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.
AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1921
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

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

Postby AdityaM » 02 Mar 2009 12:31

skher wrote:
bart wrote:"Clock Technology" :rotfl:

Bloody DDM strikes again. He obviously meant cloak. Goes to show the journalists not only have no clue about technology, they don't even know basic English nor have any common sense. :evil:

They're ordinary "mod" 21st century journalists,probably co-erced to cover 'defens/ce'.
Weren't they supposed to just copy/paste Directorate of Public Interface (DPI)'s press releases?


Oh, don't be so hard on 'em.
Probably its a verbatim translation of how the source may have pronounced 'Cloak'

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 607
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

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

Postby k prasad » 02 Mar 2009 13:25

AdityaM wrote:
skher wrote:Bloody DDM strikes again. He obviously meant cloak. Goes to show the journalists not only have no clue about technology, they don't even know basic English nor have any common sense. :evil:

They're ordinary "mod" 21st century journalists,probably co-erced to cover 'defens/ce'.
Weren't they supposed to just copy/paste Directorate of Public Interface (DPI)'s press releases?


Oh, don't be so hard on 'em.
Probably its a verbatim translation of how the source may have pronounced 'Cloak'


Actually, we aren't cribbing about how they confused the pronunciation - having spoken to our fair share of defense scientists, its easy to see the issue. However, one would have at least expected a minimum level of intelligence from the DDMs to go figure that clock didnt make sense... I bet my musharraf that if it had been a BRFite, even a trainee, we'd have the right word.

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

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

Postby ajay_ijn » 02 Mar 2009 20:41

guyz do you observe this trend of foreign participation in indigenous projects. Russian participation seems to be minimal compared to western countries n israel.

the only Russian involvement in LCA is R-73 and assistance in testing Kaveri. other than that it was completely western dominated, design consultants- west, Engine- west, assisstance for engine- French, assistance for radar-israel, assistance to reduce weight- Europe, whatever foreign avionics are present, its completely from west.

come to Arjun, again western engine, western design influence, Lahat missile. rumours of israeli involvement. i guess there is no russian involvement at all.

Dhruv ALH- again western engine, assistance in cockpit avionics. HAL also chose french gun, rockets, AAM for Dhruv WSI.

only in case of naval warships, Russians designs might have influenced Indias indigenous warships. even in this case there is equal participation from west. we won't think of russia as a strong contendor in case of P-17A.

when US imposes sanctions in 1998, DRDO suffers. but then there is also Russia? which did not impose any sanctions. DRDO always say they are fighting sanctions which is a big challenge, but in case of russia, there is no chance of sanctions. Does this tell something about Russian weapon systems?

ajay_ijn
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 20:43

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

Postby ajay_ijn » 02 Mar 2009 22:35

Outsource more from India: EADS
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... 41/350571/
European aerospace major European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS), parent company of India’s largest aircraft supplier Airbus, has directed its European tier-1 outsourcing partners to direct a larger portion of their outsourcing orders from India.

In comparison, total outsourcing to countries outside Europe will only increase by more than three times in that period, albeit from a far larger base of €8 billion.

EADS IN INDIA
* Airbus signed an agreement with HAL in 1988 to make forward passenger doors for the A320, India’s largest selling passenger aircraft
* EADS Astrium has an agreement with Antrix, Isro’s commercial arm, for PSLV launch services
* India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer.
* Eurocopter recently subcontracted airframe production for Ecureuil to HAL

Industry experts said this indirect outsourcing would be a clear way to rationalise costs. “Manufacturing parts in India would be 30 to 40 per cent more cost-effective, although it does depend on where the manufacturing takes place in India owing to differential tax structure,” said Kapil Kaul, CEO (Indian sub-continent), Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation (CAPA).

KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby KiranM » 02 Mar 2009 22:46

KiranM wrote:
KiranM wrote:Without triggering a war between entities, what exactly is the advantage of using T-72 chasis over BMP for Akash missile launcher? I am trying to understand the Army requirement to change over from the latter to the former.

If advantages exist, why was not the same required for NAMICA?


Just to try to answer my own question, I found this in the comments section of Ajai Shukla's blog. Quoting the relevant portion.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2008/05/drdo-revolution-new-engagement-with.html

Comment in BroadSword wrote:i was very much there when the army asked for the bmp and not the t-72 on the grounds that it was cheaper and lighter and would be more deployable. later, they changed their mind, when they found that the bmp based systems couldnt accompany the fast moving strike corps and would need more vehicles per battery


But still does not answer if the same need not apply to NAMICA



aditp wrote:^^^^ NAG is a comparitively much lighter missile syste. Possibly, the removal of turret easily compensates for the additional weight of the onboard missile and associated systems. Also Nag on BMP makes the system much more air deployable to Laddakh etc.



Adit, in the same vein wouldnt Akash be also preferrable to be deployed in Ladakh?

Weight of missile is a non issue I think because Akash was tested on a BMP platform.

narmad
BRFite
Posts: 217
Joined: 10 May 2005 09:47
Location: Mumbai
Contact:

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

Postby narmad » 03 Mar 2009 04:30

Apologies if posted earlier/elsewhere
Ordnance Unit develops anti-submarine rocket for Navy
The Heavy Alloys Penetrator Project (HAPP) ordnance factory here has developed an anti- submarine rocket (RGB-12) for the Indian Navy, 10 of which are under user trials at Pena, Pune, a top official said.
R R Yadava, factory General Manager, told reporters here that R&D efforts in reverse engineering had been used to develop the missile. A pilot batch of improved version of the rockets with enhanced capabilities was also being developed (RGB-60) for user trials by August 2009, he said.
The factory, originally established to manufacture kinetic energy products like FSAPDS ( Fins Stabilised Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot) for the Indian Army, has diversified since the Sabots are not used at present.
In recent times, HAPP had established bulk manufacturing of tungsten alloy pre-fragments for PINAKA rocket, Bomb Body for 81mm mortar bombs, base Bleed and adapters for 155 ERFB shells.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

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

Postby sunilUpa » 03 Mar 2009 06:55

ARDE working on improvised version of Pinaka

PUNE: A precision guided munition, which is being developed by the city-based Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE) for army battle tanks, will go for maiden field trials in December, said ARDE director A M Datar on Monday.


The ARDE is also working on an advanced version of the Pinaka multi-barrel rocket launcher system (MBRLS), which will have an improved trajectory for the missile, he added.

Datar said, "The gun-fired guided munition can be fitted to battle tanks like T-72, T-90 and Arjun and will provide greater accuracy in terms of hitting the targets."


Referring to Pinaka, he said, the army was already in the processing of raising two regiments of the Pinaka MBRLS after the same was successfully tested and cleared for induction in the armed forces the process is now on. "We are now improvising on the Pinaka's trajectory and demonstrations for the same are scheduled for 2011," he added.

Rao pointed out that the HEMRL's low-cost explosive detection kit, which is used for instant identification of explosives used in blast and also for suspicious chemicals seized, had drawn significant demand from the military, para-military and police forces. "We have now got express of interest even from a couple of European countries, who want to use the detection kit," he said.

Avinash R
BRFite
Posts: 1973
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 19:59

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

Postby Avinash R » 03 Mar 2009 16:42

Low-intensity warfare techniques developed at HEMRL
By: Subroto Roy
Date: 2009-03-03

Pune : Low-intensity warfare techniques developed at HEMRL could have helped counter terrorists at Hotel Taj

Following the 26/11 terror attacks on Mumbai, several low-intensity warfare techniques that were developed at the High Energy Materials Research Laboratory (HEMRL) in Pune are now being taken seriously by counter terrorism organisations across the country.

Break walls

Explaining the use and effectiveness of 28 mm ammunition, S N Asthana associate director HEMRL who's also the in-charge of high temperature producing and suffocating compositions project, said, "The weapon can be used to break walls made of single bricks." He added that the larger variety of this ammunition could be used to suffocate terrorists holed up in public places.

"The bombs with red phosphorous content blow up only after they pass through the wall and enter a closed area," said Asthana.

He added that red phosphorous does not cause any harm to the human body but the gas that it emanates after the explosion suffocates the terrorists forcing them come out of where they are holed up.

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 » 07 Mar 2009 04:14

Thales buys 26% in JV with Samtel.

Delhi-based Samtel Display Systems is setting up a joint venture (JV) with French defence equipment manufacturer Thales. Thales is picking up a 26% stake in the JV.

Samtel group chairman Satish Kaura confirmed that the company has sought government’s approval for the proposed JV. Thales is investing in the venture through its wholly-owned subsidiaries — Thales Avionics, the avionics system provider and its Indian arm, and Thales International India, set up in 2007 — to tap opportunities in the country.

“The first tranche of the investment in the JV is about e1 million. Over the next few years we will scale up the investment to euro 4 million,” Mr Kaura said.

The proposed JV will develop, manufacture and sell helmet mounted sight displays (HMSD) in India for ministry of defence and also render after-sales services. HMSD helps fighter pilots in communication.

The company has applied for the Foreign Investment Promotion Board’s (FIPB) approval as FDI in the sector is regulated by the government. FDI is capped at 26% for defence production and no foreign investment is allowed in the sector without prior approval of the board. Thales, a e12.7-billion group, is an international electronics and systems conglomerate, addressing defence, aerospace and security markets worldwide. The French company has operations in more than 50 countries and employs more than 68,000 people. Samtel Group is India’s integrated manufacturer of electronic displays and their components mainly used in television, avionics and professional applications.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9925
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

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

Postby sum » 09 Mar 2009 09:59

Small tit-bit i came across while reading Bharat Karnad's book(many BRFites might know already):

Apparently, the Russians offered India their top scientists during the Soviet meltdown in the late 80s/early 90s as the SU was unable to pay the salaries. The condition given was : a pay of Rs 10000 p.m in India + $200 hard cash p.m.
I can understand if India looked twice since it involved $ which India itself was short of at that time but apparently, the reason why India rejected the offer was:

The babus mentioned that the salary of these Russians would be higher than the highest paid civil servant and hence, not feasible. :-? :-?

All the scientists were promptly snapped up by China.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

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

Postby sunilUpa » 11 Mar 2009 03:48

DRDO rejig likely on lines of global labs
BANGALORE: India will attempt to transform its Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) over the next three years by consolidating around 50 research labs into fewer centres and moving towards more collaborative development with private sector companies. The aim is to model DRDO on the lines of globally successful defence labs in countries like France, US, Britain and Israel.

The government has given in-principle approval to form an implementation committee for restructuring DRDO based on the Rama Rao committee’s recommendations,” a defence ministry official said, requesting anonymity.

The implementation committee being constituted by the government will try and transform DRDO into a leaner organisation, and also consolidates its labs—numbering over 50 at present—to 7-8 centres focusing on broader segments of aeronautics, combat systems , naval systems, weapons systems and electronic warfare. Almost 20% of DRDO’s projects have budgets of over Rs 100 crore each.

The proposal also includes a hike in budgetary allocation for DRDO, up to 6-10% of the defence budget,” the person added. The organisation now accounts for around 5% of the defence budget, estimated to be over Rs 6,000 crore every year. “Given that India has to import over Rs 40,000 crore worth of defence equipment every year, the scope for domestic research and production is huge,” a DRDO official said on conditions of anonymity.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6887
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

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

Postby Anujan » 11 Mar 2009 07:22


Everyday TOI(let) touches new height
Improvised - adjective: Spoken, performed, or composed with little or no preparation or forethought

JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

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

Postby JaiS » 11 Mar 2009 09:41


bart
BRFite
Posts: 712
Joined: 04 Jan 2008 21:33

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

Postby bart » 11 Mar 2009 10:15

Anujan wrote:

Everyday TOI(let) touches new height
Improvised - adjective: Spoken, performed, or composed with little or no preparation or forethought


It must be a Transformer like Optimus Prime.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4423
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

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

Postby putnanja » 12 Mar 2009 01:58

Indigenous 14-seater Saras gets going, at last

...
The IAF, which has indented for 15 Saras aircraft and may consider a further order for 30, is perusing the detailed project report. The IAF will drive the programme through an Integrated Project Management Team headed by the commandant of the Aircraft and Systems Testing Establishment, and with members from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), the NAL, a few connected Defence Research and Development Organisation laboratories and the Centre for Military Airworthiness and Certification.

The IAF is keen that the Saras supplement and possibly even replace its 23-strong Dornier (Do) 228 fleet. The Dorniers perform a variety of roles including transporting men and material to the remotest parts, VIP transport, navigational training, target towing, high-altitude operations, paradropping and parajumping.
...

sivabala
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 10:55

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

Postby sivabala » 12 Mar 2009 02:34


This seems to be an old report with no mention about the impact of the accident and near the end the report mentions there are two PTs flying whereas one of the PT already met its fate.

However, wish the essence of the report to be a fact even after the incident.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16284
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 12 Mar 2009 06:03

sum wrote:Small tit-bit i came across while reading Bharat Karnad's book(many BRFites might know already):

..........................................

The babus mentioned that the salary of these Russians would be higher than the highest paid civil servant and hence, not feasible. :-? :-?

All the scientists were promptly snapped up by China.


ROI is not something Babus think in terms of.

Tilak
BRFite
Posts: 733
Joined: 31 Jul 2005 20:19
Location: Old Lal Masjid @BRFATA (*Renovation*)

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

Postby Tilak » 14 Mar 2009 23:30

To all those who keep nagging "What is so indigenous about Arjun" .. Amrika does all by its own.. :lol:

Trade War
By Jacques Gansler
The most important strategic decisions over trade that Obama will face will not be about French cheese or the Chinese yuan, however, but over the dozens of countries around the world that, during the past few decades, have become critical in supplying the U.S. military with the latest technologies and best equipment. These foreign suppliers are significant, and increasingly vital, contributors to America's military superiority.

Given that the purpose of military procurement is to ensure competitive advantage over other countries' technological arsenals, the idea of depending on foreign sources for military equipment might seem ill-advised, even dangerous. But in fact, virtually every weapons system used by the U.S. military today contains components that were manufactured or designed somewhere else.

Take, for example, the Army's new mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles. Designed to protect soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, they have a V-shaped hull that was originally developed and refined in South Africa, along with armor that was designed in Israel, robust axles from Europe, and electronics from Asia.

The Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) is a "joint development and production program" between the United States, Germany, and Italy; the United States' Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) is the result of the efforts of more than 20 countries and is manufactured using 14 foreign subcontractors. Even Obama's new helicopter will be based on an Italian design and partially produced in Britain. The list goes on and on.

Of course, critics argue that these arrangements are incredibly dangerous. After all, couldn't the U.S. weapons supply be cut off during wartime if the country were too reliant on foreign parts? Most of these foreign sources, however, are from NATO nations or other countries with which the United States has had enduring military and commercial relationships. For example, despite very public opposition in some of these countries to U.S. actions in Afghanistan or Iraq, at no time did foreign suppliers (including 20 German and two French suppliers) restrict the provision or sale of components.

Skeptics also worry about "Trojan horses" built into foreign-supplied systems, particularly in the case of software. But this potential threat can be addressed through extensive and rigorous testing and reverse engineering, just as occurs in the financial and medical communities. Still others raise serious and legitimate concerns about military technology leaking into the hands of rogue regimes or terrorists or being sold to third parties without U.S. knowledge. These are certainly excellent arguments for international arms-control treaties. But there's no reason why such treaties need preclude legal arms trade among allies, along with mutually agreed-to verification techniques.

More commonly, opponents emphasize the potential loss of jobs that might occur as a result of buying equipment from offshore firms. This was the argument critics in the U.S. Congress fell back on in March 2008 when the U.S. Air Force awarded a contract to build a midair refueling tanker to Northrop Grumman over rival Boeing.

What made Northrop's bid controversial was that it planned to convert commercial aircraft built by European conglomerate Airbus for military use. Parts would be built in Europe and then shipped to the United States for assembly in Alabama. The response from Congress was as predictable as it was wrongheaded. Members from both parties swiftly denounced the decision to reward the lucrative contract to a "foreign firm."

"We should have an American tanker built by an American company with American workers," said U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Kansas during a debate on the deal. "I cannot believe we would create French jobs in place of Kansas jobs."

The Defense Department is not a social welfare organization, and its sole responsibility is to supply U.S. war fighters with the best equipment at the best price. Luckily, though, these two goals aren't mutually exclusive: Military globalization is in fact a blessing for Americans.

The United States is still the world's largest military customer, and it's in the interest of international weapons manufacturers to do business where the buyers are. In the past decade, a number of major international firms have set up shop in the United States. In fact, the Northrop deal would have created tens of thousands of U.S. jobs -- though admittedly not in Tiahrt's district, where Boeing happens to have a plant.

But the arguments for military globalization aren't just economic. U.S. national security policy, for at least the past five decades, has been based upon technological superiority. But it's no longer the case that the best military technology is always American (e.g., flat screens from Taiwan or optics from Germany). Therefore, for the United States to gain the best possible technologies, it often must turn to foreign sources.

...

It is also inconceivable that the United States would be involved in any future military operation without being in some form of international coalition. This is primarily for geopolitical reasons (rather than simply military ones), but its importance cannot be underestimated. When operating in a coalition environment, the United States must be able to operate interchangeably with its allies, and it must have the best possible equipment.

The United States must face the fact that it no longer has a monopoly on the world's best military technology. America's path toward future stability involves cooperating with allies and taking advantage of the best they have to offer, not cutting itself off and watching as its military superiority slips away.



That said every thing should be done to manufacture locally, as we dont have such "allies" that are being mentioned above, at present geopolitically to go hunting as a pack.. like they do.

munda
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 11:02

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

Postby munda » 14 Mar 2009 23:39

I believe that the Indian Government should fund a study to ascertain the effect on Inidia's nominal and real GDP if It did not had to fight all the wars in last 60 years with rouge pakis. This type of study was conducted by Israel and results are duly noted in wikipedia in the topic "Arab Israeli Conflict". I believe India should also do such mathematics if it has not already done so. If they have already done this, then can somebody post that information.

JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

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

Postby JaiS » 16 Mar 2009 06:09


somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

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

Postby somnath » 16 Mar 2009 11:23

Didnt know where to post on this - this thread seemed the most suitable!

In defence R&D, given the focus and the projected amount of money being spent, its a bit surprising that the government has not put some thought behind "acquisition" of key companies...While the "crown jewels" of any country - LockMart, UAC, Embraer and the like - will be out of bounds for strategic reasons, there are lots of niche players that are available. Defence M&A is a hot and "defensive" area..A report on global M&A in the sector..

http://www.pwc.com/extweb/pwcpublicatio ... s_2008.pdf

In recent times, the govt has really focussed on acquisition of strategic assets outside - oil being the most obvious example (Sudan, Nigeria, Russia etc), but also other mineral deposits (like coal) via the pvt sector..

Currently a lot fo the action is on JVs between Indian companies and DRDO with foreign companies, but an acquisition gives the kind of instant access to critical tech that a JV never does..Plus an acquisition gives instant capability build up...

Acquisition of niche, but important companies has another positive network externaility - it builds another layer of defence against possible sanctions..So if an Indian company owns an avionics supplier to Boeing, it will be that much harder for the US to impose sanctions on India without jeopardising Boeing's own production schedules etc..

Lastly, given the amount of money that is routinely unspent in the defence budget (between 2-3 billion dollars every year), it will be eminently feasible to do some really big strategic investments using the "left over", without even asking for greater allocations...

munda
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 10 Mar 2009 11:02

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

Postby munda » 16 Mar 2009 11:29

Check out a robot developed by Boston Dynamics, looks one of those from alien movies.
Last edited by JaiS on 17 Mar 2009 05:46, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: edited due to off-topic nature

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

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

Postby somnath » 16 Mar 2009 19:24

Top 10 M&A in defence IT area in 2006..

http://washingtontechnology.com/article ... -year.aspx

The deal sizes are eminently within India's reach (these days nothing is outide our reach in any case!)....And some of the client lists makes for very very interesting reading....

The GOI should appoint BEL and HAL, as the two relatively better performing defence PSUs, as the lead arm to scout for and acquire companies around the world with specific tech...Especially in the fields of optics, software, specialised engineering - things that are not considered "strategic" necessarily by the "home" country, and hence are amenable to overseas buyers...

skher
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 16 Apr 2007 23:58
Location: Secured; no idea

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

Postby skher » 16 Mar 2009 22:03

[quote="somnath"]

The GOI should appoint BEL and HAL, as the two relatively better performing defence PSUs, as the lead arm to scout for and acquire companies around the world with specific tech...Especially in the fields of optics, software, specialised engineering - things that are not considered "strategic" necessarily by the "home" country, and hence are amenable to overseas buyers...[
/quote]

IMHO,have some mercy on the better performing ones.If the orgs. perform better that shouldn't mean that the navratnas do the work which others are meant to do....they should be rewarded with resources,autonomy and permission to make profits...yes,have a motive of making profits.

IMVVHO,the M & As,an ingenous idea, should be pursued with single target in mind:- the realization of a 750-seater multi-role transport aircraft.
And the time to buy is now or probably never - because stocks will never be this cheap.

The right company with right structure,in my opinion,is with a recently formed holding company called National Aviation Company of India Limited [NACIL].
As I understand,it is flush with cash and is not involved in day to day affairs of any company - its subsidiaries are autonomous.

Thus,it can act like a publicly owned private equity firm (eg. Carlyle Group) and pick strategic amts of shares in aero engine designers and producers like snecma; airlifter makers like CASA,Airbus, Rekkof and antonov thereby gaining a long term commitment from the companies to be involved with and expect large orders from the Indian government/market.

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

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

Postby somnath » 17 Mar 2009 06:59

^^^ Are you being sarcastic? If yes, the reason?

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2505
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 17 Mar 2009 08:28

Somanath,

I have wondered abouth the same, especially after nuclear deal there is no legal reasons why cash rich Indian defense companies should not try and buy small and specialized defense companies in western europe and USA.

The million dollar question is would they allow Indian defense companies to shop around?

somnath
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3416
Joined: 29 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: Singapore

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

Postby somnath » 17 Mar 2009 10:55

Katare wrote:Somanath,

I have wondered abouth the same, especially after nuclear deal there is no legal reasons why cash rich Indian defense companies should not try and buy small and specialized defense companies in western europe and USA.

The million dollar question is would they allow Indian defense companies to shop around?


That entity does not exist today - all Indian pvt sector companies are taking baby steps in this arena, their obvious targets would be the low hanging domestic JV fruit..For strategic acquisitions abroad, the govt will have to put its foot forward..Not all companies would be available to an Indian buy-out - but opposition to India would be much less than (say) a Chinese takeover...Even two or three well placed acquisitions would create tremendous network externailities for our entire MIC, as well as creating entry barriers for potental sanctions regimes..

k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 607
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

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

Postby k prasad » 17 Mar 2009 11:43

Tilak wrote:To all those who keep nagging "What is so indigenous about Arjun" .. Amrika does all by its own.. :lol:


Excellent piece Tilak.... thats the most hilarious part about the Abrams - it has a German Gun, and they are planning to replace the Engine with a German MTU engine... and they still call it american. The others are even worse - the Merkava has the German gun (license produced), German engine, and some American electronics - and it is completely israeli. Poor Arjun, with indigenous gun is phoren maal onlee...

skher
BRFite
Posts: 197
Joined: 16 Apr 2007 23:58
Location: Secured; no idea

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

Postby skher » 17 Mar 2009 19:28

somnath wrote:^^^ Are you being sarcastic? If yes, the reason?


Um,is this question a polite way to suggest that I'm spaced out? If yes,the reason?

I think I was quite serious in making the unconventional suggestions.HAL and BEL are immensely loaded with work and JV commitments- an M & A is most unfavorable to them at this time.All focus should be,imo, to the the local projects.

As Katare saar said,the govt. itself is best suited for the job through a currently thumb twiddling executive staffed PSU called NACIL.All they need to do is bring the best IIT/IIM/HAL/ISRO engineers,scientist,project managers etc. retirees on board to implement a single extremely significant task - the building of an indigenous multirole Very Large Transport aircraft and its aero engines.
Payload:120 tons or 500 troopers. Only then can vivek garu's tibetan treks could be feasible.

IMHO,this is only big-ticket cookie left to crumble...all others viz. tanks, missiles, fighter, helicopter, ships, submarines etc. have been attempted with varying degrees of success.


Also,the private firms esp. RURs should be encouraged to make investments into aero engine companies and be assured of returns in terms of ready orders....for power,infrastructure and heavy industry projects..

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2505
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Postby Katare » 17 Mar 2009 21:58

somnath wrote:
Katare wrote:Somanath,

I have wondered abouth the same, especially after nuclear deal there is no legal reasons why cash rich Indian defense companies should not try and buy small and specialized defense companies in western europe and USA.

The million dollar question is would they allow Indian defense companies to shop around?


That entity does not exist today - all Indian pvt sector companies are taking baby steps in this arena, their obvious targets would be the low hanging domestic JV fruit..For strategic acquisitions abroad, the govt will have to put its foot forward..Not all companies would be available to an Indian buy-out - but opposition to India would be much less than (say) a Chinese takeover...Even two or three well placed acquisitions would create tremendous network externailities for our entire MIC, as well as creating entry barriers for potental sanctions regimes..


Somnath,

Companies like HAL and BEL maintain huge cash surplus with very light balance sheets. Some of these larger companies/PSUs can buy up to Billion dollar companies in foreign land. Similarly L&T, M&M and TATA could buy smaller $10 to 50 mil a pop companies to augment their respective defense portfolios. The issue here is policy framework and clarity on roadmap/assurance on long term viability.

I think this is something that is available to us as an avenue which is not available to say China. We need to play to our strengths instead of trying to make it with the same model that Chinese are working on. Build everything in-house from scratch by reverse engineering and laborious design iterations. That model is more a necessity for them, we could be more innovative and leapfrog few obstacles like smaller domestic MIC/suppliers/niche technologies by foreign collaboration or outright purchases of missing pieces.

The first piece i.e. ‘foreign collaboration’ is being pursued on full swing now but the later i.e. buying interests in foreign companies need to be explored now.


Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66591
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

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

Postby Singha » 18 Mar 2009 08:37

WSJ

Mahindra to Invest in Military Vehicle Plant

By NITIN LUTHRA

PRITHLA, India -- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Tuesday said its investment in a new defense-vehicle manufacturing plant in Haryana state could eventually total 400 million rupees ($7.8 million).

"We have already invested 250 million rupees in the first phase and will invest another 150 million rupees for the second phase of expansion," Anand Mahindra, the Mumbai-based company's vice chairman and managing director, said.

He addressed a news conference to mark the opening of the new factory, at Prithla in northern India. Mahindra & Mahindra is India's biggest sport-utility vehicle maker by sales.

The factory will initially be used to build armored versions of Mahindra's Scorpio and Bolero SUVs, as well the Indian government's Rakshak vehicle, Mr. Mahindra said.

Later, the plant will produce the Axe military vehicle, as well as a mine-shielded vehicle, as part of a Mahindra-BAE Systems PLC joint venture. The JV, which the Indian partner controls, is scheduled to begin production by June.

"We have a simple strategy of focusing on land and naval systems only," Mr. Mahindra said.

Khutub Hai, chief executive of Mahindra's defense unit, said the new factory will build about 200 vehicles this year, 350 next year, and has the capacity to produce 750 annually.

Mahindra is no longer discussing a possible joint venture with a unit of Italy's Finmeccanica SpA to produce naval equipment in India, Mr. Hai said.

Mahindra planned to own 74% stake of the JV to build underwater weapon systems such as torpedoes for the Indian armed forces. The remaining stake was to be held by Whitehead Alenia Systemi Subacquei, the Finmeccanica unit.

A new overseas partner will be chosen by the end of the year, Mr. Hai said. He declined to say why talks with the Finmeccanica unit ended.

Mahindra plans to tie up with African governments, including South Africa, to build factories to make defense equipment, Mr. Hai said. Plans to export vehicles from Prithla to BAE's global operations are in the works, he added.

Write to Nitin Luthra at nitin.luthra@dowjones.com
Last edited by JaiS on 18 Mar 2009 08:49, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited, added link, Singha, if a link is available, please post it, thanks

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52816
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 19 Mar 2009 01:07

What is difficult to understand is the Indian Army game-plan on how it plans to acquire modern technolgy for its use? After a long tender process they select a supplier who invariably gets blacklisted for providing bribes to some political party or the other. Or restart the tender process when the suppliers drop out or become unviable due to market forces(they go bankrupt). In addition there are the sanctions and due to globalization invariably every supplier is under US control with its attendent restrictions. With all these constraints the IA kicks the domestic R&D efforts in the teeth. To add insult to injury the MoD doesn't release the funds even when they are budgetted thus delaying procurements. In fact for past ten -twenty years it has been returning upspent money.

The end result is an army that doesnt have any teeth or rusted ones at best.

So how do they plan to acquire any thing of value or use? Do they plan to fight or be in eternal mode of neti, neti? With the nukes, the threshold has to be high but by self deprivation they are lowering the threshold.

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

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

Postby aditp » 19 Mar 2009 11:22

^^^^ What say RayC ? :roll:

Anabhaya
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 20 Sep 2005 12:36

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

Postby Anabhaya » 19 Mar 2009 15:36

Hmm, just how much of the blame should the Govt take? Afterall they don't want to buy Bofors which is the best performing gun out there I think!

IA has had fair share of huge acquisitions. T-90S, anti-tank missiles, the BEL WLR, Dhruv's(120), SMERCH, and Pinaka to name a few.

I would think that the IA has two problems - one of inability to influence/package your requirements in a manner that will easily pass MoD.

And the other is its inflexibility - they appear to think nothing is better than something if everything is not available!

JaiS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2190
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: JPEG-jingostan
Contact:

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

Postby JaiS » 20 Mar 2009 04:27


Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

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

Postby Vick » 24 Mar 2009 05:01

From DN
Mar 23, 2009
India’s Arms Lab Wants To Become Export Player
By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI

NEW DELHI — India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has proposed a restructuring that would give the state-owned agency a commercial arm.

DRDO officials told Defence Ministry officials in February that the changes could streamline the development of weapons and technology, a senior ministry official said.

The commercial unit would sell arms, defense gear and services, and work with foreign firms to develop technologies.
In their proposal, DRDO officials said the agency could also help bridge the differences between Indian military services by setting up DRDO-manned technical headquarters in each branch.

DRDO has 50 laboratories and more than 30,000 employees. It runs more than 440 projects whose total costs so far are $4 billion. They include the Agni nuclear ballistic missiles and an anti-ballistic-missile defense.

Most of the agency’s projects are behind schedule. The Army has been waiting for the main battle tank since the 1970s, the Air Force for the Light Combat Aircraft since 1984, and the air-defense force for the Tr­ishul Quick Reaction Missile for some years. The DRDO proposal would put seed capital to launch a private commercial arm that would be listed on the stock markets.

“The idea to open a commercial arm is always a welcome step, but one is not sure about what shape it could take when it is created,” said Deba Mohanty, senior fellow in Security Studies at the New Delhi-based defense think tank, Observer Research Foundation. “Unless the commercial arm is professionally managed and enjoys maximum autonomy as has been the case with Antrix Corp. of the Indian Space Research Organisation, it could end up as another branch within DRDO, serving no purpose.” A senior DRDO official said a commercial branch would allow DRDO to work with Indian and foreign firms to bring products to domestic and overseas markets. That would allow the government agency to pay engineers better, one analyst said.

“In order to attract and retain the best talent, the scientists should be paid handsomely and given suitable incentives for successful research work,” said Gurmeet Kanwal, a retired Army brigadier who directs the Centre for Land Warfare Studies.

In their proposal, DRDO officials said the organization’s role in procurement has shrunk over the years, and they want to rebuild it. But the idea is unlikely even to spark much debate, Defence Ministry sources said.

A senior Army official said procurement delays begin with DRDO, which can’t even classify a requested purchase as “to make” or “to buy” in an timely manner. The same official said DRDO should stick to its basic task of developing weapons and gear for the Indian military.

Kanwal said the research arm should focus on developing the most important arms and gear that India can­not obtain elsewhere.

“In principle, the DRDO should be engaged only in cutting-edge defense technologies in which even strategic partners are unlikely to cooperate with India,” he said.

But Mohanty applauded the proposal.

“Over the decades, DRDO has become a rigid institution within the closed defense establishments, with notional interactions with other institutions like the civil Ministry of Defence and armed forces,” he said. “DRDO thus needs to be restructured to be a flexible organization in the first place with horizontal interactions with related organizations at all levels.” Mohanty added that DRDO needs more money.

“DRDO’s budget is pathetic,” he said. “It spends less than $1 billion per year on projects, many of which are strategic in nature. Look at the United States, which spends more than $70 billion — even countries like China, South Korea, Japan have significantly increased their military R&D budgets. You will not become self-reliant in military technologies at any time in the future if your budget is so low.”

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16284
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 24 Mar 2009 05:48


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 » 24 Mar 2009 21:11

HAL to set up new division for mission and combat systems.

Increasing emphasis on indigenisation of the defence and aerospace sector by the government and also with foreign companies seeking local partners for the defence offsets programme has prompted public sector undertaking Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to expand its R&D activities.

India's premier aerospace establishment will now be setting up another division in Bangalore in addition to the existing five divisions in the city. The new 'Mission and Combat System' division will operate from the Bangalore-based Design Complex and will focus on R&D activities with regard to implementation of aircraft and avionics projects on hand and also those which will be undertaken by the defence PSU in future.

The new division will not only focus on avionics systems integration and the use of smart avionics weapons systems but also act as a lead agent to encourage and assist other agencies.

The R&D focus will be on development and integration of the avionics and systems for the existing fleet of aircraft, new aircraft programmes and also unmanned aerial vehicles technology development, according to government sources.

HAL has a number of aircraft upgrade projects on hand apart from development programmes such as those of the Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT), Hawk, Light Combat Aircraft, Advanced Light Helicopter, Sukhoi 30 MKI.

In all the aerospace giant has orders in hand of around Rs40,000 crore.

With 70 per cent of the products being used by the Indian armed forces being imported the thrust now is on indigenisation.

sivabala
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 83
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 10:55

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

Postby sivabala » 24 Mar 2009 22:00

How good will it be a bifurcation of HAL into H Helicopters Ltd and H Aeroplane Ltd?
any thoughts...


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BALAR025, Google [Bot], Manish_Sharma, rajsunder and 59 guests