India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

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.
Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1651
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Sid » 12 Feb 2016 09:25

^^
Correct, I know of products which still have 10MB of 'main storage' since 1996. It used to be revolutionary in 96 but now it's stone Age. People work around such h/w problems by writing more efficient software.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 12 Feb 2016 09:30

GunterH wrote:Although RaghavaJi deserves lots of thanks for showing the pictures, a few observations on the state of electronics from DRDO (nothing against Raghava)

DRDO seems to have pulled some ancient (1980s if not 1970s) printed circuit boards for a show-N-tell.. anyone who sees this displayed at a trade-show will walk away laughing at DRDO.

64K memory module? I think it used to exist before Jesus was born.

State of the through-hole components is also ancient.

The IF amp with a DB-9 and a BNC patch will immediately disqualify as any FCC Part 15 class A (unintentional radiator) compliance let alone a mil-grade equipment, wire harness on any of the PCB is gravely in violation of mil-grade electronics .. certainly not for avionics

Embarrassing. ...

DRDO should hire a pro event manager / booth designer and a pro marketing guy... if they really want to show-case their abilities.



These half baked rants on Indian agencies are getting downright ridiculous.

First, that is not the DRDO display clearly but from the Navy's indigenization wing.

Second, its a very credible effort because the aim is to replace like for like, with compatibility with existing equipment and obsolescence management, with parts that are no longer available from abroad or are very expensive. These parts are extensively tested for compatibility to whit.

In short, its something the Navy must and should do and they deserve every bit of support.
Last edited by Karan M on 12 Feb 2016 09:36, edited 2 times in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 12 Feb 2016 09:32

http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/02 ... y.html?m=1

DDM note about radar apart, interesting.

Image

DRDO scientist Ravindra Singh talking about features of Laser Cross Section Measurement & Imaging System at Maritime Exhibition being organised at IFR Village in Visakhapatnam

Visakhapatnam: It's named LACSMI, pronounced Laxmi — the Goddess of prosperity and wellbeing - and not without reason. It holds the potential to ensure that warships, tanks and other weapons platforms manufactured in the country can have exactly the right stealth capabilities to evade laser and infrared guided bombs and missiles.

The Laser Cross Section Measurement & Imaging System (LACSMI), developed by Laser Science and Technology Centre (LASTEC) of the Defence Research and Development Organisation was unveiled at the maritime exhibition at Visakhapatnam held as part of the International Fleet Review 2016.

Most of the Indian Navy's latest warships possess stealth capabilities but till now there was no way of measuring exactly how much is good enough to fool the laser seekers. It will be LACSMI's job to carry out imaging of ships as well as tanks and other military vehicles to find the 'hotspots' that give away their location to the enemy.

"This technology is in a nascent stage worldwide and no such system is reported in open literature or available inventory of any developed nation's armed forces. This was developed indigenously and is an excellent example of 'Make in India' efforts. Electro-optically guided precision strike munitions, commonly known as laser guided and infrared guided munitions have proved how lethal they are in recent conflicts around the globe. In laser-guided munitions, the target is illuminated by a laser designator and laser seeker head installed within the bomb or missile. They make use of laser-scattered radiation from the targets to command the weapon to strike with remarkable precision. Such weapons are widely used nowadays and pose an increasingly serious threat to strategic targets. In order to modify existing platforms to make them stealthier or design new generation stealth platforms, a system which can measure and record laser signature was required;" says Dr Ravindra Singh, project director at LASTEC.

Singh added: "It can provide online and offline laser signature measurement, generate laser 3D images, identify hotspots and automatically video track sea and airborne targets. It also has the capability to give motion compensated laser signature and 3D images, which is contemporary technology developed for the first time ever."

Madhuri Yadav, who has been working closely with Singh, says that the system was developed in 2014 but took a while to test and adjust. Now, it will be set-up on Dolphin Hill at the naval dockyard in Visakhapatnam.

It will constantly be sending out a radar beam to a distance of up to five km to pick up targets. The laser is totally eye safe.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2958
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby tsarkar » 12 Feb 2016 09:41

raghava wrote:NSTL's AUV seems interesting especially since the IN plans to induct 10 of these according to the link below

Karan M wrote:We finally have our own EO sight capability for Arjun class MBTs, SAMs etc.

A note of caution here. The IRDE & NSTL brochures represent developer aspirations.

There is a spiral of development, development testing, user testing, preparation of SOP, production, factory acceptance testing & thereafter commissioning.

While I personally aspire like every other member to see these systems in service, we also cannot disregard the long process ahead, and not every stage would be successful.

I would estimate 20% of all R&D effort finally reaches commissioning. This applies worldwide. Take a look at prototypes Dassault has built, and compare with the aircraft that were actually inducted http://aviationweek.com/defense/dassaul ... prototypes

It also indicates how tough R&D really is.

Looking at brochures and considering them to be fully developed products is brochuritis. Brochuritis is brochuritis, whether indigenous or foreign.

For example, sometime back srai had posted an older NSTL/NPOL brochure where WASS C303 decoy is used to represent Mareech, whose final design was very different. When the brochure was made, Mareech decoy was in concept stage and no one knew how the final shape would be, so C303 was used to represent Mareech.

All brochures carry an inherent risk of infecting readers with brochuritis.
Last edited by tsarkar on 12 Feb 2016 09:45, edited 1 time in total.

raghava
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 88
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 18:40

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby raghava » 12 Feb 2016 09:44

GunterH,

No offense taken. Neither will DRDO or IN be offended. Their biggest problem was two fold

1 - discontinuation of spares support by OEMs which led to cannibalisation of spares resulting in lower "ready" equipment levels

2 - exorbitant prices quoted by some OEMs for spares resulting in huge capital expenditure.

By manufacturing such spares indigenously, readiness levels are up and money is also saved. What is the problem in that?

As I mentioned in my post before all the pics I uploaded..

Some of these efforts are really low hanging fruit but are delivering amazing benefits. If any of you have ever wondered like me, how is it that we still continue to operate some equipment way beyond their prescribed life, and sometimes with little or no support from OEM's, take a look at some of the pics below...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 12 Feb 2016 09:59

tsarkar wrote:A note of caution here. The IRDE & NSTL brochures represent developer aspirations.


tsarkar, in the case of the IRDE sight and the NSTL ones, you are mistaken.

That is not "developer aspiration" but a functional sight developed specifically as part of DRDO's overall programs and also, a derivative of the Arjun Mk2 program sight, along with Elbit.

It replaces the CPS on top.
https://battlemachines.files.wordpress. ... _tank1.jpg
You can see the IRDE-Elbit sight on the left on top.
http://defense-update.com/wp-content/up ... urret2.jpg

The brochure image shows the sight without the protective casing that usually covers the TI sight.

The sight is variant of one which is part of the Arjun Mk2s in trials, and replaces the current hunter killer sight (daylight optics) with a fully stabilized long range sight with thermal vision. It is also clearly a heavy duty system with long range capabilities (which is dictated in part by the size of the camera/optics aperture) and hence DRDO is noting it is also intended for the Akash MK2 and QRSAM programs.

BTW, this is not the first time the sight has been displayed. It was first revealed in Defexpo IIRC quite some time back (2014) and even DRDO's in-house magazine carried a piece on it.

Its significance, as I said lies in the fact that we finally have the capability to field EO sight capabilities with stabilization of this class.

For the private sector enthusiasts, time for them to be enthused that it is being made by a Hyderabad based firm as versus the BEL or DPSU.

Previously, we have developed other sights for the Nishant (Gimbal Mk4), the Navy (EON variants) but a modular design which could be fielded for multiple platforms was required and now we have it.

Apart from this sight, the other breakthroughs are in LORROS style (replacing the Israeli ones) and Integrated MF sights plus Commander sight for T-90 and variants which are basically form and fit (nowhere in class of this new sight).

Coming to the NSTL unit, its not an operational one (was not intended to be one) but a technology demonstration capability.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/d ... 276348.ece

The program is a long running one with various capabilities iteratively developed and demonstrated. Again, its not aspirational, but has passed trials with the Navy and will form the basis for actual UUV capability. In short, the specs mentioned are those for the TD.

With its Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV), developed as a technology demonstrator, passing muster in extensive trials, the Naval Science and Technology Laboratory (NSTL) in Visakhapatnam will “make a few more of the same” for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance missions by the Navy and agencies like the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited for safeguarding offshore installations.

The NSTL is a facility of the Defence Research and Development Organisation.

In his first media interaction after taking over as Director-General (Naval Systems and Materials) at the DRDO last week, V. Bhujanga Rao told The Hindu here that the flatfish-shaped, 1.7-tonne reconfigurable vehicle capable of carrying payloads of up to 500 kg would now be converted into an operational platform {same specs as mentioned in the brochure}.

Separately, the DRDO would work on a yet-to-be sanctioned Rs. 250-crore programme for developing a range of AUVs for a variety of roles as force multipliers. (As first reported by The Hindu, the agency is keen on developing mammoth AUVs, weighing 12 tonnes, which could function as submadrones under its secret Autonomous Sea Vehicle programme, which is similar to the U.S. Navy’s Manta Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Programme.)


http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/d ... 276348.ece
Last edited by Karan M on 12 Feb 2016 11:11, edited 1 time in total.

raghava
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 88
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 18:40

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby raghava » 12 Feb 2016 10:08

GunterH,

Forget equipment during Jesus's time ... I will give you an example below which probably dates to Moses's time

Image

Naval Armament Depot (Visakhapatnam) noticed failures in a certain type of torpedo - specifically within its Universal Stabilising Gyroscope (USG). When brought to the notice of the OEM, they quoted ridiculously high charges for both identification of the problem as well as replacement of the entire USG unit. A little bit of digging by NAD (V) pinpointed the fault to a single component in the USG known as the Liquid Level Pendulum Switch (LLPS). The OEM refused to provide LLPS spares but insisted on the purchase of the entire USG unit for Rs 50 lakh INR each.

What did NAD (V) do ...?

Image

Image

I mean I don't know how far 3.5 mil USD stretches in other countries but at ~ 24 crore INR it is around 0.1% of the Indian Navy Budget ... all for just one component.
Last edited by raghava on 12 Feb 2016 12:06, edited 1 time in total.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 12 Feb 2016 10:11

tsarkar wrote:There is a spiral of development, development testing, user testing, preparation of SOP, production, factory acceptance testing & thereafter commissioning.

While I personally aspire like every other member to see these systems in service, we also cannot disregard the long process ahead, and not every stage would be successful.

I would estimate 20% of all R&D effort finally reaches commissioning. This applies worldwide. Take a look at prototypes Dassault has built, and compare with the aircraft that were actually inducted http://aviationweek.com/defense/dassaul ... prototypes

It also indicates how tough R&D really is.


Agree.

Looking at brochures and considering them to be fully developed products is brochuritis. Brochuritis is brochuritis, whether indigenous or foreign.

For example, sometime back srai had posted an older NSTL/NPOL brochure where WASS C303 decoy is used to represent Mareech, whose final design was very different. When the brochure was made, Mareech decoy was in concept stage and no one knew how the final shape would be, so C303 was used to represent Mareech.

All brochures carry an inherent risk of infecting readers with brochuritis.


The trick lies in tracking programs over the long term and determining their progress.

Taking one pic from any displayed one and using it to extrapolate is also risky because of the abysmal PR of the state owned firms.

For instance, I have seen Arjun components displayed with pictures of T-55 and Abrams and even WW2 tanks. Looks like the creators who get the basic specs, google image the word tank and then just happily photoshop it in.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 12 Feb 2016 10:16

Raghava, good stuff. Naval Armament Depot is an Indian Navy establishment and their efforts in indigenization with pvt sector SMEs are very laudable. This "frees up" DRDO, larger firms and DPSUs to work on the bigger programs as well.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby SaiK » 12 Feb 2016 17:19

saw that tender tweet by brf. why is cabs moving those antennas to jodhpur?
http://www.drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/CABS/E ... round.html

and if they are already on wheels, why tender to move?


raghava
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 88
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 18:40

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby raghava » 12 Feb 2016 18:42

making our ships a bit more secure against missiles

Is anyone on BRF aware of this... Was news to me! When I asked the gent in the stall, he replied that it is operational. However he declined to name the ships in question. But that is easy to guess - I guess!

Image

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Gyan » 14 Feb 2016 19:22

Recently Aatre Panel gave a report on choosing Strategic Partners. I thought that we can discuss the report and also speculate on who will be best placed to be selected as a Strategic Partner.

http://armingindia.com/Aatre%20Panel%20 ... ystems.htm

Aatre Panel: Only 1 'Strategic Partner' For Each Category Of Military Systems

By Arming India Correspondent

NEW DELHI, JAN.18, 2016: In a bid to ensure Indian armed forces get the best indigenous equipment and to enable building of domestic arms manufacturing capabilities, a Task Force headed by former Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) chief Dr. V. K. Aatre has recommended the selection of "only one" Strategic Partner from the private sector for manufacturing each of the high-end military systems.

The Aatra-led Task Force has taken off on the recommendation made by the Committee of Experts headed by former Home Secretary Dhirendra Singh on selecting 'Strategic Partners' from the private sector for some categories of defense manufacturing, and has recommended that the categories be further divided into two groups - one for 'system of systems' and another for other segments of military products.

The Defense Ministry is yet to take a final decision on the recommendations, which are currently being deliberated upon by officials.
The Aatre panel, according to those having knowledge of the details, has recommended that the first set of products should include major whole systems such as aircraft; helicopters; aero-engines; submarines; warships; artillery guns; and armored vehicles such as infantry combat vehicles and battle tanks. The government may choose to further create sub-categories within these segments and choose a Strategic Partner for each of them.

However, the Task Force is learnt to have recommended that "only one Strategic Partner" should be selected per segment for major systems.
This is likely to keep out all other companies, except for the selected Strategic Partner, from manufacturing one particular 'system of systems', and that's where there may be resentment from companies that may lose out in the race, but still have some manufacturing capability already.

The argument in favour of having just one Strategic Partner is to ensure military manufacturing capabilities and strengths in the private sector, built over the last 15 years, are not wasted and are put to good use for ensuring Indian armed forces are well armed.

However, the Task Force recognized that the second set of products were more bulk-produced products, such as ammunition, and it is learnt to have recommended that more than one Strategic Partner for each of the segments should be selected. That would ensure that there is capability to mass produce these products, whenever necessary.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/2016/01/r ... firms.html

The Task Force was set up after a MoD expert committee, under Dhirendra Singh, recommended that one be constituted to lay down criteria for selecting one private “strategic partner” for each of six “strategic segments”. These were: aircraft/helicopters, warships/submarines, armoured vehicles, missiles, command & control systems, and critical materials.

However, the Task Force has rearranged these into two groups. Group I has seven segments that include aircraft; helicopters; aero engines; submarines; warships; guns and artillery; and armoured vehicles. The Task Force recommends that just one strategic partner be chosen for each segment.

For the three segments in Group II --- metallic material and alloys; non-metallic materials; and ammunition, including smart munitions --- the Task Force recommends two strategic partners for each.


As there is limitation on One strategic Partner being choosen for each category therefore TATAs may be at a loss. I think that restriction on one partern in each category is not practical as there are very few groups in India in serious high tech manufacturing, most of the grouips are in money making through process industries. So my list:-

Group – I

Helicopters – TATAs
Aircraft - Tatas (who else? Mukesh Ambani?)
submarines; L&T
aero engines; L&T (who else in Pvt sector can do turbines as an ancillary to main power business like GE, something like BHEL? But even BHEL is screw driver company)
warships; Anil Ambani through Pipav
guns and artillery; Bharat Forge
and armoured vehicles – Mahindras, (as TATAs cannot have everything, thought TATAs would again make sense here)

Group- II

metallic material and alloys; (TATAs, HINDALCO, Vedanta
non-metallic materials; Mukesh Ambani Group,
ammunition, including smart munitions (TATAs, Bharat Forge, Punj Lloyd, Godrej)

Things that were considered earlier but are now missing inlatest reports are:-

Missiles – Tatas, Godrej
command & control systems, - L&T, Tatas, Godrej

and as per me some important categories that are still missing are:-

Thermal imagers, NVGs, Sights- Tatas
Radars – Astra, Tatas
MEMS, Chips, RLG, FOGS etc- TATAs
Satelites – Godrej, TATAs
Space Vehicles- Tatas, Godrej
Small arms – Godrej, Punj Lloyd, Bharat Forge
Piston Engines – Kirloskars, Force, Mahindras
Vehicles, Cranes – Lot of companies
BPJs- Lot of companies
Clothing, tents, personal equipment – Lot companies

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby shaun » 14 Feb 2016 20:04

LYNX FCS was used with Trishul SAM ???

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 14 Feb 2016 20:06

Raghava, interesting so the Barak FCR+ Lynx FCS controls the gun.

Question is whether the Lynx FCS can handle the missiles too.. and whether the Lynx FCR and Barak FCS will be retained. Or is it that the Barak FCR is now the standard & Lynx FCR is gone, and Barak FCS will be retained.

Questions, questions..

raghava
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 88
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 18:40

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby raghava » 14 Feb 2016 20:10

@Karan M - option c

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1415
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby sooraj » 14 Feb 2016 21:04

Final version of Namica platform


Image

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1651
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Sid » 14 Feb 2016 22:38

Previous versions of Namica had raised hump to facilitate auto re-loading in battlefield, which seems to be missing now.

Most of all BMP base looks so obsolete for this system, why not use Arjun.

P.S why two EO system.

enaiel
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 97
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 07:13

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby enaiel » 15 Feb 2016 01:12

One for the commander and one for the gunner. It's called a Hunter-Killer sight - the commander hunts while the gunner kills.

I agree about using Arjun instead of BMP.

Sid wrote:Previous versions of Namica had raised hump to facilitate auto re-loading in battlefield, which seems to be missing now.

Most of all BMP base looks so obsolete for this system, why not use Arjun.

P.S why two EO system.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 02:21

Why is the gunners EO sight not armored or in its own proper pillbox arrangement? Like the Missile seeker canisters are.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Aditya G » 15 Feb 2016 03:14

Sorry, I have not understood the Barak & Lynx integration. A little simple pliss.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 06:36

c--> Or is it that the Barak FCR is now the standard & Lynx FCR is gone, and Barak FCS will be retained.

means barak fcr, lynx fcs, barak fcs
lynx fcs for gun
barak fcs for missile
radar is barak fcr std.
saves space, cost, hassle etc.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1651
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Sid » 15 Feb 2016 06:57

^^
Correct, they simply replaced the TMXEO tracker with Barak FCR in LYNX UX gun control system.

But can this hybrid system work for controlling Barak 1?

shaun
BRFite
Posts: 1150
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby shaun » 15 Feb 2016 07:05

NAMICA was supposed to have raised platform with missile launcher and the EO system or the target acquisition for non LOS target is by some other means.
Though the new system have two extra tubes but the placement of EO system in the previous version is inside a compartment not the vulnerable and protruding, like the one above .

well , its not the latest , been there for last 3 years !!
Image

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby srai » 15 Feb 2016 14:43

sooraj wrote:Final version of Namica platform


Image


AFAIR, the IA had wanted revision to NAMICA after last trials and wanted it to be equipped with a raisable mast-mounted panoramic optronic suite for target acquisition. Is the commander's sensor suite raisable for target acquisition at longer ranges or hiding behind structures like earth mounds?

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Vipul » 15 Feb 2016 17:36

NAL inks pact with Tatas for Mission Computer.

National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL), on Monday said it has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) for indigenous Mission Computer.

"The Integrated Global bus Avionics Processing System (IGAPS) popularly called Mission Computer is a CoreAircraft Computing Platform. This sophisticated state-of-the-art onboard computing system has been successfully designed, developed and integrated for the first time in India by CSIR-National Aerospace Laboratories (CSIR-NAL), Bengaluru for Civil Avionics requirements in line with "Make in India" initiative," a statment released on Monday said.

It added that in order to take this development further to the Indian and worldwide market, NAL has tied up with TASL Tata Advanced Systems Limited (TASL) so as to undertake a collaborative effort towards furthering the 'Make in India' National Mission of the Government of India.

The Mission Computer, a key electronic system on Air and Defence platforms for subsystem integration and control, and its variants will be manufactured in India and cater to the Indian and Global markets.

"Further, this will be used for wide ranging applications across various Aerospace and Defence platforms," the statement said. NAL Director Shyam Chetty said: "This is one of the best example of public private collaboration effort towards Make in India." "...This is a continued commitment towards indigenous design, development and manufacturing of key systems and sub-systems leveraging the technology developed by major Aerospace and Defence Labs in India,'' Tata Advanced Systems Chairman S Ramadorai said.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Vipul » 15 Feb 2016 18:50

Is sky the limit for Indian plane making?

Aqus Aviation, Radel Advanced Technology... new names.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 19:00

Both are old timers.. comparitively.. Aequs is a big name in contract manufacturing, build to design and design as well..
Radel IIRC makes stuff for Navy, import/spares replacement.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 19:00

The mission computer information is interesting.

That's a Saras spinoff. Some good from the program.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby member_29190 » 15 Feb 2016 19:02

On the Namica, is it me or it looks like a standard BMP-2 does not require major structural changes to make it Nag carrier? From the outside looks it you can place the missile by removing the old turret and just plonk the new one in.

The old one had 8 missiles? but required custom structures around the "turret hole"

This one may be you can convert any bmp2 in to namica? in the field.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 19:08

No way jose!

The Namica conversion is a very complicated one and can be only done at BEL or BDL or wherever the manufacture takes place. Doubtful even ABW has the capability given amount of electronics and wiring involved plus modification, turret replacement.

member_29190
BRFite
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby member_29190 » 15 Feb 2016 20:28

I dont know. Nowadays ATGM are quite compact. TOW with it's sight for example.

Could they have Moduliser the ATGM turret?

If they created a module, it would be brilliant. Convert any BMP-2 into Namica at ABW.

No need to send BMP's to Avadi and wait for a century to get them modified.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 15 Feb 2016 20:39

Please look further into the topic. This is not a drop in missile and sight.
Its a replacement of a turret with another one and significant internal modification.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Aditya G » 15 Feb 2016 23:56

Reg Barak-Lynx integration. This image answers it all. Zoom into the flyers at the bottom of this image:

On INS Betwa the STGR can now direct 76 mm cannon.

Image

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 16 Feb 2016 00:06

Thats the same flyer Raghava put up. :P

Good info on STGR as it confirms the above.. bye bye Lynx FCR..! Are we planning to make the STGR locally?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19516
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Karan M » 16 Feb 2016 00:08

Excellent link from Aditya

Aditya G wrote:Dope from IFR's Marine Exhibition:

http://ifr-2016.blogspot.in/

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Aditya G » 16 Feb 2016 00:30

I was talking about the colourful powerpoint printout. The other one i could not comprehend :D

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Vipul » 16 Feb 2016 07:48

We are building jet engines: Baba Kalyani.

What are your capabilities?

By building the artillery gun, we demonstrated our engineering capability. We are building jet engines — small ones, not as big as those by Rolls -Royce — for helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Is the jet engine indigenous?

The UAV engine we are doing indigenously. I have told my engineers in Pune that I want to see the engine in one year.


It would be interesting to know who their joint venture partner is for the helicopter engine.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby Vipul » 16 Feb 2016 08:05

Saab keen to manufacture Gripen in India.


Yes, we are offering complete aerospace capablility, not just manufacturing capability. We are willing to do a copy-and-paste Sweden factory here in India for the Gripen. We are looking at setting up a complete eco system here, which will provide 100 per cent benefit to India for the next 100 years.



We are planning to put up an entire facility here, right from research and development, to production to final testing. We are setting up everything here, so basically everything will be located in India, so it would be 100 per cent transfer. For us, it is a matter of time, for if we are to supply our product here, we need to be here. We need to be local. It is not such a big thing though, for we are setting up a full aerospace capability. It is a natural part of what we do, and we are successful. Huge investments would be required. This is an area where we would need our Indian partners to help.


Yes, since we are looking at substantial investment to set up the facility. If we are doing this together, it would be a joint investment.


Currently, 49 per cent FDI is allowed through the normal route. Higher FDI is permissible in cases where high technology is being brought into India. We have to join hands with Indian partners and in this case, since we are building an entire eco system, it will require more than one joint venture, and more than one partner. We are going to indigenise our products, and are going to require a lot of Indian partners. Though we already have a number of partners here, it will require a lot of work.We are looking at a cluster with a number of different partners and are also looking to develop tier-1, tier-2 and tier-3 suppliers.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3826
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Postby hnair » 16 Feb 2016 12:46

The Namica shown above, seem to be still not the full form, seem to have no self-defense smaller-calibre gun mounts. Doesnt it need to defend itself from hostile infantry at least? Particularly when the missile rounds are all spend


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], ParGha, Raveen, shettyp and 70 guests