Military Acquisitions, Partnerships & Developments

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 22 Jun 2010 10:59

To fast-track military purchases, Pranab empowers Defence Minister

In a bid to expedite acquisition of vital weapon systems and overcome the lag of past three years, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has proposed that the Defence Minister be empowered to approve military hardware purchases up to Rs 500 crore. At present, the limit for the Defence Minister is set at Rs 100 crore.

Mukherjee has also suggested that capital acquisitions only above Rs 1,000 crore be brought to the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) for approval. For projects between Rs 500 crore and Rs 1,000 crore, approval could be given with the joint concurrence of the Defence Minister and Finance Minister.

The proposed empowerment of the Defence Ministry is important considering that the current threshold for seeking CCS approval is over Rs 200 crore

Ain't that good news!

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 22 Jun 2010 11:20

Dmurphy wrote:Ain't that good news!

Thats fantastic news.. Lets hope and pray AKA makes good and appropriate use of the powers bestowed on him. Meanwhile, thats a great move nevertheless. Hail FM!

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 23 Jun 2010 04:37

India Projected To Spend $80B On Military Acquisitions Through 2015
Aviation Week

India and the U.S. have boosted their civil and military cooperation. Retired U.S. Air Force Gen. Charles Wald, now a director and senior adviser at Deloitte Services, said at AVIATION WEEK’s MRO Military 2010 conference in April that if Boeing or Lockheed wins, it would solidify the budding Indian-U.S. strategic alignment this century.

Yet, in naval acquisitions, India is achieving its highest level of self-sufficiency.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 11 Jul 2010 17:59

To get around all these corruption scandals. Big defence firms are trying to form partnerships with local construction firms. EADS formed partnership with L&T, but GoI is halting it at the moment due to the sensitivity of local military firms. EADS has spent the last few years lobbying GoI. Tata is also one of the most courted by these defence firms.

The french are doing this in Brazil and has been very successful, so any future sub sales from DCNS will have brazilian parts and a global supply partnership. Its easy for the brazilian firms to flout rules on corruption than for international def firms who come under OECD conventions .

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 13 Jul 2010 03:53

Boeing Sells Sheet-Metal Equipment To Mahindra

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 13 Jul 2010 10:15

India,US to ink huge military deal: report

US President Barack Obama's visit to New Delhi in November may secure $5 billion worth of arms sales to India, Russia's Vzglyad newspaper reported Monday. The deal, if signed during Obama's visit, would make the US replace Russia as India's biggest arms supplier, the paper said, adding that the deal would also help India curb China's rise.

India's shortlist includes Patriot defense systems, Boeing mid-air refueling tankers and certain types of howitzers, and the total cost of the deal may exceed $10 billion, the paper added. The report came a day after The Economic Times in New Delhi reported that talks are underway between Indian and US officials over a deal to sell 10 Boeing C-17 military transport aircraft to the Indian Air Force (IAF).

India interested in Patriot defence systems??

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 15 Jul 2010 04:11

Antony Gets More Financial Powers

Aiming to enable quicker procurement of equipment for the armed forces, the government has increased five-fold Defence Minister A K Antony's financial powers from existing Rs 100 crore to Rs 500 crore.

Also, Antony can approve defence purchases within his financial powers without having to take the proposals to the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), the highest decision- making body of the government on national security matters.

The orders in this regard came about yesterday after Finance Minister had supported the idea and mooted a proposal in this regard, Defence Ministry officials said here today.

Along with these powers for Antony, the Defence Ministry was also authorised to decide on defence procurement up to Rs 1,000 crore with concurrence from the Finance Ministry, they said.

With this decision, defence equipment that are valued over Rs 1,000 crore alone would be taken to the CCS for approval, they added........................

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 15 Jul 2010 07:09

Keep in mind, from the past

India jet deals faced sabotage

quote...
... that Delhi could be lulled into a long period of indecision was rudely shattered three months later, when Chinese forces seized part of India's north-eastern border territory.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3077778.stm

neeraj · Post by **neeraj** » 15 Jul 2010 11:07

ManuT wrote:Keep in mind, from the past

India jet deals faced sabotage

quote...
... that Delhi could be lulled into a long period of indecision was rudely shattered three months later, when Chinese forces seized part of India's north-eastern border territory.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3077778.stm

This is a 2003 report... in 2010 all countries are putting pressure on India to buy from them

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 15 Jul 2010 19:24

^^
All these countries putting pressure to buy from them, might be too much information for the buyer. In the end, the pressure might just be to prevent the order going to the rival company.

My post was just a reminder that a lot of motivations go in derailing a deal. Any acquisition process can contiune to be derailed by accusations of lack of objectivity, kickbacks, more kickbacks, bells and whistles, and when all else fails accusations of unfairness, for whatever motivations. What matters is, if the capability is in place and that is it in place TODAY. If not, it should be a matter of great concern, or least the cost and the ownership of that cost cannot be forgotten, even if the lesson is from an old story.

Allow me to me clarify further ...

This one is from 2006,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4919420.stm
quote ...
The Indian government would soon be acquiring 120 new jets ...

This one is from the main page from yesterday in 2010 after a gap of 4 years.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=13161

quote ...
"Usually, it takes about four-six months after the shortlist, but at the end of the day it is a political decision, so the deal could face delays and in the worst-case scenario, might even drag on till the end of 2012,"

Where is the sense of urgency?

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 16 Jul 2010 07:13

Deepak Parekh Joins BAE Systems' India Advisory Board

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Jul 2010 13:42

thought technically under HM , the NSG as well as army/iaf/navy special forces should be quietly able to buy all the niche eqpt needed. even stuff like eqpt needed to setup our own version of gromov test center would be covered this, if orders are suitably sized and deftly executed.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Jul 2010 10:49

X Posted from the Indian Navy thread.

Indian Navy Request for Information (RFI) for two Diving Support Vessels (DSV) capable of handling a Deep Submergence Rescue Vessel (DSRV).

Some of the specs:

(a) Approx 3000 tons displacement.
(b) Diving bell for 2-3 men with moon pool (diving up to 300 m depth)
(c) Deck space of 400 square meters for carrying DSRV and associated gear.
(d) Helo deck without hangar.
(e) Integral boat(s) with suitable lowering / hoisting mechanism.
(f) Suitable accommodation for crew and DSRV kit operators.
(g) Recompression chamber complex (RCC).
(h) High level of automation.

Read the RFI here:

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DIVING SUPPORT VESSELS (DSV) FOR INDIAN NAVY

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 18 Jul 2010 21:50

I am negotiating an end user agreement with a US and Canadian company. Its definitely not even remotely related to Indian Arms purchases. Just wanted to put for record that it very difficult to negotiate that.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 18 Jul 2010 23:22

GRSE: 'Our order book is full for delivery up to 2012'

We are currently negotiating with the Indian Navy for getting an order of three (P17-A) frigates, which is a frontline warship equipped with surface-to-air missile, surface-to-surface missile, super-rapid gun mounting, anti-aircraft guns, torpedo launcher, chaff launcher, early warning systems, navigation & fire control radars and underwater sensors. Each of these ships would cost Rs 7,000 crore and we hope to start working on the project from December 2012 if we get the orders with the cabinet committee on security approving it.

Nikhil T · Post by **Nikhil T** » 18 Jul 2010 23:25

SAP/Wipro bag Indian Navy project

arun · Post by **arun** » 19 Jul 2010 08:39

X Posted from the radar thread.

Raytheon press release.

India to equip P-8I with the APY-10 Radar:

Raytheon Awarded Radar Contract for P-8I Maritime Surveillance Aircraft

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 20 Jul 2010 04:29

Raytheon radio systems:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... india.html

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 20 Jul 2010 17:28

India may invest $80 bn in defence acquisitions: Report

khukri · Post by **khukri** » 28 Jul 2010 22:11

Javelin selected by army - Defense News :

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... =ASI&s=LAN

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 28 Jul 2010 23:22

Any talk of production in India? The numbers required are so large that we can't be importing the whole lot?

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 28 Jul 2010 23:28

^^^ Why not? HAL is now finely crafting gun bay doors for Boeing for the F-18 as an offset. Since Lockheed Martin is a partner in the Javelin missile, maybe HAL can make the toilet paper dispensers for the C-130 India is importing. After ToT of course.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 09:23

^^^Sorry, I don't share your sarcasm on the topic. That was a serious question.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2010 09:47

rohitvats wrote:Any talk of production in India? The numbers required are so large that we can't be importing the whole lot?

The numbers needed are not mentioned but if this is a big order like 2000 -3000 then they may Lic Manf at BDL as they do with others.

If its like ~ 500 odd system for infantry then they may import it , Javelin must be an expensive system

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 10:42

Austin, just think on these lines - IA has 300 Infantry Battalions and numbers are going to go up by another 60-80 in next 5-7 years. Substract around 50 Mechanized Infantry Battalions (guessestimate to cater for some future mechanization). Now, allot 8 launchers per battalion with 6 reloads per launcher (round off to 60 missiles) - that gives you requirement for 15,000 missiles and 1,500 launchers for present strength. IMO, BDL will come into picture sometime soon.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Jul 2010 11:26

Rohitvats just because IA has 300 IB and number going to rise does not mean all will get Javelin , its a niche and expensive F&F missile so it will procured in limited quantities the rest will get Milan-3 and Kornet perhaps the latter two will be widely used.

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Jul 2010 11:33

Indian assembled Milan is around US$ 10,000 per missile while Javelin would be around US$ 100,000 per missile. There is no way Milan and Knokars will be replaced fully with Javelin. Javelin will be special purpose missile while the bulk work will done by Milan & konkors. I think that total Indian assembly of Milan + konkors is around 50-70,000 missiles. If such production is attempted for Javelin, it will only cost around US$ 5-10 Billion

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 14:11

Austin wrote:Rohitvats just because IA has 300 IB and number going to rise does not mean all will get Javelin , its a niche and expensive F&F missile so it will procured in limited quantities the rest will get Milan-3 and Kornet perhaps the latter two will be widely used.

What is niche about Javelin - it is representative of the current generation of ATGMs in production and entering/entered service. And which IA Infantry Units are first amongst equals to warrant Javelin ATGM? What do these Infantry Units do which warrants Javelin/F&F ATGM and that too man-portable? Apart from SF, every Infantry Unit does the same role.

As for Milan-2T and Kornet - Milan-2T is replacement for Milan. I'm not aware of the deployment of Kornet. BMP-II is equipped with Konkurs-M. So, we may see phased wise entry of Javelin in the IA service.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 29 Jul 2010 14:18

vic wrote:Indian assembled Milan is around US$ 10,000 per missile while Javelin would be around US$ 100,000 per missile. There is no way Milan and Knokars will be replaced fully with Javelin. Javelin will be special purpose missile while the bulk work will done by Milan & konkors. I think that total Indian assembly of Milan + konkors is around 50-70,000 missiles. If such production is attempted for Javelin, it will only cost around US$ 5-10 Billion

The cost of Milan was for a 2nd generation missile. Also, how current is that USD 10,000 number? And for what quantity?

As for replacement of Milan, we've already placed order for 4,100 Milan-2T. In due course of time, as the newer tech comes in and armor (especially,the ERA) becomes more formidable, newer tech will become neccessity. So, as older Milan are being replaced with Milan-2T, Konkurs and Milan-2T will be replaced with newer generation missiles.

Added later: IA seems to have immediate requirement for 7,000 ATGMs....4,100 Milan-2T cleared after 26/11 were to replenish stocks. We might see some 2,000-2,500 Javelin ATGMs ordered. Coming to the 15,000 Konkurs-M ordered, we have more than 1,500 BMP-I/II in service. That translates into 10 Konkurs-M per BMP-I/II. Not big deal.

Also, the price for Milan ATGM@BDL seems to be around INR4.5 lakhs. Plan for Milan-2T extended the BDL license for another 4 years.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 29 Jul 2010 14:20

Guys,

It seems that the IA is interested in the Javlin. I also know that NAG works prety well. Can't the seeker and components on Nag be used to produce some thing in the Javlin catagory. As NAG is reported to have killed a tank in tests in less then 3.5 second of flight time.

Cause the experties developed painstakingly have to be retained and enhanced. Acquiring some thing from the US will not permit us to retain the HR developed for the NAG project.

We need to move forward and not stall.

JMT

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 Jul 2010 15:19

I thought the Javelin(and Spike before) was only for the special forces, from the very beginning.

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 30 Jul 2010 23:22

BAE, HAL May Jointly Market Hawks Globally

IMHO, with this, one may consider plans of having a desi AJT shelved!

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 31 Jul 2010 06:43

Dmurphy wrote:BAE, HAL May Jointly Market Hawks Globally

IMHO, with this, one may consider plans of having a desi AJT shelved!

Wow! If that materializes, that would be great news for HAL..

Dmurphy · Post by **Dmurphy** » 31 Jul 2010 07:08

^^^

Unless HAL 'wants' to end up building doors and windows all life, it can't make them too independent. JMT

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 31 Jul 2010 13:38

Dmurphy wrote:^^^

Unless HAL 'wants' to end up building doors and windows all life, it can't make them too independent. JMT

Well if it turns out to be a 'Joint venture' in the true sense, theres everything to gain from BEL's experience and expertise..

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 31 Jul 2010 18:51

Dmurphy wrote:BAE, HAL May Jointly Market Hawks Globally

IMHO, with this, one may consider plans of having a desi AJT shelved!

Something similar was being discussed about the basic trainer too

.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.com/2010/06/ ... s-for.html

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 31 Jul 2010 22:24

rohitvats wrote:What is niche about Javelin

I guess the price

All the electronics associate with F&F missile make it expensive

As for Milan-2T and Kornet - Milan-2T is replacement for Milan. I'm not aware of the deployment of Kornet. BMP-II is equipped with Konkurs-M. So, we may see phased wise entry of Javelin in the IA service.

There was news that IA was procuring Kornet , Well lets see how many Javelin we manage to procure

negi · Post by **negi** » 31 Jul 2010 23:25

^ Javelin unlike Milan-2 has a IIR seeker hence it allows for target designation even after launch and employing top attack mode to take out tanks the former employs wire SACLOS so it is neither fire and forget nor capable of switching to a top attack mode for tanks. Yeah former is expensive for obvious reasons.

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 01 Aug 2010 14:28

TOI reports.. (by Joy Joseph)

India's indegenious industry and the lack of it. All the issues that have bogged down DRDO...

Farewell to foreign arms?

This is gold... Brilliant article! This is a topic that would be close to a lot of BRFites hearts.. Snippets from the article..

What is wrong with the DRDO? In February 2007, the government tried to find out, setting up an external review committee under the chairmanship of P Rama Rao, a former secretary in the department of science and technology. The committee submitted its report to the government in 2008. In April this year, another committee headed by defence secretary Pradeep Kumar accepted some of its recommendations and rejected others. The Rama Rao Committee report remains a classified, two-volume report, which exposes all that has gone wrong with DRDO. TOI has seen a copy of the damning report.

It paints an extraordinary picture of planning and execution failure and abysmal human resource management and says the DRDO brand is “wilting”. The report says: “Sixty years ago the fervour generated by extraordinary leadership won India its political independence. At the present time, technological independence requires a similarly passionate and inspiring leadership.”

The report says poor HR management is the DRDO's biggest problem and only 3% of its scientists have PhDs in engineering-related subjects, 60% being plain-vanilla graduates or post-graduates in science, humanities or medicine. The DRDO's staffing clearly is ill-equipped and ill-prepared to conduct cutting-edge research, which could find its way to the assembly line and eventually into the armed forces' armoury.

The DRDO has more than 6,750 scientists in its Defence Research and Development Service (DRDS) cadre, which is spread over 51 laboratories. Fewer than 2% of the scientists in 43% of the DRDO's labs have PhD degrees in their respective core disciplines. The report warns that the DRDO's “biggest challenge” is to attract, nurture and retain talent. “The situation cries out for reforms in HR policies and imaginative new steps to improve and enhance professional opportunities for a technically highly qualified workforce,” it says.

The DRDO's cut-off age for entry-level scientists “should ideally be less than 24 years (but) is 28 years and above in more than 40% of the labs,” the report says. It adds that in half its labs, “the average age of scientists in all grades is above 37 years. The average age at various levels is significantly higher than what is desirable. This has to be corrected since it is important for younger people to occupy higher positions.”

DRDO's recruitment process, too, has come under fire. Entry-level scientists are hired through the Scientists Entry Test (SET) and there is some campus recruitment from IITs, IISc and NITs. But SET suffered a 71% drop in applicants between 2003 and 2006, says the report and there is unnecessary delay in hiring, which “is a major deterrent for the highly talented to consider DRDO as a ‘go-to' organization,” says the report.

An internal survey, quoted in the report, says 57% of scientists leave DRDO on account of professional dissatisfaction. A whopping 87% of the entry-level cadre joins the DRDO in the belief that it offers great career opportunities, but is “disenchanted soon after”, laments the report.

The committee also points serious lacunae in project execution. The report says the DRDO has taken up several large projects, which it would find impossible to execute because of human, financial and infrastructure resource constraints. The committee said interaction with the UK and Israel's defence R&D establishments revealed the “involvement of users at virtually all levels of design, development and production.” But back home, there is nothing like that, save for the Navy. “While the Navy has taken the initiative in managing and involving itself successfully in several major projects, the Army and Air Force have not had a similar experience. DRDO, too, has not been forthcoming in accepting service officers, especially at senior levels, to assist in project management,” the report says.

The report recommends setting up a ‘Services Interaction Group (SIG)' and creating a new chief controller's post within the DRDO. But the panel headed by the defence secretary has shot down these proposals. Instead, it has suggested nominating an officer from each service, who would always be available to the DRDO for consultations. There is the suggestion that senior DRDO scientists undergo abridged capsule training at the War College and other military colleges and that junior scientists be sent on field assignments in a bid to overcome the mistrust between the country's premier defence research organization and its armed forces. “This will enable them to meet and see men in action, and get a better appreciation of the ‘how' and ‘why' of general staff requirements,” the report suggests.

More important, the DRDO should have a bigger role in the purchase of weapons from abroad, the report says, but the defence secretary's committee has shot down this proposal too. The point of all of this is that the DRDO, in the words of the report, is playing a “peripheral role” and India's “most important need is of a policy for self-reliance, promoted by specific quantitative targets for indigenous sourcing of products of R&D.”

The report argues that “such growth and development are most urgently required in taking India beyond vulnerability in research, development and effective production”. It warns the “imported equipment will increasingly (be) embedded denial-of-use technology as a strategy to protect the national security interests of supplier nations.” It says India urgently needs to “reiterate...the goal of self-reliance as a basic policy goal”.

All of this is damning stuff but India's inability to create an MIC goes beyond the inherent weaknesses of the DRDO. Senior private sector executives blame the ministry of defence's “institutional bias” against private sector participation. “The attempt is to keep out the private sector, and favour the defence PSUs even if it is at the expense of quality and cost,” says a senior executive, who insisted on anonymity. He points out that the central recommendations of the Vijay Kelkar Committee, set up by the government in 2004 to enhance the “country's self-reliance in the defence industry” haven't been implemented six years later. The Kelkar committee had suggested nominating more than a dozen Indian private sector companies Raksha Udyog Ratnas, with a status equivalent to that of the defence PSUs when it comes to bidding for major defence contracts. It had also suggested setting up a Technology Development Fund to support R&D.

An indigenous MIC would also go against the interests of that other invisible power broker — the arms dealers lobby, which greases palms at every level of decision making. It's thought that on average, 5% commission is paid on every defence deal. That would mean a few hundred crores for a deal worth, say, $2 billion. “If the Indian private sector were to become system integrators and major players in the defence sector these middlemen would have no role,” points out a senior executive with a major private sector firm.

The problem is clearly part DRDO incompetence, part conspiracy and part systemic weakness. All of this means India is losing out on what could be a key driver for the economy. According to some estimates, a Rs 5,000 crore defence contract can sustain or create about 20,000 high-end jobs. For each high-end job, there are about four support jobs. So, India's projected $80 billion arms imports over the next decade could create six million to seven million jobs within the country. The other positive fallout would be greater financial commitment to industrial R&D and improvement in engineering capabilities.

There has never been a better chance for India to create an MIC as a force for good. It has huge military requirements, a growing defence budget and a thriving private sector. Never in its history has India needed a MIC more than today. South Asia's growing chaos, the rise of a “superpower” in the neighbourhood and its adversaries' threatened manipulation of imported systems.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 01 Aug 2010 17:03

negi wrote:^ Javelin unlike Milan-2 has a IIR seeker hence it allows for target designation even after launch and employing top attack mode to take out tanks the former employs wire SACLOS so it is neither fire and forget nor capable of switching to a top attack mode for tanks. Yeah former is expensive for obvious reasons.

The flight time of SACLOS ATGM is Milan/Milan-2T is the real issue...with tanks becoming increasingly equipped with eletronics to detect lasers...the time taken for a MBT to detect ATGM unit is getting lower.....the only thing on ATGM firing unit's mind is to get out ASAP after firing the missile.....