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

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 11 Jun 2010 09:07

RamaY wrote:
tsarkar wrote: AFAIK, pop up spring loaded wing extensions for increasing stand off range. The extent of extension is set by armourers based on mission requirements. The exercise is akin to fuse setting for desired effects.

It is this type of force multiplier R&D that is required. Long overdue, but atleast its now there.
One can see the open ends in the rear fins of the big-bull. Looks like spring loaded wing extensions....

The tail end cavities are meant for that. You do not see that on fins.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Jun 2010 18:38

Rahul M wrote:
chackojoseph wrote: AFIK, this kit has not been tested in winter at high altitudes as the testing began few months back. Also this has been developed from kargil experiences. Similar to what M2K's and Jags had in Kargil. They had this peculiar problem where they couldn't lob into places without coming near to it. It would be ok lob to the nearest possible place from designated distance and deny the enemy space to come out and attack.
a very interesting point that was, the LGB's we were using had an operating altitude limit of
~ 20k feet while many of the IAF's targets were above 15K feet. as a result the aircrafts had to come very low wrt to the mountain tops to drop the bombs.
now there's no problem with this limitation for other AF's but for IAF it's a pretty serious one. just goes on to show the myriad problems of using foreign equipment which are designed to foreign requirements and work perfectly well for them but not for our often unique needs.

Yes as per the spec 20k feet but was it not lobbed from higher altitude...i remember that being dropped higher than 20k feet.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Jun 2010 18:40

Singha wrote:some claim the diamondback wing kit of sher khan released from 40,000ft @ near mach1 can glide for 40km. but obviously in that mode only useful against fixed targets using gps guidance. targets of opportunity and moving targets need laser guidance.

even the latest version of Paveway can do 40km & more.

negi · Post by **negi** » 11 Jun 2010 18:45

^ I assume true only for relatively flat terrain in Kargil like environment the range would greatly reduced for an acceptable CEP.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Jun 2010 18:52

I'm not talking abt the range but the altitude for dropping the Paveway.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 11 Jun 2010 19:15

Kanson wrote:Yes as per the spec 20k feet but was it not lobbed from higher altitude...i remember that being dropped higher than 20k feet.

Weapons have a possible range and a confidence range. Possible range is what is physically possible. Confidence range is mix of various parameters in which manufacturer says will work well.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 11 Jun 2010 19:49

^ Looks like its official...

The Paveway II Plus systems were launched from altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet against a 24’ x 24’ billboard target angled at 45 degrees. Two GBU-10s and four GBU-12s equipped with MAU-209C/B computer control groups were released from a pair of F-16D Viper aircraft from Eglin’s 40th Flight Test Squadron. Each successfully initiated laser acquisition at the expected time and guided to the intended target.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 12 Jun 2010 08:41

Kanson wrote:^ Looks like its official...

The Paveway II Plus systems were launched from altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet against a 24’ x 24’ billboard target angled at 45 degrees. Two GBU-10s and four GBU-12s equipped with MAU-209C/B computer control groups were released from a pair of F-16D Viper aircraft from Eglin’s 40th Flight Test Squadron. Each successfully initiated laser acquisition at the expected time and guided to the intended target.

True. I am sorry that sometimes I reply in general terms as this takes some searching. it is not possible most times cause I am multitasking.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Jun 2010 09:10

> Next in line should be laser guided artillery shells.

how about domestic production of all types of BASIC 155mm shells? its been a "work in progress" since before the nuclear tests. first a US co disappeared in cloud of post-test sanctions, then nalanada+denel+george fernandes, then possibly soltam...

this must be the most closely guarded failure in india.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Jun 2010 10:50

Singha wrote:> Next in line should be laser guided artillery shells.

how about domestic production of all types of BASIC 155mm shells? its been a "work in progress" since before the nuclear tests. first a US co disappeared in cloud of post-test sanctions, then nalanada+denel+george fernandes, then possibly soltam...

this must be the most closely guarded failure in india.

We have a whole breed of 155mm Shells being manufactured at OFB. This list is from OFB Website:
(http://www.ofbindia.gov.in/index.php?wh ... #subclass3)

155 mm SHELL HE 107
155 mm SHELL HE M 77B
155 mm SHELL HEER
155 mm SHELL SMOKE ER 24KM
SHELL 155 mm ILLUMINATING MIRA
SHELL 155 mm HE
SHELL 155 MM ILLUMINATING ERFB
SHELL 155 MM SCREENING SMOKE BE M2A2
155 mm HE ERFB BB
155 mm HE ERFB BT
155 mm EXTENDED RANGE CARGO PROJECTILE
155 mm HE-ER BASE BLEED PROJECTILE

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 12 Jun 2010 19:52

chackojoseph wrote: True. I am sorry that sometimes I reply in general terms as this takes some searching. it is not possible most times cause I am multitasking.

This is not abt the correctness. I wish you could be more armed in terms of data to see how good our LGB compared to the Paveway kits if you get an opportunity. A jingo to a jingo...

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 12 Jun 2010 20:39

Prem Kumar wrote:
Saw this slightly old news item today, which is heartening Russia, India may jointly make Glonass, GPS navigation devices

GPS & GLONASS receivers have been around for many years now. The taiwanese make them really cheap.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 13 Jun 2010 08:36

Cap on FDI in Defence to stay, Germany told

ndia has communicated to Germany that at present there is no change in the policy of raising the cap on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) from 26 per cent in the defence sector.

With the German defence industry taking up the issue of raising the cap to at least 49 per cent, if not higher, a top Defence Ministry official told his counter parts that the policy of restricting the limit to 26 per cent was not going to undergo a change in the perceivable future.

Special Secretary of Defence Production Ajoy Acharya, who is here leading the official delegation at the Berlin Air Show, told TheHindu that he reiterated the Indian stand during his meeting with both German officials and those of the European Aeronautic Defence and Space (EADS) Company's Defence and Security (DS).

Earlier, the EADS DS told a group of correspondents from India that while the organisation planned to develop a Centre of Competence for developing a product that will be supplied to its global customers, it suggested the FDI cap be raised to at least 50 per cent.

During his meeting with German officials, Mr. Acharya said the overall impression was that there was greater interest to expand cooperation between both countries. During the 2008 Berlin Air Show, India made a splash by becoming the partner country.

Bidding for aircraft

The EADS is among six manufacturers bidding to bag the multi-billion dollar 126 Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft that the Indian Air Force wants to acquire. On Wednesday, the Chief of the German Air Force, General Aarne Kreuzinger-Janik, vouched for the performance of the plane.

The aircraft, he said, has an accident-free record and took part in a NATO air policing task on the Russian border. He added that its multi-role capability was established and that it was a machine that could be used both in air-to-air and air-to-ground missions.

As for greater cooperation between the Air Forces of Germany and India, Mr. Kreuzinger-Janik said that while both services were not quite there yet for conducting joint exercises, moves were afoot to have a greater understanding in the fields of aviation medicine and flight safety to begin with.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 15 Jun 2010 03:53

DRDO:Trimming the Fat

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 09:04

Kanson wrote:This is not abt the correctness. I wish you could be more armed in terms of data to see how good our LGB compared to the Paveway kits if you get an opportunity. A jingo to a jingo...

True. You know I try. But, I am sure the paveway kit is superior as its gone through generations and busted a lot of Taliban arse. Our kits are good for our situations. Sometime back I was chatting up with a PRO. What he told me was that he Knows I am interested, but, the amount and type of questions I seek is very difficult to answer. It is same as what the enemy would want to know

. Ditto with a foreign manufacturer. He said that if he tells me, his customer (the Indian armed forces), will be very offended. Sometimes that prefer to give it to large newspaper etc. There are limitations.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 09:48

ramana wrote:Chacko, The Paveway II because of its extending rear fins could have more lift and hence more range. Their need is to hit from afar.

The Indian version is closer to Paveway I with fixed rear fins. However dont know what type of copter control is there. If its proportional control then its more sophisticated than PavewayII as that would allow more range!

I guess it has GPS integrated in it making it more versatile.

As per wiki,

The Paveway III system was also used during the Indian offensive in the Kargil War of 1999 by the Indian Air Force with the Mirage 2000 as a launch platform. Raytheon, the sole provider of Paveway III variants, is currently delivering both standard and enhanced versions to the US Government and foreign customers.

So, what we might have could be even superior to Paveway 3?

1) We could have got something specific to the kargil conditions and could be applied in general too.
2) We got something better to paveway 3
3) We got something that is an import substitute.

Choose one of the possibilities above.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Jun 2010 10:01

I don't know about using Paveway III in Kargil. In mid 90s IAF acquired some PavewayII kits suitable for the British designed 1000 lb iron bombs. However they were quite expensive. There were press reports of Israel supplying LGB kits right during Kargil. Recent reports last decade talk of Griffin III from Israel.

However from DRDO LASTEC site, this SUDHARSHAN optics is their baby. And ADE is said to have added GPS ability. So its a laudable achievement. If they also have proportional control logic then it manages the energy to give more range. Something to look out for.

BTW the LASTEC site says next important munition for them is cannon launched guided shell! Keep an eye and scoop its emergence.

vic · Post by **vic** » 15 Jun 2010 13:15

ramana wrote:I don't know about using Paveway III in Kargil. In mid 90s IAF acquired some PavewayII kits suitable for the British designed 1000 lb iron bombs. Hoever they were quite expensive. There were press reports of Israel supplying LGB kits right during Kargil. Recent reports last decade talk of Griffin III from Israel.

However from DRDO LASTEC site, this SUDHARSHAN optics is their baby. And ADE is said to have added GPS ability. So its a laudable achievement. If they also have proportional control logic then it manages the energy to give more range. Something to look out for.

BTW the LASTEC site says next important munition for them is cannon launched guided shell! Keep an eye and scoop its emergence.

The initial batch of Paveway was US$ 20,000 per kit and so was Israeli ones, thought US were considered better. The latter batches were more sophisticated and could have been costlier but I don't think it would be more than US$ 100,000 per kit.

The so called cannon launched guided (shell?) to my knowledge is actually a cannon launched guided (munition?) i.e. Lahat modified to 120mm caliber and demo-ed in Delhi Def Expo. It is supposed to have been well tested and fully ready. I hope that DRDO is not falling for OFB-PSU-Pvt sector malaise to start calling Israeli products as Indigenous / JV.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 14:35

ramana,

There is so much ambiguity that it takes a while to figure out the actual truth. Thanks for the LASEC tip, will work on it.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 15 Jun 2010 21:00

Ajatshatru wrote:
ex Air Chief Marshal feels that the LCA programme has become a joke, that is something for DRDO to ponder about seriously.
And can it be said with 100% certainty that he had no vested interest when making such a statement and moreover, everything he says has to be taken as an absolute gospel truth?

This is precisely what I meant, either the remark can be met with immediate, denial, hostility, attribution of misconduct or DRDO and others can do some soul searching.

I am afraid its not going to cut it. The latest changes are clear indications that GoI has realized where the problem lies, and even DRDO brass acknowledges it, for example this is posted on a DRDO site

http://www.drdo.gov.in/dpi/IndiaToday07_June2010.pdf

It is a India today article, is scathing on DRDO and talks about how the recent changes are to ensure that DRDO is more accountable, more focussed and most importantly has a armed forces oversight on DRDO.

I had already mentioned in this thread that exactly such changes are needed, still some more changes are needed (which I had mentioned before too) and are also referred to in the article.

Read it all....

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 15 Jun 2010 22:07

Ajatshatru wrote:
This is precisely what I meant, either the remark can be met with immediate, denial, hostility, attribution of misconduct or DRDO and others can do some soul searching.
Hold on, not so fast….before this self-righteous ‘I told you so’….So the only real choice, according to you, is to accept ex Air Chief Marshal’s remark on the face value because not doing so would tantamount to ‘denial, hostility, attribution of misconduct’.

Furthermore, the only real path to nirvana for the DRDO is to accept that the LCA programme ‘has become a joke’ and once having accepted that, then DRDO to proceed on the path of ‘soul searching’ to cleanse itself of all its perceived sins under certain parameters as viewed and defined by a rather dubious group?

There were two parts to the answer, one you have taken a stab at, the other you did not.

Clearly the reorganization of DRDO and the article on DRDO posted on the DRDO sight list that the deficiencies pointed to are accepted as true even by DRDO staff who are working to fix those.

These reorganizations have not happened because of a random wish some where some place, these have happened due to a formal committee looking into the matter which has in turn sourced the views of various people to come to these conclusions.

The changes are driven by the criticism like that by the ACM, so in a sense GoI itself verifies that the DRDO needs fixing and is doing that.

Now, coming to your part of "how to disagree with ACM" let me tell you what not to do--

Make sweeping allegations of corruption, vested intrest and what not -- which you did

Then, you want to disagree, feel free to do so without attacking him personally in turn and alleging malfides. Point out specifics of how is wrong or how you disagree with him. That would work.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 15 Jun 2010 23:07

Certainly you can disagree with that assertion, to an extent it is sweeping, but it also clearly shows the level of frustration that IAF has when needing to sit back and wait for the Sqn strength dwindle away even as the opposition keep getting stronger by the day.

From his perspective at the end of day, if he is asked to face off with the Chinese tomorrow, he cant go and tell them about the great work that DRDO is doing in building things from scratch and what not.

He needs Sqns to fight, and MoD keeps telling him (whether true or not) "sorry only LCA when it comes". At the end of the day "nourishing the long terms Indian Mil-Ind complex" means ZERO to him if he cant do his primary duty.

From his perspective it is a joke, at his expense no less.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 15 Jun 2010 23:18

Can we just end all this to and fro and agree that each cog in the wheel - DRDO, IAF, MOD, public, rest of GOI all have sincere people working very hard to get things done. And at the same time have enough of wrongdoings and blunders and other failings which riles up the other constituents for them to go off on a rant. Of course MoD and the GoI are off limits to drdo and IAF so they take a go at each other

Until the LCA gets into IAF in sufficient strength this will go on and perhaps after that wrt the MCA too! Peace?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Jun 2010 01:00

Chackoji, One more thing. Find out is the LGB kit can work with all types of bombs in IAF inventory including the smallest? being able to deliver 125 kg ~ 250 lb within close proximity is a valuable capability. Same with the FAE

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 19 Jun 2010 04:32

DRDO Newsletter for July 2010
Special issue on DRDO Awards. Lots of good information.

sum · Post by **sum** » 21 Jun 2010 13:16

^^ From the newsletter:

Dr J
Narayana Das,
Ou t s t a n d i n g
Scientist and
Chief Controller
Research &
Development,
D R D O
HQrs, Delhi,
is conferred the Technology Leadership Award
2009 for his vision, dynamic leadership, and
proactive development strategies that have led to
establishment of technology maturity levels, enabling
DRDO to embark on strategic projects like Air-
Independence Propulsion Systems for submarines

DRDO is working on AIPs? Could any guru point out as to what progress have we made on this front?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 21 Jun 2010 13:25

sum wrote:^^ From the newsletter:

Dr J
Narayana Das,
Ou t s t a n d i n g
Scientist and
Chief Controller
Research &
Development,
D R D O
HQrs, Delhi,
is conferred the Technology Leadership Award
2009 for his vision, dynamic leadership, and
proactive development strategies that have led to
establishment of technology maturity levels, enabling
DRDO to embark on strategic projects like Air-
Independence Propulsion Systems for submarines
DRDO is working on AIPs? Could any guru point out as to what progress have we made on this front?

Not without the very tight control of the IN.

Tomorrow they will start off on nuclear research!!

This DRDO head guy seems to have a penchant for stepping on numerous toes.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 21 Jun 2010 14:33

ramana wrote:Chackoji, One more thing. Find out is the LGB kit can work with all types of bombs in IAF inventory including the smallest? being able to deliver 125 kg ~ 250 lb within close proximity is a valuable capability. Same with the FAE

No it cannot work. Its designed for a 1000 pounder.

Added later...

The technologies have been developed. If the need arises, it will be adapted for smaller or bigger pounders. This was told to me just now.

I have put the sudarshan query. let us wait for the answer.

Added later....

The LGB is still in testing and has not been tested in Himalayas. It will be tested later ( think you asked this question a page back).

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 21 Jun 2010 16:24

X-post

Foreign Defence Suppliers are Seeking to Incorporate the Indian Defence Industry into Their Global Supply Chains

Highlights of the CII-Deloitte report on ‘Prospects for Global Defence Industry in Indian defence market’:

• Indian defence procurement would rise to an estimated USD 42 Billion (including USD 19.20 bn for capital acquisition) which could make India as one of the most attractive markets in the World.

• The defence capital expenditure budget is expected to achieve a compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 10 Percent from 2011 – 2015.

• Total indigenous production over 2011-2015 would need to expand from approx USD 30 bn to more than USD 70 bn in the span of 5 years to be able to achieve 70 percent indigenization by the year 2015. Defence industry would need to expand by an average of 30 percent a year over the next 5 years.

• It is estimated that India is likely to spend nearly USD 80 bn USD for next five years (2010-2015) on Capital expenditure.

• The Report provides Information to global investor firms to understand the Indian defence requirements and domestic industry capabilities and opportunities in the four key domains vis maritime, land , aerospace and electronics.

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 22 Jun 2010 03:29

Perfecting the art of balloon science

Hyderabad: To construct a scientific balloon, first build a really, really long table.

The longest table at the National Balloon Facility (NBF) measures 178m; it would take Usain Bolt a quarter of a minute to run from one of its ends to the other. Covered in spotless white plastic, the table is the most arresting occupant of a long, slender room. This is the balloon fabrication unit, which makes NBF the only facility in the world to design, manufacture and launch its own balloons, tugging along a raft of science experiments as payload.

On this table, the seams of a balloon can be sealed as effectively as its fate. Long stretches of polyethylene film, often as thin as 6 micron—six thousandths of a millimetre, so thin that even sweat can ruin it—are heated and joined to each other. Too much heat, and the film will burn; one careless move, and the film will tear. The careful fabrication of a balloon may require 90 days and cost up to Rs50 lakh.

The final, pear-shaped envelope of polyethylene, when filled with hydrogen, can be enormous. “The largest balloons we’ve launched,” says S. Sreenivasan, the scientist-in-charge at NBF, “have had volumes of 26 million cubic feet.” NBF balloons have sent up experiments from India as well as from the US, Russia, Japan and Italy, all eager to take advantage of the low magnetic interference this close to the equator.

Now, in a literal instance of pushing the envelope, NBF is developing a balloon that can regularly take payloads more than 50km above the earth’s surface—very close to, if not over, the 53km altitude record achieved precisely once by a team in Japan. It’s harder than it sounds. It requires polyethylene so thin as to be virtually non-existent, and it is a significant leap from NBF’s present high of 42-43km. If these balloons succeed, they could replace the traditional atmospheric and weather-sounding rockets used by the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro).

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

Matthew_H · Post by **Matthew_H** » 23 Jun 2010 00:20

Deleted spam posted on multiple threads.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Jun 2010 00:36

Thanks Matthew_H, thats a very telling article, for quite some time I have been warning forum members about the new found thought process of our old friend Col Ajay Shukla.

The fact that he choses BS as a vehicle to criticize DRDO riding on the coat tails of your article is very illuminating.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 23 Jun 2010 01:52

Guys Don't bother with Matthew hoey.Don't give him undue attention.He is biased in favor of chinese as he has not written anything against them even when they have actually conducted an asat test.

A useful idiot working for the chinese.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 23 Jun 2010 02:14

Sanku wrote:Thanks Matthew_H, thats a very telling article, for quite some time I have been warning forum members about the new found thought process of our old friend Col Ajay Shukla.

The fact that he choses BS as a vehicle to criticize DRDO riding on the coat tails of your article is very illuminating.

Sanku, read Col Shukla's article fully, especially the last paragraph. All he is saying is that do what is required for our security without sending out contradictory signals.

I don't know why he gives such prominence to a two-bit chinese sympathizer like Mathew though. They should be shown their place with the contempt they deserve.

darshhan wrote:Guys Don't bother with Matthew hoey.Don't give him undue attention.He is biased in favor of chinese as he has not written anything against them even when they have actually conducted an asat test.

A useful idiot working for the chinese.

Whether he a useful idiot or just a idiot is a matter for debate

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Jun 2010 10:58

putnanja wrote: Sanku, read Col Shukla's article fully, especially the last paragraph. All he is saying is that do what is required for our security without sending out contradictory signals.

darshhan wrote:Guys Don't bother with Matthew hoey.Don't give him undue attention.He is biased in favor of chinese as he has not written anything against them even when they have actually conducted an asat test.
.

Well folks read the above two in conjunction, Col Shukla's article is pretty much a regurgitation of Matthew_Hs view with a small disclaimer tagged at the end. He quotes him by name? Now who is giving this chap importance?

The small disclaimer at the end does nothing to the spread of the vicious propaganda that Matthew_H has been spreading.

So why is Col Shukla acting as a channel for Matthew_H? If not for his article who would care for who this guy anyway?

And why does Col Shukla *assume* and *deride* DRDO for their presentation, they are GoI, if the spoke about their plans it would be inconceivable that MoD was not in the loop. India was trying to give out a message and take a stand, people didn't like that.

Is Col Shukla telling us on the behalf of those pay his latest salary checks that "stay in bounds", dont walk straight, keep your eyes down? You are a serf, even if you have developed muscles?

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 23 Jun 2010 13:57

Why is yet another wannabe US Ayatollah being given so much attention by a usually fair Indian journalist ex soldier?

Yes it has been apparent for sometime that a Space NPT may be in the offing and that is precisely why India may be gearing up so as to not be on the wrong side of the unjust international order once again.

Concurrently and somewhat expectedly some space ayatollahs have been gearing up too...

There's the aforesaid NGO, there's space debate etc.
but why the unnecessary coverage in a mainstream Indian daily by an otherwise respected journalist? Hain?

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 23 Jun 2010 14:08

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 23 Jun 2010 14:08

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 23 Jun 2010 14:10

And you know I love how these things go,

India is saying that it will develop this and that , and although they haven't made much progress ( otherwise how else will the equal equal with Pukistan be done at a later stage by the same NPA) , that in itself is "shocking" and "abominable" as opposed to demonstrated proliferation by the likes of the G-2 condominium.

Ha ha, I wonder how long will the Goras keep pouting this kind of rhetoric.

An India which is justifiably taking threshold steps in response to the wanton and blatant proliferation of new weapon systems by one of its chief adversaries is "culpable" and "wrong" because of some statements but the G-2 violators are of course not that much too blame.
]
I am sorry you Goras- this is pure propaganda and it does not wash anymore.

And you know what is the greatest contradiction-

the demonstrated capability of the G-2 shows that the NPA have already failed and please I don't think anybody will believe that a shit ass NPA sitting in Washington will be able to "roll bac" the g-2'S INTENTIONS.

I am sorry but the only aim is clearly to keep India behind the G-2 and possibly out of the permanent seat in the forthcoming space NPT.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 23 Jun 2010 14:10

Yes Sir D Roy Sir, and this otherwise respected jorunalist has been going down the path of being less than respected with some quotes from unnamed sources that he has been liberally dishing out which tarnish the Indian strength in various areas.

For a while it was about IA and the DRDO lobby (which does not mean pro-DRDO btw, I am pro DRDO) cheered him on BRF, then he tried his hatchet job with IAF and Il 76 factoids (made up data) which was cheered by pro buy-US and now this.

I think it is time we start catching on to his "respect" game.