Joint development of Ship Propulsion system with Russia

[charlie]

Charlie the Brahmos was always marketed as a joint development. Project.We have contributed the guidance system. For the money and time we have put into Brahmos 3-5 billion? If this missile is the pride of three branches We should have full access to the whole missile.
I think pillai maybe a bigger problem than the Russians in the tot?

India is paying for the component that it's buying, I don't get the point here.

How can we expect or force them to share their technology, I assume our scientist or Engineers don't expect other countries would share their technology with us because we ordered or did JV with them. I think it's more to do with poor journalism that you see article like Russia or Israel is not sharing tech with India.

It's not just Russia, even Israel will not share it's seeker tech for Barak 8 though it's will depolyed in most of the Indian ships and it's a JV too

I can same thing about F18 in case it would have been produced in India, most of the vendors would not have shared their tech no matter what Boeing said. we would end up just assembling them.

 

[pmaitra]

You need to look at the time frame. Soviet was quite advanced for its time but not Russian.

Maybe. Maybe not. Russia has been churning out advanced submarines lately, acknowledged by western media. Does that counter your claim?

So??? Use the sales pitch if their is an Indian US interplanetary lander project.
Alcoa Inc. is one of the companies that supplies Al based alloys to NASA. Alcoa Inc.has mines and reprocessing units in Russia but that doesn't make it a Russian metallurgy.

Because it makes scene to have reprocessing plants near mines. Just having reprocessing industry doesn't make our metallurgy superior.

What are you even talking about? Who said Alcoa does not supply whatever to NASA? Did I say that?

Here is a link (from 1996 article, 5 years after collapse of USSR) and excerpt:

The Russian-made liquid-oxygen fuel tank, made of an aluminum-lithium alloy, is one-third lighter than a conventional aluminum tank. Another Russian component is a modified auxiliary power unit, run by gases taken from the rocket's liquid propellants instead of a separate fuel supply, that is being used to power the craft's hydraulic system.

This is sufficient to counter your comment on metallurgy.

I repeat, I am countering your comment on metallurgy. I am not saying Alcoa does not supply stuff to NASA. Maybe they do, but I don't care, because that was not my argument. My argument is countering your implication that Russia has inferior metallurgy. I hope you get it.

The rest of your comment has a lot of prejudiced and uninformed assumptions, but are completely irrelevant to what I am trying to counter. I made my point, so I will ignore the rest of your post.

No they don't. On the contrary Boeing brings most metallurgy from western nations and uses here. Most of its metallurgy used by Boeing is western developed.
They only reason Boeing facility is located their because of the mines.
Final machining and processing of the forgings will be completed by Boeing's Portland, Ore., fabrication facility and other machining subcontractors.

Total BS. History showed both weapons resulted in heavy air-loss and you are claiming they were limited success against the Hind.
Stinger with a kill ratio of about 70% and with responsibility for most of the over 350 Soviet or Afghan government aircraft and helicopters downed in the last two years of the war.
Fuel economy is the issue here. Better metallurgy results in reduced weight having a positive effect on fuel economy.

Pro-Russian propaganda BS. "Greed" and "brinkmanship" were refereed as separate points as pitfalls dealing with Russians. Its you who are putting things out of context to suit your needs.

"Greed" and "brinkmanship" were refereed as separate points as pitfalls dealing with Russians.
Didn't Russians threatened to keep Vikramaditya for themselves if we didn't pay extra.

Maybe because they don't have a market for it??? Their are compines like Tatra and Mercedes that manufacture off road vehicles.You don't need specialized materials for every thing. You can compensate inferior metallurgy by adding a more metal but that makes things heavy.

Isn't the end result that India paid extra and Russian threated us that they would sell it off???

 

[Dark Sorrow]

What are you even talking about? Who said Alcoa does not supply whatever to NASA? Did I say that?

Here is a link (from 1996 article, 5 years after collapse of USSR) and excerpt:

This is sufficient to counter your comment on metallurgy.

I repeat, I am countering your comment on metallurgy. I am not saying Alcoa does not supply stuff to NASA. Maybe they do, but I don't care, because that was not my argument. My argument is countering your implication that Russia has inferior metallurgy. I hope you get it.

Typical propaganda strategy. Keep on harping about thing in the past. All I said is Alcoa is now one of the primary supplier for Al-Li alloy as of today. You are using 20 year old example to show how advanced Russian metallurgy is today.

The rest of your comment has a lot of prejudiced and uninformed assumptions, but are completely irrelevant to what I am trying to counter. I made my point, so I will ignore the rest of your post.

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

@charlie

Pillai always gave the impression that we would have full access to the whole missile when he marketed the project and had the air force,navy and army buying. I guess I should not have expected anything but buying since no TOT on anything has ever been given by Russia

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pmaitra]

Typical propaganda strategy. Keep on harping about thing in the past. All I said is Alcoa is now one of the primary supplier for Al-Li alloy as of today. You are using 20 year old example to show how advanced Russian metallurgy is today.

You are entitled to your opinion.

Does not counter my points. I have no desire to get you to agree. I had the desire to give the average reader the opportunity to see that your claims could be wrong. I have done my job.

Have a good day!

 

[charlie]

@charlie

Pillai always gave the impression that we would have full access to the whole missile when he marketed the project and had the air force,navy and army buying. I guess I should not have expected anything but buying since no TOT on anything has ever been given by Russia

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well we are getting into a loop now, I commented before that they were ready at one point to share tech for just 200 crore

"I saw some IIT guy comments in pak forum that during 90's Russian were proposing to sell liquid ramjet technology at around 200cr, but DRDO didn't make any move and now there is a talk going on to buy the same technology for 2000 crores."