Indian Army wants futuristic vehicle for its Armoured corps

[sob]

It's not Markava, it's Merkava. And I thought you know about tanks...

Do not start an English spelling class here. Stick to the topic.

 

[Bhadra]

Do not start an English spelling class here. Stick to the topic.

It is ok fault is mine ... so I would learn Merkava ...

 

[sob]

Looking at some of the posts I would like to point to one very basic fact

RFI – Request for Information
An open enquiry that spans the market seeking broad data and understanding.

This is first step in the whole process and the other steps are

RFQ – Request for Quotation
An opportunity for potential suppliers to competitively cost the final chosen solution(s).

RFT – Request for Tender
An opportunity for potential suppliers to submit an offer to supply goods or services against a detailed tender.

RFP – Request for Proposal
Sometimes based on a prior RFI; a business requirements-based request for specific solutions to the sourcing problem.

As the name suggests RFI is used to gather information to help decide what step to take next.
An RFI is a solicitation sent to a broad base of potential suppliers for the purpose of conditioning, gathering information, preparing for an RFP or RFQ, developing strategy, or building a database which will all be useful in later negotiations.

Further RFI is also a two way street:
It is common and accepted practice for a subcontractor or supplier to use an RFI to state his/her concern related to the omission or misapplication of a product, and seek further clarification of the building owner's intended use or the building official acceptance of the specified product. It is also acceptable for the subcontractor to use an RFI to call attention to an inferior product that may not meet the owner's needs, and use his/her expertise to recommend the better/correct product.

IA may have been very vague in their RFI but for me this is a golden opportunity for DRDO to lay down the specifications as per their studies and their expertise.

 

[Bhadra]

Well Sir, irrespective of your attempts to show your infinite understanding, you have absolutely no idea how designers work and what they require to do their work.

Any designer tasked with designing anything requires very clear and detailed understanding of the following.
1. The performance requirements
2. The environment of (expected) operations.
3. The constraints imposed on the product being designed.

The party requesting the design need to be very precise when describing the above requirements. Vague description as in the IA RFI are viewed with derision, because they are meaningless and risky for the designer. In fact, few designers will stick their neck out and accept such a project with such vague requirements, as it leaves the door open for abrupt changes in requirements.

Just to emphasize how dangerous the RFI is for any prospective design firm:

There are several load classes of bridges in the western sector: 20 ton, 45 ton, 60 ton, 70 ton, 100 ton etc etc. So which one does a design firm choose? If they choose the 60 ton , their design is open to rejection by the IA saying that 45 ton carrying capacity or 70 ton bridge should have been chosen. The RFI being vague leaves the door open to rejection/redesigning on such flimsy grounds.

Then there is the problem of the ground: There are fine grained sandy soils, coarse grained sandy soil, silty soil, clay etc etc all with different load bearing capacities at different seasons. So what ground pressure does the design firm choose for the FRCV/FMBT? Without a specified max ground pressure, the design can easily be rejected saying that it is unsuitable for the terrain.

The RFI basically tells "We want a tank" and nothing more. There is nothing in that RFI that any designer can use to make any reasonable assessment of the project.

Just to be clear, I'm not on DRDO's payroll.

I have answered all these things a number of times in this thread and emphasised that those who do not know why they are designing a tank should pack up and go home. The RFI has sufficiently given all parameters except for specefics.

DARPA announced a design completion for an amphibious tank. They did not issue RFI. They just provided software and told public they want designs for drivetrain, chasis and overall integrated structure. The designers submitted their designs, were modified and have benn put through Prototype trials.

http://www.gizmag.com/darpa-fang-winner/27213/

However, I wish to answer here a few questions about the design and what is required to be told to a designer. Suppose I have a plot of land with me on which I wish a build a house. What I need to tell an architect is not the size of my bed rooms and bath rooms but that I wish my bedroom are specious and height is also good, room be airy and the sun light into room be sufficient. I may tell him that I want good sunlight through out the air. Broadly I need to tell him that I have two cars and sufficiently parking be catered for and that there should a reasonale lawn. That is all. In short that I want a house - like I want a tank.

There is an article here which you may read at your leisure:
How to (and not to)
work with a designer

http://www.will-harris.com/design/working-with-designers.html
Imagine that you’re Christopher Columbus. You arrive in the New World and are so disappointed there are none of the oriental silks and spices you came looking for that you turn around and go home, missing all the wonders of the New World.

That’s what happens when you have preconceived notions about design. You can end up with something that’s better, but NOT see or appreciate it because you’re only focusing on the fact that it’s not what had in mind.

Remember you are a vital part of the design process. If you aren’t a good client, then you can’t expect good results.

Preconceived notions are just one of the mistakes people make when they work with a designer. A good designer’s work will make something:

• Work better
• Sell better
• Shed new light on old subjects
• Look better

The trouble is, a lot of people hire designers because they want their site to “look good.” But that’s just scratching the surface of what a designer can and should do. So they don’t know what’s possible, so they don’t get the most bang for their buck.

Just as writers are not just people who can type, designers are not just people who can use graphics programs. Good Design is more than skin deep.

Design is communication.

The way to inspire a designer is to give them the message and feeling you want to convey, and the freedom to convey it in a fresh, new way.

So how do you work with a designer to get their best work? Here are some suggestions:

• 
  1) Choose your designer carefully. Look at their previous work. The best designers don’t have a “signature look.” Their sites look as different as their clients do. Awards don’t necessarily mean the design worked for the client. If you’re not sure about a design, go to sites they designed and ask their clients.
  
  2) Leave your preconceived notions at the door. Don’t ask for a site like someone else’s but in a different color. Be open to new, unexpected ideas. Don’t be afraid of something different. Let new ideas sink in.
  
  3) Tell your designer what you want to sayrather than how you want it to look. Don’t ask for a color, shape, or style--ask for meaning or emotion.
  
  4) Be clear about specific features you need.You want your designer to create a design specific to your needs. If you try to add features as you go along, the design won’t fit as well.
  
  5) Do your research and be specific about your needs. “I need to sell meeting planners on the idea of hiring me to plan entertainment for their events.” That’s clear and specific about both the product and the audience. The more detailed and specific you are at the start, the better the designer can tailor the site to your needs. If you add requirements later on, the designer will probably just have to shoe-horn them in, which won’t give you the best results.
  
  6) Make sure your message and content are clear. The more of your content you have complete, the better the designer can build your site around it. A good designer may make suggestions to refine your content to get your message across faster or more clearly, but the more content you have complete, the more the designer will have to work with.
  
  7) Design for your customer, not yourself, your friends or your colleagues. Be specific so your designer knows who your customers are and what they want. It’s more important that they like your site than that you like it. Always remember, “What’s in it for them.”
  
  If the design pleases your customers, they’ll please you. If you insist on a design that only pleases you, then your customers may not be inspired to buy your product or service and in the end you will lose.
  
  8) Have good reasons for your preferences. You can show the designer sites that appeal to you, but dig deeper and figure out why they speak to you. Think in terms of feelings.
  
  Design makes you feel, so tell your designer how it makes you feel. Instead of saying, “I like yellow,” get to the root of it and say “I want a site that feels warm,” or “I want something upbeat and friendly.” Focusing on your logical or emotional impressions give the designer more to work with. Why? Because your customers may not “like” the same things you do, but a good designer can convey the impression you want them to have.
  
  9) Don’t design by committee. No good design was ever created by a consensus. The more people who have a voice in the process, the more watered down the results will be. Your friends and coworkers will often give you conflicting advice and people often have ulterior motives when they give you comments (they may be jealous or threatened if you get something that’s too good, or they may just be ignorant). You can show it to a few trusted people and get their comments, but there can only be one person making decisions. Don’t be wishy washy and try to change direction late in the process.
  
  10) Don’t tell your designer how to design. That’s not your area of expertise. Give a designer your requirements and preferences, but also the freedom to create something that answers them as effectively as possible. If you micromanage a designer, they won’t be motivated to do anything but cash your check.
  
  11) You can’t please all the people all the time. Bill Cosby said “The only sure way to failure is to try to please everybody.” If everyone thinks your site is “OK” then it’s probably too dull to get much of a reaction from anyone. If you design a site with NO personality no one will hate it. Or love it.
  
  12) Trust your designer(you are paying for their expertise).
  

Then when they start to show you “comps” (design versions), give them specific comments.

Don’t just say, “I don’t like brown.” That says nothing of real value. If you say “I’m concerned that the color looks sickly and we need something that conveys growth,” then you are giving the designer useful information, because you’re talking about content rather than telling them how to design.

Your designer should know more than you do about design and its implications, both emotional and cultural. So if you ask for a color and the designer explains why it isn’t a good idea, believe them. Don’t ask for a color, shape, or style--ask for meaning or emotion.

Yes, designers can make mistakes and take wrong directions. And yes, you need to give them direction. But you must tell them what you need, not how to achieve that goal.

The reason that so many great discoveries have been accidents is because when you set out with a destination in mind then end up someplace else you feel you’ve missed the mark and gotten lost.

The reality is different—you may have ended up someplace different—but better. Yet if you’re only viewing things in terms of “this is where I wanted to go and I’m not there,” you will be disappointed, even with something better.

 

[Bhadra]

@sob

I agree with you.
RFI may be for the purpose of procurement in which case some / approximate details have to be given what the buyer wants information on.

RFI may be for Design, prototype bulid etc (like this case) in which a conceptual framework should be given rather that the user becoming a designer himself having preconceived notions and landing up with an old design.. Or how would the designer come up with something innovative and new.

I fully agree with you that this a gold mine for DRDO who have been working on tanks, know advantages and limitations of their designs, know bridges, infrastructure, terrain, tactical requirement of IA and have required technical skill at hand.

Instead of politicking over the issue they should immediately get on their drawing board and present the best design and win the competition outright.

 

[sob]

One thing is for certain with the present Govt. I do not see any move to buy Tanks from Russia in the near future.

IA will have to work with DRDO/CVRDE and get the tank that they want.

 

[Khagesh]

@Bhadra

If the shape, size, nuts and bolts are given then what is the design for ? What will designer do ?
If there are specifications then then how does one chooses between the designs?
The other RFI are in specifics and procurement ... or are those also for design ?

But what would the designer design to. Does it serve anybodies purpose to say “Both sides of western border”. Why cannot the DGMF say what is there on the other side of the western border. What is to be expected in terms of canal depths, ditch cum bund preparations, road conditions, soil conditions.

This is not an India’s Got Talent Contest that every kind of circus novelty will be allowed. This is exactly the attitude IAF had when they went in to test for MMRCA – single engine, twin engined, one design from multiple countries, two different designs from one country, 4 different planforms. And you have seen the funtime we all had. You want the IA to go into this too. DGMF has made an RFI that will make it easier to fudge the AUCRT &/or Comparative tests later on. And all this merely to justify what 5 top guys in IA will decide based on completely extraneous reasons a la VIP-helo-specs-fudging.

No sir we do not send our young boys into the armed forces, so some lucky sperms can play around with their lives and fates.

I will tell you what the DGMF is doing. Some big guys in IA think they and the ‘system’ they have pioneered will outlast Modi. That presumption is the basis for resisting Make In India for defence purposes. The only way these people can 10 years hence, presumably under a speculated UPA-3, fudge the results of so called tests is when they have laid out an RFI that is vague, to begin with. Now obviously they will require a committee decision so all these big guys can save their own personal skins later on. Sure enough the RFI design itself is going to be a Committee decision – stated so in the RFI itself.


Sorry boss India is not made for these small cabal who write dicey reports about concocted tests, learn life cycle costing from the vendors and ultimately change specs mid way to cooperate with the bunch of crooked politicians, winding up intel important departments for their political masters.


Notice this very clearly. Indian Army is India’s Army. Indian Army is not the retirement plan of a bunch of lazy louts. Luckily there are enough patriots even among the civilians and these people will be tracked for the rest of their natural lives. A lot of us were too young when the Arjun was sought to be killed. But this time from the RFI stage itself these people and their vacillations will be tracked.

India does not follow that nationalist and economic philosophy in all other goods- cell phones, Laptops, computers, electronics, telecommunication, infrastructure, tool, machinery, auto parts , engines, aviation, sensors..

You perhaps failed to notice that the whole country (labour, salarymen to industrialists) everybody is rooting for the political option that breaths in and breaths out only about Domestic Industry. Welcome to the party.

Actually this fetish for foreign maal is what got us into gulami. Jahangir gave the trading rights, basically designed to kill domestic industry. And these later day mini Jahangir’s cannot be allowed to become successful.

Whenever the borders go hot, the whole country goes to fight. And these 'You Can't Handle the Truth!' types have already been exposed in 1962.

 

[Bhadra]

Mahendras, L&T, TATA, Ambani, Punjloid, BEL, BDL, ARDE etc would be able to deliver. CVRDE does not have a good track record. May be they can be asked to work on armour!

DRDO has become stand still.

I have a hunch that with their experience in Merkava, the Israelis would be able to present a good design. The Russians would also not be far behind with their new found design of Merkava. But will they give that design to India ? Merkava to be produced in India in collaboration with a private firm?

Why do not we invite the Chinese? They will also lean something !

 

[Bhadra]

@mod / admin
Edges of massage board being cut....

 

[Khagesh]

DARPA announced a design completion for an amphibious tank. They did not issue RFI. They just provided software and told public they want designs for drivetrain, chasis and overall integrated structure. The designers submitted their designs, were modified and have benn put through Prototype trials.

http://www.gizmag.com/darpa-fang-winner/27213/

Indian Army is not DARPA.

FYI the current director of DARPA is described as follows:

Regina E. Dugan is an American businesswoman, inventor, and technology developer.

Who/What, in Indian Army matches that?

For the time being even DRDO does not stake claims to be an Indian ARPA/DARPA.

So IA should better start learning instead of teaching.

 

[Bhadra]

@Khagesh

short answer - read how DARPA got their amphibious tank designed by public competition ...

All DRDO fanboys have only one theme, one massage and one charge - everyone except them is disloyal, dishonest and suspect !

You talk of ten year's strategy - No Lt Gen such as DGMF serves for more than four years and probably not more than two years as DGMF !! The colonel making the draft RFI would not even know if he goes to be a Brigadier. It is not DRDO where every one will become Scientist E / F/ G merely by commenting and passing time of DFI or even without that. He just has to be alive. That is all.

Pardon me but that is why I call all this "Shyapa" ... You are questioning the intent to design then you can not move forward.

Answer following questions ( I am asking this the third time) :

Questionnaire.


(a) What is your estimate of the approximate expenditure likely to be incurred in preparing the design?

(b) What is the approximate time period which will be required to prepare the design?

(c) What details would be needed in the FRCV design philosophy to enable the design to be prepared?

(d) What is the approximate amount of prize money for the winning design which will adequately motivate your organisation to participate in the competition?

(e) What would be your most preferred model for conduct of the competition such that maximum transparency and a level playing field is maintained?

No one has answered this:

 

[sob]

@Khagesh You mentioned 3 RFIs I just read those and found a very basic and fundamental difference in them

For the Light Bullet proof Vehicle and the Helicopter the opening paragraph says

For the LBPV :Ministry of Defence, Government of India is desirous of procuring Light Bullet Proof Vehicle (LBPV). With the view to identify probable vendors who can undertake the said project, OEMs/ vendors are requested to forward information on the product which they can offer.

For the RSH :
The Ministry of Defence, Government of India intends to urgently replace the fleet of existing Cheetah and Chetak helicopters with suitable helicopters of modern design (hereinafter called Reconnaissance & Surveillance / RSH Helicopters).

and Now for the FRCV

The Indian Army is planning to design and develop a new generation, state-of-the-art combat vehicle platform for populating its Armoured Fighting Vehicle fleet in the coming decade. This vehicle, which will be called the Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV), will form the base platform for the Main Battle Tank which is planned to replace the existing T-72 tanks in the Armoured Corps. It is also planned to subsequently develop other need-based variants on this platform.


Just see the basic differnce in the 3 RFIs.

For the LBPV they want to buy existing products, while for the RSH they want replacement of Cheetah and Chetak Helicopters. So in both cases the specifications are clear.

Now coming to the FRCV the RFI clearly states that they want to Design and Develop a new Vehicle. So they have informed the areas of operation and other relevant data and now it is upto DRDO to design a new vehicle from scratch. Nowhere is the RFI suggesting or tilting towards an existing product. DRDO is fully aware of the ground conditions and they have all the data with them. They will work on it and come back with a proposal. There will be lots of discussions and Design will keep on changing.

Let us not jump to conclusions so early in the stage.

 

[ezsasa]

For those who are under the assumption that every requirement should be spelt out in an RFI, there is always a meeting that is usually held in Delhi for clearing of any doubts regarding RFI. May be the details are discussed there with. Interested parties.

In case if anybody is still doubtful of how RFI is issued, you can check the RFI given by Americans for the "Next generation protective ensemble" for their local vendors, their RFI was equally vague without giving out too many details. This is the one we are supposed to co-develop under DTTI.

We also have to consider that, not every Tom dick & Harry applies for this RFI. Only those with prior experience will participate in this RFI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kharavela]

Do not start an English spelling class here. Stick to the topic.

I do not intend to start any type of spelling class, let alone English. Writing Su-30 MKK in place of Su-30 MKI changes meaning of a well written paragraph. I just pointed such an error.

 

[Mad Indian]

@Khagesh Sir, I wanted to ask the same question to @Bhadra ji & @Mad Indian ji.

If DGMF can provide details in 2 of the 3 RFIs published, why details of requirement were not provided in RFI for FRCV ?? Was that intentional ?? Does that lead to some pre-decided direction / conclusion ??

One more question. Accepting all the shortfalls of DRDO, can somebody clarify why Indian Army did not took OWNERSHIP of all projects related to IA ?? Why did IA chose not to be engaged with the project from definition to production phase ???

If you were not so busy hating army you would have known the reason for it by reading karn and bhadra posts on what RFI are and why it is being given out this way here. Even then sob has answered your question.

But no that must not stop you guys from talking crap on army because drdo can't deliver.

BTW, if army wants the Armada, what stopped drdo from building their own Armada? Are you accepting that DRDO is incompetent?

 

[Khagesh]

@sob,

I agree with your assessment about differences in the RFI. But then you too have agreed that currently this is about gathering information and that information flow has to be a two way exercise.

I am not questioning the DGMF on his view that he needs an RFI his right too frame an RFI for an FRCV.

Following is what I am questioning:

(1)
The structure of the RFI - I am questioning that RFI. For just one example easily picked by a non-expert like me and I quote myself:

Does it serve anybodies purpose to say “Both sides of western border”. Why cannot the DGMF say what is there on the other side of the western border. What is to be expected in terms of canal depths, ditch cum bund preparations, road conditions, soil conditions.

Please notice this was put upto @Bhadra. He was the one who presented it as an apology. Notice now that instead of answering the objection he has started talking about DARPA - Sharpa. WT_ Indian Navy has a real design capability in the float category. A capability that is several notches above merely testing which is a skill that IN shares with IAF and IA also. And mind you unlike the Army that never sees the seas or the Air force that has only the air to take care of the Navy actually works on, under, over the water and land. And despite that IN too have never claimed to be an Indian DARPA.


(2)
The need for an RFI in this holier than thou competitive style. What the hell will the designers compete about when they do not even have the hard data on requirements. If the DGMF really needs information for use in a competitive fashion why cannot he approach design houses directly. What for this drama.


(3)
The capacity of the DGMF to write a proper RFI for FRCV:

(a)
When he himself does not know what the criteria for the evaluation for an FRCV is.
Exhibit:

Design Selection Committee, under the aegis of DGMF, which will have members selected from amongst domain experts and representatives of concerned defence agencies. The selection will be based on detailed and comprehensive Evaluation Criteria.

Please notice the language. Thus Currently the RFI does not even states clearly and expressly, what the hell will be selected - the design or the Design Selection Committee?
What will be the Evaluation Criteria for - the design or the Design Selection Committee?

My hunch is that the DGMF currently does not even know what is the evaluation criteria for the selecting (notice DGMF is going to select) the Design Selection Committee.


(b)
when even at the RFP stage (which comes after this RFI but before the Prototype Development Stage) the DGMF knows he will only be able to give out, and I quote:

(a) Design Stage. In this stage, there will be a FRCV Design Competition for selecting the best design. Established tank designers will be invited by means of a global RFP (Request For Proposal), wherein the broad design philosophy for the FRCV will be given out, along with the detailed guidelines for conduct of the Competition. The participants will be asked to submit detailed designs based on the FRCV design philosophy.

Hamari Army mein General sahib, Philosophy karne lag gaye hain. They want detailed designs and mind you ab-initio designs based on a mere design philosophy. heh heh.


(4) The intent of the DGMF:

(a)
Notice that “variants are planned to be developed on the FRCV platform” and two of these ‘vairants’ are expected to be “Tracked Light Tank” and “Wheeled Version”. IIRC there is an oft-voiced requirement for a light tank. But what is that is not clear either. And then this Medium weight FRCV should also lend itself to becoming a wheeled variant. Will the Design Selection Committee also formulate views on how well a design conforms to these extra plannings. And what to do with the often talked about Light Tank.

To my limited understanding as things become smaller/lighter they will also require different engines and protections and armaments and ammo and crew count. So what is this Tracked Light Tank variant?

(b)
Notice DGMF is unwilling to say anything about the crew count required. What does that show – knowledge of requirements or knee jerk reaction to their own Arjun fiasco.

Same is the case where the DGMF talks about “weather conditions in terrain and temperature ranges obtaining on India’s Western borders” – Does this show knowledge of requirements or is it a knee jerk reaction to the air conditioning failures of their vaunted imports.

(c)
Obviously the DGMF did not decide on his own that that he needs a design competition. But nonetheless he has agreed to make his office the nodal point for all decision making in this regard. Now let us presume that people actually do take the DGMF seriously and submit their designs and further see what these designers will get in return. This whole thing is a give and take – I hope

Here is what they will get:

(d) The winning design(s) will become the sole property of the Indian Army.

<snip>

6. The agency/bureau whose designs are selected will require to continue to work on the project through the prototype and the Limited Series Production (LSP) stages. For this, a separate contract will be drawn. The agency/bureaus participating in this competition will mandatorily have to give an undertaking to this effect while applying for the competition.

<snip>

(d) What is the approximate amount of prize money for the winning design which will adequately motivate your organisation to participate in the competition?

Sir sorry to say but what will the design house do after the LSP stage? Let us just say that CVRDE entry submits and wins. Then what? What will they get?.............. Exactly . I thought so too . The fun thing is that even for the LSP stage the design agency will be at the mercy of the DGMF and his yet to be staffed Design Selection Committee for which even the Selection Criteria is not finalized.

This RFI is an admission not a request. This RFI is :
1) an admission of failures;
2) a further intent to perpetuate by not establishing a proper design team inhouse. Because once you have this design teams in place working for years on a product, then the procurements cannot be made on whims of a selected few;
3) most likely to have at least a retirement plan in place with one live hope of seeing windfalls should the UPA-3 come into power.


Seeing the Variants list, does anybody remember Sergeant Bilko's Flying Tank.

 

[Kharavela]

Let us not jump to conclusions so early in the stage.

Anyway, at the end of July, scenario shall be clearer on this RFI.

 

[Khagesh]

Mahendras, L&T, TATA, Ambani, Punjloid, BEL, BDL, ARDE etc would be able to deliver. CVRDE does not have a good track record. May be they can be asked to work on armour!

Deliver what. Lifafa?

Bear in mind that one COAS is on record saying that he has been approached with the offer for bribes. That COAS has been "Elected" (not Selected) by the people of India based primarily on the support of reasonable political parties and his own personal honesty.

I fail to understand how, except for that one officer in such a large army no other COAS ever got an offer of Bribes. And even if we grant that no COAS has actually received offers, how was it that none of the vendors ever offered bribes to several Director Generals of Supplies, Transport, Disposal, Ords, Quality Assurance.

Looks like we already have the Bhagwa Army in place, supporting a Ram Rajya.

Or probably that one officer was corrupt , why else would anybody approach with an offer for bribes

 

[sob]

Look at it from the other way.
The Army is giving DRDO a Carte blanche on this project. In my experience this is an indication that they want to work with DRDO on the project.

DRDO does not need the army to tell them the terrain on both sides of the border and neither do they need to be told about the capacity of the bridges.

Just bear in mind if DRDO/CVRDE were unhappy with the RFI the media would be full of stories from their side. This is how the game is played.

This is a massive programme with huge quantities and the first organisation with a concrete proposal is going to get his specs frozen. Until and unless the Russians agree for Make in India, Armata will not come in the picture.

 

[Rowdy]

Until and unless the Russians agree for Make in India, Armata will not come in the picture.

Logically speaking, would the russians not want to print and invest money in their own economy to balance the flight of foreign capital.