Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49813
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 06 Jun 2018 21:11

Even many babus suggested picking up technology from East Germany which was being sold off as part of German Integration.

East German technology was good enough to build on.

There really was no money.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 06 Jun 2018 22:58

True all this.... Gut wrenching but water under the bridge.
I say there is still opportunity now when the Russians are again under economic and strategic duress.

This is where the purse strings needed to be loosened a bit in buying some decent tech. The s400, rights to pakfa manufacture or mki upgrade. Hard bargains should be driven.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby JayS » 06 Jun 2018 23:02

Kashi wrote:Did we have the resources to hire so many Russian scientists? Do recall we were staring at a financial abyss ourselves in early 90s.


Even hiring a handful of scientists for 2-3 yrs could have shown huge upswing in some key programs like LCA, IGMDP, Kaveri. financial crisis cant be an excuse.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 06 Jun 2018 23:09

JayS wrote:
Kashi wrote:Did we have the resources to hire so many Russian scientists? Do recall we were staring at a financial abyss ourselves in early 90s.


Even hiring a handful of scientists for 2-3 yrs could have shown huge upswing in some key programs like LCA, IGMDP, Kaveri. financial crisis cant be an excuse.


Good show, boys.

Finally, some faint glimmerings at the far, far end of the tunnel. :)

Currently, ukraine would be a better bet.

Go for the retired guys first and selectively. Be very careful that the "selection committee" does not sabotage the process as that is a very real danger.

Be wise as to who and from where you choose the "selection committee" and ensure that those guys do not have a vested interest in the failure of the foreigners.

The retired goras would be more economical, more reliable and more grateful for dollar payments.

Use the first lot of goras to source the others.

Measure progress and pay as per the metric as laid out in detailed contracts mutually agreed upon.

iran, iraq, china and a whole lot of others have followed this secret recipe of adding some foreign spice into the technological cooking pot.

Some succeeded and others not so much. Start with baby steps and don't expect miraculously great leaps right off the bat.

and finally, don't expect the affected countries to sit tight and take the shit while you poach their guys. Some may even react violently like israel did in iraq and iran.

Just my two paise only.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1546
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby srin » 07 Jun 2018 00:43

We could have just bought MiG (not the plane, but the design bureau) along with Gorshkov (instead of buying just the Mig-29K). We need not go for 1990's when our economy wasn't doing well. I'm talking early 2000's when the Gorshkov deal was signed.

Oh and in return, we could have given them one of our OFBs :D

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1288
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Kakarat » 07 Jun 2018 02:20

It seems No 15 Flying Lances have converted to Su-30MKI

Image
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Indian-Air-For ... SwRsJaxcMu

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Philip » 07 Jun 2018 02:44

Ukraine does not have the diversity of Russian design bureaus. They haven't progressed beyond legacy Sov. era T-80s , with the Pakis worried at our MBT superiority and marine engines for warships.Antonov struggles on.After the loss of the Crimea and Sevastopol, they would've lost further industrial capability located there.
However, they upgraded / overhauled our AN-32s and other AN transports could've been obtained for a song like Dornier which the canny Swiss picked up instead of us.Even the Chins picked up the Do Seastar amphib!
There is little vision in the cobwebbed corridors of the MOD. In a previous era they were far more visionary picking up the Hermes plus Sea Harriets and Gorky , when we had no Western alternatives available.The huge time it is taking us to build the new Vikrant, twice as long than the new Chin 65t CV, shows that we still have to crack the whip with the DPSUs.

The HAL offer for more MKIs built locally to SS std. at these low prices must be swiftly seized as well as upgrading around half of the 272 MKIs that will soon be completed.This will give us around 9-10 sqds. of heavy BMos capable fighters that will enable us to maintain the qualitative edge for at least another 5+ years vs China and Pak. The cost effectiveness of operating around 312+ aircraft will show as well as availability, as the bird had a reported "90%" availability during the recent Gagan S exercises.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2119
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Katare » 07 Jun 2018 08:14

Austin wrote:If we havent got any industrial deal or offset then we wouldnt be making MKI with 70 % indiginous content and with indian sourced raw materials , To make these materials in the right composition with the right materials with the exact specification you need data from OEM and TOT without that you cant even make a sheet of metal that you wont know how it works well in flight. We even make the engines components and the SCB for AL-31FP

MKI program has the best offset till date and best value for money , Rafale does not give any thing that we didnt pay for and what we paid for the aircraft is exorbitant so much so that Parrikar had to say what I posted.

If CAG report is a snap shot of some data for previous year and if I have to take CAG report as Truth that did not get fixed then it has a lot to say of our own program and on Navy and other programs you name it , The Auditor report is taken by MOD to fix what has been found , So if CAG pointed out some thing it would have been fixed by MOD in the past 5 years and something we will come to know when the next CAG report is placed in parliament.

In the end its your word versus what MOD Parikar said in Parliament and what HAL Chief said about MKI cost in recent Ajai Shukla report and I would rather believe in what is official then hearsay


The concept of offset didn't even exist when MKI deals were made, so much for mki offsets. Second, tot and offset are two different things. MKI purchase has no offset at all.

Rafale has very handsome offsets, we didn’t buy tot because it is useless screwdrivergiri as we learned crom MKI and mig tot.

We paid for the MKI tot but ROE delayed transfer of technical documents until most of the manufacturing was done using Russian supplied kits.

All important raw material comes from the Russia (mandated, or no warranty) indian raw material means metals like steel and aluminum mostly. Tot is limited to fabrication shop level work.

Why do you keep repeating the MKI cost at $62M which is not in dispute. CAG has quoted the same number but also gave additional details. The contract was signed for $40 M/aircraft but RussiNs manged to jackup the price by 80%, to $62 M. You can make a MKI at this cost for original 140 aircrafts signed in 2006. The 2012 contract is for $72M/aircraft and any new contract would be north of $100M.”

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21574
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 08:23

What you say about contract value goes against what Hal chief says , so the $100 million is pulled from thin air, mki cost of 62 million usd since 2010 till date period !

Materials 70% Indian content as Hal said the rest is too expensive and import is cheaper

By that logic the contract for mirage was signed at 30 million usd in mid 80 and today the upgrade for mirage cost 50 million and jags cost 20 million in 80 , so there is no concept of military inflation and material cost and manufacturing cost are frozen in time and they don’t increase and so is electricity cost !

MMRCA deal had tot and rafale deal is a small subset of mmrca deal , india couldn’t afford the mnt a deal either in numbers or in what was asked for including tot

Offset in rafale deal is an additional 3 billion usd pay something we could have given to any one via tender at lowest cost needlessly inflating the deal cost
Last edited by Austin on 07 Jun 2018 08:35, edited 4 times in total.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21574
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 08:27

JayS wrote:
Kashi wrote:Did we have the resources to hire so many Russian scientists? Do recall we were staring at a financial abyss ourselves in early 90s.


Even hiring a handful of scientists for 2-3 yrs could have shown huge upswing in some key programs like LCA, IGMDP, Kaveri. financial crisis cant be an excuse.


Hiring 2 , 10 or 20 scientist won’t change any thing as we lacked infra and other facilities , try hiring 20 American scientist at their cost and try to accelerate many delayed program even today and see if it helps

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2119
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Katare » 07 Jun 2018 08:37

Cain Marko wrote:My take is that MKI deal might seem not so great in hindsight and in light of all the tot bakwas that western manufacturers have been marketing for mrca. But in reality little is offered and often at bank breaking prices.

The MKI is a damn good acquisition and gi es superb baNG for the buck, st Anthony was on record in Parliament saying entire MKI procurement cost was INR 55000 crores. That is bloody good no matter how you look at it.

Having said that, Could it have been better? Absolutely. There were plenty of missed opportunities from Hal iirc which did not go in for more tot on the al 31, which was on offer in those days.

This doesn't mean that Rafale deal doesn't have merit. I think it is IAF's silverbullet solution for now. The F35 would have been better but in light of caatsa, perhaps not.


I think even in hindsight it is a great deal and a great aircraft, problem lies with typical Russian way of doing business with India. We got tech documentation when 70% of mfg was complere. Price was jacked up by 80%, lies were fed to us about aircraft maintenance and spare consumption. MKI is still worth the trouble in my opinion but there are a lot more options availble to IAF now.

Not to forget we led the design and capability pecs for it and spend a decade sourcing components to make it a wonderful aircraft.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21574
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 09:46

I suspect the prices were jacked by HAL in early 2010 based on Statement from HAL Chairman that HAL has sold MKI at same price " HAL chairman, T Suvarna Raju, said: “We will offer a very competitive price. Since 2010, we have been delivering the Su-30 at Rs 425 crore. We can deliver another three squadrons at that same price.”"

He says he can deliver 3 more squadron at 425 crore even today , 3squadron is 60 aircraft , HAL makes 12 MKI per year which means even if the deal is signed today the last aircraft is delivered 4-5 years from today.

To keep aircraft cost at 425 since 2010 to mid of next decade is not possible with galloping military inflation and cost of other good steadily rising infact doubling or tripling in many cases.

The only resonable conclusion is HAL jacked up the price to account for 10-12 years of supply and anticipating new deals so that it gets good malai from it and as year progresses by the malai quantity will go down but it will still be profitable.

SO likely MKI cost would have been $40 million in 2010 but HAL charged MOD $60 but promised to keep prices stable for 10-15 years and the interim they keep giving divident GOI YOY but IAF is told to pay more from capex ,This is a case of left hand charging the right but since this all 3 are government entity the money floats within the system

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49813
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby ramana » 07 Jun 2018 09:51

Austin, HAL is not a private company and IAF is not born yesterday. Both are part of govt.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21574
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 10:10

ramana wrote:Austin, HAL is not a private company and IAF is not born yesterday. Both are part of govt.


Yes but HAL YOY gives fats cheque as dividend to government and MKI program is one of the major money earner to HAL.

Neither are born yesterday but this game is being played for long time not started with MKI program nor will end there but like I said all 3 are government entities ( MOD,HAl , IAF ) so its case of Left arm charging right but in the end major Money remains within India within the government just the flow pattern changes.

Else how is that HAL can keep MKI cost constant for 1.2 decades ? Even the milk 1 liter cost in 2010 has gone up by 50 % in India ,The cost of materials , Electricity , labour cost and manufacturing has only risen and military inflation is more so

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1215
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Thakur_B » 07 Jun 2018 10:18

Austin wrote:To keep aircraft cost at 425 since 2010 to mid of next decade is not possible with galloping military inflation and cost of other good steadily rising infact doubling or tripling in many cases.

The only resonable conclusion is HAL jacked up the price to account for 10-12 years of supply and anticipating new deals so that it gets good malai from it and as year progresses by the malai quantity will go down but it will still be profitable.


You forget the massive devaluation of rouble and the effect of increased local sourcing.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2018 10:32

Philip wrote:Ukraine does not have the diversity of Russian design bureaus. They haven't progressed beyond legacy Sov. era T-80s , with the Pakis worried at our MBT superiority and marine engines for warships.Antonov struggles on.After the loss of the Crimea and Sevastopol, they would've lost further industrial capability located there.
However, they upgraded / overhauled our AN-32s and other AN transports could've been obtained for a song like Dornier which the canny Swiss picked up instead of us.Even the Chins picked up the Do Seastar amphib!
There is little vision in the cobwebbed corridors of the MOD. In a previous era they were far more visionary picking up the Hermes plus Sea Harriets and Gorky , when we had no Western alternatives available.The huge time it is taking us to build the new Vikrant, twice as long than the new Chin 65t CV, shows that we still have to crack the whip with the DPSUs.

The HAL offer for more MKIs built locally to SS std. at these low prices must be swiftly seized as well as upgrading around half of the 272 MKIs that will soon be completed.This will give us around 9-10 sqds. of heavy BMos capable fighters that will enable us to maintain the qualitative edge for at least another 5+ years vs China and Pak. The cost effectiveness of operating around 312+ aircraft will show as well as availability, as the bird had a reported "90%" availability during the recent Gagan S exercises.


Sirji,

Start small.

Start with some tank guys.

See how it goes and if warranted, move up to ship and aerospace with Russian bureaus.

The Ukrainians seem have some expertise in transport aircraft.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6229
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby habal » 07 Jun 2018 10:56

chetak, problem is with the bureaucrats sitting in defence ministry (IAS babus) who have a vested interest in imports since they (a significant number) are hand-in-glove with arms dealers and it is these bureaucrats who represent us in discussions with Russians. We do not know what they tell these russian manufacturers and if what they reveal is genuine at all.To date they have not bargained good offset deals with any one arms manufacturer bar maybe for rafale (if kaveri-m88 materializes ie).

bypass this lobby, and we can have prompt movement in defence 'make in India'. China doesn't have this problem because CPC routinely orders execution of corrupt bureaucrats, so the chinese babus are always kept on their goody two toes else they too would have had same fate as us.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21574
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Austin » 07 Jun 2018 11:16

Thakur_B wrote:
Austin wrote:To keep aircraft cost at 425 since 2010 to mid of next decade is not possible with galloping military inflation and cost of other good steadily rising infact doubling or tripling in many cases.

The only resonable conclusion is HAL jacked up the price to account for 10-12 years of supply and anticipating new deals so that it gets good malai from it and as year progresses by the malai quantity will go down but it will still be profitable.


You forget the massive devaluation of rouble and the effect of increased local sourcing.


Sir , Devaluation has happened only in late 2014 and our def trade with them is in USD but HAL says I will keep cost same from 2010 till next 12 years , I dont think this is possible in normal economic sense at the very least and I am saying bare minimal you have 5 % inflation cost added every year.

Unless for any other rational explaination which I can accept if convincing , HAL has over charged IAF and in return paid higher divident to MOD to keep cost constant , could be part of HAL risk hedge as even they cant predict how the price would move in coming decade , if it does not much they make more money if it does then it covers the risk

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2018 11:28

habal wrote:chetak, problem is with the bureaucrats sitting in defence ministry (IAS babus) who have a vested interest in imports since they (a significant number) are hand-in-glove with arms dealers and it is these bureaucrats who represent us in discussions with Russians. We do not know what they tell these russian manufacturers and if what they reveal is genuine at all.To date they have not bargained good offset deals with any one arms manufacturer bar maybe for rafale (if kaveri-m88 materializes ie).

bypass this lobby, and we can have prompt movement in defence 'make in India'. China doesn't have this problem because CPC routinely orders execution of corrupt bureaucrats, so the chinese babus are always kept on their goody two toes else they too would have had same fate as us.


This is the hydra headed and hydra limbed deep state.

How do you bypass this self sustaining monster??

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6229
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby habal » 07 Jun 2018 11:51

It's not a deep state, maybe deep sh1t .

We only have template of chini model, as a cure.

It is a vicious chain alright because babus are answerable to only more senior babus and politicians and the politicians know squat about procurement, defence industrial swot, and most don't even care unless the bureaucrat makes a powerpoint presentation and impresses the top man on the pressing need and urgency of a situation. And do you think the current lot would even bother unless some ones injected with booster dose of deshbhakti. Latter types also exist but rarely promoted to meaningful positions. Their CR will easily be wrecked by their superiors.

everything is solveable if govt of the day can bear down upon bureaucrats with performance targets to indigenize every screw, nut & bolt. Only those bureaucrats who help meet indigenization targets are promoted and retained in def min, rest are transferred to ministry of textiles or krishi bhavan.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby JayS » 07 Jun 2018 20:04

Austin wrote:
JayS wrote:
Even hiring a handful of scientists for 2-3 yrs could have shown huge upswing in some key programs like LCA, IGMDP, Kaveri. financial crisis cant be an excuse.


Hiring 2 , 10 or 20 scientist won’t change any thing as we lacked infra and other facilities , try hiring 20 American scientist at their cost and try to accelerate many delayed program even today and see if it helps


It is going to depend on who we hire and what for. We have many examples of one key person invigorating organizations/systems. But the discussion hereafter is going to be based on unsubstantiated beliefs for both sides so lets stop here and agree to disagree.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2018 20:24

JayS wrote:
Austin wrote:
Hiring 2 , 10 or 20 scientist won’t change any thing as we lacked infra and other facilities , try hiring 20 American scientist at their cost and try to accelerate many delayed program even today and see if it helps


It is going to depend on who we hire and what for. We have many examples of one key person invigorating organizations/systems. But the discussion hereafter is going to be based on unsubstantiated beliefs for both sides so lets stop here and agree to disagree.


Need to know exactly where you are stuck and find people who can help you move from there. This is not going to be easy. It's not like supermarket shopping with dad's credit card.

It requires deep domain knowledge which I seriously doubt we currently have. All our guys were walking around on footpath, passed some entrance exam, trained a little bit in totally unrelated subjects and suddenly found themselves transformed as "scientists" one fine morning.

It is exactly how baboo(n)s are made in the IAS. No difference in the process. Guaranteed promotions, rise up the ladder with 40-50 Sc H in every lab. Their perks and privileges of status cost a bomb.

Not finger pointing but it is a sad commentary on how our systems were developed, run and kingdoms enlarged. Socialist to the core, from each according to his ability and to each, according to his need.

country is neither mentioned nor is it ever considered in the grand scheme of things. Needs always outstrip abilities, by a cool country mile.

and yet we expect output.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2393
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chola » 07 Jun 2018 21:30

Austin wrote:The Chinese are good at reverse engineering the Harbin Z-9, a copy of the French AS.365 Dauphin and Z-10 is exact replica of U.S. Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk and Apache lookalike there are many systems that look like Western Russian system


No.

1) The Z-9 and Z-8 were well-recorded ToT from the French Dauphin and Super Frelon and got off the ground very quickly with in many variants of both in service today.

2) The Z-20 CopyHawk is a true reverse engineering attempt that lasted from the 1980s to today and still none in service.

3) The Z-10 was a chini original project that relied heavily on phoren consultants — Kamov for the frame and P&W/French for engine. It too was fairly rapid with many in service today.

So they are three separate kinds of indigenization projects. The full reverse-engineering one (because the US absolutely refused to work with them) is the least successful and took the longest time.

ToT also happened with the J-11. The ability of the chinus to integrate the WS-10 engine and their own weapons suite to the Flanker with a few years of the Su-27SK contract meant that the codes were opened to them. I wrote about this extensively.

The key is not RE. The key is properly negotiated “Transfers of Technology” where you end up with the rights of ownership which is heralded by the ability to export. This was done by Turkey for the T129 from Augusta Westland and by S Korea for the TA-50 from Lockheed Martin. This was NOT done by India for the Su-30MKI.

Austin wrote:I met an admiral few year back and he told us that the Chinese and Indian delegation were in the same hotel in the 90's the Russians were willing to sell the Indian latest technology but we did not have the cash and the babus wont allow the Defence team to negotiate but the Chinese were willing to pay any amount of cash but the russians did not trust the Chinese , the rest is history


This was like the Varyag during that same period. For want of $20M we have forfeited our lead in carrier aviation and allowed the chinis to jumpstart theirs.

The scientists deal was worse and affected multiple fields. But forget the chinis, even the damn Saudis have beaten us with foresight in this game. Even though we operated An-32s in large numbers for decades, it was Saudi Arabia who bought the design for the followon project the An-132.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6147
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby nachiket » 07 Jun 2018 22:42

chetak wrote:It requires deep domain knowledge which I seriously doubt we currently have. All our guys were walking around on footpath, passed some entrance exam, trained a little bit in totally unrelated subjects and suddenly found themselves transformed as "scientists" one fine morning.

I hope you have some data to back up that ludicrous statement.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 07 Jun 2018 23:09

nachiket wrote:
chetak wrote:It requires deep domain knowledge which I seriously doubt we currently have. All our guys were walking around on footpath, passed some entrance exam, trained a little bit in totally unrelated subjects and suddenly found themselves transformed as "scientists" one fine morning.

I hope you have some data to back up that ludicrous statement.


Please tell me how DRDO recruits its "scientists"??.

Just like all other govt services, right??

Entrance exam route??

followed by departmental training??

Later on some are maybe sent to some IIT etc where they train some more.

Where did Cmde Paulraj train?? He did his PhD in IIT delhi but he had the innate ability of a scientist even before he came to DRDO where he built the APSOH sonar, a thing that hadn't been attempted before or built until he came along??.

Today he graces the National Inventors Hall of Fame in the US for his work on the MIMO antenna.

He is Professor Emeritus at the Dept. of Elect. Engineering, Stanford University. Winner of the Marconi Prize, IEEE Alexander Graham Bell Medal, Padma Bhushan and god knows what else.

It took a Prof Indiresan to discern the qualities of Paulraj at an early age, encourage him and almost forcibly get him to IIT delhi for the PhD.

I am not saying that everyone needs to be a paulraj to work as a scientist but at least some of the characteristics he displayed should be present, in however small a measure, so as to bring something to the table, where ever one is asked to contribute.

As far as I know, being a "scientist" is a state of mind and a superior domain knowledge that is applied assiduously and relentlessly to the job at hand and not merely a job description thrust upon someone.

I have met very few scientists but a lot of govt servants in various organisations. The difference is in the depth and quality of their domain knowledge and hence the rare ability to home on to the very root of any technical problem that falls within their purview.

Very few actually come equipped to fight this battle.

Most are content to bring a knife to the gunfight, if you catch my drift.

Many projects are stalled or are aimlessly drifting, hopelessly overshooting promised deadlines and are also vastly over budget and the reasons are known to all.

Should we not have a laser-like focus on the recruitment and onboarding process, to truly separate the wheat from the chaff??

It would also help to institutionalize a dedicated mentoring program with associated metrics to quantify the success of such a venture.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6664
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Indranil » 08 Jun 2018 01:17

Chetak sir, I have a Ph.D. and I work with a lot of Ph.Ds. What you say is true for a lot of "researchers", govt. sector, or private, deshi or videshi. A degree is not an indicator of creativity. So, I don't know why we should pick on only those in the Indian govt. sector.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 08 Jun 2018 02:24

Indranil wrote:Chetak sir, I have a Ph.D. and I work with a lot of Ph.Ds. What you say is true for a lot of "researchers", govt. sector, or private, deshi or videshi. A degree is not an indicator of creativity. So, I don't know why we should pick on only those in the Indian govt. sector.


Indranil ji,

A degree is not an indicator of creativity is a very true statement.

But, an (engineering) degree is primarily nothing more than a tool for the development of a ruthlessly logical, crystal clear, cold, agile risk evaluating, determining the risk appetite, adroit risk taking and safely innovative thought process.

This process may not be perfected fully at that stage but it must exist consciously and in a concrete fashion in one's already budding professional repertoire. There is no escaping this.

The subject of the actual degree is meaningless or even immaterial but when one has one's degree in hand, it is this all important thought process that one should have tried to consciously perfect in college because that is the often missed aim of the degree course. If one hasn't understood this when one leaves college, then one has failed miserably.

Most people do this maybe subconsciously and without effort in the beginning and it shows up in different ways. But you will become aware of it soon enough because the consideration and solution of a problem leads one through some specific pathways that one may think of as comforting. Soon things will fall into place and the process has begun to take shape.

Along the way, one will, of course, have picked up some domain knowledge of one's chosen field of specialization. There is a massive disconnect between what one has been taught and what one is expected to apply practically.

Since the fundamentals are mostly clear to everyone, the technical experience becomes vital for honing and enlarging one's domain expertise. Experience is not only of oneself but also the experience, insights and related domain expertise of fellow workers and peers where it intersects with one's own domain.

The foundation to all this, the very pillars on which the edifice stands and continues to grow still remains that singular but all important thought process which one (should have) consciously learned and developed in engineering college.

Most people who are successful in ventures, business and profession are mostly basically engineers who developed this fundamental thought process, later specialized in finance, management, whatever. The IIMs have always had a very large percentage of engineers as do almost any and every management school around the world. It is this thought process which they have developed and honed by doing an engineering degree that now goes to work for them.

OTOH, a govt servant has an "iron rice bowl". It is his fundamental and inalienable right because it is a rice bowl that cannot and does not break.

The "iron rice bowl" is a chinese term used to refer to an occupation with guaranteed job security, as well as steady income and benefits.

He just needs to show up, collect his paycheck and wait patiently for the next one and the next one and so on. Nothing is ever asked of him.

So he neither needs nor did he ever develop this very productive, very fundamental, performance enhancing and intellectually enriching thought process.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 08 Jun 2018 06:03

Katare wrote:[
I think even in hindsight it is a great deal and a great aircraft, problem lies with typical Russian way of doing business with India. We got tech documentation when 70% of mfg was complere. Price was jacked up by 80%, lies were fed to us about aircraft maintenance and spare consumption. MKI is still worth the trouble in my opinion but there are a lot more options availble to IAF now.

Not to forget we led the design and capability pecs for it and spend a decade sourcing components to make it a wonderful aircraft.


No denying the truth in this however I don't think it is entirely the Russians to blame here. Indian negotiators and the psus seem to like it this way too, short term acquisitions, short-term tech transfers and never thinking it through.. Even the vikad deal which seems like so much arm twisting by the russkis had certain rather obvious holes in it...

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 854
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Vips » 08 Jun 2018 06:14

India to be blamed for the Vik saga? Yeah sure. This when Russians have openly admitted that they are asking for 3 times the original price as "they under estimated the quantum of work required" on the re fit of Vik. It is India's fault if the Russians were sozzling vodka and were tipsy during the negotiations. Right?

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2119
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Katare » 08 Jun 2018 06:28

I guess we have to take our share of blame for continuously getting suckerd into these Russian quagmires.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 08 Jun 2018 06:29

Thank you Katareji, you got the point.

the same old... Under estimated the work excuse reg vikad only goes so far. We do know that there was a full team of Indians inspecting the work before and after the deal was signed. What were they doing? Even internet admirals knew that the cost of getting the vikad back to life would have been much more than that quoted, don't tell me all the knowledgeable folks deputed didn't have a clue. Or did they just take some land lubbers from lalujis tabela to go to inspect and negotiate?

Anyways my point was to emphasize that Indian negotiations are far from transparent. And India often winds up paying a lot more for the arms it imports. There is a damn gravy train and everyone has their snouts in it.

Cybaru
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2185
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Cybaru » 08 Jun 2018 07:32

That is how PAKFA would have gone CM, had we funded the 4 billion for it. It would end up closer to 16-20 billion for a half baked product.

Cain Marko
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3106
Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Cain Marko » 08 Jun 2018 07:51

Cybaru wrote:That is how PAKFA would have gone CM, had we funded the 4 billion for it. It would end up closer to 16-20 billion for a half baked product.

Yeah there was always that possibility which is why I think they'll go for a mki redux when the pakfa is ready in a few more years. In the meanwhile Hal will get additional mki orders or upgrades. Lots more screw drivering, but a happy PSU and a capable platform. The last bit is the only consolation.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15298
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2018 10:13

nachiket wrote:
chetak wrote:It requires deep domain knowledge which I seriously doubt we currently have. All our guys were walking around on footpath, passed some entrance exam, trained a little bit in totally unrelated subjects and suddenly found themselves transformed as "scientists" one fine morning.

I hope you have some data to back up that ludicrous statement.


Chetak, irrespective of your other comments - your statement above is completely devoid of any merit and is patently false. It would be one thing to state that "some" or "several" individuals were as you allege. That, as Indranil pointed out could have merit. All organizations, Govt, private, civilian, military or otherwise reflect our larger society in one form or the other and have some slackers or confused folks within the larger group.

However, to claim, that "all our guys were walking around on footpath ...and suddenly found themselves recruited as scientists.." is inflammatory, false and libelous especially given India's notable achievements in multiple fields, achieved against all sorts of odds & vested interests.

In a cavalier manner, you have dismissed their lives achievements, demeaned those who are still serving, of which many are excellent engineers and passionate about what they do, which is to enhance Indian national security.

Please don't make such sweeping generalizations henceforth and also kindly stick to the topic of the thread. Further discussion on this topic is NOT warranted & any further OT replies will be deleted.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15298
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2018 10:20

All the negotiation in the world, won't matter if the other side doesn't hold up their end of the bargain and further, you are so dependent on them that you can't push the issue. That's our challenge with Russian arms (or for that matter several other vendors too). The only answer is progressive indigenization.

Cain Marko wrote:
Katare wrote:[
I think even in hindsight it is a great deal and a great aircraft, problem lies with typical Russian way of doing business with India. We got tech documentation when 70% of mfg was complere. Price was jacked up by 80%, lies were fed to us about aircraft maintenance and spare consumption. MKI is still worth the trouble in my opinion but there are a lot more options availble to IAF now.

Not to forget we led the design and capability pecs for it and spend a decade sourcing components to make it a wonderful aircraft.


No denying the truth in this however I don't think it is entirely the Russians to blame here. Indian negotiators and the psus seem to like it this way too, short term acquisitions, short-term tech transfers and never thinking it through.. Even the vikad deal which seems like so much arm twisting by the russkis had certain rather obvious holes in it...

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6664
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Indranil » 08 Jun 2018 10:36

To be fair to the Russies, the same is true about everybody we have imported from. Where are the French sticking to their MMRCA bid submission? Meteor is too hi-fi for them to integrate into our systems. They openly told the French that we are second class citizens when we import the Scorpenes. At least the Russians truly contributed to our submarine design.

Strategic independence and indeginization are tied at the hip. There is no alternative.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15298
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2018 10:48

Jay, for once I have to agree with Austin.

Unless we buy out the entire design and associated infra e.g. China with Lavi becoming the J-10, we won't get anywhere with a handful of guys who will lack the supporting ecosystem they enjoyed back in the USSR. They simply can't work miracles.

To stay on topic, and taking the Su-30 as an example.

For instance, for every aero guy in TSAAGI, there were several design engineers in Sukhoi, many more in factories and subsystem plants all of whom worked together to make some Su design a reality. They had entire city factories so to speak full of purpose built infra and test equipment. Bought/built with a blank cheque so to speak.

In our case, the infra and funding is seriously lacking.

Let me give a real Su-30 example, the Tarang RWR on the Su-30 suffers from blanking (the first design that went on the initial Sukhois), also had reliability issues.

The basic challenge was and is, DARE had no flight data. They didn't have a flying Sukhoi testbed to judge the RWR performance from all angles and possible situations, and ground based simulations simply didn't match the dynamic reality of a canard equipped TVC bird being thrown around the sky by fighter pilots and being painted by radars from different directions. Also, we never got access to specific interfaces/programming for the Russian radar or the Israeli pod at the time and spent far too much time working this out.
All this had to wait till the IAF actually flew the flight test units for months, years and gave them the data.
Then even the ground based rigs were missing. Abroad, you have huge hoists which actually hold up the aircraft in a RF room full of absorbers and emitters & you can accurately judge the performance of each and every emitting gizmo on the plane. Or, you have flying test beds which make up for this by flying specific test routines (usually the most complex) and you can judge your design passed muster.

We were funded for neither. I am still not sure whether we have a fighter or radar testbed even today, which flies at speed. A turboprop like the DO-228 simply doesn't compare.

With these limitations, we can get some foreign guy to design our stuff for us, either he draws on previous knowledge and somehow comes up with some working examples but his Indian peers won't be able to replicate his work because they won't know "why" (and why would he just hand over that knowledge) or he remains stuck asking for infrastructure which won't arrive.

JayS wrote:
Austin wrote:
Hiring 2 , 10 or 20 scientist won’t change any thing as we lacked infra and other facilities , try hiring 20 American scientist at their cost and try to accelerate many delayed program even today and see if it helps


It is going to depend on who we hire and what for. We have many examples of one key person invigorating organizations/systems. But the discussion hereafter is going to be based on unsubstantiated beliefs for both sides so lets stop here and agree to disagree.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15298
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby Karan M » 08 Jun 2018 10:50

Indranil wrote:To be fair to the Russies, the same is true about everybody we have imported from. Where are the French sticking to their MMRCA bid submission? Meteor is too hi-fi for them to integrate into our systems. They openly told the French that we are second class citizens when we import the Scorpenes. At least the Russians truly contributed to our submarine design.

Strategic independence and indeginization are tied at the hip. There is no alternative.


True, an ex-IAF guy at HAL said that at least the Russians have started listening to us & know we are serious. These French guys (referring to the engine for ALH) still try to fob off whatever they have and we have to "make them understand" it won't do.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16979
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby chetak » 08 Jun 2018 11:29

Karan M wrote:
nachiket wrote:I hope you have some data to back up that ludicrous statement.


Chetak, irrespective of your other comments - your statement above is completely devoid of any merit and is patently false. It would be one thing to state that "some" or "several" individuals were as you allege. That, as Indranil pointed out could have merit. All organizations, Govt, private, civilian, military or otherwise reflect our larger society in one form or the other and have some slackers or confused folks within the larger group.

However, to claim, that "all our guys were walking around on footpath ...and suddenly found themselves recruited as scientists.." is inflammatory, false and libelous especially given India's notable achievements in multiple fields, achieved against all sorts of odds & vested interests.

In a cavalier manner, you have dismissed their lives achievements, demeaned those who are still serving, of which many are excellent engineers and passionate about what they do, which is to enhance Indian national security.

Please don't make such sweeping generalizations henceforth and also kindly stick to the topic of the thread. Further discussion on this topic is NOT warranted & any further OT replies will be deleted.


The footpath statement did not come out as intended.

Some posters seem to have picked up on that.

My fault for not being clearer.

I am never cavalier about the defence of the state and all its implications.

My last on this.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3375
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Su-30: News and Discussion - August 9, 2014

Postby JayS » 08 Jun 2018 14:52

Karan M wrote:Jay, for once I have to agree with Austin.

Unless we buy out the entire design and associated infra e.g. China with Lavi becoming the J-10, we won't get anywhere with a handful of guys who will lack the supporting ecosystem they enjoyed back in the USSR. They simply can't work miracles.

To stay on topic, and taking the Su-30 as an example.

For instance, for every aero guy in TSAAGI, there were several design engineers in Sukhoi, many more in factories and subsystem plants all of whom worked together to make some Su design a reality. They had entire city factories so to speak full of purpose built infra and test equipment. Bought/built with a blank cheque so to speak.

In our case, the infra and funding is seriously lacking.

Let me give a real Su-30 example, the Tarang RWR on the Su-30 suffers from blanking (the first design that went on the initial Sukhois), also had reliability issues.

The basic challenge was and is, DARE had no flight data. They didn't have a flying Sukhoi testbed to judge the RWR performance from all angles and possible situations, and ground based simulations simply didn't match the dynamic reality of a canard equipped TVC bird being thrown around the sky by fighter pilots and being painted by radars from different directions. Also, we never got access to specific interfaces/programming for the Russian radar or the Israeli pod at the time and spent far too much time working this out.
All this had to wait till the IAF actually flew the flight test units for months, years and gave them the data.
Then even the ground based rigs were missing. Abroad, you have huge hoists which actually hold up the aircraft in a RF room full of absorbers and emitters & you can accurately judge the performance of each and every emitting gizmo on the plane. Or, you have flying test beds which make up for this by flying specific test routines (usually the most complex) and you can judge your design passed muster.

We were funded for neither. I am still not sure whether we have a fighter or radar testbed even today, which flies at speed. A turboprop like the DO-228 simply doesn't compare.

With these limitations, we can get some foreign guy to design our stuff for us, either he draws on previous knowledge and somehow comes up with some working examples but his Indian peers won't be able to replicate his work because they won't know "why" (and why would he just hand over that knowledge) or he remains stuck asking for infrastructure which won't arrive.



I can give you some examples to which show that simple guiding at some key steps can really go a long way. Right now I can remember a few past examples - inputs from BAe on failure analysis and design of quad channel FCS for LCA with three channel failure, or an input (can't remember by whom) to Kaveri team to use hot geometry for design work. Imagine saving of efforts had someone told ADA what is correct rate of decent for MLG design or ADE to take correct FoS for Rustom-2 project.

As I said, it really depends on what we hire for and who we hire. If we expect hired engineers to actually seat down and do the manual work, that's out of question. Our guys can anyway do that, and they have shown that very well. What they can really use is (apart from obvious issues of funding and infra) some guiding on design best practices, practical issues typically seen and on program management which Russians and Western engineers have leant through hard work and lot of iterations and failures.

Beyond this I wont say more, Its rather debatable and subjective thing to discuss about, so lets agree to disagree.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 26 guests