After years of TOT, why is India lagging behind?

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
If we go on purchasing what is best , when will we learn to build one
purchaseing arms has nothing to do with building one if it did i fail to understand what we are doing now the MOD is buying everything from tevors to a/c why? they could have built one my point is don't mix R&D with militery requirements R&D normally takes years of painful research and failures to perfect or develop let our forces be prepared delaying vital procurements will have dire concequences for the security of the nation i will give you another example the army wanted to purchase WLC in the early 1990s an american company was already finalised and all commercial and technical terms were finalised then at the last minute DRDO stepped in and convinced the MOD that inhouse development was possible and promised the army of delivery soon but it never came and soon kargil happened and many brave indian soldiers died which could have been prevented this is what i am arguing this is the reason why we are still not able to develop indegenious weapons lack of clear communication and transperency and not to mention beaurocracy
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
Boss please don't get upset i am repeating again I AM NOT BLAMING THE PRODUCTS OF DRDO I AM SAYING THE BEAUROCRACY AND THE WAY OF FUNCTIONING is the reason why DRDO is facing problems i just gave the example of LCA thats all i am not blaming the technology of LCA please read it again i said"instead of waiting for the development of the plane the MOD & the DRDO could have approved the purchaseing of new a/c for the IAF to replace there MIGS and jaguars and not wait for the LCA development" these migs and jaguars could have been decommissioned long time ago by buying these a/c long time back, it would have cost half of what we are paying now that is what the armed forces are upset about, all i am saying is this lack of foresight is what is hurting the upgrading process and giving DRDO negitive criticism, i say again the problem is lack of foresight not development let the armed forces upgrade when necessary as & when DRDO develops the products they will replace the imported one's that is my point then our operational preparedness will not be compromised & we can save crores on long upgrades
Biss I am not being upset I am answering to your points raised jaguars were getting upgraded when the MRCA was first envisioned so it was not supposed to be retired. only MiG23 have been retired. DRDO does not approve purchases they are consulted before purchase and that's just consultation they don't have veto power over purchases. Lack of foresight well that's the problem but isn;t the things are moving in right direction like increasing the FDI letting private sector participation discussion on reforms of DRDO but things take time
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
Biss I am not being upset I am answering to your points raised jaguars were getting upgraded when the MRCA was first envisioned so it was not supposed to be retired. only MiG23 have been retired. DRDO does not approve purchases they are consulted before purchase and that's just consultation they don't have veto power over purchases. Lack of foresight well that's the problem but isn;t the things are moving in right direction like increasing the FDI letting private sector participation discussion on reforms of DRDO but things take time
FDI will not be increased from 26% as far as letting the private industry through, the RUR schemes which gave licenses to such private companies which could develop defense hardware to compete directly with PSu's for any requirements was scrapped recently by our raksha mantri so much for private industry in defense, considering the veto power, DRDO has every say in acquiring militery hardware uptil1992 any component which the DRDO thought that they cannot produce was purchased so any purchase had to get the approval of DRDO although now that system is not there but they have certain authority towards defense procurement that is how the WLC which was selected from hughes (now raytheon) was delayed that is why i gave that example there is no scope for private companies in defense deals they still play second fiddle to PSu's
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
FDI will not be increased from 26% as far as letting the private industry through, the RUR schemes which gave licenses to such private companies which could develop defense hardware to compete directly with PSu's for any requirements was scrapped recently by our raksha mantri so much for private industry in defense, considering the veto power, DRDO has every say in acquiring militery hardware uptil1992 any component which the DRDO thought that they cannot produce was purchased so any purchase had to get the approval of DRDO although now that system is not there but they have certain authority towards defense procurement that is how the WLC which was selected from hughes (now raytheon) was delayed that is why i gave that example there is no scope for private companies in defense deals they still play second fiddle to PSu's
Things take time we are democracy no body can change the system overnight isn't tata & l&t got orders for akash launchers? Isn't L&T is involved in making hulls of ATV, isn't Tata power created instruments for ATV. (Just some examples) There is pressure from OFB unions too as there jobs will be at stake these process take time. You quoted WLC as example isn't it was reactionary step when our enemy bought such radars our forces wanted it too? Why didn't they came up with a requirement that they wanted this sort of radar before hand and asked for a development. DRDO was right that this tech could get developed and please don't start that if they could have developed in time we could not have lost some precious life.
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
Things take time we are democracy no body can change the system overnight isn't tata & l&t got orders for akash launchers? Isn't L&T is involved in making hulls of ATV, isn't Tata power created instruments for ATV. (Just some examples) There is pressure from OFB unions too as there jobs will be at stake these process take time.

Ok i will buy that but L&T building the hull is still speculation they have just decided to compete in the order if & when the proposal comes regarding akash if you are talking of the tetra trucks then you are right sir

You quoted WLC as example isn't it was reactionary step when our enemy bought such radars our forces wanted it too? Why didn't they came up with a requirement that they wanted this sort of radar before hand and asked for a development. DRDO was right that this tech could get developed and please don't start that if they could have developed in time we could not have lost some precious life.
it was not a reactionary step the army was requesting for a WLC in 1988!! almost 11 years before the kargil conflict happened they had even finalised the American AN/TPQ-36/37 radars but was stopped for some reason then again in 1998 the army sent RFP where american, french and ukrainian co. sent there proposal but then sanctions were imposed for our neuclear testing so american and french co. backed out and ukrainian offer broke down then during kargil conflict the need for WLC was felt and then the govt. decided to purchase the american AN/TPQ-36/37 12 no's then later DRDO developed the WLC from rajendra radar so this was not a reactionary step the WLCand along with it many vital hardware was also held up that is it earlier in those times DRDO had to approve any purchase of hardware that they felt they cannot develop themselves but now that rule is not there so you see the plathora of things we are purchasing now the DRDo has its successes i am not denying that but they have to radically change the way they function as i mentioned in my earlier post the govt. had promised the RUR schemes but was later scrapped, then they issued a tender for high tech network centric communication system where 6 pvt. co. participated but abruptly cancelled the evaluation & handed it to BEL how are we to develop if we keep doing this this is what i think should change
 
Last edited:

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
it was not a reactionary step the army was requesting for a WLC in 1988!! almost 11 years before the kargil conflict happened they had even finalised the American AN/TPQ-36/37 radars but was stopped for some reason then again in 1998 the army sent RFP where american, french and ukrainian co. sent there proposal but then sanctions were imposed for our neuclear testing so american and french co. backed out and ukrainian offer broke down then during kargil conflict the need for WLC was felt and then the govt. decided to purchase the american AN/TPQ-36/37 12 no's then later DRDO developed the WLC from rajendra radar so this was not a reactionary step the WLCand along with it many vital hardware was also held up that is it earlier in those times DRDO had to approve any purchase of hardware that they felt they cannot develop themselves but now that rule is not there so you see the plathora of things we are purchasing now the DRDo has its successes i am not denying that but they have to radically change the way they function as i mentioned in my earlier post the govt. had promised the RUR schemes but was later scrapped, then they issued a tender for high tech network centric communication system where 6 pvt. co. participated but abruptly cancelled the evaluation & handed it to BEL how are we to develop if we keep doing this this is what i think should change
I requested you not to raise the particular point and you raised it. Just putting this link to show that it was a reactionary step not a pro active one: http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories129.htm. Let's not forget the financial condition of 1990's there were lot of things that were delayed. I have already explained other points already. changing the system will take time it can not be done over night especially in democracy. Private companies are getting the chances although may be not at the speed we would like
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
I requested you not to raise the particular point and you raised it. Just putting this link to show that it was a reactionary step not a pro active one: http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories129.htm. Let's not forget the financial condition of 1990's there were lot of things that were delayed. I have already explained other points already. changing the system will take time it can not be done over night especially in democracy. Private companies are getting the chances although may be not at the speed we would like
sir i have no intention of raising any issues i will drop this point if you want i was just pointing out what i felt regarding the WLC please read this line in the link you posted "It may be noted that the Indian Army had asked for the WLRs in mid-1980s but the government sanctioned their acquisition only after the 1999 Kargil War in which the Indian Army suffered more than 80 per cent of its casualties due to the Pakistani artillery fire"
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
sir i have no intention of raising any issues i will drop this point if you want i was just pointing out what i felt regarding the WLC please read this line in the link you posted "It may be noted that the Indian Army had asked for the WLRs in mid-1980s but the government sanctioned their acquisition only after the 1999 Kargil War in which the Indian Army suffered more than 80 per cent of its casualties due to the Pakistani artillery fire"
You have missed this line :)

Pakistan has had the advantage of US-supplied radars from the mid-1980s, and they were also built by Raytheon, but an earlier model, AN-TPQ-36. The version supplied to India, Firefinder AN-TPQ-37, has longer range and reach, and the additional capability to destroy some artillery missiles.

The point I am trying to make is when this radar is acquired then only our machinery got woken up to acquire it
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
You have missed this line :)

Pakistan has had the advantage of US-supplied radars from the mid-1980s, and they were also built by Raytheon, but an earlier model, AN-TPQ-36. The version supplied to India, Firefinder AN-TPQ-37, has longer range and reach, and the additional capability to destroy some artillery missiles.
The point I am trying to make is when this radar is acquired then only our machinery got woken up to acquire it


Sir, but the fact remains that the MOD only procured the WLC only after the kargil war even when the army was asking for it for 11 years :) it does'nt matter which radar they got if they had it before at least half the casualty could have been saved


exactly that machinery is the MOD not the army
 
Last edited:

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
Sir, but the fact remains that the MOD only procured the WLC only after the kargil war even when the army was asking for it for 11 years :) it does'nt matter which radar they got if they had it before at least half the casualty could have been saved


exactly that machinery is the MOD not the army
And this fact also remains that the requirement came only after enemy got it right. And IA is also part of the machinery they are not independent of the system
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
And this fact also remains that the requirement came only after enemy got it right. And IA is also part of the machinery they are not independent of the system
The Indian armed forces had no say or what so ever in procurement the army was asking for a simple WLC radar (whatever the series) for 11 yearsi.e since 1988 so how can that be a reactionary purchase by the army!!!! so how can the army be blamed for this!!! it was the MOD who rejected the offer first and then DRDO who promised to make a radar in 2 years time just like they promise a lot of things and at the end of the day the army had to pay the price how can the army be held responsible for this, the army was requesting this radar for exactly these kind of tarrain they were requesting for 11 years for this so you can it be there fault also irrespective what the enemy had if we had an WLC would'nt it had made any difference? so don'nt blame the army they have been requesting for this radar since 1988 which was never heard after the kargil war seeing the importance then they buy it and later after 4-5 years the DRDo develops a WLC !! do you think it is still the army's fault

please see the links below and you will see what i mean

http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/jan/15guest.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEL_Weapon_Locating_Radar
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/sci-tech/drdo-has-failed-to-deliver-says-antony_10037023.html
http://www.8ak.in/8ak_india_defence...e-radarwork-and-battle-management-system.html
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
The Indian armed forces had no say or what so ever in procurement the army was asking for a simple WLC radar (whatever the series) for 11 yearsi.e since 1988 so how can that be a reactionary purchase by the army!!!! so how can the army be blamed for this!!! it was the MOD who rejected the offer first and then DRDO who promised to make a radar in 2 years time just like they promise a lot of things and at the end of the day the army had to pay the price how can the army be held responsible for this, the army was requesting this radar for exactly these kind of tarrain they were requesting for 11 years for this so you can it be there fault also irrespective what the enemy had if we had an WLC would'nt it had made any difference? so don'nt blame the army they have been requesting for this radar since 1988 which was never heard after the kargil war seeing the importance then they buy it and later after 4-5 years the DRDo develops a WLC !! do you think it is still the army's fault

please see the links below and you will see what i mean

http://in.rediff.com/news/2008/jan/15guest.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEL_Weapon_Locating_Radar
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/sci-tech/drdo-has-failed-to-deliver-says-antony_10037023.html
http://www.8ak.in/8ak_india_defence...e-radarwork-and-battle-management-system.html
Sigh...... why you are not listening to the request to not bring deaths in to this argument? You are simply repeating one line again and again. Let me put a question to you why did the request for WLR came only in 1989? Does it magically dropped out of heaven in 1989 or what? DRDO is a research organization and it is bound to happen that they will succeed in some cases delay in some and fail in some we can't really change this to 100% success.
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
Sigh...... why you are not listening to the request to not bring deaths in to this argument? You are simply repeating one line again and again. Let me put a question to you why did the request for WLR came only in 1989? Does it magically dropped out of heaven in 1989 or what? DRDO is a research organization and it is bound to happen that they will succeed in some cases delay in some and fail in some we can't really change this to 100% success.
ok then i will not argue about this topic anymore :)
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
ok then i will not argue about this topic anymore :)
I think you got me wrong I am against the argument of if this could have been there at this time we might not have lost y hence the organization developing has done blunder of not letting the equipment imported. I am saying the aim for the organization is to reduce dependency hence some times they might get something wrong and not deliver on time as our industrial base and experience of developing is not up to mark. But do we have way out of this other then keep trying to develop products if we want to have independent MIL-IND complex. We can't keep importing the things infinitely there might be some unfortunate losses in that path. But that is part and parcel of it. Hence i request to desist from making arguments in the line you were making. I hope I made myself clear
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
I think you got me wrong I am against the argument of if this could have been there at this time we might not have lost y hence the organization developing has done blunder of not letting the equipment imported. I am saying the aim for the organization is to reduce dependency hence some times they might get something wrong and not deliver on time as our industrial base and experience of developing is not up to mark. But do we have way out of this other then keep trying to develop products if we want to have independent MIL-IND complex. We can't keep importing the things infinitely there might be some unfortunate losses in that path. But that is part and parcel of it. Hence i request to desist from making arguments in the line you were making. I hope I made myself clear
it is easy for us to say it is part and parcel but these blunders are doing more damage to indegenisation then helping what i am saying the MOD should do is to not place all there eggs in one basket and diversify the market thats all instead of depending on DRDO and PSU's they can issue RUR's to pvt co. and allow them to grow but that is not happening what you said about changes being made is just in paper in reality it is totally different
 

nitesh

Mob Control Manager
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
7,550
Likes
1,307
it is easy for us to say it is part and parcel but these blunders are doing more damage to indegenisation then helping what i am saying the MOD should do is to not place all there eggs in one basket and diversify the market thats all instead of depending on DRDO and PSU's they can issue RUR's to pvt co. and allow them to grow but that is not happening what you said about changes being made is just in paper in reality it is totally different
Well it is hard to digest but yes it is part and parcel. Decision making process takes time until you have a solution to change the system overnight. Mate I have given you examples of participation by private sector in defense although not at the pace as you wish
 

mehrotraprince

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Messages
198
Likes
348
Country flag
There is vast difference in ToT and Licence production
ToT: You get to know everything from A to Z about product, while in
Licence production: Critical components are supplied by main company (like radar, engine, missiles), you just assemble it and you are permitted to manufacture non critical components only.
 

BunBunCake

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
405
Likes
75
If ISRO could succeed what stopped DRDO ?
- ISRO since it's beginning was totally independent. (take the Cryogenic engines for example.... they wouldn't sell to us so they developed their own)

- ISRO has no boss that reject it's 'products' saying they are not satisfactory.

(in this case, the boss of DRDO is our Armed Forces. If they don't like. DRDO have to go re-develop again. And the press will know...... so now we all know)
No one is here to judge ISRO.

Who says DRDO is 'failed' or lagging back? We don't know the standards of our armed forces. Take the comparative trials between Arjun and T-90. I've read news saying the Arjun outperformed the T-90 (yes, i know they are different weight class, but not the point) Previously everyone was laughing at the Arjun and calling it Ar-Junk (our Pak friends).

That being said, I do believe part of the lack of capability we have is due to the internal problems. The higher levels eating all the money, and spending nothing on the actual project. (As we all are aware of this).
I've read someone post in this thread.... someone used a screwdriver to tighten a screw for the Tejas.

No wonder why these projects are ending up in such delays. The money is not going where it's supposed to go.
 
Last edited:

Kingmaker

New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
5
Likes
0
Though i am no expert, but based on the information that i have read or come across - i for one do not blame that our R&D companies are lagging... The problem is we do not have rolled out a complete product because of the ever changing specifications handed out by the Armed forces.. Rather than going for blocked versions of the products, our forces want the latest technology to be incorporated into the weapons, by the time our DRDo or for that matter other agencies come up with the required product, the technology would have improved and this results in our armed forces again asking for modifications...

In my opinion we should have a roadmap where we define the required specs for atleast three blocks/stages and as and when the objectives are met for a defined block start mass producing it and at the same time continue research on the successive blocks that are planned... this way it will help all the concerned stakeholders and leads us eventually into self sufficiency in our defence procurements...
 

pavanvenkatesh

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
175
Likes
9
I think the MOD must first decide whether they want pvt companies in defense sectors or not? If they do then they should come out with a totally different policy for them which can provide a level playing field for both public and pvt companies
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top