Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to blame?

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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 05:26

nileshjr wrote:Would they be putting migs in hanger with probes removed?? or the shelters are open and probe poking out it al-right?? Genuine query, I have no idea.

Neither. The probe is an integral part of the aircraft and contains sensors

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby srai » 23 Sep 2015 06:31

+1 nileshjr

Too many project managers doing the Indian head nodding for change requests :wink:

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 23 Sep 2015 13:56

Rustom-2 was to have weighed 1800kg but is supposedly overweight by 400kg which is massive 22%. So has HAL learnt anything?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19584
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Karan M » 23 Sep 2015 13:58

Source?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 15:54

Gyan wrote:Rustom-2 was to have weighed 1800kg but is supposedly overweight by 400kg which is massive 22%. So has HAL learnt anything?

Has HAL learnt anything is a rhetorical question. Rhetorical questions such as these can mean different things and one need not specify what the question means and leave it to the reader to take some meaning out of it.

However I love rhetoric and I love asking and answering rhetorical questions. Your question is actually two sentences. One is a statement and a question follows. The statement is that HAL wanted to make a 1800 kg aircraft and ended up making it 22% heavier. For the sake of argument let me assume that the statement is 100% correct. I have a response to that statement. So what? If you believe that the first iteration of a prototype aircraft should be the exact predicted weight it is not HAL that needs to learn anything. You need to learn something though. That does not mean that HAL does not need to learn, but it definitely means that they probably learn stuff that will be much more useful than what you have come up with so far.

After the sentence comes your actual question: ""Has HAL learnt anything". Assuming they know that it is overweight I suspect they have learnt that it is overweight.

I hope you are satisfied with the answer. I have no objection to your being up front and critical of HAL. But if you make statements that expose your own ignorance while asking sarcastic rhetorical questions, I would be happy to join in a discussion that beats about the bush for the next ten pages.

if you have something to say - critical or not, say it up front and boldly. If you think HAL are a bunch of incompetent bums. Just say it. Don't beat about the bush and play word games.

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby jayasimha » 23 Sep 2015 16:40

Gyan wrote:I think that we cannot restrict our discussion on HAL & IAF love affair only with respect to LCA. We need to consider what is happening in:-

HTT-40 - Dilution of GSQRs for Swiss Maal while HAL takes 10 years to select engine

LUH- HAL delays project by 5 years again on engine selection issue

LCH- Project struggling with weight issues, why cannot we induct a few LCH for plains/deserts first?

Saras- HAL is definitely not in hurry even after 10 years delay

MRH- IAF cannot decide GSQRs for last 10 (?) years

AMCA- super advanced 6th Gen requirements, 2040 for first flight is not far away.

LCA Mark-2 - Nobody seems to be in a hurry or in any worry!

LCA Mark-3- Is there one?

Rustom-2- HAL oh shit, we forgot to order actuators in last 20 years, pls believe us.

Rustom- Turboprop- why make one, when we can import from Israelis.

IJT- IAF, should we import? HAL, pls wait, it is only 10 years delay!



I think i know the perfect solution to the above problems
1] Appoint a non aviation man as chairman and managing director as did by UPAvasis last time.
2] keep sending parliamentary commitees / xyz commitees 121 times in a year so that they can probe on major issues like " how many Hindi magazines you subscribe, where are they are displayed, how many read them, how do you monitor them, later how they are disposed off, how you prevent them to be used as toilet paper,, why there is not sufficient qty of aloo in the samosa,,
3] obtain satisfactory response from the CMD for the above queries . if not satisfied send the next parliamentary committee immediately.
4] keep pinging them/ of on "other issues" like surplus land
5] Now Upavasis are in the state govt. try to prick them as much as possible through state boards/ unions etc..
6] Desh prem, desh bhakthi, dedication is rewarded by count less inquiries by vigilant commissions on mundane things. where as real culprits go scot free.

After this kind of "response", the top management of many PSU are so fed up they just occupy the position just for some time then retire as Senior management of great PSU...

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 23 Sep 2015 17:17

I am not beating about the bush but the pointing out another factoid on the issue, which is already under discussion that HAL has not properly anticipated the overshoot in weight and gone wrong in "all" its projects. As a thumb rule 1/3rd of an aircraft is airframe weight. Hence overshoot of 400kg means that airframe is almost 50% more than the projected weight.

Now coming to my insinuation, while I was not making any accusation in the present post but I have not made any bones about my allegation that "top management" of HAL is completely corrupt and is helping foreign imports by delaying indigenous projects using stupid excuses eg. delay in civil works, delay in tendering, delay in translation, delay in moving files, delay in land allotment etc. HAL is "also" incompetent as they should have anticipated the weight overshoot. Due to overshoot in weight, Rustom-2 will have a depend on a piston engine which is made only by USA, now lets guess, how it will pan out. If some thought had gone into potential increase in weight then HAL could have planned for completely different design or could have used turbine engines. In regard to LCA, HAL was allocated funds for setting up LCA production line in 2003, even after 11 years they have not placed even the orders for the requisite equipment. It is incompetence and also the intention to give helping hand to imports, rolled into one.
Last edited by Gyan on 23 Sep 2015 17:27, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 23 Sep 2015 17:23

ramana wrote:Also to add to nileshjr's long post, there is always weight gain from prototype to production model due to many desires/requirements for electronics and other doodads. The engine has to have sufficient thrust margin to accommodate this weight growth.


+1

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby srai » 23 Sep 2015 18:15

Gyan wrote:... In regard to LCA, HAL was allocated funds for setting up LCA production line in 2003, even after 11 years they have not placed even the orders for the requisite equipment...


So where did all those 5 PVs, 8 LSPs and 2 NPs come from?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54542
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ramana » 23 Sep 2015 19:15

Gyan, It all hinges on the engine. Usually concept design begins with know engine characteristics. Unfortunately weight allocation for different sub-systems in not done upfront or customer requires new features which overshoot the weight budget.
A demanding customer can torpedo the best design by asking for new heavy features.
There is no accountability all around.

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby jayasimha » 23 Sep 2015 19:41

Gyan wrote:HAL is completely corrupt and is helping foreign imports by delaying indigenous projects using stupid excuses eg. delay in civil works, delay in tendering, delay in translation, delay in moving files, delay in land allotment etc.
HAL is "also" incompetent as they should have anticipated the weight overshoot. Due to overshoot in weight, Rustom-2 will have a depend on a piston engine which is made only by USA, now lets guess, how it will pan out. If some thought had gone into potential increase in weight then HAL could have planned for completely different design or could have used turbine engines. In regard to LCA, HAL was allocated funds for setting up LCA production line in 2003, even after 11 years they have not placed even the orders for the requisite equipment. It is incompetence and also the intention to give helping hand to imports, rolled into one.



Completely agree with you boss... but but all this happens with the consent of Babus and mantriji..

if mantri+ baboons are really serious they can/will put the burner under the seat of the HAL employees with a target of xyz product on abc date with all the due support. rewards and penalty should drive them. then comes the desired output as all know. I have seen this in other PSUs.

blaming only HAL ( rather its employees ) is waste of time and bandwidth

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 19:45

Gyan wrote:I am not beating about the bush but the pointing out another factoid on the issue, which is already under discussion that HAL has not properly anticipated the overshoot in weight and gone wrong in "all" its projects. As a thumb rule 1/3rd of an aircraft is airframe weight. Hence overshoot of 400kg means that airframe is almost 50% more than the projected weight.


Fair enough. But this "overweight by 22%" is what you say and I am not willing to believe you unless you can back up this statement with some published data. Simply post a link and a quote and I will accept what you say. Data cannot be an opinion.

Generalizations about weights such as those you have made are debatable - but yes, your opinion is as good as anyone else's opinion and must be accepted for that reason alone - but first the source of information and a link.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 19:53

Gyan wrote:HAL is "also" incompetent as they should have anticipated the weight overshoot. Due to overshoot in weight, Rustom-2 will have a depend on a piston engine which is made only by USA, now lets guess, how it will pan out. If some thought had gone into potential increase in weight then HAL could have planned for completely different design or could have used turbine engines.


Clearly HAL has learned nothing from this because it is an ADE program, not HAL

Here is Saurav Jha on the Rustom 2


The flagship UAV programme at the moment is the Rustom-II being developed in the lead by the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO's) Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) based in Bangalore. The Rustom-II is a medium altitude long endurance (MALE) UAV with an altitude ceiling of 32,000 feet and an endurance of up to 35 hours. This bird is being designed to meet the needs of all three services with different configurations, naturally. However, while the Indian Navy (IN) version is slated to carry mostly electro-optical payloads and maritime patrol radar, the Indian Army (IA) and Indian Air force (IAF) versions are a more involved proposition tailored to carry Electronic Intelligence (ELINT), Communications Intelligence (COMINT) and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) packages as well. In fact a new indigenously developed airborne Ku-band SAR scheduled to commence trials this year on a flying test bed will eventually take pride of place on the Rustom-2.

Two Rustom-2 prototypes have been developed thus far, one of which was displayed at Defexpo 2014 in Pragati Maidan, New Delhi. The programme is currently in iterative development mode with refinements in aerodynamic shaping underway and it is likely that a total of eight prototypes will be built with the last one serving as the base for production variants. While the target weight for the Rustom is roughly around 1800 kilograms (kgs), the current prototypes are about 400 kgs over that benchmark. Moreover it is unlikely that the final variant will be less than 2100 Kgs. With that figure in mind and typical margins for capability growth, DRDO has decided to fit the Rustom-2 with new diesel engines.

As such the two existing 125 HP Rotax 914 engines (one on each wing) are slated to be replaced by new 200 HP class diesel engines supplied by Lycoming. Interestingly, the new engine configuration is slated to be indigenized with a domestically developed equivalent as a result of a collaborative effort between DRDO's Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (VRDE) and Tech Mahindra. The Rustom-2's private sector footprint obviously extends into the MSME sector as well. For instance, Bangalore based FLOTECH Engineering & Trading services is supplying aircraft fuel rigs for the Rustom-2 while Nfotec Digital Engineering Pvt. Ltd from the same city is providing CAD design and CFD analysis support services to the program.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5245
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ShauryaT » 23 Sep 2015 19:56

ramana wrote:Gyan, It all hinges on the engine. Usually concept design begins with know engine characteristics. Unfortunately weight allocation for different sub-systems in not done upfront or customer requires new features which overshoot the weight budget.
A demanding customer can torpedo the best design by asking for new heavy features.
There is no accountability all around.
Good point on the engine and its power planning requirements. The new Gerald Ford class of aircraft carriers will consume only about 50% of the energy production capacity leaving the rest as capacity for future growth for add on systems - not even identified yet.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 19:58

jayasimha wrote:blaming only HAL ( rather its employees ) is waste of time and bandwidth

Blaming HAL for a program that it does not run is an indicator of the same sort of shoddiness that HAL is being accused of showing. There is, literally no accountability all around. On the forum or off it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54542
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ramana » 23 Sep 2015 20:31

Here is the problem. its the packages and the limited horse power of the engines. Will bold the relevant sections.

shiv wrote:
Gyan wrote:HAL is "also" incompetent as they should have anticipated the weight overshoot. Due to overshoot in weight, Rustom-2 will have a depend on a piston engine which is made only by USA, now lets guess, how it will pan out. If some thought had gone into potential increase in weight then HAL could have planned for completely different design or could have used turbine engines.


Clearly HAL has learned nothing from this because it is an ADE program, not HAL

Here is Saurav Jha on the Rustom 2


The flagship UAV programme at the moment is the Rustom-II being developed in the lead by the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO's) Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) based in Bangalore. The Rustom-II is a medium altitude long endurance (MALE) UAV with an altitude ceiling of 32,000 feet and an endurance of up to 35 hours. This bird is being designed to meet the needs of all three services with different configurations, naturally. However, while the Indian Navy (IN) version is slated to carry mostly electro-optical payloads and maritime patrol radar, the Indian Army (IA) and Indian Air force (IAF) versions are a more involved proposition tailored to carry Electronic Intelligence (ELINT), Communications Intelligence (COMINT) and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) packages as well. In fact a new indigenously developed airborne Ku-band SAR scheduled to commence trials this year on a flying test bed will eventually take pride of place on the Rustom-2.

{How about some sliced bread also to along?}

Two Rustom-2 prototypes have been developed thus far, one of which was displayed at Defexpo 2014 in Pragati Maidan, New Delhi. The programme is currently in iterative development mode with refinements in aerodynamic shaping underway and it is likely that a total of eight prototypes will be built with the last one serving as the base for production variants. While the target weight for the Rustom is roughly around 1800 kilograms (kgs), the current prototypes are about 400 kgs over that benchmark. Moreover it is unlikely that the final variant will be less than 2100 Kgs. With that figure in mind and typical margins for capability growth, DRDO has decided to fit the Rustom-2 with new diesel engines.

As such the two existing 125 HP Rotax 914 engines (one on each wing) are slated to be replaced by new 200 HP class diesel engines supplied by Lycoming. Interestingly, the new engine configuration is slated to be indigenized with a domestically developed equivalent as a result of a collaborative effort between DRDO's Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (VRDE) and Tech Mahindra. The Rustom-2's private sector footprint obviously extends into the MSME sector as well. For instance, Bangalore based FLOTECH Engineering & Trading services is supplying aircraft fuel rigs for the Rustom-2 while Nfotec Digital Engineering Pvt. Ltd from the same city is providing CAD design and CFD analysis support services to the program.



So the ~250 HP engines set has to be replaced with ~400 HP engines. Good news is local development of the engines.


Now diesel engines are heavier than petrol engines due to many factors : compression ratio, fuel injection etc. This will add its own weight! But guess Lycoming has already done it so its feasible.


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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 23 Sep 2015 21:46

Funny that HAL wants to blame DRDO for projects in which it is active participant but always want to take credit for ALH in which it had no role except grabbing the project credit after it was completed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54542
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ramana » 23 Sep 2015 22:01

Gyan, Can we give this a rest?

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 23 Sep 2015 22:21

Ok

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 23 Sep 2015 22:23

Gyan wrote:IIRC HAL won a tender in 2010 to build Rustom -2 and participate in it's R&D.

http://www.livemint.com/Companies/tpOcK ... oject.html

http://www.livefistdefence.com/2010/04/ ... e-uav.html

The 250 km range quoted suggests Rustom 1. Not Rustom 2. Both reports refer to the same news.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54542
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ramana » 09 Oct 2015 03:51

IAF ethos is RAF.

Was reading a reappraisal of RAF during WWII by historians and serving personnel.

- During the intervening years between end of WWI and beginning of WWII, RAF was doing punitive raids of Afghan tribesman and woefully ignored any threat developing in Europe.
- Even in early 1930s they came up with undersized dumb bombs. They thought 500 lb (GP) bomb with ~25% explosive was enough. Blast would scare of all bad people!
- Only after looking at German bomb damage with SC series in early Luftwaffe raids on UK, they realized the need to up the fill ratio. And need to get bigger explosives to target.
- Led to developing the 1000 MC and bigger bombs.

Same way with fighter gun development: 0.303 rifle bullet MGs vs 20 mm cannon
They wised up quickly and led to the Barnes Wallis designs and post WWII ADEN cannon based on German designs.
Same with many silly planes which didn't work well.

member_22605
BRFite
Posts: 159
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby member_22605 » 09 Oct 2015 06:32

Gyan wrote:Funny that HAL wants to blame DRDO for projects in which it is active participant but always want to take credit for ALH in which it had no role except grabbing the project credit after it was completed.

Do you have any idea about what you're typing?
What do you know about the ALH program?
Who completed the project for HAL?
You seem to be absolutely clueless about anything related to HAL so please read up before posting and please do not spread lies
Cheers!

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

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Gyan » 09 Oct 2015 10:28

Read CAG report on ALH.

member_22605
BRFite
Posts: 159
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby member_22605 » 12 Oct 2015 18:28

What does it say? The rotor, transmission and the structure was developed by HAL after the consultant left half way through the project. You should seriously do some reading and the presentation by wg cdr unni pillai at aero india 2013 is a good starting point. Please do not believe nonsense written by accountants with zero understanding of technology.
Cheers!

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Rahul M » 12 Oct 2015 18:36

Gyan, give it a rest.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby shiv » 22 Dec 2015 08:18

Here is something that someone said to someone else - in this case it was a retired technical person. I post this because he has said what I suspected - the lack of people with technical competency at senior levels in AF and Army. The system probably weeds them out leaving the machos and the manegerials.(my words)
Armed forces because of fighting insurgencies, combating terrorist threats etc. always
get a favorable ear with the Govt. They tend to override scientists and do not work in
tandem with them. Navy is an excellent exception, they are there from day one with the
design teams. The Army and Air Force lack people at senior levels who have technical
competency.
The senior people maybe are good for sales etc.<A certain senior retired IAF officer> is a
prototype of the loudmouth, who knows little of what can be technically done and cannot
be.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby Philip » 28 Dec 2015 10:27

I echo what Shiv has said.The IN have a diff. culture,or had a diff culture, that has borne much fruit.IN officers and sailors were trained par excellence to RN stds.They knew how to operate almost any type of machinery as aboard a ship in the high seas,you damn well had to improvise in a crisis.Coupled with the RN naval tradition was the other advantage of operating both British and Russian warships and subs. That allowed the IN to innovate heavily as we first saw in the '71 attacks on Karachi.Styx missiles were removed from missile boats and fitted to British built Talwars. WE leveraged the Leander design into the Godavari,etc.,etc. That led to our own indigenous designs of the Brahmaputra (G class+) and Delhi classes. The IN has never looked back and is now building its own CV .A terrific record given the miserly share of the def. budget compared with the IAF and IA. Those two services are still struggling to induct Arjun and the LCA. Not even lesser challenging projects a desi IICV/IFV or even a Basic trainer has emerged from the IA and IAF.

However,though the IN has its in-house design capabilities,there has been say some of a falling in standards in shiphandling and command experience of younger officers.There are too many "desk jockeys" today who have lesser sea-going experience than their predecessors who were thrust with responsibility early on in their careers. The discipline of sr. admirals was also legendary. One former V.Adm.,Western Command CO upon retirement left his official residence quietly before dawn without any fanfare. When the customary bouquet of flowers was carried by a retinue of officers to ceremonially see him off after breakfast,they found him and his small old car gone,leaving his official residence perfectly ready for his successor! The accidents that bedeviiled the IN in recent years appears to have resulted in some serious stocktaking,how to rectify the situ. Notwithstanding its need to sharpen standards,the other two services really need to take a leaf or two out of the IN's indigenous manual.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54542
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Poor IAF role in R&D, manufacture - HAL/IAF tiffs to bla

Postby ramana » 28 Dec 2015 11:04

Shiv Again RAF has same issues. Tech branch gets sidelined.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gyan, k prasad, Rakesh and 42 guests