Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 04 Sep 2009 11:35

Anujan wrote:
kit wrote: Actually it does.Remember those EULAS India signed with US , PK I 'think' has also done it. PK is showing uncle the middle finger that what it bought / got / borrowed is theirs ( and their aunt CN who would be very happy to reverse engineer whatever american weapons PK gets ! ) Now question is how India is going to deal with its EULAs regarding Block 3 harpoons or SDB s or whatever.Remember you may not get any spares if some congressman gets a cold.
OT but I think that "pakis modified harpoon" is an euphemism for something far more sinister that they did. Modifying harpoons for land attack makes no sense. Unless they modified it to target offshore oil rigs. But then even the SDREs used the styx against oil storage tanks in karachi. All this indicates that some bigger perfidy is afoot

All of this is fine, however, why does Puke need an Anti-ship missile against the terrorists, who have no navy, no access to the sea and not many rivers to have any reasonable littoral warfare capabilities. I am sure Amrikka knew that the Harpoons would be used against India! Or am I missing something here

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Sep 2009 15:18

Mayuresh wrote:All of this is fine, however, why does Puke need an Anti-ship missile against the terrorists, who have no navy, no access to the sea and not many rivers to have any reasonable littoral warfare capabilities. I am sure Amrikka knew that the Harpoons would be used against India! Or am I missing something here

These are vintage Harpoons given much before 9/11.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 04 Sep 2009 15:31

F-16s came with more advanced gadgets than Harpoons. They solidify Nuclear deterrance of Pakistan. Harpoons issue is just an attempt to divert Indian public attention from American F-16s delivery to Pakistan, towards a rather irrelevant issue by blaming Pakistan naively for the modification.

It doesn't even matter here if Pakistan modified it or not. If USA helped them modify or not. Its totally irrelevant. The bigger issues are being cleverly covered up. Just like "terrorists attacks" are becoming a norm, the western funding and arming up of Pakistan Army is also becoming a norm. Pass the weapon from one hand to Pakistan, pass from other hand to India.

It doesn't matter much if its before 9/11 or after 9/11. The crucial thing here is, India has a western backed Nuclear capable Rival in South Asia and this will not change despite breakup of Pakistan even if there is one.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Sep 2009 03:24

Driving force

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Sep 2009 06:45

Mayuresh wrote:
All of this is fine, however, why does Puke need an Anti-ship missile against the terrorists, who have no navy, no access to the sea and not many rivers to have any reasonable littoral warfare capabilities. I am sure Amrikka knew that the Harpoons would be used against India! Or am I missing something here

It's pretty simple and it sums up the US-Paki relationship for decades. The US wants Pakistan to do something and in exchange Pakistan demands, and gets equipment to use against its biggest security fear - India. If you keep watching the US media you will find commentator after commentator saying how threatening India appears from Pakistan and how Pakistanis face genuine threat from India where mosques have been torn down and massacres of Muslims in Gujrat (sic)

Unkil Khan is part of the probem.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Sep 2009 07:12

Gerard wrote:Driving force

He hasnt changed much from college days!

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 12 Sep 2009 08:00

shiv wrote:Unkil Khan is part of the probem.

Agreed.

There is enough evidence to prove that Khalistan, Kashmir insurgency and Gujarat riots has been backed and funded by USA through its proxy Pakistan. Also, not to forget role of English media during riots.

It is in every anti-Indian power's interest to polarise Indian society more and more. The foreign-funded conversion groups and human rights NGO's are biggest weapon in this regard.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 13 Sep 2009 01:14

dinesha wrote:U.S. Says Pakistan has modified the Harpoon antiship missiles to Attack Land Targets
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/world ... le.html?hp

At issue is the detection by American intelligence agencies of a suspicious missile test on April 23 — a test never announced by the Pakistanis — that appeared to give the country a new offensive weapon.

American military and intelligence officials say they suspect that Pakistan has modified the Harpoon antiship missiles that the United States sold the country in the 1980s, a move that would be a violation of the Arms Control Export Act. Pakistan has denied the charge, saying it developed the missile itself. The United States has also accused Pakistan of modifying American-made P-3C aircraft for land-attack missions, another violation of United States law that the Obama administration has protested.

Some experts are also skeptical of the American claims. Robert Hewson, editor of Jane’s Air-Launched Weapons, a yearbook and Web-based data service, said the Harpoon missile did not have the necessary range for a land-attack missile, which would lend credibility to Pakistani claims that they are developing their own new missile.

“They’re beyond the need to reverse-engineer old U.S. kit,” Mr. Hewson said in a telephone interview. “They’re more sophisticated than that.” Mr. Hewson said the ship-to-shore missile that Pakistan was testing was part of a concerted effort to develop an array of conventional missiles that could be fired from the air, land or sea to address India’s much more formidable conventional missile arsenal.

So the dhehati "Paanwalla mehfil" gup-shup is that Pakistan has lengthened the body for increased range and done these change on a whole big quantity of Harpoons received from USA (to fight Talibani Navy operating off Karachi). These are submarine launched Harpoons.

The range of these modified Harpoon is >300km and pose a new and very serious threat to Indian naval installations, and off-shore installation. This raises teh ante on Indian navy whereby its war doctrine would require at the onset of hostility to totally destroy all TSP submarines. Think about teh changes required in Indian Navy force structure !!

vishwakarmaa wrote:
dinesha wrote:U.S. Says Pakistan has modified the Harpoon antiship missiles to Attack Land Targets
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/world ... le.html?hp
What that has to do with Indian Missile thread?

You think India does not a need something to neuter this new direct threat to Indian military, cities and economic assets?
Hint Anti-Anti-ship-Missile system that is cheap and have high 'pk'.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 13 Sep 2009 03:12

couple of interesting pics from PLA ICBM:

DF-31A launch
http://www.sinodefence.com/strategic/mi ... 3large.jpg

DF-31A warhead:
http://www.sinodefence.com/strategic/mi ... 2large.jpg

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 13 Sep 2009 05:48

Arun_S wrote:You think India does not a need something to neuter this new direct threat to Indian military, cities and economic assets?
Hint Anti-Anti-ship-Missile system that is cheap and have high 'pk'.

Absolutely. Its time to dump MTCR and go for 1000km Brahmos-III, with TATA+DRDO JV.

Every coming day, from time to time, Americans will make sure that Pakistan Army's conventional Combat power doesn't fall below 'threshold level' where India can easily neutralize them.

The day Pakistan army is crushed, USA will loose all chances of dominance in Subcontinent.

darshan · Post by **darshan** » 13 Sep 2009 06:08

deleted

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 13 Sep 2009 06:14

OK. Harpoon is turbojet powered missile with a solid fuel booster for surface and underwater launch. Lengthening the turbo jet portion to add extra fuel would also add weight which the solid booster has to accomodate and all this requies launch validation. And not to mention needs new computer software to be loaded.

OTH there is a Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) aka AGM 84H and K based on the Harpoon.

I think the real story is US supplied the latter versions and is claiming that the Pakis without screwdriver technology modified the Harpoon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Harpoon

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 13 Sep 2009 06:19

darshan wrote:Do you really have to use that word?

Corrected, Sir. Kya karein, adat chootati nahi.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 13 Sep 2009 06:23

NYT, Washington Times, BBC, Fox are known as 'independent' and 'fair' news services which are used to 'condition' various non-American 'english speaking elite' groups and keep them within western camp. In reality, they are puppets of their Governments and privately controlled by a few Anglo-saxon families.

The recent Harpoon news is in same light.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 13 Sep 2009 06:32

ramana wrote:OK. Harpoon is turbojet powered missile with a solid fuel booster for surface and underwater launch. Lengthening the turbo jet portion to add extra fuel would also add weight which the solid booster has to accomodate and all this requies launch validation. And not to mention needs new computer software to be loaded.

OTH there is a Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) aka AGM 84H and K based on the Harpoon.

SLAM and SLAM-ER differs substantially from the Harpoon. Especially the sensor section and the wings. OTH, SLAM-ER was sold to Turkey, UAE and the Saudis.

Also the article makes it sound as though the Harpoons were sold to Pakistan during Shah of Iran days. That is false. 130 Harpoons were sold as late as 2006 (I cannot find the exact article, but here is one)

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency informed Congress of a request from Pakistan for 50 UGM-84L (submarine-launched), 50 RGM-84L (surface-launched), and 30 AGM-84L (air-launched) Block II Harpoon missiles; 5 Encapsulated Harpoon Command Launch Systems; 115 containers; missile modifications; training devices; spare and repair parts; technical support; support equipment; personnel training and training equipment; technical data and publications; U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistics support.

Raveen · Post by **Raveen** » 13 Sep 2009 06:33

vishwakarmaa wrote:NYT, Washington Times, BBC, Fox are known as 'independent' and 'fair' news services which are used to 'condition' various non-American 'english speaking elite' groups and keep them within western camp. In reality, they are puppets of their Governments and privately controlled by a few Anglo-saxon families.

The recent Harpoon news is in same light.

NYT, WT and FOX don't have governments
and FOX is far from independent and fair
OT mode off

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Sep 2009 23:17

So they have the "L" version which is an advanced electronic upgrade version.

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-84.html

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 14 Sep 2009 23:52

ramana wrote:OK. Harpoon is turbojet powered missile with a solid fuel booster for surface and underwater launch. Lengthening the turbo jet portion to add extra fuel would also add weight which the solid booster has to accomodate and all this requies launch validation. And not to mention needs new computer software to be loaded.

OTH there is a Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) aka AGM 84H and K based on the Harpoon.

I think the real story is US supplied the latter versions and is claiming that the Pakis without screwdriver technology modified the Harpoon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Harpoon

Very correct the software has to be extensively modified and lots of experimentation required to get the control law right.
It is US supplied newer Harpoon version being passed off to Yindu's as pakistani Jinn power creation.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 15 Sep 2009 00:45

Harpoon news is a subtle way to tell Indians - "Buy F-16/F-18s from us else, be prepared to face more Harpoon sales to Pakistan".

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Sep 2009 01:27

Arun_S wrote:
Very correct the software has to be extensively modified and lots of experimentation required to get the control law right.
It is US supplied newer Harpoon version being passed off to Yindu's as pakistani Jinn power creation.

Also come up with a story in the news media that Pak is illegally modifying the Harpoons for land attack

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 15 Sep 2009 01:48

X-posted. Regarding EUM clauses -

The Indo-US contract for eight Boeing P-8I long-range maritime reconnaisance & anti-submarine warfare (LRMRASW) aircraft was signed at the beginning of this year, but, according to sources in the Navy, there appear to be some bogeys that seem to have passed the muster of South Block bureaucrats, certainly the ones who signed the deal. With such committed focus on the end user monitoring (EUM) clauses, sources point to a certain other clause in the contract that could spell potential trouble in the future, not just for the P-8I relationship, but others Indo-US contracts as well.

According to Section 6.1 under Article 28 of the contract between the two governments, the US will be liable for no penalties in the event that any "malicious code" is detected in the software that governs the P-8I's sensors and systems. Malicious code, among other things, could include deliberately embedded bits of software designed to do one or many of a variety of things, which could include encrypted recording of platform usage information -- data that only American inspectors will be able to decrypt during end-user inspections, without making it apparently so. Sound far-fetched. It apparently isn't. Anyway, the point is, if Indian engineers are lucky enough to detect the malicious software (in some fortuitous spasm of counter-intelligence), then as per the contract on paper, there will be no penalties. All the US will have to do is to modify the hardware or software and remove the malicious code, with no other liabilities.

There are folks who believe this is precisely what the US government has seen done in contracts with Pakistan's P-3 and F-16 fleet. Could something be amiss or is this paranoia? Has something far more dangerous passed under the radars of South Block?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Sep 2009 19:32

It is OT here, but will continue since it has been started.

ramana wrote: OTH there is a Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM) aka AGM 84H and K based on the Harpoon.

I think the real story is US supplied the latter versions and is claiming that the Pakis without screwdriver technology modified the Harpoon.

Ramana, as per this the US sold Harpoon Block II missiles and this confirms the sale being notified in May 2006. There has been a further sale of 20 Block IIs in 2007 and another 30 by 2011. According to this, BlockIIs are land-attack versions.

he Harpoon Block II is the latest version of the Harpoon missile and is able to strike land-based targets and ships in littoral environments. The Block II incorporated the GPS/INS guidance system of the JDAM bombs and the mission computer, software, and GPS antenna employed by the SLAM ER missile.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 16 Sep 2009 23:52

Cross positing my post from POK-II fizzle thread:
-----------------------------------------------

shiv wrote:If you recall the old days when Prithvi I was said to be able to carry a 1 ton payload 150 Km. Later we heard about Prithvi II with 500 Kg payload and 250 Km. Doesn't it seem absurd to have these stupidly small ranges? Even a MiG 21 can carry a bigger load of conventional weapons for a longer distance.

Blasphamy !!! One cant speak against a 90 mile range mijjile that Ex-president APJ Kalam created.

Absurd or not Mig 21's air breathing jets ISP is much more than ISP of liquid rocket engine of Prithvi. I also think Prithvi flies faster than Mig thus almost impossible to be shot down by Indian enemies (just wait a little longer and TSP with its new ABM radar based system will be able to take down Prithvi).

Imagine if we had nuclear warheads that weigh 250 Kg. How far would Prithvi go then?

Of all the missiles made by IGMDP only one saw day of light in usable quantities, called Prithvi, and that too a lame duck with very short leg (BTW lower payload on Prithvi cant result in longer range, because the aluminum body missile is incapable of re-entry for those high velocity regime and will melt on re-entry) . Trishul is canned and dead. Akash is no where to be seen in Akash yet, and by the time it is deployed, the types of targets and war-fighting it has been designed would have aged and been long dead. Astra has only a tested rocket motor as yet, and barely a dozen or two of Agni-II are manufactured . All while Ex-president Kalam floated the IGMDP in DRDO, later spent time in the south block and even more later in Rastrapati Bhavan. His project management legacy has left a legacy of un-met commitments.

Here is an article that I largely agree with:
The issue is not "belief" but validation - by Manoj Joshi

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 17 Sep 2009 00:05

Can Agni in its ICBM version launch a mil-sat to LEO? if so, could we have avoided the sanctions on cryogenic engines by leaving ISRO in civilian domain?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Sep 2009 00:17

vasu_ray wrote:Can Agni in its ICBM version launch a mil-sat to LEO? if so, could we have avoided the sanctions on cryogenic engines by leaving ISRO in civilian domain?

ISRO was always in the civilian domain. In fact UR Rao told Al Gore that more ISRO scientists joined NASA than DRDO.

What is your real question?

US sanctions on ISRO were not due to DRDO developing missiles. In fact a US company General Dynamics did bid for the cryo-genic contract and all the sanctions talk started when the Russian one was chosen.
Its acase ofhte powerful trying to make sure there is no tech leakage to preserve their status.

England has restrictions of the emigration of technicians to American Colonies with blue prints etc to ensure dependence.

vasu_ray · Post by **vasu_ray** » 17 Sep 2009 00:24

Thanks Ramana for the background, if we had proved with the Agni that we could do (or on the path to) ICBM development without involving cryogenic engines, how would have that turned out for ISRO? the argument that cryogenic engines are dual use would have been pointless

also a decade ago Agni testing was politically sensitive, this launch capability (launching mil-sats was politically legitimate) would have helped it reach its ICBM status early in this decade

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 01:24

vasu_ray wrote:Can Agni in its ICBM version launch a mil-sat to LEO? if so, could we have avoided the sanctions on cryogenic engines by leaving ISRO in civilian domain?

We should stop worrying about sanctions and West. We need to learn to think independently. This 'baggage' of western fear is crux of the whole problem.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 01:38

Arun_S wrote:The issue is not "belief" but validation - by Manoj Joshi

IMO, the writer must been high when he wrote the article. Article is depressing in tone and full of twisted facts.

The case he is supporting is good, that is of validation of nuclear tests yield but he is using this to demean whole DRDO and one ex-scientist who preferred indigenous R&D over imports. It seems the author is paid by Boeing or American lobby, because he is also unhappy that India refused to take American WLR in early 1990's and he even goes to the length to blame ex-DRDO chief for that!

Now, Imagine one Russian or chinese journalist blaming the head of defense research institution of that country, for not importing radars from a foreign country like USA. Who pays such people?

India is so grateful that such snakes are given freedom to speak shit in public.

Say thanks to Kalam's stubbornness(which this writer accuses him tobe), today we have progressed much in home-grown missile R&D. We would have never seen Agni-III if we had accepted Russian import in 1980s.

After two decades of R&D, we are in Agni-V phase. This is all because of Kalam's stubbornness. Thousand thanks to him.

Same is true with American WLR. Good that it wasn't imported early in 1990's otherwise there wouldn't be any Indian AEWACS programme.

Also the writer missed to mention that Indian AEWACS was IN the flight-test phase "10 years ago" and was destroyed in 'accident'.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 01:51

This Manoj Joshi fits in the pattern which is part of keeping Indian media full of negative news and feeding Indian youth depressing picture of National security. That helps fasten the process of brain-drain through making youth depressive and hopeless of their country's future.

Manoj Joshi should goto Russia and try doing similar Journalism there and try writing on corruption in Russian defense houses. Lets see, how Russians treat him.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 01:52

vishwakarmaa wrote:
Arun_S wrote:The issue is not "belief" but validation - by Manoj Joshi
IMO, the writer must been high when he wrote the article. Article is depressing in tone and full of twisted facts.

The case he is supporting is good, that is of validation of nuclear tests yield but he is using this to demean whole DRDO and one ex-scientist who preferred indigenous R&D over imports. It seems the author is paid by Boeing or American lobby, because he is also unhappy that India refused to take American WLR in early 1990's and he even goes to the length to blame ex-DRDO chief for that!

If I may it case of cognitive dissonance ! and if it does not fit your conception the author is branded as paid by Boeing or American lobby.

Just look objectively at the facts he presents and see if the facts are wrong, in which case the conclusion he make could be wrong.

I think Manoj Joshi as written a darn good and critical article, and deals head on with the reality.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 01:58

vishwakarmaa wrote:
Arun_S wrote:The issue is not "belief" but validation - by Manoj Joshi
IMO, the writer must been high when he wrote the article. Article is depressing in tone and full of twisted facts.

The case he is supporting is good, that is of validation of nuclear tests yield but he is using this to demean whole DRDO and one ex-scientist who preferred indigenous R&D over imports. It seems the author is paid by Boeing or American lobby, because he is also unhappy that India refused to take American WLR in early 1990's and he even goes to the length to blame ex-DRDO chief for that!

Now, Imagine one Russian or chinese journalist blaming the head of defense research institution of that country, for not importing radars from a foreign country like USA. Who pays such people?

India is so grateful that such snakes are given freedom to speak shit in public.

Say thanks to Kalam's stubbornness(which this writer accuses him tobe), today we have progressed much in home-grown missile R&D. We would have never seen Agni-III if we had accepted Russian import in 1980s.

After two decades of R&D, we are in Agni-V phase. This is all because of Kalam's stubbornness. Thousand thanks to him.

vishwakarmaa ji: I can count many dozen things that Kalam ji failed utterly in delivering to the nation that costed life and limb of Indian soldiers, and paint him black if you want to keep score (I am not too earger to do it). Pls see the video of Gen Ved Mallik on nuclear testing issue (I think w/IBN) and the role of APJ Kalam w.r.t. Kargil and he stop's getting into a mode of exposing his follies, by choose to not comment on it.

Same is true with American WLR. Good that it wasn't imported early in 1990's otherwise there wouldn't be any Indian AEWACS programme.

Wrong.

Also the writer missed to mention that Indian AEWACS was IN the flight-test phase "10 years ago" and was destroyed in 'accident'.

Care to elaborate why DRDO did not continue and instead canned it? Pls read on the detailed subject matter to come to an informed conclusion rather than emotional conclusion.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 02:16

Arun_S wrote:Just look objectively at teh facts he presents and see if the facts are worg, in which case teh conclusion he make could be wrong.

Ok, lets get him one by one.

1. He quoted the facts but gave those facts a negative twist, to push his psy-op propaganda against an ex-DRDO scientist who killed weapons import.

He is giving impression that 'what looks good, is good'. For him, Prithvi is 'bulky' and he doesn't mind accepting Russian system which were on offer in 1980's.

Lets ask him few questions - "Russian missile systems during their first development phase were Bulky too. So, why blame DRDO if they matches Russians? Why not give DRDO time to improve on Prithvi missile systems, just like Russians did over 4 decades? Why give clean cheat to Russian scientists but accuse just Indians?"

2. I don't mind when he says "ex-DRDO scientist blocked American Radar Import." But, he becomes naughty, when he blames that scientist for that and paints him as traitor and as if that scientist did something anti-national.

The author is completely wrong here. He is missing the fact that the DRDO scientist was doing his job and he did the right thing by proposing to divert funds from weapon import to domestic R&D. Thats his job. He is paid for that.

What else this author expects from DRDO scientists? Do marketing for foreign arms companies?

Cognitive dissoanance works both ways.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 02:22

vishwakarmaa wrote:This Manoj Joshi fits in the pattern which is part of keeping Indian media full of negative news and feeding Indian youth depressing picture of National security. That helps fasten the process of brain-drain through making youth depressive and hopeless of their country's future.

You are suggesting to continue to live in make believe feel good cocoon of we live in country of honey and milk. Just like No Korea, TSP and USA. Some people call that living in fool's paradise.

Truth may be bitter, but it is self sustaining. You have choice to do "karma" for a favorable Truth that is sweet, and it will be self sustaining. Killing the messenger does'nt help.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 02:33

Arun_S wrote:You are suggesting to continue to live in make believe feel good cocoon of we live in country of honey and milk. Just like No Korea, TSP and USA. Some people call that living in fool's paradise.

In early 1990's, the act of turning down American WLR offer wasn't honey and cocoon. It was bitter only and those who follow truth know how to walk on bitter path and so we did. At same time, those in honey and cocoon(TSP) in those times running on American imports, are now fighting for life and oxygen from donator(USA).

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 02:37

vishwakarmaa wrote:
Arun_S wrote:Just look objectively at teh facts he presents and see if the facts are worg, in which case teh conclusion he make could be wrong.
Ok, lets get him one by one.

1. He quoted the facts but gave those facts a negative twist, to push his psy-op propaganda against an ex-DRDO scientist who killed weapons import.

How many projects did the ex-DRDO scientist deliver on his own time commitment for those killed weapons import? I do not recall even ONE. IOW failed in his own terms of measurement matrices.

He is giving impression that 'what looks good, is good'. For him, Prithvi is 'bulky' and he doesn't mind accepting Russian system which were on offer in 1980's.

Lets ask him few questions - "Russian missile systems during their first development phase were Bulky too. So, why blame DRDO if they matches Russians? Why not give DRDO time to improve on Prithvi missile systems, just like Russians did over 4 decades? Why give clean cheat to Russian scientists but accuse just Indians?"

You forget what matters to defense forces and DRDO is a QSR, and war does not wait for a timetable, and soldiers die and countries security is risked if army is not armed and fighting fit. It does not matter what it took Russia or for that sake TIMBUKTU to start walking from hunch posture to upright.

2. I don't mind when he says "ex-DRDO scientist blocked American Radar Import." But, he becomes naughty, when he blames that scientist for that and paints him as traitor and as if that scientist did something anti-national.

I agree he should have used a glorified and honorable title to call non-performing supplier due to which patriot soldiers die or are amputated with a partly pension to live the rest of the lives in village.

The author is completely wrong here. He is missing the fact that the DRDO scientist was doing his job and he did the right thing by proposing to divert funds from weapon import to domestic R&D. That is his job. He is paid for that.

What else this author expects from DRDO scientists? Do marketing for foreign arms companies?

You got it wrong, DRDO scientist is not paid to "divert funds from weapon import to domestic R&D".
DRDO scientist is paid to deliver to his commitment. Measure him by what he delivers on his commitments. Giving a dead soldier a belated weapon does not reset him back into life, or undo defeat. When non performing DRDO scientists and managers understand that there will no need to have this discussion.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 02:48

vishwakarmaa wrote:
Arun_S wrote:You are suggesting to continue to live in make believe feel good cocoon of we live in country of honey and milk. Just like No Korea, TSP and USA. Some people call that living in fool's paradise.
In early 1990's, the act of turning down American WLR offer wasn't honey and cocoon. It was bitter only and those who follow truth know how to walk on bitter path and so we did. At same time, those in honey and cocoon(TSP) in those times running on American imports, are now fighting for life and oxygen from donator(USA).

I dont know which cocoon you are talking about? I am talking about your vision of Indian media full of positive news and feeding Indian youth glowing picture of National security, as against critical bare-ing of failures by Manoj Joshi :

vishwakarmaa wrote:This Manoj Joshi fits in the pattern which is part of keeping Indian media full of negative news and feeding Indian youth depressing picture of National security. That helps fasten the process of brain-drain through making youth depressive and hopeless of their country's future.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 03:24

Arun_S wrote:How many projects did the ex-DRDO scientist deliver on his own time commitment for those killed weapons import? I do not recall even ONE. IOW failed in his own terms of measurement matrices.

Yes, IGMDP missile project under Kalam had delays. Same is true with Russian missile programmes. They faced delays and failures too during initial phases.

The author doesn't understand innovation process lifecycle. Also, he misses the point that India didn't have a ready-made missile science and test data when IGDMP began. Imports don't give you these test data which are crucial to building any system.

Even Americans failed in projecting their missile programmes schedules in nascent phases. Has author done enough research on Russian, American missile programme history?

Also, ask the author about how Americans stole German rocket designs. why DRDO is not allowed to smuggle the designs so they can develop faster, just like Americans?

You forget what matters to defense forces and DRDO is a QSR, and war does not wait for a timetable, and soldiers die and countries security is risked if amry is not armed and fighting fit. It does not matter what it took Russia or for that sake TIMBAKTOO to start walking from hunch posture to upright.

Soldiers would die even if you push the QSR higher. That's part of war. You can never win a war without loosing soldiers.

Lets not mix emotions and practical aspects of military equipments R&D.

I agree he should have used a glorified and honorable title to call non-performing supplier due to which patriot soldiers die or are amputated with a partly pension to live the rest of the lives in village.

Soldiers would die even if India imports American WLR. Death is part of war. You can't avoid deaths.

Yes, better equipments = less deaths.

Also, world-class expectations from DRDO(funded and treated like 3rd world country) = more deaths.

DRDO scientist is paid for deliver to his commitment. Measure him by what he delivers on his commitments. Giving a dead soldier a belated weapon does not reset him back into life, or undo defeat. When non performing DRDO scientists and managers understand that there will no need to have this discussion.

In USA and in Russia, pays to defense scientists are proportional to heavy commitments put on them. Why author missed to mention it?

Again, bringing deaths of soldiers into debate, is a good strategy to emotionalize debate.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 17 Sep 2009 03:43

Arun_S wrote:I dont know which cocoon you are talking about? I am talking about your vision of Indian media full of positive news and feeding Indian youth glowing picture of National security, as against critical bare-ing of failures by Manoj Joshi

Being rosey and being positive are two different things. The author is negative.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 04:12

vishwakarmaa wrote:
Arun_S wrote:How many projects did the ex-DRDO scientist deliver on his own time commitment for those killed weapons import? I do not recall even ONE. IOW failed in his own terms of measurement matrices.
Yes, IGMDP missile project under Kalam had delays. Same is true with Russian missile programmes. They faced delays and failures too during initial phases.

The author doesn't understand innovation process lifecycle. Also, he misses the point that India didn't have a ready-made missile science and test data when IGDMP began. Imports don't give you these test data which are crucial to building any system.

Even Americans failed in projecting their missile programmes schedules in nascent phases. Has author done enough research on Russian, American missile programme history?

Also, ask the author about how Americans stole German rocket designs. why DRDO is not allowed to smuggle the designs so they can develop faster, just like Americans?

You forget what matters to defense forces and DRDO is a QSR, and war does not wait for a timetable, and soldiers die and countries security is risked if amry is not armed and fighting fit. It does not matter what it took Russia or for that sake TIMBAKTOO to start walking from hunch posture to upright.
Soldiers would die even if you push the QSR higher. That's part of war. You can never win a war without loosing soldiers.

Lets not mix emotions and practical aspects of military equipments R&D.

Saar: Sure DRDO may not have the tech and will have to develop it. Like any project DRDO makes plan and factors in all tasks in the project including development of tech, and negotiate w/forces if their functionality & time-frame is acceptable to the forces. The pertinent question is does the supplier keep to their end of the bargain?? Case closed.

Now if supplier elongates the delivery way beyond commitment, who is to blame if forces have to evolve their war-fighting doctrine and tactics and change the QSR. And I ask what legs APJ Kalam stand on w.r.t Astra missile making booster test flight and still being 5 -15 years away from deployment. Pathetic it is no doubt, which ever way you look.

I agree he should have used a glorified and honorable title to call non-performing supplier due to which patriot soldiers die or are amputated with a partly pension to live the rest of the lives in village.
Soldiers would die even if India imports American WLR. Death is part of war. You can't avoid deaths.

Yes, better equipments = less deaths.

You sound callous and pathetic with that claim, that soldiers will die anyway whether DRDO delivers or not, or delivers in committed time or not .
Looks like day will never come when we start caring for lives of Indian citizens and soldiers, and people holding your viewpoint will not send their kids join Indian military; yet enjoy the cream while it last on other people's sweat and blood. Coming from a family whose parents and siblings were/are in Military I can't nurture such thoughts.

Also, world-class expectations from DRDO(funded and treated like 3rd world country) = more deaths.

Let DRDO leadership carry their own weight to lift their successes and credibility to earn the rightful place.

DRDO scientist is paid for deliver to his commitment. Measure him by what he delivers on his commitments. Giving a dead soldier a belated weapon does not reset him back into life, or undo defeat. When non performing DRDO scientists and managers understand that there will no need to have this discussion.

In USA and in Russia, pays to defense scientists are proportional to heavy commitments put on them. Why author missed to mention it?

Where do I talk of USA/Russia?
I am simply talking about India; and DRDO to lift their own weight and deliver what THEY promise and plan to deliver! What is so difficult, if you yourself make a plan and commitment?
APJ Kalam has a legacy of personal successes and failures for everyone to see; dont try make him a flawless/unblemished God.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 17 Sep 2009 04:23

vishwakarmaa wrote:Being rosey and being positive are two different things. The author is negative.

OK it was initially a tangetial cacoon argument. Now somethign else.

Bottom line is: Is the author factual?
Some delinquents respond to loving suggestion, others to criticism, and yet other to chastisement. An author may choose any of the methods, as long as they are factual.