Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 05 Feb 2009 13:07

helicopters worth $3.1 billion and almighty 4 of them.

Whatever happened to Defense reporting these days !!

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 05 Feb 2009 13:20

It is almost confirmed that we will buy 3-4 more phalcon systems in the coming months for about 1.5 $ Billion.Rest of the details are not clear. It may be some aerostats ,and medium range survelliance aircrafts.
All in all 3.1$ Billion looks unlikely.It will be very intresting to see in next 23 days as to how much increase in defence spending will be done.
I dont think we will touch 30 Billion, but 28 abillion seems to be a likely figure.
Secondly, the next 2 months of the GOI will be important as we have to ensure that as many deals are completed befor Mar-31-09.It is not necessary that all deals may be made public certain level of confidentiality has to be maintained.

I am hoping some important deals to be inked during Aero-India-09.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 07 Feb 2009 07:05

Army falls for Arjun, induction by month-end

......the first-ever fleet of Indian-made Arjun battle tanks would be inducted into the Army by February end.....

....A total 45 tanks would form this armoured regiment and the first order of tanks is expected to arrive within next three weeks. In the first phase, 18-20 tanks would be handed over to the Indian Army.....

......Defence Minister AK Antony stood his ground and made it clear that the 58-tonne Arjun would be inducted, as it was working fine....

.....the induction would be carried out without waiting for the much-awaited comparative trials of the indigenous Arjun tanks with Russian-made T-90s.......

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 07 Feb 2009 08:15

More Postive news.

Stealth ship is ready for trial.

Mumbai: Mazgaon Docks Limited (MDL) is all set to hand over the first of the three new-generation Shivalik-classstealth ships for trials to the Indian Navy. The frigate is expected to be commissioned in the navy by April or May, MDL officials said on Friday.

The move is significant as these ships are among the 12 being constructed under Project17 (P17), the Indian government's indigenous programme to build new stealthy multi-role surface ships. Design changes and procurement delays had been plaguing the construction of these ships, which began almost five years ago.

While Shivalik was launched in 2003, Satpura and Sahyadri, the two other frigates, were launched in 2004 and 2005. The P17 is an enlarged and modified version of the Talwar (Krivak III) class frigate.

"The Shivalik-class ships have many more signature reducing features than other Indian Navy ships,'' said an MDL official.

The stealth frigate is designed to avoid enemy radars and works on principles of reducing the ship's signature. The ship is fitted with a mix of Indian, Russian and western weaponry systems along with both air defence and anti-submarine warfare capabilities.

The frigate also carries two advanced helicopters. The total length of the ship is 142.5 metres, while its breadth is 16.90 metres. The total displacement of the ship is 4,900 tonnes. It is powered by gas and diesel turbines.

These warships are capable of speeds in excess of 30 knots.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 07 Feb 2009 08:56

Why has the IN been so far behind in submarine building? When we are seeing stealth ships come out of Indian shipyards, good subs could also have been developed. Does IN not feel that Paki/Chinki subs are a threat?

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 07 Feb 2009 09:35

From Indian Express:

The first of the three stealth frigates awaiting commissioning — the Shivalik launched in April 2003 — now undergoing trials, is expected to be commissioned by the Indian Navy by April.
Although the date is tentative, a spokesperson from Mazagaon Dock Limited (MDL), the country’s largest shipbuilding and offshore fabrication yard, confirmed it to The Indian Express.

The second and third frigates of the same class, the Satpura and Sahyadri, would be commissioned by 2010, an official said.

Apart from the commissioning of Shivalik, designed indigenously by the Directorate of Naval Design, MDL officials are also gearing up for the launch of the second Kolkata-class stealth destroyer, the Navy’s latest addition to the first, launched in March 2006.

Explaining the difference between commissioning and launch, an MDL officer said that a launch means the ship is launched into sea but essential fittings such as electrical and hull fittings are still to go and that may take two to four years. Commissioning would mean handing over the ship, post fittings and trials, to the end user which, in this case, is the Indian Navy.

The official was speaking during the foundation-stone laying ceremony of the Rs 826 crore modernisation programme undertaken by the public sector undertaking (PSU), which is being funded by the Navy.

According to MDL, the modernisation project comprises creating a new wet basin to park more ships, adding a 300-tonne capacity Goliath crane and setting up of a modular workshop as well as a cradle assembly store.

The new wet basin is of prime importance as it would help MDL start work on more ships than it can under the current set up. According to the spokesperson, at the moment there is space for just three ships-and-a-half (under construction) in the wet basin. “After the new one comes up, we can park three more ships and begin work on them,” he said. “The biggest reason for the delay in delivery of ships is because of limitations in parking under-construction ships,” said the MDL official.

After laying down the foundation stone of the modernisation project, Minister of State for Defence Production, Rao Inderjit Singh, stressed the need for increasing efficiency in PSUs. Without mentioning MDL, he said, “Production efficiency has not always been a hallmark of PSUs.” He urged workers to make relentless efforts to meet production deadlines.

Vice Admiral (Retd.) H S Malhi, CMD, MDL, in his remark on the project, said the target of the ‘Mini Ratna’ PSU was to increase value of production (VOP) to Rs 3,000 crore from the current Rs 2,321 crore.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 07 Feb 2009 19:01

vivek k

i believe the problem is the complexity of submarines. while the russians have been quite quick to hand over designs for frigates and aircraft, submarine tech is a lot murkier. it requires a lot more research and design skills to make a 70m+ (kilo class) ship stealthy.

besides, i believe all of drdo's energies (!!!) are being spent on the atv...it should've been "taken out for a ride" by now...

username changed to R_Sharma,
Rahul.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 07 Feb 2009 19:13

sorry, rahul...force of habit...

if possible, could you change my display name to just 'rajat'? i'm yet to come upon someone with that name.

done,
cheers !

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 08 Feb 2009 02:50

After 26/11, Defence Ministry puts purchase of hi-tech weapons for Army on fast track

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 08 Feb 2009 06:23

RaviBg wrote:After 26/11, Defence Ministry puts purchase of hi-tech weapons for Army on fast track

Yeah our Netas and Babus have always resorted to the eyewash technique, all headline grabbers but no affect on the ground. And back to square one.. Same routine.. over and over..

Defence Ministry surrenders Rs 16,000 cr

# Fails to use budget allocation to buy weaponry
# Antony blames procedures, red tape

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 08 Feb 2009 09:41

RaviBg wrote:After 26/11, Defence Ministry puts purchase of hi-tech weapons for Army on fast track

The report is classic example of media bias against the Defence forces. Consider

A classic example of delay in the Army is field guns or howitzers to replace the ageing Bofors 155 mm gun. Despite the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) giving an in-principle approval to the Army’s proposal way back in 2001, the force is still to get back to the CCS with the finalised gun.

-->Everyone knows why the Bofors replacement is such a pain. The Bofors scandal and then the Denel disqualification are all political impediments, nothing to do with the Army. The Army would only be more than happy to induct more 155mm guns, and light-weight howitzers on those peaks.

Also, the Finance Ministry has objected to any decision to park the advances with the defence PSUs.

-->Now, whose fault is that ?? The entire decision to 'lapse' the unspent amount and return it to the babus financial sheets to cover up the zillions on the oil/fertilizer subsidies, is faulty and downright illogical. If the US Congress has to approve the final P-8I deal and there are delays with THEIR legislature, why should Indian defence budget suffer ?? We anyways have to pay the amount after the deal is approved !

The South Block is now projecting a capital outlay of Rs 42,000-43,000 crore for 2009-10 keeping in mind the initial payouts (Rs 50,000 crore) for multi-role medium range combat aircraft acquisition for the Indian Air Force.

Who is even expecting a decision in 2009 ?? Even if we decide, PNC negotiations and final inking of the deal including the offset linkages, is going to easily spill over 2009. Thus no payments were even expected this year.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 08 Feb 2009 12:58

procurement is a real problem in india. i really don't see why we can't replicate the acquisition system that is prevalent in the US. let large, private sector enterprises develop solutions, instead of just letting one lumbering PSU do everything...

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 08 Feb 2009 13:13

We should appreciate that some major deals were signed, but it is true we tend to spend more than required time for some crucial weapons like towed artillery and some major ships and aircrafts.
No one wants to sign controversial deal like artillery. I will appreciate if govt considers this and signs major deals in the next 2 months by asking more funds from the finance ministry as it was quite open now why we dint attack pak after 26/11.I will prefer npt to go onto the details.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 08 Feb 2009 15:23

well, there was a feeling during kargil, that if the IA had been able to procure smerch batteries, india could've easily fired rockets at the PA's HQ and an airbase in PoK, thus cutting off their support...

if that isn't incentive enough for the government, i can't imagine what is...dedication to indigenization is laudable. but if it is clear that the security of the country could be endangered, it is CRIMINAL to maintain the status quo...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Feb 2009 15:38

what does indigenisation got to do with it ??

let's not confuse issues.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 08 Feb 2009 17:18

what i meant was, because of the government's focus on indigenous weapons systems, they neglected to factor in how much time such a weapon would take to be developed. any true leader worth his salt would've understood that it would be far better for the country to physically posess the weapons, rather than have a vague (and often conflicting) promise of one...

as a result of this, when the need became too much, they resorted to unconventional means of acquisition. if they'd thought it through before, our acquisition processes would already have been streamlined enough to allow for quick tendering, evaluating, and eventually, signing of the contract...

consider how the US operates. going for the overly simplistic version, the government tells lockheed/boeing/ratheon/N-G, "see here...this is what we need. go do your thing as quickly as possible, because whoever comes up with the best and the cheapest product gets all the money." this encouraged the companies to not only come up with GOOD products, but also to come up with them as quickly as possible.

while the idea of developing indigenous weapons is not only a good one, but also an essential one, we need to understand that other countries have had the benefit of YEARS of time. after all, the US took three hundred years to become what it is now. we've gotten to where we are in just over 60. our scientists CANNOT be expected to come up with winning products without the benefit of so many failures. we can't afford failures. we should swallow our pride, and do what's best for the country...

our biggest problem, and indeed, our greatest strength, is that a handful of people can affect the lives of our billion. hence, to protect the jobs of the hundreds of people working in the government owned shipyards, ordnance factories, HAL, DRDO, etc, the government feels it is probably best to NOT involve the tatas, birlas or L&T. my question is this : if these people are protesting against losing their job at the cost of the country's security, is it really correct for them to be working in a GOVERNMENT enterprise? and anyway, the government would NOT let go of its best workers...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 08 Feb 2009 20:26

what i meant was, because of the government's focus on indigenous weapons systems, they neglected to factor in how much time such a weapon would take to be developed. any true leader worth his salt would've understood that it would be far better for the country to physically posess the weapons, rather than have a vague (and often conflicting) promise of one...

no Rajat you are wrong. it doesn't happen that way at all.

of course there have been massive delays, many of them due to unforeseen reasons like sanctions due to nuke tests etc. the failure to equip Indian forces properly lies primarily at the door of red-tapism.
for virtually every delay in acquisition of desi systems the forces have put forward and the govt has agreed in principle to the acquisition of a foreign alternative.

take the army's howitzer project for example, no indigenous products running for it. so why is it still not decided some ten years after initial projections came out ?

why did it take 2008 to induct the hawk, the initial requirements were floated in 1982-83(La Fontaine commitee) the govt was certainly not waiting for any HAL product.

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 08 Feb 2009 21:56

does anyknow in which cases Govt choses single vendor or multivendor competitions?

when Military buys T-90, Smerch, or even recent C-130, they don't go for tenders, RFI, RFP, evaluation, shortlisting etc. they approach the foreign govt, test the product and if Successful buy it.

Is it for Military or Govt to decide that?

AmitR · Post by **AmitR** » 08 Feb 2009 21:56

Rahul M wrote:
what i meant was, because of the government's focus on indigenous weapons systems, they neglected to factor in how much time such a weapon would take to be developed. any true leader worth his salt would've understood that it would be far better for the country to physically posess the weapons, rather than have a vague (and often conflicting) promise of one...
no Rajat you are wrong. it doesn't happen that way at all.

of course there have been massive delays, many of them due to unforeseen reasons like sanctions due to nuke tests etc. the failure to equip Indian forces properly lies primarily at the door of red-tapism.
for virtually every delay in acquisition of desi systems the forces have put forward and the govt has agreed in principle to the acquisition of a foreign alternative.

take the army's howitzer project for example, no indigenous products running for it. so why is it still not decided some ten years after initial projections came out ?

why did it take 2008 to induct the hawk, the initial requirements were floated in 1982-83(La Fontaine commitee) the govt was certainly not waiting for any HAL product.

Both of you have valid points and clearly GOI has failed to show any sense of maturity and urgency in attaining latest weapons systems for our armed forces. Tardy civilian counterparts of defence forces have put a roadblock on every effort to modernise.

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 08 Feb 2009 23:17

more bad news, Vikek from defensenews.com reports that many deals have been cancelled this year and 1 billion USD may be returned.
Url

NEW DELHI - Despite efforts to speed up arms programs and finalize large purchases, the Indian Defence Ministry will return $1 billion that it was unable to use as planned in the fiscal year that ends March 31.

Ministry officials, fearing criticism from the military and political leaders, tried to speed procurement ahead of this year's general elections. In 2008, bids worth about $9 billion were floated, some of which resulted from cancellation of earlier bids. Most had been pending for two to three years due to delays.

"The process of acquisition had slowed down over the last three to four years," said S.V. Thapaliyal, a retired Indian Army major general. "Now there is a political compulsion to show results in view of forthcoming elections. Although a number of requests for proposals [RfPs] have been issued, the acquisition process is so slow and complicated that most of the acquisitions will only materialize in two to three years' time."

"Procurement of the required weapon systems is only a small part of the defense planning process - the whole process is flawed in execution," said Gurmeet Kanwal, retired Indian Army brigadier and director of the Centre for Land Warfare Studies, here. "Bureaucratic red tape must be eliminated through empowered committees, rather than according to a case-by-case approval on files that bounce back and forth endlessly. Prolonged trials are another chokepoint; a system of accountability should be instituted to ensure that trials are completed on time."

Other defense analysts said that the pile-up of RfPs began long ago.

"The cumulative pile is not just over the past three to four years, but goes back at least two decades," said independent defense analyst Rahul Bhonsle, a retired Indian Army brigadier. "The ideal acquisition schedule projects requirements at least 15 to 20 years in advance. That is the aim of having long-term integrated plans. But for the past few years, not having bought any weapons worth the name, the government is now rushing, driven by a post-Mumbai paranoia."

Swaran Singh, professor for diplomacy and disarmament at Jawaharlal Nehru University here, said the sudden big numbers of RfPs are due to a recent sharp surge of economic activity.

"Since the late 1990s, the Indian economy has had impressive growth rates, enabling the UPA government to prioritize weapon purchases, which appears like a sudden burst of RfPs floated in recent years," he said.

India plans to buy more than $30 billion in arms over the next five years to fight the low-intensity war in the northern state of Jammu and Kashmir, head off terror attacks in cities, and prepare for potential battle with Pakistan or China.

Program Status

In the near term, there is some hope for fast-track purchases of smaller items, including fast interceptor craft, hovercrafts and patrol boats for the Coast Guard. The government also will finalize major deals in the next two to three months, a senior Defence Ministry official said.

India expects within two to three months to sign its largest deal ever with Israel, a $3 billion-plus joint effort to develop a medium-range, surface-to-air missile, sources said.

The big-ticket bids floated in 2008 include $2 billion for 100 tracked howitzers, 48 ultra-light howitzers and 185 wheeled howitzers. The Army also sought to procure armored fighting vehicle protection and countermeasure systems worth $270 million, and floated a tender for the joint development of a laser-based directed infrared countermeasure system. The Army's quest for quick-reaction, surface-to-air missiles for $1.4 billion received a poor response; overseas vendors asked for requirements changes.

Other major tenders included a $2 billion bid from the Navy and Coast Guard for maritime patrol aircraft, a $750 million global bid to buy 197 reconnaissance and surveillance helicopters, and a $2 billion effort to upgrade Mirage fighters.

A $1 billion deal to replace the Russian-made Shilka air defense system has drawn no bidders, though Russia has offered licensed production of the Shilka system as a separate arrangement. India also may cancel a bid to procure 266 general guidance munitions in the 1,000-kilogram class compatible with Mirage-2000H/TH aircraft, because the Defence Research and Development Organization claims it can manufacture the munitions itself, Defence Ministry sources said.

The Defence Ministry canceled a bid to purchase a successor to the Swedish-made L-70 air defense guns because only the state-owned Ordnance Factories Board, in partnership with Rheinmetall Defense of Germany, had submitted the bid. The $1.2 billion contract to buy transportable radars is also heading for cancellation as Rafael was the only bidder.

Rajat · Post by **Rajat** » 09 Feb 2009 09:02

rahul, i most fervently wish i am wrong. but i keep on getting the feeling that the government is COMFORTABLE letting DRDO and their ilk take their own sweet time developing the weapons systems that the country needs. the government seems to blindly trust DRDO's estimates, despite evidence to the contrary. case in point :

India also may cancel a bid to procure 266 general guidance munitions in the 1,000-kilogram class compatible with Mirage-2000H/TH aircraft, because the Defence Research and Development Organization claims it can manufacture the munitions itself, Defence Ministry sources said.

so fine...if the DRDO says they can do it, they most OBVIOUSLY can. its like the government is in denial. and i believe it is criminal.

by the way, i DO love hearing jets fly overhead! almost makes my self imposed exile to bangalore worth it!

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 09 Feb 2009 21:43

As i have emphaised ,even there is one bidder they should be entertained and we should go ahead with technical evaluation and sign the deal.
Just because there is only one bidder,we cannot wait for other companies to come and hamper our modernization plans,looks so stupid.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 09 Feb 2009 22:22

pkudva wrote:As i have emphaised ,even there is one bidder they should be entertained and we should go ahead with technical evaluation and sign the deal.
Just because there is only one bidder,we cannot wait for other companies to come and hamper our modernization plans,looks so stupid.

The basic agenda behind inviting bids from multiple vendors would then be lost. Only when they have serious competition will we get the best out of the manufacturers.

ever seen a caged elimination match on WWE?

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 09 Feb 2009 22:32

multivendor competitions are delaying the whole process, also creates more opportunity for corruption. and if accidentally other vendors are facing problems, entire deal is cancelled. best example: Artillery deal for the army.

for sake of bringing the best out of vendors, we cannot afford to compromise national security. something is better than nothing. multivendor aquistion process is doing more harm than good.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 09 Feb 2009 23:58

ajay_ijn wrote:multivendor competitions are delaying the whole process, also creates more opportunity for corruption. and if accidentally other vendors are facing problems, entire deal is cancelled. best example: Artillery deal for the army.

for sake of bringing the best out of vendors, we cannot afford to compromise national security. something is better than nothing. multivendor aquistion process is doing more harm than good.

You have a point there, ajai.
But lets look at the MMRCA competition. See how the competitors are running from pillar to post to please a "third world country". It has made some of them offer us the best they have. The moral of the story is...if the stakes are high enough, they will do anything to get their hands on the moolah.

But we can't apply the same funda in every deal. It backfired on us in the attack helicopter deal (only 22 attack helos) which the Americans were OK to let go. When they got a hint that IAf was keen on them. They suddenly got into a position from they could dictate terms to us.

On the other hand, the IAf as been tactfully tight lipped about which MRCA they would like to see win. So the key here is to not give out feelers too soon.

JMT.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 10 Feb 2009 00:17

Situation is not that bad, 16K corer comes down to 3-4% of the total budget or 7-8% of the total capital budget. Things take time but they do get done except for some cursed deals like 155 mm Howitzers......

Don't worry have curry....babus have their own way of doing things. 96% budget utilization is not something that I would worry about too much. The problem is defense budget has not grown fast enough to keep pace with the economic growth.

NDA's record was much worse than UPA in budget utilization but in their time defense budget grew faster than in UPA's time.

All in all good 'ol India, chalta hai, ho jayega, thand rakh.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 10 Feb 2009 05:11

India Balks at C-130, P-8 Restrictions

Several Indian Defence Ministry officials said privately that New Delhi will not comply with EUMs and other export-control limitations that Washington requires of its weapon customers. They said the government has promised on several occasions not to share U.S. weapon technology with other countries. But they said India will not be told how and where to operate the equipment it buys for its own military.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 10 Feb 2009 05:28

In a recent interview Air Chief said that we have achieved since Mumbai more than what we could in many years. He was talking in terms of procurement of air defence system.

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 10 Feb 2009 08:33

Speck, Israel Aerospace to produce UAVs

Sukhoi opens office in New Delhi for fifth generation jets

kit · Post by **kit** » 10 Feb 2009 12:52

Indonesia's recent purchase of several older-design Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker combat aircraft from Russia highlights a crucial lesson of weapons development and international arms sales -- technical superiority is relative, not absolute. You don't need state-of-the-art weapons if your potential enemies are only equipped with older ones. Just making sure you have a sufficient quantitative and qualitative edge on them will do just as well.

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industry/20 ... 234215405/

This logic surely applies to the MRCA deal.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 10 Feb 2009 12:55

What logic? Do you expect china to be equipping themself with 3rd gen fighter aircrafts? You should be in such a state that your enemy doesnt even think about waging a war with you, just thinking about what we can unleash on them should make them pee in their dreams

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 10 Feb 2009 13:45

not sure if these figures are accurate. actual spending seems to be way less than what was planned. IIRC planned figure was 42,000 crore, but spending target is 30,000 crore.
URL

The Ministry took up the delay in military hardware acquisition with the Army as it has not been able to spend its budgetary capital outlay this year though it is less than that of the Air Force and the Navy. While the budgetary capital outlay for 2008-09 for the 1.1 million-strong Army was Rs 7,607 crore, its revised estimates are pegged at Rs 5,740 crore. Both the Navy and the Air Force are expected to spend their respective capital outlays of Rs 16,108 crore and Rs 8,564 crore.

In 2008-09, the budget capital outlay of Rs 37,482 crore was revised to Rs 30,614 crore as payouts earmarked for Admiral Gorshkov ($250-300 million), Brahmos missiles (Rs 2000 crore) and Eurocopter (Rs 3200 Cr) for the Indian Army were not made.

The Defence Ministry is now rushing to spend the revised capital outlay of Rs 30, 614 crore even though it will not be able to pay the initial amount for the $ 2 billion acquisition of long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft from Boeing until the US Congress approves the deal. Also, the Finance Ministry has objected to any decision to park the advances with the defence PSUs. The South Block is now projecting a capital outlay of Rs 42,000-43,000 crore for 2009-10 keeping in mind the initial payouts (Rs 50,000 crore) for multi-role medium range combat aircraft acquisition for the Indian Air Force.

sum · Post by **sum** » 10 Feb 2009 14:05

With the US land forces in Afghanistan in mind, the Army is all set to acquire the Harpy weapon system that has the capability to loiter in the enemy territory and pick up targets through its electro-optical sensors and destroy them with its 23-kg warhead.

Didnt we have the Harpy already?

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 10 Feb 2009 14:27

sum wrote:
With the US land forces in Afghanistan in mind, the Army is all set to acquire the Harpy weapon system that has the capability to loiter in the enemy territory and pick up targets through its electro-optical sensors and destroy them with its 23-kg warhead.
Didnt we have the Harpy already?

may be follow on purchases or newer Harpy version with electro-optical sensor.

kit · Post by **kit** » 10 Feb 2009 14:51

sum wrote:
With the US land forces in Afghanistan in mind, the Army is all set to acquire the Harpy weapon system that has the capability to loiter in the enemy territory and pick up targets through its electro-optical sensors and destroy them with its 23-kg warhead.
Didnt we have the Harpy already?

Already in service with India .. and china... that being sold to the chinks apparently irritated mighty uncle so much that they downgraded Israeli status in the joint strike fighter program.. the chinese ones were apparently 'returned'

.. wonder whats the chinese clone of this ? does anyone know about it ?

ajay_ijn · Post by **ajay_ijn** » 10 Feb 2009 15:15

M&M in talks with Australian aerospace firms

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 10 Feb 2009 19:36

I have lots of hope in the month of Feb & March especially when aero india is going on. I expect india to sign delas on Miraage 2000 upgrade,aerostats,follow on orders for phalcon and off course new amended gorshkov deal.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Feb 2009 03:17

Left sees red on Israeli missile deal

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 11 Feb 2009 03:25

Lockheed, Boeing $11 Billion Order Snags on U.S.-India Talks

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 11 Feb 2009 03:52

US Golden eye on VIP planes - Pact allows inspection of jets meant for PM, President

posting some excerpts as full article was edited out...

...
This week, India is also expected to present a new draft for an omnibus end-use and enhanced end-use verification programme, the Pentagon’s chief military sales officer and head of its defence security co-operation agency, Vice Admiral Jeffrey A. Wieringa, said here today.

“I was present at the meeting between Mr (A.K.) Antony and Mr Gates (US defence secretary) during the defence minister’s visit to the US. The feeling I got was that we are very very close (to signing the agreement),” said the admiral.

...

The cabinet committee on security has been looking into the EUV deal, a logistics support agreement and a communications interoperability security agreement, for two years. A forward movement was confirmed only today.

India has never disclosed that it had already entered into separate EUV agreements for each of its military acquisitions from the US. Wieringa said it was Delhi that wanted an omnibus agreement to avoid bureaucratic delays in drafting EUV agreements for each purchase. This is also indicative of a willingness in India to buy more US-made military equipment.
...