Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV)

Discussion in 'Indian Army' started by Anshu Attri, Feb 5, 2011.

  1. cyclops

    cyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    3,645
    I'm guessing the whole discussions with the MOD and IA will have to start all over again if TATA wants to go with Make-2 and not Make-1.
    Make-1 discussions have already eaten up so much time, and there's no guarantee that Make-2 will be any faster, which is why IA seems to be reluctant.

    Probably the MOD sees the opportunity to save the government some money which is why they are entertaining TATA's Make-2 proposal, whereas IA sees this attempt as further delaying an already delayed project and thereby lessening their warfighting capability.

    Indian DPPs are such that L1s were/are usually given preference. Buy Indian might just become the norm but the lowest bidder thing will be difficult to root out.

    TATA knows that being the L1 bidder will give them the upper hand so they go with Make-2 and bank on the politicians' practice of going for the lowest price weapon system, as the final okay will be that of the government's.

    Whereas the MOD knows how defence deals go in the country, look at the Rafale mess. "Why this much money is being wasted, when something can be brought for cheap?" is literally the first thing they want to avoid for such big deals.
    The "kitna deti hai" attitude biomagnifies down even to our political class.

    We have to stop this L1 business and provide for efficient logistics for vendors opting for either Make-2 or Make-1 and then opt for the best and not the cheapest product.
    After all, we are not haggling for aloos and gobis down in the market; this is the defence of the nation we are talking about.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
  2. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,801
    Likes Received:
    6,901
    Probably......... But I think when there is question of indigenous production, IA should put their feet down. Cost is a factor which would be taken care by MoD and it is the tech specs which IA should look at.

    Whether its Make-1 or Make-2 way, there would always be techno commercial bid. IA should put its foot down on Technical aspect and then let co's decide on which way they would move. The biggest concern for IA should be time frame and technical aspect, not the commercial.

    L1 is important in commercial aspect of the deal, so either way if technical design is not compromised, commercial could be taken care of. I think MoD should involve both Make-1 and Make-2 category with the condition that whole IP right would be with the company. After all its the cost of the tech which matters at the end.
     
    Bleh likes this.
  3. cobra commando

    cobra commando Tharki regiment Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,041
    Likes Received:
    14,039
    Location:
    Oblivion
    L&Ts FICV concept

    ______________________________
     
  4. Prashant12

    Prashant12 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    12,745
    Location:
    Mumbai
    L&T FICV hull and chasis

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    aditya10r, Mayan, cyclops and 2 others like this.
  5. SREEKAR

    SREEKAR DEEP STATE Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    4,339
    Likes Received:
    7,027
    Location:
    Milky way galaxy
    Kick backs.
    Top brass in Indian Military and Civilian IAS officials in MOD are corrupt to core.
     
    aditya10r and darshan978 like this.
  6. cyclops

    cyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    3,645
    Army has already put their foot down.
    Regardless of what's chosen, FICV will only be Indian.

    I understand that we as civilians with a segregated pov want to see less disagreements between the military and the government but the MOD and general politicians who have the power to finally okay the thing aren't always the best at the logistics of a defence procurement.

    IA's main concern seems to be quick induction of FICVs whereas the Defence Ministry seems to want the cheapest option while time frame seems to be a bit down the list, mostly to prevent being dragged into VVIP chopper or Rafale like mess.
    Ever since the Bofors scandal, our polity seems to have become super averse to making fast decisions, they'd rather if the defence deal takes super long and is cheap than fast but costly.
     
  7. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,801
    Likes Received:
    6,901
    I am not talking on the final product. Either way, Make 1 or 2, it would be made in India as of now.

    What I am talking of is apprehension of IA towards Make 2. They should stick to the time frame instead of make category. If OEM could deliver it in Make 2 category in stipulated time frame, then what could be the reason for them not approving it?
     
  8. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,801
    Likes Received:
    6,901
    Now what system is this?

    Screenshot_2019-01-21 Narendra Modi on Twitter.jpg
     
  9. cyclops

    cyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    3,645
    Time is the reason.
    As I said initially, IA believes it will take more time if TATA decides to go into Make-2 at this late a stage.

    Army is justified, they are willing to accept a completely new product from an Indian company that has no experience in making the same, I think the MOD should put its foot down now and listen to IA and think about inducting the FICV quickly and not think about saving money.
     
  10. Bleh

    Bleh Berry member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2017
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    2,837
    Looks like it's a K9 Vajra unfinished hull...
     
    aditya10r, Chinmoy and Aaj ka hero like this.
  11. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,801
    Likes Received:
    6,901
    I agree...... But if TATA could deliver the system within stipulated time frame, IA should have no objection to it. IA is apprehensive about the idea that it would extend the time frame and they should instaed put their foot down on the time line and specs instead of the Make Category.
     
  12. cyclops

    cyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2016
    Messages:
    981
    Likes Received:
    3,645
    Agreed, if that is indeed the case then IA should put their foot down.

    Technically, we don't know that.
    Army might have a legitimate case when they say Make-2 would take a lot of time, and they might have done their due diligence before bringing forth this problem. I really doubt they are saying so for the heck of it.

    After all, what would they gain from delaying the project or specifically wanting Make-1? They have to buy an Indian product, this way or that, also be it Make-1 or Make-2 IA still has to put the money back in India and there is no system that is completely foreign that is allowed to vie for the FICV.
    I mean look at how much time FICV took to be finalized under Make-1.

    Eitherway we don't have enough information to judge who's in the wrong, for all we know it already has been sorted out.
     
  13. Chinmoy

    Chinmoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    4,801
    Likes Received:
    6,901
    Exactly my point. But none of the OEMs has submitted a prototype as of now. So whether we go with Make 1 or 2, the time line is crucial. If any vendor could provide a prototype under any category under the stipulated timeline, no one should have any concern regarding this.
     
  14. Killswitch

    Killswitch Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    70
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    Another critical project that hasnt moved an inch towards induction. There should be prototypes in trials by now.
     
    Mayan and Kay like this.
  15. Hunter ellis

    Hunter ellis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2018
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    27
    Well the name of the project says it all . It'll be inducted in the "FUTURE".
     
    Craigs likes this.
  16. proud_indian

    proud_indian Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    860


    FICV Project Needs to be Moved Under Make I, Says J D PAtil
     
    aditya10r likes this.
  17. Prashant12

    Prashant12 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    12,745
    Location:
    Mumbai
    OF Medak is also working on what it will offer as an entry in the Indian Army's Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) competition. They intend to have their prototype ready by December 2019. Fabrication work on the same is currently underway.





    The Future Infantry Combat Vehicle (FICV) design from Ordnance Factory Medak will have an unmanned turret and an active protection system. Importantly, its hull will have composite armour, with the expectation of better protection at a lower than otherwise weight penalty.


     
    Kay, ezsasa, Bleh and 2 others like this.
  18. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    11,271
    Likes Received:
    25,727
    Location:
    Andhra Pradesh, India
    So this explains why there was no visible movement on FICV, looks like DPSUs wanted time to pitch their product for the competition.

    I am sure if we do some digging, we might find similar delays forced by DPSUs in other procurements. Off top of my head OFB’s 7.62 NATO rifle comes to mind. Only when IA rejected the prototype, the foreign procurement went ahead..
     
    aditya10r and Gessler like this.
  19. G10

    G10 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Messages:
    440
    Likes Received:
    518
    Why always there has to be PSU. Unnecessarily we are losing resources in internal competition. ATAGS was a good project. DRDO helping out private players. Thats the way to go.
     
    darshan978 and Kay like this.
  20. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    11,271
    Likes Received:
    25,727
    Location:
    Andhra Pradesh, India
    DPSUs are our safety net... Scope for Private players will increase definitely, based on their performance from now on. Private players are already involved for manufacturing sub-components , just not as Primary integrators.
    But DPSUs are here to stay....
     
    aditya10r and Kay like this.

Share This Page