Livefist: COLUMN: MMRCA, The Right Choice For The Wrong Reasons
Its DRDO's fault if it gets delayed beyond the 2020 deadline for production models , even though it has no GSQR as of today not even the PSQR , and it wont have the GSQR.
When DRDO says they can have the prototype ready by 2017, then it is their duty to deliver. DRDO says they will finalize the design in 2013 and field the first prototype by 2017. If the GSQR is delayed from the army's side, then the time line is obviously adjusted. For eg: If the GSQR states a prototype trial is required in 7 years and if the army gives the GSQR in 2012, then it is obvious the prototype should be ready in 2019. If DRDO takes longer than 2019, then it is DRDO's fault.
The Army has never made unrealistic demands. But DRDO has failed to live up to the Army's expectations.
For eg: Look at HAL. They are an example of how LM or Boeing work. They always promise less, but deliver more. When ALH came, it surpassed GSQR. When LCH came, it received concrete orders from the IAF the minute a second prototype took to the air. Even though the ALH and LCH still use foreign made parts, HAL never denied they will not do so. They never made empty promises, they always delivered on the promises they made. They consistently claimed there are things they cannot do and will require foreign help in electronics and other aspects. But then they also say they will reduce foreign dependency over time which is currently happening.
When LCA's second prototype took to the air, the Air Force was still laughing. Comparatively the MKI has been a huge success. This was something handled well by HAL and therefore, they were the ones who were selected for the PAKFA JV. HAL delivers, no critic will say otherwise. But it is not the same with DRDO. All through the history of DRDO, it is DRDO which has delayed the project by many years for whatever reasons.
If the F-35B fails to achieve it's objectives, then the Marines will cancel the project as fast as a a donkey runs when he sees red hot tongs. They will not hesitate. Our Army has been accommodating of DRDO's wishes, to the point where the Army is inducting Arjuns which will never form part of their offensive corps.
FMBT has already been delayed and its not DRDO's fault and this is concerning. I am legitimately concerned the GSQR will not be up to scrap and DRDO would be trying to develop a tank the army will inevitably not want
We don't know if FMBT has been delayed or not. We are judging this with just one article. The article maintains the GSQR has been delayed by 6 months. But how are we to know that without official confirmation? This isn't 20 years down the line when we have a better picture. All of this is happening now and we will not know for many more years on what is happening with the FMBT.
In the article you yourself posted, there is something that is of great importance that has always been conveniently been forgotten and which the good Admiral highlights;
Livefist: COLUMN: MMRCA, The Right Choice For The Wrong Reasons
The MoD has neither the expertise nor the inclination to call for professional studies regarding national security issues. Therefore no critical examination or cost-benefit analysis has ever been undertaken on (for example) the continuing future relevance of weapon-systems such as battle-tanks, aircraft-carriers or short-range ballistic missiles in the Indian context, or the impact of an anti-ballistic missile defence system on deterrence stability. In such a scenario all wish-lists from the Services (and DRDO) become sacrosanct and, eventually, receive MoD approval.
This is of such great critical importance that it is impossible to ignore. All top militaries do this and India is now one among those top militaries. We currently have an admiral who has questioned the relevance of battle tanks, and this is something a lot of countries like the US and Russia have studied. We don't really know what they are planning, but one thing is for sure, the first time hostilities are started the Americans will send in their BCTs and tanks will follow much later depending on the feasibility of deploying tanks.
What I have stated still stands. Battle tanks can be picked up by aircraft from many kilometres and engaged with deadly force. With armoured groups as they are today, it will be a massacre. We are currently seeing that in Libya. NATO has already announced hundreds of vehicles have been destroyed in the first week of the war alone, these include tanks. The numbers stand at over 100 tanks destroyed followed by another 100 APCs and IFVs with air strikes alone.
You sound like glen beck :|
Sorry but Hitler compressions on any thing always piss's me off.
Unfortunately I don't understand the metaphor.
Hitler is a typical example of how his ego and pride did not allow him to listen to better men when it came to war and thus made grave mistakes in the German plans that ultimately led to his downfall. So, I don't understand why that should piss you off.
. Hope they dont run to MoD to force IA to buy their products after 10 years .
