India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

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.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 03:57

With the Defence Trade & Technology Initiative (DTTI) turning a new page, it is time for a new thread to discuss all the upcoming joint developments between India and the US. Let me start off with this interesting (and exciting) news.

Mods, if another similar thread exists...kindly close this one and move these posts to that thread. Thanks.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 04:02

India, US join hands for making warfighting gear: drone swarms, virtual reality training aids, ultralight small arms
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... aking.html
25 Oct 2019

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 04:05

India seeks US help for drone swarm technology to prepare for warfare of the future
http://www.sps-aviation.com/news/?id=59 ... the-future
23 Oct 2019

Sources indicated that India and the US could take forward a US Air Force Research Laboratory concept on small unmanned systems which could be launched from C-130J and C-17 military transport aircraft which are used by both countries. The proposal is for "ground up" development of drone swarm technology.

Significantly, India is also seeking counter-UAS technologies to detect and defeat swarms. The kill solutions India is looking at include electro-magnetic lasers. The American aerospace giant Lockheed Martin claims to have progress in this area with the Q-53 radar and a high-powered laser beam.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 04:05

US-India co-development flop show forces new approach to DTTI
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... -show.html
31 October 2019

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 02 Nov 2019 04:24

We should also run a poll on which of the three time frame projects will materialize?

I suspect these will lead to US raiding any Indian engineers involved in these areas.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 02 Nov 2019 06:10

I have been following the budget bread crumbs in support of the DTTI in the US OSD budgets and I have yet to figure out what each side is trying to achieve here. What constitutes success? I saw that a few in the IAF and MOD S&T community were at US labs a few months ago discussing some of these capabilities but I have yet to figure out what the end goal is. It appears that these are just some basic probing S&T initiatives that are geared towards maintaining and sustaining a given S&T profile and exchange. Besides really big ticket items, there is very little that comes out of joint cooperation (in the US system) that is not US Service led but rather OSD led.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 06:24

brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Nov 2019 06:25

ramana wrote:We should also run a poll on which of the three time frame projects will materialize?

I suspect these will lead to US raiding any Indian engineers involved in these areas.

Surely. Please advise on poll questions (in the cave) and we can add them in the first post of this thread.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 02 Nov 2019 19:24

Rakesh wrote:brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.


Honestly, I would begin taking these programs seriously only when there is genuine collaboration between MOD and the US services with alignment on technologies and requirements for current or future systems. OSD specific programs (That is how Ash. Carter set it up as well) that are not aligned or backed by a service quite often don't end up going very far. Until then, this is not going to be anything more than just a way to keep the conversation going and keeping the lights on with some small scale S&T and R&D investments..Most of the collaborative R&D or even EMD activities that have been successful as joint efforts in the US, have involved either a direct service need or direct service to service or service to MOD/DOD investment. For example, Japan's work with the US Missile Defense Agency on the SM-3 missile and high performance GaN radars for BMD, The AEGIS program, or the US-Israeli cooperation on Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow programs...In the past, direct work between the UK, DARPA and the US Deptt. of Navy on the ASTOVL program for example...Numerous other examples. I draw a blank when I try to compile a list of successful R&D projects which were exclusively OSD led with little or no service backing or defined need...Having said that, the OSD works on some very cutting edge and exciting technologies that are often developed for the purpose of developing them. They also have some significant leverage over DARPA...but in the end, unless there is alignment with a service those technologies are often developed for the sake of developing and advancing tech. and not neccesarily aimed at one specific near term application.

Roop
BRFite
Posts: 257
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Roop » 03 Nov 2019 01:57

It would help if some of these acronyms are expanded/explained. What is OSD? What is EMD?

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 03 Nov 2019 02:11

OSD - Office of Secretary of Defense. A small subset of US programs are created and managed by the OSD as opposed to the end user (a service or another agency). EMD - Engineering Manufacturing and Development.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 03 Nov 2019 07:45

brar_w wrote:
Rakesh wrote:brar_w: I am going to rely on your background/expertise in US defence programs to see what - if any - of the new joint programs announced which actually see the light of day. Looking forward to your contributions in this thread.


Honestly, I would begin taking these programs seriously only when there is genuine collaboration between MOD and the US services with alignment on technologies and requirements for current or future systems. OSD specific programs (That is how Ash. Carter set it up as well) that are not aligned or backed by a service quite often don't end up going very far. Until then, this is not going to be anything more than just a way to keep the conversation going and keeping the lights on with some small scale S&T and R&D investments..Most of the collaborative R&D or even EMD activities that have been successful as joint efforts in the US, have involved either a direct service need or direct service to service or service to MOD/DOD investment. For example, Japan's work with the US Missile Defense Agency on the SM-3 missile and high performance GaN radars for BMD, The AEGIS program, or the US-Israeli cooperation on Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow programs...In the past, direct work between the UK, DARPA and the US Deptt. of Navy on the ASTOVL program for example...Numerous other examples. I draw a blank when I try to compile a list of successful R&D projects which were exclusively OSD led with little or no service backing or defined need...Having said that, the OSD works on some very cutting edge and exciting technologies that are often developed for the purpose of developing them. They also have some significant leverage over DARPA...but in the end, unless there is alignment with a service those technologies are often developed for the sake of developing and advancing tech. and not neccesarily aimed at one specific near term application.


Well said. Folks look at the projects named and discuss each one. Not being skeptic but be realistic.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 03 Nov 2019 07:46

Rakesh wrote:India, US join hands for making warfighting gear: drone swarms, virtual reality training aids, ultralight small arms
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2019/10/ ... aking.html
25 Oct 2019

Image



Discuss each of these seven projects.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Nov 2019 11:11

AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.

So USG cannot force any private entity to share its IP or Technology with India or any other country , There are many laws too governing it besides the fact of ownership of private companies.

Hence expecting any thing in terms of technology sharing or JV to come out of Indo-US deal is a long shot unlike Israel or Russian type , All past program from Narsimharao era has ended with High on Talk and nothing on Ground.

Even during MMRCA race , US was not willing to share source code of radars etc but only a way where modules can be added if you want to fit in a new weapons or other stuff.

It is possible we *may* get a JV/TOT from small stuff like hand held drone or something similar where the resistance to transfer technology wont be high from US MIC.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 03 Nov 2019 20:36

Austin wrote: AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.


That is not universally true. There are extensive examples of technologies and programs, related to the themes covered in the graphic above, where the Technical baseline of a system, or the underlying technology developed by the industry, is owned by the US government. Even the US services buy or require TB ownership of systems when desirable, because they like to compete future upgrades and sustainment, though many legacy systems from the past are more restrictive compared to modern systems.In fact, most modern RFP's now have an extensive Technical Baseline and IP transfer requirement which is almost always in the top 4-5 things that the proposal will be evaluated on ( in some areas even ahead of things like schedule or cost). Similarly, there are many parallel efforts that are S&T, and in some cases, even R&D related, that don't involve industry or an industry lead proprietary solution. Plenty of work on all or most of those listed above, is farmed out to organizations like Lincoln Labs, Sandia, JHAPL and even the individual service run labs where industry participation requires TB sharing or transfer. Given that they are collaborating on technologies, and not programs, I don't think IP is going to be a significant issue. If this were a full up program collaboration then yes, they could have run into those issues but not with something this specific and small.

I'll try to cover the technology areas and projects unveiled in a later post, but it appears clear that these projects were chosen, in part because the underlying programs and technology is something the US OSD is currently working on at the moment and it sees its efforts as doing some basic S&T/R&D and advancing the technology to a level of maturity where it then becomes available to individual services as they choose fit. The same could perhaps be also available to Indian end users and OEM's if this entire thing pans out. This is the same fundamental restriction that applied to DTTI when Ashton Carter championed it - The Secretary of Defense and his immediate staff want to keep these programs closer to themselves which to me suggests that there are really no takers in the services. Post S-400, I don't think that there is any near-mid term possibility of a US service - Indian MOD lead Brahmos, or MRSAM level of R&D or even JV so they are being realistic and starting small with the hope to grow it over time. Till then, this will be tightly controlled by the civilian leadership as opposed to a more enduring collaboration that is driven via a bottoms up process that starts from each operator/end-user and aligns on capability, need, sharing etc etc

Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7917
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby Mort Walker » 04 Nov 2019 00:11

brar_w wrote:
Austin wrote: AFAIK in the US the technology is owned by the Private Company or rather many of them and not owned by the USG.


That is not universally true. There are extensive examples of technologies and programs, related to the themes covered in the graphic above, where the Technical baseline of a system, or the underlying technology developed by the industry, is owned by the US government. Even the US services buy or require TB ownership of systems when desirable, because they like to compete future upgrades and sustainment, though many legacy systems from the past are more restrictive compared to modern systems.In fact, most modern RFP's now have an extensive Technical Baseline and IP transfer requirement which is almost always in the top 4-5 things that the proposal will be evaluated on ( in some areas even ahead of things like schedule or cost). Similarly, there are many parallel efforts that are S&T, and in some cases, even R&D related, that don't involve industry or an industry lead proprietary solution. Plenty of work on all or most of those listed above, is farmed out to organizations like Lincoln Labs, Sandia, JHAPL and even the individual service run labs where industry participation requires TB sharing or transfer. Given that they are collaborating on technologies, and not programs, I don't think IP is going to be a significant issue. If this were a full up program collaboration then yes, they could have run into those issues but not with something this specific and small.


Well said. The US government through collaborations with academia and industry by funding R&D programs in the fundamental sciences and engineering yields results. If anything, this is a great model which must be studied in India to develop its own MIC.

The one thing I have to take exception of with brar_w-ji is that not all RFPs have an IP transfer requirement since the service or agency is unable to absorb the technology in a timely basis and or costs are too high. In other areas, the US government funds places like Los Alamos, Sandia, MIT Lincoln Labs, John Hopkins APL and others to develop technologies that can be shared with other defense contractors and agencies. Since we're early into this area, for India it would be best to get into academic network of these labs. We may not see immediate results, but in 20 years it will be quite valuable.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 04 Nov 2019 00:35

Mort Walker wrote:The one thing I have to take exception of with brar_w-ji is that not all RFPs have an IP transfer requirement since the service or agency is unable to absorb the technology in a timely basis and or costs are too high. In other areas, the US government funds places like Los Alamos, Sandia, MIT Lincoln Labs, John Hopkins APL and others to develop technologies


Actually the trend is almost exclusively headed in that direction. A sample of some of the very new top radar programs, or even full up aircraft programs shows that trend (look at the T-X RFP). In some cases, the Pentagon is now retroactively negotiating buying the TB of older systems that did not have this requirement. In fact, a frequent analyst asked questions in recent earnings calls to CEO's and CFOs has been to better understand the effect of this on long term franchise programs and IR&D investments.They obviously risk going too extreme (and throttling IR&D and innovation) but they'll eventually find a good equilibrium. You are right about the difficulties in absorbing this, and this is the reason that Pentagon leaders, over the last two administrations (Frank Kendall in the Obama administration, and Mike Griffin in the Trump administration) have dedicated resources on strengthing the labs, forming deeper partnerships with academia and building up numbers for the technical work-force that can handle the technical baseline loads associated with future programs.

Hypersonic weapons are a perfect example of this. You have a technology initially developed by industry, brought in house and handed over to Sandia..refined over more than two decades, and now going back to industry for production. The TB in all instances stayed with GOTUS and they reserve the right to pass it on to an industry partner of their choosing. The latest Sentinel and PATRIOT radar replacement programs are again the same. As was the T-X RFP. So as of 2019, this is a fast developing trend as post "award" competition is being seen as an opportunity to reduce life cycle cost via competition. Another more notable example was the X-47Bs carrier landing, deck handling and autonomous in flight refuelling technologies. Northrop won the competition to pursue the N-UCAS effort but 100% of the technology developed by it under USN funding is usable for all who competed on the MQ-25 program for example. To enable this, the services and the DOD is proactively mandating TB transfer and flexible OP ownership as pre-condition. Not with the intention of just farming off full-fledged programs from OEM to another (this is bad for competition even if it were possible) but to compete future upgrades and sustainment. They want to break the trend of OEM's loosing a ton of money on development to win a competition and then trying to recover margins over lifetime via sustainment. This strategy, might seem logical, favors the Primes and is ultimately a barrier to entry for many of the smaller innovative firms the DOD has been trying to get into its acquisition and R&D pipeline (through organizations like DIU-X etc.).

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16405
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India-US Defence Trade & Technology Initiative: News & Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Nov 2019 01:25

Here is the latest on IP from Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, signed off by Ellen M. Lord, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

Since DTTI falls under her Office (-> INDPOL-> DTTI), I would expect this would apply to the DTTI projects.

Issued on Oct 16, 2019

DOD INSTRUCTION 5010.44 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) ACQUISITION AND LICENSING

It does not provide details on assertions, I guess they will either leave it to the individual service or issue an addendum.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dwaipayandhar, mahadevbhu and 48 guests