It is odd, it was also odd that the US would do a BMD workshop with Indian scientists around the same time as when India was pondering whether it could buy the Arrow system or not.

Thats not really odd – basically we’ve declared we’re still open to cooperation in BMD if its worth it. Hence the briefings from LM on the PAC system etc. BTW, the PAC et al are still being proposed as interim choices for a rough and quick BMD system.

Barak NG. MR SAM LR SAM might be a way of risk reduction for PAD. India needs missile defense and its only going to be a good thing if there are two systems that can hit missiles..

To some extent yes, but the PAD will be far more capable. The MR/LRSAM are going to have limited capability against faster TBMs let alone the longer ranged systems. These are primarily missiles designed for highly maneuverable airbreathing systems. The PAD/AAD combo is designed for high speed, B’ missile RCS targets.

We have all been reading about the green pine for some time now and 3D car etc etc etc..

GreenPine is just one of those things the media loves to trot out whenever the Indo Israel thing pops up since we purchased a couple as part of the LRTR deal apparently. The 3D CAR is not anyways related to Israel. Its antenna hardware was developed with PIT & the Rohini et al have new systems there as well.

One more of these types of technologies that India could really benifit from is the legendary or mythological KALI project or even a Russian/US/Indian/Israeli version of land based phalanx, not sure if Tunguska has the same capabilities (i.e. take out mortors etc..) but it would be great for the western fence and pill boxs dotted around Sikkim and Kashmir.

I agree about KALI- that would be great, and about Phalanx type things, we should look into Kashtan with the Russians. Of course, I’d rather the Tatas built it with DRDO/BEL, rather than the OFB being the prime manufacturer, which will be least bothered about developing it further.

Well its no secret that Indian was shown the ARROW system.. Would not be suprised if ELTA/IAI etc and India worked to make a version for India or adapted a version for India.

I wasnt talking about the Arrow. We looked at the Arrow & the Russian S-300V and went with our own PAD project.

What suprises me about the above report is that there is US funding in the Israeli-Indian Joint venture.. how did that get squeezed in and how much control does that money actually give the US?

Now where did you read that?
The Barak8/MRSAM/LRSAM are purely Indo-Israeli projects.

Perhaps you mixed it up with the Arrow program which has US funding & technology contribution? :confused:

Yes all good, but how many MKI’s have India at present time?

Thanks

100+ now, with 98 in July 09.

HAL is delivering around 13/year – which its been asked to increase.

The 40 additional MKIs coming from Russia over what HAL is making will come as knocked down, almost complete kits – which means a rapid rise in numbers as deliveries commence from 2010 onwards.

Also, the MKI upgrade will commence as well, in a few years time, and the additional 50 MKIs ordered will assist in rotating out the oldest airframes for MLU + overhaul, without impacting operational numbers in the IAF.

India and Japan Tighten Defense Cooperation
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a645cfcf5-a4ec-4ec7-925d-87bdb711e254&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Bharani is a 2D radar for the Army Air Defence.

Aslesha is a 3D radar for the Indian Air Force for mountain ops, it will be used to look down into valleys.

Both are lightweight systems, and can be broken down into containers (slightly larger than a large suitcase) and transported to remote areas. Set up time is very less.

Both systems are on the cusp of series production and have already been trialled extensively.

Both utilize sub-systems from private sector partners who were first tapped for the BFSR-SR (Battlefield surveillance radar short range), with over 1100 produced over the past few years.

Both radars are also network capable and have LPI features by intentional design.

Based on trials so far, the IA has already ordered the Bharani & the IAF has indented for a number of Aslesha.

The Indian Navy is now looking at Aslesha, which with stabilization and some additional modes, will be a very useful addition for their small ships.

The Aslesha also gives India the capability, once Astra is completed over the next few years, to field a system like the Derby component of the SpyDer.

The TELAR radar is not multifunctional afaik, and has limited scanning volume as well, its primary role is to provide fire control for its missiles. Also, its ECCM features will be limited given the limited aperture and power capability plus space constraints on the vehicle with associated missiles as well. The Russians went for mobility and traded radar capability for survivability (ie lose the TELAR we have x more) we went for a different set of objectives.

About which missiles the TCR tracks, I’d rather not speculate at this point, but the Army is interested in theater protection systems which will come with their own dedicated surveillance sensors. The 3D TCR could however theoretically detect and track SBMs if not the faster IRBMs. This would assist the Army a lot, in any conflict if it gets advance impact warning.

By the way, about the Akash & the Army…

Guess what cleared trials recently? The brand new 3D TCR – Tactical Control Radar, which is the Army customized variant – of the Akash’s 3D CAR.

Along with that, the Akash trials for the AF used the Rajendra-III FCR, developed on a T-72 chassis..

😉

The above if done by HAL, is the least that one of Asia’s oldest aeronautics companies which enjoys state patronage, can do. By this time, it should have had it’s own couple of fighter jets, airliners and business jets. While it’s efforts in successful Dhruv and IJT Sitara are laudable, it is unfortunate that it has consciously embarked on a strategy of licence production only.

Your lack of awareness regards this topic speaks volumes here. What you should first determine, is who owns HAL, and who decides its fate.

The Govt of India.

The GOI decided that HAL would not and should not bother about anything beyond assembling imports, since there was no money for local development – a stupid & illogical decision. That was what doomed HAL’s post Marut attempts. A similar decision doomed an attempt to make a jet engine for the Marut. Similar decisions doomed any Marut follow ons.

If you are interested, try and look up HALs attempts to make Marut derivatives, its attempts to make India’s civil airliner, all of which were shot down by the MOD & its civilian bureaucracy. Even what it had was stripped from it via ad hoc decisions.

Even so, HAL contributed as the prime partner for ADA in the LCA, the Dhruv program and others by co-opting other agencies to push some decisions through at the MOD level.

FYI, since you are clearly unaware, that NAL Saras, which you were touting as an example of how “small NAL” can do things and not HAL- was the brainchild of Dr Raj Mahindra, ex HAL design chief, who was turfed out since the GOI was not really interested in keeping design capability alive at HAL. And so it goes..

Then why don’t you tell us the complete (or even abridged) story, if you claim to know HAL’s “unsung” stories ? All members will certainly read it with interest. About Tejas, it has been documented that HAL has clearly not given it it’s 100% effort, partly due to some disagreement with ADA, and partly due to propagating it’s own initiatives like IJT.

There are far too many stories to tell, and one feels like telling it only if you stop your incessant flame baiting viz HAL or the IAF or whichever organization you have decided is the new face of evil and has to be attacked non stop.

FWIW, HAL undertook a series of measures to shake off the sloth of the late70’s mid-80’s when it had no clear direction from the GOI. It fought for the independence to do these steps as well.

These include voluntarily moving to a performance based costing scheme with fixed costs incorporated as compared to the earlier, cost + margin which used to rile the IAF up.

When RAC MiG refused to deliver, for various reasons, it was HAL that stepped up and made design mods to the MiG-23, 27 and 21 families and increased spares indigenization so that the IAF could keep them flying @ high utilization.

When MiG-29s et al and the other non license manufactured airplanes became affected by the soviet union collapse, it was the HAL which again worked with the IAF to build up spares capabilities along with the IAF’s Base Repair Depots.

When it comes to the LCA, one man’s issues with ADA affected the project – now he isnt there, do you see HAL cribbing about the LCA? No, they are supporting it.

In recent years, they took up – and delivered the MiG-27 and Jag upgrades with DARE. Now they have a separate and entirely mission oriented division for upgrades. For the Chopper focus, they have a helicopter division. Their latest bit of work is an entirely new avionics division which will work with the DRDO and private industry to develop local solutions for HAL products. This is a very positive step and has already been cleared. Amongst initial systems marked are glass cockpits, communication suites and navigation systems. All critical, expensive and high value added items.

In terms of design and development, they have steadily ramped up their capabilities, they now aim to cover the entire gamut from civil airliners to military transports. This is the vision required for the long term. They are also pragmatic enough to work with OEMs abroad. If they didnt, the IAF would say “too long” and just have imports and license manufacture at HAL. As hard as it may for you to believe, HAL does have significant design & manufacture capability, and its leveraging those to the hilt in its programs. Nor is it unaware of what DRDO et al are doing. There is competitiveness but there is also cooperation. For the heavy weight class, there is the FGFA, for the medium weight, HAL could have joined hands with MiG or EADS – but they didnt. Thats been left for the MCA, GOI funding permitting. Similarly, for UAVs, they are not competing with DRDO & undercutting DRDO’s aims in the MALE class et al.

All in all, HAL is gradually transforming into what it should be, after several decades of GOI’s pointless meandering. They have products across key families, with local & international partners. They have divisions, clearly demarcated to support these products & sustain them. They have earmarked funding for increasing R&D capabilities.

The only area where they are very badly lagging is marketing. They still dont get how important image building is or so it appears.

This company HAL survives mainly due to state support and state monopoly. Had it been for other companies (private or even public), then it would have delivered far more than it has today.

HAL has suffered as much thanks to bone headed GOI policies than benefited as some monopoly. That it exists is thanks to the stubbornness of those who realized India needs indigenous aircraft manufacturing capability.

These companies must collaborate with DRDO, ISRO (Godrej & Boyce already does major business with ISRO), NAL and others to increase indigenous product development. These “tie-ups” with foreign firms will merely result in the foreign firms assembling/selling their equipment via a local agency.

You need a reality check in this matter. First, DRDO et al dont have the resources, technological & managerial to spread them thin over many projects. The core systems are already being developed inhouse, the rest from UWB radars to be purchased in the tens of units for CQB teams to this to that, need private sector involvement and there is nothing wrong in tapping foreign expertise for these systems.

Second, you seem to assume that private firms are by nature dodgy and will circumvent the system for the profit motive. That is wrong. There are many firms who have worked heart and soul for DRDO et al on wafer thin margins and deserve to have the ability to scale up their operations.

Third, the private sector is far more aware than the PSUs et al are, about how to survive in a dog eat dog environment. They can deal with foreign OEMs just fine & will compete as fiercely with them the next day. Its a given & has already occurred as matter of fact.

See, you must now understand how private component companies obtain technology. Organizations like BARC, after doing years of research in say, some manufacturing process involving lasers, perfect the procedure, assembly line debug etc. & etc. and invite small & medium enterprises that they see fit to sell the procedure and consultancy to them for a fee. The private firms having acquired this, go on to develop products (not necessarily defence) whose sales proceeds are likely to be shared with BARC.

In fact, the main purpose of CSIR and IISc is to provide consultancy in manufacturing to SMEs and even large industries.

ISRO also has thousands of private SMEs in it’s roster whom it asks them what to manufacture and with what specifications. The best design wins the tender.

Similarly, DRDO and private sector must step up collaboration so that as far as manufacturing the various components is concerned, there are no delays.

I am quite aware about how technology is developed, shared and productionized. You are in the above post, really confused about applied engineering versus research. There is no reason why the Indian industry should not take up more and more R&D in applied engineering which is where most of the work is required, and that is the point.

Look, as and how the process of manufacture becomes increasingly documented, packaged and commoditized, it is thrown open to private industry. If they come up with a design of their own of a component or integration of many components, it does NOT amount to any innovation, because they have been taught to do so by one or more of these sources : government organization like CSIR or BARC, hired consultants from academia or purchase of the process from elsewhere.

What you are unaware of, is that the private sector has already designed and created high value items on its own for both the DRDO & clients abroad, and it serves India well by getting them abroad full time in an organized fashion. The more money they have, the more sustainability they have, the greater the number of partners for DRDO et al, bar the handful of PSUs and the smaller SMEs who have to be handheld.

See, I’ve already said my concern is not the private sector’s “emancipation”. For indigenization, the private sector must partner with DRDO and associated labs, rather than these “tie-ups” with foreign companies.

Your “must” part of the statement shows a regrettable lack of business awareness. What you dont seem to get at all, is that the DRDO cannot help these companies survive yet it needs them. Do you get that? The Army will order a handful of systems and conduct trials for donkeys years & it becomes the DRDOs problem of keeping these guys alive for that period on low orders, till series production is cleared.

The only way the private sector can get the volume & funding to drive their own capabilities is by becoming a part of the global supply chain & becoming world class OEMs in their own right. What that means is that XYZ, in Pune is no longer supplying precision fasteners just for the IJT. Airbus comes and gives it technology and the same firm also makes similar items for Airbus worldwide – not only is manufacturing technology obtained but the company has a much more sustainable order book than just waiting for IJT series production.

That is what we should do & look towards – the capabilities in the Indian pvt sector are immense. And once India makes its mark in this arena, the benefits across the board for local defence are immense.