number of 850k soldiers is its overall strength or only the strength of is land army facing us?
TIA

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 14 May 2018 02:05

fanne wrote:quick question gurus, I saw this number on Sjha article as well. chine number of 850k soldiers is its overall strength or only the strength of is land army facing us?
TIA

Overall pla strength. Facing us was 3-4 brigades in Tibet.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2752
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby fanne » 14 May 2018 06:14

If I may, mountain warfare is going to be manpower extensive. Technology can help, but to only some extent (aircraft cannot take off at that heights or performance is highly downrated), armor cannot move that fast and can be choked, artillery is not that effective, a miss of few meters can be missing by a mile etc etc.). Moreover, technology differential between us and PLA is not that much (we could be better, but with reduced number and bigger economy, that will change rapidly in their favor), also in mountain traditionally 6:1 manpower is needed by the invading army (which tech may reduce)...so has plaaf given up on attacking and/or fighting meaningful war with us?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 19 May 2018 13:48

As India Goes Military Shopping in Russia, US Reminds of Moscow Sanctions

US officials said the major defence purchase by India from Russia would attract sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act (CAATSA), which was signed into law by US President Donald Trump in August 2017 and went into effect in January this year
Washington: At a time when India plans to purchase five S-400 Triumf air defence systems for around $4.5 billion from Russia, the US on Saturday said its friends and allies should take into consideration the law under which any significant purchase of military equipment from Moscow would attract American sanctions.

US officials said the major defence purchase by India from Russia would attract sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act (CAATSA), which was signed into law by US President Donald Trump in August 2017 and went into effect in January this year.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin will hold an informal summit in the Russian city of Sochi on Monday, and official sources said the possible impact of the US sanctions against Russia under CAATSA on Indo-Russia defence cooperation may also figure during the talks between the two leaders.

"CAATSA is a feature and we need to take it seriously. The (Trump) administration is always bound by US law. This is a US law. I'm hoping that not just India, but all of the partners that we engage with will understand that we will have to evaluate any potential large defence purchase from Russia seriously because that's what the law demands of us," Tina Kaidanow, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, told reporters during a conference call on Saturday.

Kaidanow travels to India next week, during which she will hold talks on defence trade and peacekeeping, which are among two key areas of the rapidly growing US-India partnership as envisioned in the administration's Indo-Pacific strategy.

Referring to the conversation that the US is having with India and other countries on CAATSA, Kaidanow said the US wants this to be a positive discussion, not framed on the negative.

"We are going to have to continue to have that conversation with both our Indian counterparts and others about how do we deal with the CAATSA issue. But, I will tell you again, it is US law. We need to take it seriously. Our partners need to take that into consideration as they make their decisions. I can't stress that enough," Kaidanow said.


When specifically asked if she sees the possibility of US imposing sanctions on India, if it goes ahead with its defence deals with Russia, the senior US official said that everyone should read that legislation carefully and understand its intent.

"The intent is not to sanction our partners. The intent is to emphasise how important it is that Russia's malign behaviour all over the world is countered and by virtue of purchasing large-scale Russian system, what you're doing is enabling that kind of behaviour. That's the intent of the legislation," she said.


India is not going to allow its defence engagement with Russia to be dictated by any other country, the sources said earlier this week, adding New Delhi has been lobbying with the Trump administration on the issue.


Kaidanow sought to clarify that the message was intended not just for India but for all its partners as they contemplate these purchases. She underscored the "positive incentives" to buy American products which are "good" and address relevant security needs besides making their forces interoperable in certain instances. :rotfl:

"Think about what you're doing when you purchase Russian product. It has a distinctly negative byproduct and that is you are creating an environment in which they are better able to do some of the things that we know are problematic," Kaidanow said.
:lol:

She acknowledged the US understands the historic defence relationship between India and Russia.

"We understand all of that. It's a function of what are we talking about? Are you buying, a single truck; are you buying a large scale system ... these are things we're going to talk about," she said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 19 May 2018 13:52

New U.S. Sanctions Pose Dilemma for India’s Defense
“India is now between the devil and the deep blue sea. If India opts to do business with Russia, it loses out on spares and services from the U.S. on equipment already purchased such as the Boeing P-8I maritime patrol aircraft and the Lockheed Martin C-130J,” said a senior MoD official. However, with no “force majeure” clause in those contracts, U.S. defense companies will be considered defaulters according to India’s Defense Procurement Procedure, resulting in heavy fines.

“This issue brings us back to the issue of trust that took so long to build between the two nations,” said an Indian MoD official. He noted that India has not yet signed two foundational agreements for defense cooperation with the U.S.: the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement, previously known as the Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement, and Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement. The two are necessary for India to access communication security equipment on imports from the U.S. and sharing geospatial information, respectively. “India never fully trusted the U.S.,” the official added.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2972
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby arshyam » 19 May 2018 15:01

Some junior chaprasi in usg trying to explain why we must steer clear of US kit. I fear for the Tejas, time to start a Kaveri powered testbed and also explore alternatives for our strategic airlift capabilities.

And look at the tone of that article: another example of why we the public should steer clear of our DDM. No spine whatsoever. "Lobbying" for someone else's permission to buy something for our use with our own money.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6976
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby JE Menon » 19 May 2018 16:04

This is a perfectly developing scenario. Keep in mind we are the buyers. The imposition of sanctions on Russia is a US choice. CAATSA is it's own law and the extent to which it will be adhered to is its choice. We are buyers of US kit. India will want to know whether products purchased before the sanctions were imposed will be subject to CAATSA to the extent that the sanctions requires. If they are, and products that we have purchased become non-optimal for use, then our decision regarding to future purchase should not come as a surprise to the US. Recall that we are a third party who had zero input on the question of whether sanctions would be imposed in the first place.

The only disadvantage I see is that some of the items already purchased from the US, and some supplies we are receiving from the US, will no longer be optimised for military use. That is an excellent lesson to learn, if it happens. There is no way on earth that the sanctions will stop us from having our usual relationship with the Russians. It hasn't in the past. It will not now.

But we will not have to learn that lesson, because the Americans will do everything they can to ensure that we don't have to attend that class. They know damn well that if we learn that lesson and take it to heart, they will be the biggest losers. They will find a way around it. Gen. John Mattis has already started making noises in that regard, in respect to India (read it somewhere, don't have link).

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 19 May 2018 16:21



If the Americans want to play this stunt, they can forget their "Asia pivot", quad, Naval Logistics treaty, Apache , Chinook, UAV and potential F18 orders.

And yeah heavy fines on Boeing, LM for not delivering and bye bye to Indian market. May be Boeing like to forget the hundreds of civilian jets order.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7845
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Pratyush » 19 May 2018 16:23

Correct JEM. In Asia pacific region the US needs us as much as it thinks we need them.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 19 May 2018 16:29

Considering how US is treating its closest ally in EU on Iran JCPOA where sanctions are being threatened and how Germany Merkel is being threatened with sanctions on Nord Stream there is no guarantee even less mortals like India would get any exemptions.

Even Exemptions from US senate wont come without strings attached and they might ask for x percent reduction every year in buying Russian weapons or y percent in buying more US weapons etc mostly certainly US senate wont give a clean exemption if at all it even reaches that stage ...its more of a case of US law being forced on others for their own commercial benefits , that lady from Jr official from SD as much says so !

Hope US understands we are not vassals to be treated like one but most friendly nations that are treated to be on equal terms and our interest , strategic independence and sovereign decision are as much to be respected.
Last edited by Austin on 19 May 2018 16:43, edited 1 time in total.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2752
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby fanne » 19 May 2018 16:35

Time for a LCA with SU3OMKI engines (it will be bigger than MMCRA), We manufacture 1000 of them, with apparently full ToT (whatever that means)

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1460
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kakarat » 19 May 2018 17:02

India will not be able to completely ignore Russia or even Iran where it has invested. It is the US which has to find a way around this CAATSA but if it imposes the sanctions on India then it would be shooting itself on its legs, especially that the Europeans might not follow rather would be happy as US will again loose the market and would be difficult for them to return back. On the other hand sanctions could be good for some of the indigenous programs and some private industries, Kaveri could be accelerated and a F414 equivalent could also be developed with Safran and also the ULH of Kalyani could get a boost as alternative for M777. But I feel US will avoid sanctions on India

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 743
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kvraghav » 19 May 2018 17:54

We should sanction Pakistan which in effect would ban Boeing and Lockheed martin from doing business in India.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3228
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Cain Marko » 20 May 2018 03:04

So, what will be the next play from the US? If india is to acquiesce, which it won't, what will be their offer? Free JSF?

What they need to realize is that India doesn't NEED US Weapons, it has and can manage nicely with large Russian inventory aka quantity, some Israeli gear and few Euro toys, aka quality. With a bigger economy now than in the past, the Euro and Israeli content could easily increase at the expense of the US.

having said this, the Indian Navy will hurt most if spares and supplies are squeezed.

TBH I don't really think anything will happen, Trump's style is to make a lot of threats and then negotiate. Just look at Noko.

Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3151
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kakkaji » 20 May 2018 08:12

Another potential acquisition (VSHORAD) in trouble?

Rs 27,000-crore anti-aircraft missile deal hits hurdle

NEW DELHI: A mega deal to procure shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles for the Indian Army has hit controversy after competitors alleged that a Russian system was qualified even though it failed to meet technical requirements and could not fully demonstrate capabilities during trials.

Sources have told ET that after the IGLA S system was qualified in January after five years of trials by the Army, competitors have approached the defence ministry with protest letters, alleging that the system did not meet specified requirements, contending that norms have been tweaked to favour the Russians.

It is learnt that one point raised by competitors is that the IGLA S did not demonstrate low level target hits in desert environments during summer season and failed to lock into targets at long distance.

The particular test – to intercept a target at a distance of 500 meters, travelling 10 meters above ground – is alleged to have not been passed by the Russian system in the summer season, when the hot sand makes it difficult to track incoming aircraft.

It has also been alleged that the Russian side modified the sights of the IGLA S during trials by changing the optics and sensor, in a violation of rules that permit only minor alternations. And, that the Russian side did not turn up for trials ate least two times, in a violation of norms.


If this tender is canceled, are there any desi alternatives on the horizon?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19628
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Philip » 20 May 2018 12:38

This dog- eat-dog attitude by rival firang competitors has plagued sev. deals in the past with losers trying to scuttle the winner's chances after selection.The evaluation process must be watertight and a level playing field ensured.Remember the AW VVI P helo scam, where allegedly the goalposts were moved.

I am not sure that there is any desi MANPADS system under dev.Come to think of it why not? It is the most common of all and numerically the most prevalent in modern armed forces for air defence both on land and on ships.Even Kilo subs carry 8 for use against ASW helos and aircraft.If there was no hanky-panky the contest must move on instead of starting afresh losing valuable time.

Good news from L&T.It has delivered the 1000th Akash
" integrated airframe propulsion system hardware " from its Coimbatore plant .Sustainer and booster motors in srctions 4 and 5, integrated with 112 other systems etc. In collaboration with the DRDL.
This facility will in future will expand to make ISRO rocket
boosters and some of its other facilities in the country will be shifted to this one.Another local co. called LAW was also in the news for its range of aviation components being supplied esp. for the LCA.

Q.Does it mean that there are 1000 Akash missiles in the pipeline or that some are spares for the same?

With the first LCA sqd. being located at Sulur near Coimbatore and a report that the AMCA tech. demo prototypes are planned to be built locally with the input of pvt. industry since Sulur's BRD air base and the LCAs will be buzzing the city in the near future.This is all part of the defence corridor that the MOD is setting up in TNadu from Bangalore down the national highway/ rail corridor to western TN onto Kerala.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 20 May 2018 23:04

Sources have told ET that after the IGLA S system was qualified in January after five years of trials by the Army, competitors have approached the defence ministry with protest letters, alleging that the system did not meet specified requirements, contending that norms have been tweaked to favour the Russians.


If we want to tweak the requirements to give the order to the Russians, since it is our money, it is our wish. I would send a letter to the "sources", thanking them for their concern for India's defence and with big, bolded letter written : buzz off.

Don't like our trail process.. don't participate.

Doesn't require too much hard work to imagine who the sources are.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2664
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kit » 21 May 2018 02:53

The US is testing waters as to how India will bend to some stupid American rule ., its a bluff. Someone needs to have a hard talk with the yanks "whats with your boss saying buy more American while you are pushing sanctions ?"

Anyway let that be a good lesson to push for indigenization local production of *everything* imported ., no screwdriver stuff and all future supplies sanctions proof.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby RoyG » 21 May 2018 07:03

kit wrote:The US is testing waters as to how India will bend to some stupid American rule ., its a bluff. Someone needs to have a hard talk with the yanks "whats with your boss saying buy more American while you are pushing sanctions ?"

Anyway let that be a good lesson to push for indigenization local production of *everything* imported ., no screwdriver stuff and all future supplies sanctions proof.


India isn't a pushover. It'll try to play both the Western Alliance and SCO to further its own interests.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2236
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby abhik » 21 May 2018 11:03

Wasn't the VSHORAD deal cancelled in favor of a local development?

sahay
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Apr 2017 19:45

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby sahay » 21 May 2018 14:23

No, I think you might be confusing it with SR-SAM or QRSAM procurements. The former was cancelled in favour of Akash Mk. 2 and the latter was supposed to be developed by DRDO.

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2236
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby abhik » 21 May 2018 21:41

Nope, it was VSHORAD. But i guess it was only a proposal, nothing concrete.
As Army evaluates foreign missile systems, govt considers building indigenous variant under Make in India

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 25 May 2018 12:57

Saurav Jha
‏@SJha1618
2h2 hours ago
Decorated Veteran, Captain Ramaprasad (retd), who designed an indigenous combat management system for submarines explains why COMCASA is a bad idea:
COMCASA – Should India Sign? - By Captain Ramaprasad

Over the past decade, India has been steadily purchasing military platforms from the United States that typically come with secure communication systems of US-origin. However, since India has thus far refused to sign the so-called Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA), usually known as the Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) in US parlance, it has been forced to use lower-grade commercially available equipment in lieu of US-origin radio, communications security (COMSEC) and navigation equipment that apparently give American platforms an operational edge over similar systems available from elsewhere. By extension, it is claimed that the regional superiority that India was expecting via such procurement has been somewhat diminished. So, the question is: ‘Should India just sign COMCASA?’

In this piece, we argue that there are very good reasons for India to not rush into something like COMCASA.

What is COMCASA?

COMCASA essentially provides a legal framework for the transfer of COMSEC equipment from the US to India that would facilitate ‘interoperability’ between Indian and US forces, and potentially with other militaries as well that use US-origin systems for secure tactical data links. The US, however, tightly controls COMSEC technology and provides access to only those countries that have signed a CISMOA / COMCASA with it. Obviously, the current denial of this COMSEC equipment to Indian military forces means that they cannot really exchange tactical information with even friendly regional forces that might use CISMOA/COMCASA covered communication systems. Furthermore, not signing COMCASA also means that certain things such as high-precision GPS or the latest guidance packages for US-origin air to air missiles will not be available to India. Indeed, if a US origin fighter plane is selected for the recently announced ‘Make in India’ single-engine fighter aircraft procurement project, the pressure on India to sign COMCASA will likely increase, since the Indian Air force (IAF) will be hard put to integrate cutting edge non-US origin weapons with an American fighter platform.

However…

Having said that, even though the US maintains that COMCASA is only ‘foundational’ in nature and ‘innocuous’ in import, there are genuine reasons for India to be concerned about the implications of this agreement. For instance, from an Indian perspective, it is worth considering whether COMCASA has the potential to compromise India’s operational security while protecting that of the US. COMCASA may also increase pressure on India to source all of its COMSEC equipment from US vendors in the future.

At the end of day, secure communications require high-grade encryption algorithms and encryption-key management. An encryption algorithm operates the key over messages to produce an encrypted message that any intruder is supposed to find difficult to break, if he has no access to the keys. This also implies that all communication devices in a network need to be compatible with one another by incorporating the same encryption algorithms. Now COMCASA requires that US operators perform functions such as keying for the encryption. Indian operators will not be allowed to even participate in the maintenance of these systems. So, will India be comfortable with the presence of US designated personnel on Indian-procured US platforms for long durations of their operational life? In the COMCASA scheme of things, the US will basically end up controlling the entire communications and message flow for the sake of ‘interoperability’. Long term analysis of the message flow could end up revealing tactical doctrines adopted by Indian forces in combat.

Since communication devices and links currently in use with Indian Forces cannot interact with US-provided systems, it implies that any attempt to establish interoperability between a part of India’s inventory and participating US forces could actually lead to reduced ‘intra-operability’ within India’s own military. This is on account of the fact that COMCASA-covered equipment/platforms will become ‘incompatible’ with the rest of India’s inventory. This could lead to calls to ‘overhaul’ the Indian military’s entire network to COMCASA-compliant standards through wholesale import of US systems. Short of which India would have to willfully acquiesce to the creation of a divide in its inventory, thereby reducing the flexibility of field commanders to deploy available resources during action. Obviously, neither prospect is a particularly happy one for Indian military planners. The fact that COMCASA could lead to the secrecy of tactical doctrines getting compromised besides imposing greater complexity costs on India’s communication systems demands that a detailed study of the ground realities and practical implications of signing COMCASA be made prior to deciding on a course of action.

Captain Ramaprasad is a veteran Indian Navy submariner and is a recipient of the Vishisht Seva Medal (VSM) for his contributions towards the development of an indigenous combat management system for undersea applications.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5218
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby ShauryaT » 26 May 2018 10:43

The Problem with Defence Acquisitions - Bharat Karnad

Compare this state of affairs with the country’s design, development and production capabilities where SSBNs are concerned: India is completely self-sufficient in propulsion systems, control technology, and most of the assemblies in the boat. What will continue to be imported for the foreseeable future are diesel engines for support functions, motors, the optronic head of the mast, and a communications sub-system. L&T, moreover, has a 3-D fully digitalised submarine design facility that is as technologically advanced as any in the world, and can convert a ‘basic’ design into a production-ready engineering design.

It would have been commonsensical, under these circumstances, for the conventional diesel submarine project to be also assigned to L&T, which has the requisite production experience, design-development wherewithal, and excess manufacturing capacity. It would be in line with the trend to consolidate national resources in single submarine design-cum-production units, like Kockums in Sweden, the Vickers-Barrow combine in the UK, and the Rubin Bureau-Severodvinsk complex in Russia.

The previous Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, keeping in mind economies of scale and a viable indigenous industry, surveyed the existing capabilities in the country, analysed the cost advantages, and concluded that L&T would spearhead the Project 75i. A combined L&T-Defence Ministry team was then to negotiate the purchase of just the design of an advanced conventional submarine from interested suppliers along with the few select technologies the country is still deficient in. The German firm, Thyssen-Krupp, with its HDW-series of submarines—the HDW 209 submarine bought in the 1980s is still in service and a darling of the Navy—was identified as a firm that could be induced to sell the design of its HDW-214 boat. This was an imaginative tweaking of the foreign ‘strategic partner’ concept central to the Defence Procurement Procedure, 2016.

Once Parrikar departed, Arun Jaitley, reassuming concurrent charge as Defence Minister, reverted to global tendering and the lowest tender (L-1) process. This tendency will be reinforced by the current Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s declaration at the 2018 Defence Expo in Chennai that the armed services can’t be compelled to buy Indian.

What L1 also means is that there will be no scrutiny of the technical capacity and capability of the Indian companies bidding for the contract, and permit a company with no experience in building submarines. The lowest bidder will become hostage to the interests of the foreign submarine supplier who will decide what technologies to pass on, including those that India already has, and what to sell as ‘black boxes’ for the duration of the production run, as has happened with all defence Transfer-of-Technology deals to date. So the 75i boat will have 100 per cent foreign-sourced content because the supplier knows the bid-winner has zero assets, zero production experience, and untested specialised manufacturing capacity.

vasu raya
BRFite
Posts: 1599
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby vasu raya » 27 May 2018 00:40

Austin wrote:Saurav Jha
‏@SJha1618
2h2 hours ago
Decorated Veteran, Captain Ramaprasad (retd), who designed an indigenous combat management system for submarines explains why COMCASA is a bad idea:


Thanks for the clarifying article. Can India not have multiple communication stacks? and which one is used to boot up at any particular time is based on operational needs.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1569
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srin » 27 May 2018 07:04

^^^ That is precisely what I'm thinking. Wouldn't this be solved if we have our commsec standard, and have special adaptors to interface with NATO, Russians and anybody else when necessary ?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5853
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Rakesh » 27 May 2018 09:06

You guys are missing the point of COMCASA and other foundational agreements. America "wants" India within its fold for obvious geopolitical reasons. There are folks on here who will disagree with the term I am about to use, but basically become a poodle nation like the UK, Australia or Japan.

It is not about adapting to multiple standards, but rather to "one" standard - the Amreeki standard :) After all, that is the true meaning of interoperability in the Amreeki sense. Buy American and Use American. You feed and thrive on the American system. Forgive me for sounding crude, but you suck on the teat of America, but they decide "when" to feed you and "what" to feed you.

What COMCASA and other foundational agreements basically do, is it gets India within the fold of that American system. The issue is how deep does India need to get into that crevice. At some point, the crevice gets so deep, that it becomes next to impossible to get out. Take a look at the poodle nations I described above. How many of them can take an independent foreign policy stand, without Uncle Sam reminding them who the Alpha Male in the room is? When America says jump, they ask how high. Must India be in that situation?

See these tweets from Saurav Jha....

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/999583699468472321 ---> Unlike what some believe, if India signs ridiculous agreements like COMCASA / BECA, far from making China wary of India, it will actually make them sanguine that they could then deal directly with the United States since India would have become a part of global US C3I.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/999672144685547520 ---> C3I - Command, Control, Communications, Intelligence.

There is a grave problem with COMCASA. When you develop a "special adaptor" to communicate with the secure American system, you need the keys and they will *NEVER* part with those keys. When you are in the American system, they control the "keys" to the secure communication room (figuratively speaking). You get "guest" access into the living room, but that is it. Now tomorrow if we want to use the C-130 to drop off special forces for some clandestine mission somewhere around India (an operational need), should the Amreekis really need to know that? When you control the keys, you can eavesdrop on your guests inside the communication room, but the reverse is not true. Now poodle nations like UK, Australia and Japan have no choice. They handed over their sovereignty (and their balls) to the Amreekis, a long time ago. Should India do the same?

See what Tina Kaidanow, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs in the US Govt says,
As India Goes Military Shopping in Russia, US Reminds of Moscow Sanctions

"CAATSA is a feature and we need to take it seriously. The (Trump) administration is always bound by US law. This is a US law. I'm hoping that not just India, but all of the partners that we engage with will understand that we will have to evaluate any potential large defence purchase from Russia seriously because that's what the law demands of us," Tina Kaidanow, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, told reporters during a conference call on Saturday. So India is bound to US law? :lol:

Kaidanow sought to clarify that the message was intended not just for India but for all its partners as they contemplate these purchases. She underscored the "positive incentives" to buy American products which are "good" and address relevant security needs besides making their forces interoperable in certain instances.

"Think about what you're doing when you purchase Russian product. It has a distinctly negative byproduct and that is you are creating an environment in which they are better able to do some of the things that we know are problematic," Kaidanow said.

Kersi
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 31 May 2017 12:25

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kersi » 27 May 2018 17:47

Rakesh wrote:You guys are missing the point of COMCASA and other foundational agreements. America "wants" India within its fold for obvious geopolitical reasons. There are folks on here who will disagree with the term I am about to use, but basically become a poodle nation like the UK, Australia or Japan.

Right from the beginning of NATO, the USA started the concept that within NATO "Standardise" which meant "Buy American".

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 27 May 2018 19:45

Would this law apply to NATO members who have Russian kit? or Pakistan buying Mi35? or the Arabs? or Israel selling UAVs to Russia?

The spokesperson seem to have missed the irony in saying we have great kits, please buy it, else we will sanction you. Someone should have asked the obvious, who will buy US kit with such a threat?

Would US sanction China as well for S400 & SU35?

Edit: Here is the report on Chinese deal. So far it has been hot air, with excuses like they were signed before the law came into effect..

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/us-wrestling-with-decision-to-sanction-china-under-law-targeting-russia

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 27 May 2018 20:04

Yes the law apply to nato members , Turkey will be denied F-35 for buying S-400 plus US congress is threatening Turkey with other sanctions.

Even nato members are not spared

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 27 May 2018 20:18

Austin wrote:Yes the law apply to nato members , Turkey will be denied F-35 for buying S-400 plus US congress is threatening Turkey with other sanctions.

Even nato members are not spared


More than F35, will US sanction Turkey on F16 & F4s? Would be interesting to see who has got a bigger ego. Turkish President or American.

John
BRFite
Posts: 1825
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 27 May 2018 20:30

Considering for 6 billion dollars we are getting only 5 systems ( already cost more than 2.5 times as Mr-sam and that doesn't all price escalations that will happen by the time system is inducted) and we are paying much more than China or Turkey for these systems.

Throw in there no tech transfer or even integration of domestic equipment, S-400 is one deal I gladly wish It died. We are much more important procurement that have been languishing in limbo.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1490
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 27 May 2018 20:33

Deals with Russians generally involve paying for what is not publicly stated. We must be paying the Russians in some way for all the nuke sub tech, we are using

I am pretty sure there is more to the deal than it meets the eye.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 27 May 2018 20:39

nam wrote:
Austin wrote:Yes the law apply to nato members , Turkey will be denied F-35 for buying S-400 plus US congress is threatening Turkey with other sanctions.

Even nato members are not spared


More than F35, will US sanction Turkey on F16 & F4s? Would be interesting to see who has got a bigger ego. Turkish President or American.


It is not about ego but law , US law passed by US congress would not allow Potus to over rule it even if he wants too

John
BRFite
Posts: 1825
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 27 May 2018 21:16

nam wrote:Deals with Russians generally involve paying for what is not publicly stated. We must be paying the Russians in some way for all the nuke sub tech, we are using

I am pretty sure there is more to the deal than it meets the eye.

If that were case would have signed the deal while back. The original plan was for 11 systems but got shaved in half due to cost escalation. From what I am picking up this deal is heavily pushed by GOI for political purpose.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5853
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Rakesh » 27 May 2018 21:58

nam wrote:Would this law apply to NATO members who have Russian kit?

Nam Saar, let us simplify this. This law applies to *ANYONE* who buys Russian kit. If Romulans from Star Trek bought Russian kit, they too would fall under the law. That is what the Americans want you to believe and they have the economic & military might to enforce that. It could be anything we buy and if they feel it enhances Russia's posture in anyway, they will enforce the sanction. See below....

As India Goes Military Shopping in Russia, US Reminds of Moscow Sanctions
https://www.news18.com/news/india/as-in ... 53107.html

She acknowledged the US understands the historic defence relationship between India and Russia. "We understand all of that. It's a function of what are we talking about? Are you buying, a single truck; are you buying a large scale system ... these are things we're going to talk about," she said.

Large scale system can mean anything to them. They define what is large scale. It could be a follow on order for Krivak III frigates, lease of another Akula boat, S-400 SAMs, etc. This is nothing new for the policy makers in India, however it just reinforces the mistrust that we in India have vis-a-viv the Americans. And if anyone thinks, this is only against Russia...think again. The Amreekis believe they can enforce whatever suits their fancy. This is classic school yard bully behaviour. But that is human nature. They can say and do whatever they want, but the key is to *NOT* fall into the trap of signing these agreements.

US hindering completion of Egypt-France Rafale deal: La Tribune
http://www.egyptindependent.com/us-hind ... a-tribune/

The French weekly financial newspaper La Tribune reported on Friday that a deal between Cairo and France over the sale of 12 Rafale jet fighters to Egypt has been blocked because the US is refusing to export a component of a cruise missile that is part of the plane.

Now that does mean we should start dhoti shivering because of this? On the contrary, let them impose the sanctions if we bought something from Russia, France or whoever else. Stop the supply of spares of the P-8I Neptune, C-130 Hercules and C-17 Globemaster. There are billions of dollars in the pipeline for US companies to lose out on. A few that come to mind are;

1) Honeywell F125 engine for the Jaguar (confirmed)
2) Sale of CH-47 Chinook and AH-64 Apache (confirmed)
3) F-16 and F-18 (in competition with other OEMs)
4) Follow on order of P-8I Neptunes (confirmed)
5) Follow on order of C-130 Hercules (confirmed, but not sure if deliveries began)
6) Last C-17 Globemaster (the white tail one, confirmed)

How are they planning to explain the loss of billions to the CEOs of Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Honeywell and others because of the sanctions their government imposed? Now if they want us to *NOT* lease another Akula (for example), will the Amreekis be willing to lease out a Virginia Class boat to us instead? They don't hand out sensitive platforms even to their poodles, why would they do it for us? Gone are the days (like Pokharan '98) when they willy-nilly imposed sanctions on India for doing nuclear testing. Now if they impose sanctions, they lose too. We will suffer (capability wise), but they will feel hurt as well.

The *REAL* question is how much hurt (financially) are they willing to absorb?

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21993
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 28 May 2018 21:03

Vishnu Som
‏Verified account
@VishnuNDTV
Following Following @VishnuNDTV https://twitter.com/VishnuNDTV/status/1 ... 0961433600
US transfer of high-tech military equipment to India could be hit by India closing out a deal to buy Russian S-400 missile systems: William Thornberry Chairman of the US Arms Service Committee.

2. Transfer of US armed drones to India could be impacted by India's decision to acquire Russian S-400 missile systems from Russia: William Thornberry Chairman of the US Arms Service Committee

3. While sanctions against India for the purchase of the Russian S-400 system may not happen (US laws allow case by case flexibility), there is deep concern at the decision to acquire the system: William Thornberry Chairman of the US Arms Service Committee :!:

4. Background - the US passed CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) earlier this year after allegations of Russian meddling in the US election process. The US could technically place sanctions on India for buying new systems from Russia.

5. Earlier this month, PM Modi was in Sochi, Russia where both sides agreed on a Rs.40,000 crore deal for the advanced S400 system. Formal announcement of the deal will likely happen ahead of the next Russia-India later summit this year.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aditya_V, Austin, Virendra and 37 guests