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.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23306
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 06 Jun 2018 10:41

Karan M wrote:Only weakness is that its PESA based systems mostly


Its an hybrid PESA and Dual band Radar ( S & L ) 3 different Radar ( 91N6E ( S Band ) /92N6E ( X Band )/96L6E ( L Band )

The basic radar operating in S and L band are effective agaisnt LO type targets

recent details on S-400 system I posted here from OEM few days back

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7101&start=1240#p2267993

Beyond these radars they are also integrated with TriBand Nebo-M Radar that covers between X ,S and meter ( 3 Meter ) band



As far as AESA goes it is under work for upgrade model ( both radar and missile ) of S-400 system under work

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4840
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Neshant » 06 Jun 2018 13:59

Bart S wrote:
Neshant wrote:None of the anti missile systems from US more Russia have proven to work effectively in battle.
Could be ending up with a large bill and a false sense of security.
I'd have more faith in anti missile systems if India developed it's own version.


+100 This is an investment that will only compound over the years, if built indigenously instead of shortcuts inspired by brochureitis. The gains for Indian electronics/radars/EW/missiles/seekers/C4I along with advanced areas like encryption, AI and automation would be immense.


National development in defence R&D ranks way higher in security needs than getting some (unproven) missile defence system from a foreign source at huge cost.

China is well on it's way to building up a world class defence R&D base.

India has no comprehensive plan for such development beyond blowing huge wads of money on foreign maal.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1724
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srin » 06 Jun 2018 21:15

^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1693
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Bart S » 06 Jun 2018 21:27

srin wrote:^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?


Yes, but as part of an integrated national strategy to acquire the tech and capability and not just the equipment, their deals with the Russians are generally cover for full-scale TOT and rapid buildup of equivalent clone systems that they rapidly improve on. Also, the Chinese have much more money so its not a comparison with India in any case.

In India's case with the IAF having the narrow perspective of a customer shopping for 'ready' and 'off the shelf' systems rather than a maker willing to work with local systems that are a WIP and not perfect, and with limited funds where we can do one or the other, not both, this is only going to result in an expensive system that we will have to depend on the Russians (who smartly deny us the tech transfers that they give the Chinese) for. And in 20 years when the next iteration of such a system comes around, we will be in the same place that we are in today.
Last edited by Bart S on 06 Jun 2018 21:29, edited 1 time in total.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2032
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 06 Jun 2018 21:29

srin wrote:^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?

Likely for "unlicensed" production in matter of few years.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby ramana » 06 Jun 2018 21:31

srin wrote:^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?



We should stop comparing with what China did or didn't do?
India needs the S-400 like yesterday.
Spurious arguments that Chinese are buying the S-400 and US will sanction India have kept India from acquiring the weapons it needs.
S-400 is need to counter Pakis missiles like Babur, Nodong 2 etc.
Now if China acquires the S400 what goes our father ?
Does that harm our ability vis a vis Pakis? NO

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1724
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srin » 06 Jun 2018 21:47

Bart S wrote:
srin wrote:^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?


Yes, but as part of an integrated national strategy to acquire the tech and capability and not just the equipment, their deals with the Russians are generally cover for full-scale TOT and rapid buildup of equivalent clone systems that they rapidly improve on. Also, the Chinese have much more money so its not a comparison with India in any case.

In India's case with the IAF having the narrow perspective of a customer shopping for 'ready' and 'off the shelf' systems rather than a maker willing to work with local systems that are a WIP and not perfect, and with limited funds where we can do one or the other, not both, this is only going to result in an expensive system that we will have to depend on the Russians (who smartly deny us the tech transfers that they give the Chinese) for. And in 20 years when the next iteration of such a system comes around, we will be in the same place that we are in today.


Not really. Our missile and radar story is a big success, with multiple new missiles coming in. The S400's are IMO a stop-gap.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1724
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srin » 06 Jun 2018 21:50

ramana wrote:
srin wrote:^^^ Hasn't China also purchased S-400's ?



We should stop comparing with what China did or didn't do?
India needs the S-400 like yesterday.
Spurious arguments that Chinese are buying the S-400 and US will sanction India have kept India from acquiring the weapons it needs.
S-400 is need to counter Pakis missiles like Babur, Nodong 2 etc.
Now if China acquires the S400 what goes our father ?
Does that harm our ability vis a vis Pakis? NO


Yes and no.

We should look at S400 in our national interest. But at the same time, the comment was against the OP argument which was that we're blowing money on S400, whereas Chinese are building everything indigenously.

And Chinese having S400 should be a concern for us (and our S400 isn't an answer to that), and will require us to develop counter-measures against it. Pak isn't the only adversary.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby ramana » 06 Jun 2018 21:56

Right Lets not buy the S-400 and be naked to nuclear blackmail form Pakis because the Chinese might have the S400.

Same time the US might sanction our scam ridden economy.

very good thinking.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1693
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Bart S » 06 Jun 2018 21:57

srin wrote:
Not really. Our missile and radar story is a big success, with multiple new missiles coming in. The S400's are IMO a stop-gap.


You are actually making my point here. Why buy a super-expensive 'stop-gap' that will take the better part of a decade to operationalize, when we have most of the building blocks of a local equivalent already available and the remaining can be developed (with the freedom of us owning all the IP and source codes) in a similar timeframe?

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1693
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Bart S » 06 Jun 2018 22:00

ramana wrote:Right Lets not buy the S-400 and be naked to nuclear blackmail form Pakis because the Chinese might have the S400.

Same time the US might sanction our scam ridden economy.

very good thinking.


Countering nuclear blackmail is all well and good (it is a different matter that the counter can be offensive, something that India has already stated, and not defensive) but why do you conclude that the S400 is the only system that can do that and that a combination of systems that we can put up inhouse like Akash, AkashNG, QRSAM, MRSAM and LRSAM along with cutting edge radars that we can make or get, will not do as good a job or better?

I am all for giving a middle finger to the Americans for CATSAA or whatever it is called, but why does that have to result in us handing over our hard owned money to the Russians, especially given the arrogance and lack of cooperation they have shown in the recent past with other weapons systems that we purchased from them?

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1724
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby srin » 06 Jun 2018 22:02

ramana wrote:Right Lets not buy the S-400 and be naked to nuclear blackmail form Pakis because the Chinese might have the S400.

Same time the US might sanction our scam ridden economy.

very good thinking.


I'm very curious to know why you think I've even indicated that we shouldn't buy S-400. :roll:

That's a very interesting leap of logic. I'd love to see your explanation.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby ramana » 06 Jun 2018 22:05

BartS, it will take more than a decade to put those building blocks together into a usable system.
Making a few DRDO labs built test article is not a weapons system for the forces.
The threat is near term not very long term.
Do you think we have a ready made alternative to the S-400 right now?

All those SAMs are good but not same as S-400.
Both the IAF and IA agree they need this.

I don't want to second guess them as usual with civilian hat and half info from the DDM.

Every year of delay jacks up the price.

srin, I am replying to you but answering those reading the forum who are coming up with objections to the S 400.

So you are the shoulder onlee.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2032
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 06 Jun 2018 22:16

ramana wrote:Right Lets not buy the S-400 and be naked to nuclear blackmail form Pakis because the Chinese might have the S400.

Same time the US might sanction our scam ridden economy.

very good thinking.



I am not following you, why does IAF need it like yesterday? MR-SAM already provide medium range engagement at 1/3rd price and ER can fill long range need. 200 km+ engagement can be filled by DRDO AAD based SAM

Added:
The threat is near term not very long term.
Do you think we have a ready made alternative to the S-400 right now?


Missed your reply yes for Short to Medium range we already have the pieces in place and as i said earlier MR-SAM is superior alternative to S-400 given the price and smaller footprint. S-400 won't be induced any time before 2024 even if deal is signed now.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52335
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby ramana » 06 Jun 2018 22:19

Are any of those available for IAF? Or still in trials stage?

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2032
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 06 Jun 2018 22:23

ramana wrote:Are any of those available for IAF? Or still in trials stage?

MR-SAM is being inducted right now. And components (radar, TEL) of MR-SAM can be used with QR-SAM and possible XR-SAM greatly reducing future costs.

I am for S-400 if Russia is willing to provide tech transfer (like they are likely doing with china) and license production/integration with domestic components

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 06 Jun 2018 22:36

Thanks Cain!

Second top I guess :lol:

Why is the puzzling question and Karan have given some insigts as to why IAF is so keen on this long range SAM even after so many SAM systemss under induction or in pipeline.

Kuch to baat hai sir!

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17875
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Karan M » 07 Jun 2018 03:30

Austin wrote:
Karan M wrote:Only weakness is that its PESA based systems mostly


Its an hybrid PESA and Dual band Radar ( S & L ) 3 different Radar ( 91N6E ( S Band ) /92N6E ( X Band )/96L6E ( L Band )

The basic radar operating in S and L band are effective agaisnt LO type targets

recent details on S-400 system I posted here from OEM few days back

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7101&start=1240#p2267993


S Band is quite near X Band. L Band is better but not ideal. Per se, just having S Band and L Band is not sufficient until and unless you put out prodigious power (e.g. GaN) and reclaim the range deficit against LO targets.

Beyond these radars they are also integrated with TriBand Nebo-M Radar that covers between X ,S and meter ( 3 Meter ) band


The meter band is key. Basically, it uses Meter band for detection, S Band to get a smaller window (concentrated power) and then a highly concentrated X Band beam for accurate tracking.



As far as AESA goes it is under work for upgrade model ( both radar and missile ) of S-400 system under work


More than AESA, it will be interesting to see if they have GaN units. Those may well bring back the range deficit against LO targets.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17875
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Karan M » 07 Jun 2018 03:39

Katare wrote:Thanks Cain!0

Second top I guess :lol:

Why is the puzzling question and Karan have given some insigts as to why IAF is so keen on this long range SAM even after so many SAM systemss under induction or in pipeline.

Kuch to baat hai sir!


S-400 to my mind has 3 main advantages
1. Flexibility - a single missile system with missiles with multiple ranges and able to handle a variety of targets - aircraft, cruise and even IRBM class. This means a single S-400 system can effectively guard a set of vital targets by putting a shield around an entire vital area against a range of targets.
2. Very high survivability - the system is highly mobile and can be brought into operation and relocated very quickly. This makes hunting it very hard for even USAF level operators.
3. Very high (theoretical at least) effectiveness. The S-400 uses a derivative of track via missile guidance. The missile sends back target data to the command center which then compares target data from the missile and the radar and uses what is more accurate. So conventional SPJs which jam the missile seeker won't work. Jamming the huge main radar, easier said then done, since it has many advanced features and waveforms plus algorithms to detect and ignore jamming. Next, the S-400 power output was considerably increased above S-3XX so merely blanking the airwaves with noise won't work either. The datalinks are pencil thin and directional. So to jam all three radar, datalink, missile seeker you have to put in a huge EW effort and even then, there is nothing to say that the S-400 battery is not getting cued by another battery or extra radar co-located with it. Otherwise, you have to spam it with decoys, somehow con the missile operator to use up his rounds and attack the system. All in all, the S-400 is a huge challenge for a very well-supplied opponent. This is one battery. Now imagine 5 regiments, each with multiple independent batteries (search radar, fire control radar, missiles, command post).

The combination of all 3 attributes makes the S-400 a very hard nut to crack and also, very valuable to any AF.

One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 07 Jun 2018 07:53

Excellent!

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1693
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Bart S » 07 Jun 2018 09:53

Karan M wrote:The combination of all 3 attributes makes the S-400 a very hard nut to crack and also, very valuable to any AF.

One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.



Is this functionality that we can implement in our locally developed systems as well, building on existing platforms? And will buying and operating the S400 give us some clues on building our own equivalent?

The end goal has to at least be developing our own equivalent so that we don't have to go shopping for the S600 or whatever after 20 years.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23306
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 10:21

One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.


For ground based system it does not matter much because power requirement & mobility is not much an issue as in case of awacs or fighter aircraft for GaN to take advantage , Even the 1950 venerable THD can put in 20MW of Peak Power if required.

GaN will give other advantage like low power requirent for same output ( power effecient ) and higher bandwidth available but it comes at a cost but they are focussing on ROFAR for next generation of radar technology including SAM https://www.rt.com/news/397698-russian- ... nic-radar/

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23306
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 11:43

Austin wrote:
One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.


For ground based system it does not matter much because power requirement & mobility is not much an issue as in case of awacs or fighter aircraft for GaN to take advantage , Even the 1950 venerable THD can put in 20MW of Peak Power if required.

GaN will give other advantage like low power requirent for same output ( power effecient ) and higher bandwidth available but it comes at a cost but they are focussing on ROFAR for next generation of radar technology including SAM https://www.rt.com/news/397698-russian- ... nic-radar/


Advantage of ROFAR in interview with director of KERT http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/4441543
The radio-optical radar will be able to see, according to our estimates, much further than the existing radar. And since we will irradiate the enemy in an unprecedentedly wide range of frequencies, then we know with high accuracy its position in space, and after processing we get an almost photographic image of it - radio view. This is very important for determining the type: immediately and automatically the aircraft computer will be able to establish that it is flying, for example, F-18 with specific types of missiles.

Due to its ultra-wide band and the huge dynamic range of the receiver, the radio-photon radar will have great opportunities to protect against interference. Also, due to the fact that all the systems of the sixth generation fighter will be integrated in terms of functions, the photon radar will additionally perform the tasks of electronic warfare (EW), transmit data and serve as a means of communication.

Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9212
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Hari Seldon » 07 Jun 2018 12:25

India’s first indigenous technology to search, track and kill enemy drones, has been developed and a working prototype is sitting in Bengaluru.


Image

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2979
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kit » 07 Jun 2018 16:52

a combined soft kill / hard kill systems should be on guard for all sensitive installations and a longer ranged one for the borders

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2979
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby kit » 07 Jun 2018 16:57

Bart S wrote:
Karan M wrote:The combination of all 3 attributes makes the S-400 a very hard nut to crack and also, very valuable to any AF.

One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.



Is this functionality that we can implement in our locally developed systems as well, building on existing platforms? And will buying and operating the S400 give us some clues on building our own equivalent?

The end goal has to at least be developing our own equivalent so that we don't have to go shopping for the S600 or whatever after 20 years.


As with all systems we are literally buying the time to build systems on our own. Hope we find the resources to build and the will to see through those projects in capable hands. India has time and again shown it can develop any system it needs if it really wants to.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17875
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Karan M » 07 Jun 2018 17:14

Austin, of course it matters more. What is the size of the THD-1955. Can you put it on a truck and cart it around?
GaN radars offer 4x power aperture increases for the same size! That is a huge advantage, provided you can manage the cooling and power generation. Peak power is not the only thing, duty cycle matters - i.e. PAv.
Next generation stuff is interesting. Perhaps they want to skip a generation and avoid investing in something the west has a lead in already.


Austin wrote:
One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.


For ground based system it does not matter much because power requirement & mobility is not much an issue as in case of awacs or fighter aircraft for GaN to take advantage , Even the 1950 venerable THD can put in 20MW of Peak Power if required.

GaN will give other advantage like low power requirent for same output ( power effecient ) and higher bandwidth available but it comes at a cost but they are focussing on ROFAR for next generation of radar technology including SAM https://www.rt.com/news/397698-russian- ... nic-radar/

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1654
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Vips » 08 Jun 2018 03:51

Nirmala Sitharaman gives fillip to indigenisation, approves Rs 5500 crore proposals.

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman approved equipment valued at over Rs 5500 crore to strengthen Indian defence while encouraging indigenisation and self-reliance in matters of procurement.

The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) which was chaired by the minister, cleared the procurement of 12 High Power Radars for the Indian Air Force along with Air Cushion Vehicles (ACVs) for the Indian Coast Guard and Indian Army from Indian Shipyard

In a statement issued by the government, the radars will provide long range medium and high altitude radar cover with the capability to detect and track high speed targets following parabolic trajectories.

These technologically superior radars will have the capability to scan 360 degree without mechanical rotation of Antenna and will operate on 24 x 7 basis with minimal maintenance requirements.

The ACVs would be superior to conventional boats/crafts with their ability to travel at very high speeds over shallow water, sand banks, mud flats and swamps.

The DAC was scheduled to discuss the broad contours of Indian Navy's ambitious project to build six advanced submarines under the multi-billion P-75 (I) programme. But, it is not known whether there was any decision on it during the meetin

Sources had said that the state-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd (MDL) is likely to be given the responsibility to implement the project as against the government's earlier indication that private shipbuilders would be involved in constructing the submarines.

The DAC also reviewed implementation of various procurements of military platforms.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 08 Jun 2018 06:47

Seetharaman can approve all she wants, it doesn’t really matter if budget is mot allocated by finmin.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3342
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Kashi » 08 Jun 2018 07:34

^^ Isn't the money already allocated in the annual budget including specifically for CAPEX?

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 09 Jun 2018 11:01

Yes, but the budget is not even sufficient to pay milestone payments for the already signed contracts so approving more project is not going help much. When she gets supplementary grants from finmin, I would applaud.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 09 Jun 2018 13:54

Katare wrote:Yes, but the budget is not even sufficient to pay milestone payments for the already signed contracts so approving more project is not going help much. When she gets supplementary grants from finmin, I would applaud.


India has not defaulted on any signed contract. Moreover defence budget are always allocated according to signed contracts.So there is no chance of MoD not paying for signed contract.

MoD may delay signing new deal and push it next fiscal. In the specific case of these radars, they are to be built by BEL, which is a MoD unit. So it is MoD paying... well MoD.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 09 Jun 2018 13:59

The most interesting aspect of the radar deal is how we are going to town with home built AESA radars.

Compare this to time of Cope India 2005 huha about Americans not been allowed to use their TFTA aesa radar on their f15, which third world Indians cannot even dream to get.

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2032
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby John » 09 Jun 2018 20:30

kit wrote:
Bart S wrote:

Is this functionality that we can implement in our locally developed systems as well, building on existing platforms? And will buying and operating the S400 give us some clues on building our own equivalent?

The end goal has to at least be developing our own equivalent so that we don't have to go shopping for the S600 or whatever after 20 years.


As with all systems we are literally buying the time to build systems on our own. Hope we find the resources to build and the will to see through those projects in capable hands. India has time and again shown it can develop any system it needs if it really wants to.


Problem with S-400 is Russia simply turned and handed full S-300 tech to China for reverse engineering and likely doing the same with S-400. So we are spending more on it than China or Turkey per system ( it's likely China gave more money under the table) and with little or no tech transfer or even license production opportunity. China will crank dozens in few years for not even 1/5th price and in other hand going to set us back our indigenous programs and catch up in numbers game.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66410
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Singha » 09 Jun 2018 21:22

the hovercrafts are for brahmaputra whose 5 bridges create a choke point that cruise missiles can target. large shallow draft vessels are best for moving in the watery world of the river.

open in chrome https://earth.google.com/web/@27.384576 ... 872341t,0r

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 10 Jun 2018 01:00

nam wrote:
Katare wrote:Yes, but the budget is not even sufficient to pay milestone payments for the already signed contracts so approving more project is not going help much. When she gets supplementary grants from finmin, I would applaud.


India has not defaulted on any signed contract. Moreover defence budget are always allocated according to signed contracts.So there is no chance of MoD not paying for signed contract.

MoD may delay signing new deal and push it next fiscal. In the specific case of these radars, they are to be built by BEL, which is a MoD unit. So it is MoD paying... well MoD.


How do you know India has not defaulted on signed contracts? What is a default on signed contract really means? Did you just created a term from thin air on borrowed from the banking sector to make an argument? The buyer pays as per milestone and builder builds as per contract, if money is rationed, which regularly happens all over the world, the project slows down. No such thing as default exists. You default on loans not on contracts.

Army vice chief on record, told to the parliamentary committee on defense that money allocated in defense budget this year is not even sufficient to pay for the committed liabilities so no new modernization projects are possible this year. Read it, it’ll give you good understanding of how our govt has neglected modernization of defense forces in the last 4 years. Before that it was a 10 year disaster called UPA and before that we were struggling with sanctions. India needs a politically strong defense minister like Gadkari, shushma or Rajnaath singh not feather weight (they both are smart and capable) minsters like MP and NSR.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2325
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby nam » 10 Jun 2018 01:42

Katare wrote:How do you know India has not defaulted on signed contracts? What is a default on signed contract really means? Did you just created a term from thin air on borrowed from the banking sector to make an argument? The buyer pays as per milestone and builder builds as per contract, if money is rationed, which regularly happens all over the world, the project slows down. No such thing as default exists. You default on loans not on contracts.


We can go in circles on terms used in financial industry, however a loan is a contract as well. Defence purchases payments are staggered over the years and that's how MoD calculates it's liabilities. If MoD had defaulted on it's liabilities and flately said to producers that it cannot pay, the equipment will not reach Indian forces or support will be stopped. As simple as that. Do you have any story of signed weapon purchases not reaching our forces? If yes, please enlighten me.

Army vice chief on record, told to the parliamentary committee on defense that money allocated in defense budget this year is not even sufficient to pay for the committed liabilities so no new modernization projects are possible this year. Read it, it’ll give you good understanding of how our govt has neglected modernization of defense forces in the last 4 years.


Sure, Vice Chief is on record, so is MGO.

http://bharatshakti.in/dont-panic-the-army-is-not-as-badly-off-as-it-is-projected/

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3474
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Cain Marko » 10 Jun 2018 05:54

John wrote:
kit wrote:
As with all systems we are literally buying the time to build systems on our own. Hope we find the resources to build and the will to see through those projects in capable hands. India has time and again shown it can develop any system it needs if it really wants to.


Problem with S-400 is Russia simply turned and handed full S-300 tech to China for reverse engineering and likely doing the same with S-400. So we are spending more on it than China or Turkey per system ( it's likely China gave more money under the table) and with little or no tech transfer or even license production opportunity. China will crank dozens in few years for not even 1/5th price and in other hand going to set us back our indigenous programs and catch up in numbers game.

Why should we pay more if tech was transferred to turkey or China? What's the reasoning there? Also how do we know that we are not getting any tech transfer it licence to manufacture? Furthermore, how do we know that we are not getting some modifications of the existing system and even s500 tech to integrate into our own system?

Thing is, we know very little and the little that we do know is that all the stakeholders involved, the iaf and the mod, consider it a priority.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2451
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Katare » 10 Jun 2018 07:39

nam wrote:
Katare wrote:How do you know India has not defaulted on signed contracts? What is a default on signed contract really means? Did you just created a term from thin air on borrowed from the banking sector to make an argument? The buyer pays as per milestone and builder builds as per contract, if money is rationed, which regularly happens all over the world, the project slows down. No such thing as default exists. You default on loans not on contracts.


We can go in circles on terms used in financial industry, however a loan is a contract as well. Defence purchases payments are staggered over the years and that's how MoD calculates it's liabilities. If MoD had defaulted on it's liabilities and flately said to producers that it cannot pay, the equipment will not reach Indian forces or support will be stopped. As simple as that. Do you have any story of signed weapon purchases not reaching our forces? If yes, please enlighten me.

Army vice chief on record, told to the parliamentary committee on defense that money allocated in defense budget this year is not even sufficient to pay for the committed liabilities so no new modernization projects are possible this year. Read it, it’ll give you good understanding of how our govt has neglected modernization of defense forces in the last 4 years.


Sure, Vice Chief is on record, so is MGO.

http://bharatshakti.in/dont-panic-the-army-is-not-as-badly-off-as-it-is-projected/

I have nothing else to add

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17875
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Postby Karan M » 11 Jun 2018 03:03

Bart S wrote:
Karan M wrote:The combination of all 3 attributes makes the S-400 a very hard nut to crack and also, very valuable to any AF.

One can only imagine what will happen if Russia starts producing GaN radars with very high power output allowing these systems to detect VLO targets at range.



Is this functionality that we can implement in our locally developed systems as well, building on existing platforms? And will buying and operating the S400 give us some clues on building our own equivalent?

The end goal has to at least be developing our own equivalent so that we don't have to go shopping for the S600 or whatever after 20 years.


At best, we will know all the features and modes in S-400 so we have to develop our own equivalents. We can't really expect to get any detailed insight about the real algorithms and the actual implementation of any of these modes. There is no way for us to get the secret algorithms or any of the other details to make our own S-400 as a clone of the Russian one.

On the other hand, the IAF deal is ONLY for 5 firing units. That is pitifully small for India's requirements. There is ample scope for India's own systems to compensate.

The Russian system has several heavy ECCM features, a unique guidance scheme, high mobility. We now have a benchmark to develop against. We do have basic competence and building blocks to build own - e.g. high power radars, mission planning centers, datalinks and our missing items are high mobility trucks of the kind the Russians churn out.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests