DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[vidhwanshak]

 

[flanker99]

 

[Srinie]

Acrylonitrile and carbon fibre plant to be set up by motabhai . Significant news for aerospace sector

 

[HitmanBlood]

New positive list with specific components of many systems.

Adding a long image of list also.
______________________________

Spoiler: Long image

View attachment 169373

We are importing wiper blades and headlights

 

[IndianHawk]

New positive list with specific components of many systems.

Adding a long image of list also.
______________________________

Spoiler: Long image

View attachment 169373

While individually these items look small and insignificant we must look at the scale. We need 1000s such items for thousands of platforms in service/ upcoming. Which may translate into business of billions of dollars for domestic players.

 

[ezsasa]

We are importing wiper blades and headlights

not that they can’t be made here, tender rules gave priority to L1 over domestic production. This is being rectified now.

 

[IndianHawk]

https://www.financialexpress.com/defence/indian-army-gets-future-ready-pushes-for-mechanised-infantry-modernisation/2648447/

BMP 2 upgrade from private sector.

Plus aon for 480 new ficv.

 

[IndianHawk]

Defence exports record Rs 13,000 cr in FY22, to reach Rs 50K cr by 2025

Eight years back, our defence exports were about Rs 800 crore, today we have hit Rs 13,000 crore target by exporting defence items and technology, said Defence minister Rajnath Singh on Saturday.

knnindia.co.in

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Plus aon for 480 new ficv.

That recent FICV RFI for which this AoN has been given is rather weird. Look at the armament they want on that thing:-

• 30mm autocannon
• 7.62mm coax
• RCWS with 30mm AGL
• 4 Ready to fire 3rd gen ATGM.
• Loitering Munition
• UAV with automatic, dust proof docking bay

How does one fit all this on one puny 25 ton chassis? I mean look at the following BMP-2 with two loitering munition launchers. Where is the space?

On top of it all, they also want emergency escape hatches to go through the unmanned turret. Oh well, at least they eliminated the firing ports on the sides and asked for a single firing port at the rear door.

One good news though: It says WhAP for Mechanized Infantry outside of the BRDM-2 replacement. Which means Army are planning to raise wheeled Mech Inf Battalions (and not just field WhAP as part of Recce and Support Battalions, as was originally believed to be the case). Lets just hope they don't regressively start converting tracked Mech Inf Battalions to wheeled ones. We should expand Mech Infantry, maybe even consider converting one of the Light Infantry Regiments to Wheeled Mech Inf Regt.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

That recent FICV RFI for which this AoN has been given is rather weird. Look at the armament they want on that thing:-

• 30mm autocannon
• 7.62mm coax
• RCWS with 30mm AGL
• 4 Ready to fire 3rd gen ATGM.
• Loitering Munition
• UAV with automatic, dust proof docking bay

How does one fit all this on one puny 25 ton chassis? I mean look at the following BMP-2 with two loitering munition launchers. Where is the space?


View attachment 169533

On top of it all, they also want emergency escape hatches to go through the unmanned turret. Oh well, at least they eliminated the firing ports on the sides and asked for a single firing port at the rear door.

One good news though: It says WhAP for Mechanized Infantry outside of the BRDM-2 replacement. Which means Army are planning to raise wheeled Mech Inf Battalions (and not just field WhAP as part of Recce and Support Battalions, as was originally believed to be the case). Lets just hope they don't regressively start converting tracked Mech Inf Battalions to wheeled ones. We should expand Mech Infantry, maybe even consider converting one of the Light Infantry Regiments to Wheeled Mech Inf Regt.

Doesn't the recent tender of drdo FICV design fulfil all the requirements.

There are all things present- 4 atgm ready to fire, rcws hmg can be swapped with 30mm AGL as both have right side feed.
There are 3 variants of FICV required- infantry carrier, recon and command.
Atgm tubes can be replaced with loitering munitions tube, though a new loitering munition has to be designed to fit the dimensions, pretty doable.
In variants where infantry are not required in cargo area can be converted for drone operations, enough space for that.

Actually, with this one, drdo has pretty much met all the requirement. Addition of APS will also provide radars which can also detect mini uavs and the rcws can be slaved to shoot them, so you have your personal Anti drone system too.
Now, even so if army do nilly-willy with drdo FICV and lust for videshi maal, only God can save us, for notice, no videshi maal has all the things IA requires.

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Doesn't the recent tender of drdo FICV design fulfil all the requirements.View attachment 169548
There are all things present- 4 atgm ready to fire, rcws hmg can be swapped with 30mm AGL as both have right side feed.
There are 3 variants of FICV required- infantry carrier, recon and command.
Atgm tubes can be replaced with loitering munitions tube, though a new loitering munition has to be designed to fit the dimensions, pretty doable.
In variants where infantry are not required in cargo area can be converted for drone operations, enough space for that.

Actually, with this one, drdo has pretty much met all the requirement. Addition of APS will also provide radars which can also detect mini uavs and the rcws can be slaved to shoot them, so you have your personal Anti drone system too.
Now, even so if army do nilly-willy with drdo FICV and lust for videshi maal, only God can save us, for notice, no videshi maal has all the things IA requires.

Problem is that IA wants all three: four ATGM launchers, a drone dock and a loitering munition on the troop carrier version. At least that is what I gleaned from the RFI.

 

[Akula]

Problem is that IA wants all three: four ATGM launchers, a drone dock and a loitering munition on the troop carrier version. At least that is what I gleaned from the RFI.

That's global players take Indian requirements as joke.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Problem is that IA wants all three: four ATGM launchers, a drone dock and a loitering munition on the troop carrier version. At least that is what I gleaned from the RFI.

Nah, read again. Just assume 2 atgms as reloads inside vehicle and you'll have the idea of ready to fire atgms+ loitering munitions required.
So, gun version-> 4 atgm launchers
Command and other version-> 2 atgm launchers+2loitering muniton tubes
And in versions with 4 less passengers, other things can be stored as required. Drdo design has 2 launch tubes on both sides of turret, totalling 4.

I was also sceptical about this requirement but DRDO design seems to fulfil everything, so I guess all cool on indigenous side.

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Nah, read again. Just assume 2 atgms as reloads inside vehicle and you'll have the idea of ready to fire atgms+ loitering munitions required.
So, gun version-> 4 atgm launchers
Command and other version-> 2 atgm launchers+2loitering muniton tubes
And in versions with 4 less passengers, other things can be stored as required. Drdo design has 2 launch tubes on both sides of turret, totalling 4.
View attachment 169552

View attachment 169551

Thanks it makes a lot more sense now. I misread the text written earlier in the document and didn't read this part.

Even so, FICV will need to be larger than BMP-2 to have a chance at fitting all this in. DRDO FICV is longer than BMP-2, though, seems like it will fit. How much does the DRDO FICV weigh? 20.8 tons would be the limit with a 700 HP engine (which DRDO is making for FICV). Assuming 30 hp/ton requirement as stated in RFI.

If DRDO FICV can't fit in this 20.8 tons weight limit, it will have to get a bigger engine or Army will reject it. And I am not even considering the electric needs right now.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Thanks it makes a lot more sense now. I misread the text written earlier in the document and didn't read this part.

Even so, FICV will need to be larger than BMP-2 to have a chance at fitting all this in. DRDO FICV is longer than BMP-2, though, seems like it will fit. How much does the DRDO FICV weigh? 20.8 tons would be the limit with a 700 HP engine (which DRDO is making for FICV). Assuming 30 hp/ton requirement as stated in RFI.

If DRDO FICV can't fit in this 20.8 tons weight limit, it will have to get a bigger engine or Army will reject it. And I am not even considering the electric needs right now.

Drdo is developing 2 engines for armoured vehicles which I know if:- 1500hp and 750hp.
So, a 750hp engine with 30hp/ton would give a weight of 25 tons. The number 25tons has very special thing in IA heart coz they want everything to be amphibious. Current status of engine is unknown to me.

Whap has 600hp Cummins engine, i think that too might be replaced by this 750hp engine since indigenous and will give enhance performance to Whap.

Turret developed for drdo FICV will also be tested on Whap. So, your idea of Wheeled ICV in mech infantry is true, don't know if it will be a complementary or an alternative.

DRDO will be using ultra high strength steel and add on armour but I don't know how much armour value can be beefed up.
Bmp2 has been pretty much massacared due to its paper thin armour. Even Pkm ap bullets on side were piercing it. I hope enough protection is provided somehow.

I have just one question about IA obsession with amphibious capabilities, in Ukraine conflict I haven't heard much of bmp or btr river crossing operations so I am not entirely sure if concept of amphibious assault through FICV is really that much important. And the western forces are going towards heavier IFVs like lynx which almost weigh as much as T 72.

Well, kurganets-25 is a big ifv and weighs 27.5tons with add on ERA so i think a decent protection is possible with 25 tons requirement.
IMO IA should give a breather to requirement and cap the weight at 30 tons for more jiggle room

 

[Arjun Mk1A]

Drdo is developing 2 engines for armoured vehicles which I know if:- 1500hp and 750hp.
So, a 750hp engine with 30hp/ton would give a weight of 25 tons. The number 25tons has very special thing in IA heart coz they want everything to be amphibious. Current status of engine is unknown to me.

Whap has 600hp Cummins engine, i think that too might be replaced by this 750hp engine since indigenous and will give enhance performance to Whap.

Turret developed for drdo FICV will also be tested on Whap. So, your idea of Wheeled ICV in mech infantry is true, don't know if it will be a complementary or an alternative.

DRDO will be using ultra high strength steel and add on armour but I don't know how much armour value can be beefed up.
Bmp2 has been pretty much massacared due to its paper thin armour. Even Pkm ap bullets on side were piercing it. I hope enough protection is provided somehow.

I have just one question about IA obsession with amphibious capabilities, in Ukraine conflict I haven't heard much of bmp or btr river crossing operations so I am not entirely sure if concept of amphibious assault through FICV is really that much important. And the western forces are going towards heavier IFVs like lynx which almost weigh as much as T 72.

Well, kurganets-25 is a big ifv and weighs 25tons so i think a decent protection is possible with 25 tons requirement.View attachment 169562

You don't need to compare with Ukr- Russian war. Western sector especially Rajasthan and Punjab have lot of canals thus IA wants amphibious IFV for faster mobility. Heavier IFV may force to deploy Bridges thus there will be a time delay.

This is one big reason.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

You don't need to compare with Ukr- Russian war. Western sector especially Rajasthan and Punjab have lot of canals thus IA wants amphibious IFV for faster mobility. Heavier IFV may force to deploy Bridges thus there will be a time delay.

This is a one big reason.

Theoretically yes but performance of Russian ICVs for such operation in Ukraine doesn't instill confidence. Pakistan is many times more powerful than Ukraine and expect to see mini uavs and loitering strikes by Pak. So is it really worth it at the expense of armour.
It's not like mech infantry will charge alone after crossing rivers, bridges will have to be laid to make way for tanks.
There should be a mix of amphibious IFVs and heavier IFVs.
Maybe a heavier IFV variant may come out of FRCV platform

 

[Arjun Mk1A]

Theoretically yes but performance of Russian ICVs for such operation in Ukraine doesn't instill confidence. Pakistan is many times more powerful than Ukraine and expect to see mini uavs and loitering strikes by Pak. So is it really worth it at the expense of armour.
It's not like mech infantry will charge alone after crossing rivers, bridges will have to be laid to make way for tanks.
There should be a mix of amphibious IFVs and heavier IFVs.
Maybe a heavier IFV variant may come out of FRCV platform

Heavy IFV is something Israel using it for long time from Modified Centurion to Namer. But no army is using them except Israel even US army uses M2 and M3 which weighs in 25-30 tonnes.

Another one is T-14 based Heavy IFV but Russia does not sufficient fund to produce it. But at least our IFV will have anti-drone capability for now.

Maybe in future we may have to develop the heavy IFV if situation demands

 

[omaebakabaka]

Theoretically yes but performance of Russian ICVs for such operation in Ukraine doesn't instill confidence. Pakistan is many times more powerful than Ukraine and expect to see mini uavs and loitering strikes by Pak. So is it really worth it at the expense of armour.
It's not like mech infantry will charge alone after crossing rivers, bridges will have to be laid to make way for tanks.
There should be a mix of amphibious IFVs and heavier IFVs.
Maybe a heavier IFV variant may come out of FRCV platform

You can't be serious in that Pakis are more powerful than Ukrainians? Ukrops may be stupid to become cannon fodder but they are putting valiant front vs pakis who would surrender in similar scenario. Both seem to have same cowardice to hide behind civilians, all cowards are basically same. Russia is not using their most modern stuff when it comes to ground warfare, mostly 70's soviet stuff. IA is asking too much....except for one or two IFV's, there aren't that many that will qualify their requirements. This feels like a trap so they can import stuff

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Drdo is developing 2 engines for armoured vehicles which I know if:- 1500hp and 750hp.
So, a 750hp engine with 30hp/ton would give a weight of 25 tons. The number 25tons has very special thing in IA heart coz they want everything to be amphibious. Current status of engine is unknown to me.

Whap has 600hp Cummins engine, i think that too might be replaced by this 750hp engine since indigenous and will give enhance performance to Whap.

Turret developed for drdo FICV will also be tested on Whap. So, your idea of Wheeled ICV in mech infantry is true, don't know if it will be a complementary or an alternative.

DRDO will be using ultra high strength steel and add on armour but I don't know how much armour value can be beefed up.
Bmp2 has been pretty much massacared due to its paper thin armour. Even Pkm ap bullets on side were piercing it. I hope enough protection is provided somehow.

I have just one question about IA obsession with amphibious capabilities, in Ukraine conflict I haven't heard much of bmp or btr river crossing operations so I am not entirely sure if concept of amphibious assault through FICV is really that much important. And the western forces are going towards heavier IFVs like lynx which almost weigh as much as T 72.

Well, kurganets-25 is a big ifv and weighs 27.5tons with add on ERA so i think a decent protection is possible with 25 tons requirement.
IMO IA should give a breather to requirement and cap the weight at 30 tons for more jiggle room
View attachment 169562

Not even 25 tons, they want to include 2.5 tons of combat load weight in the gross weight and then have 30HP/ton. So with 750 hp engine, 25 ton will be the maximum permissible gross weight. Take away 2.5 tons of combat load and the FICV can not exceed 22.5 tons empty.
As for protection, Army's standards dictate STANAG level 4 all round and STANAG level 5 (upgradable to level 6 with modular armour plates) for the frontal armour. With APS, such protection levels are rather formidable. I hope its achievable within weight limit with learnings from Arjun Mk2 weight reduction efforts, such as use of High Nitrogen Steel and Rubber Composite Wheels. But 22.5 tons is a tough weight limit.

I do agree that IA should also look at a heavy, Namer-like IFV based on FRCV or whatever new tank program they finally implement. Would serve us well in urban areas and since our doctrine supposedly calls for fighting near urban areas, the need becomes even more urgent. But FICV needs to be amphibious. In river and canal crossing ops, its important to first secure a bridgehead on the other bank before you start building a bridge. Mech Inf Battalions can work to secure bridgeheads.
Also, as a commander, our side should be able to seize the initiative even if enemy is across the canal/river. So having the flexibility to be able to send IFVs out to manuever past the river/canal without having to wait for an entire bridging operation sounds good to me. Sure, without tanks and combined arms support, there are limits to what such a sortie can try to achieve, but in war, its all about being audacious and seizing the initiative. A few small groups crossing at a few different points without needing a bridge and using hit and run on enemy targets of opportunity is an important capability, not only for Recce battalions but for most of the Mech Inf. Without this capability, we can only deploy light infantry or airborne on Force LSV for such tasks.
In fact, not having amphibious capability in our IFVs makes enemy commander confident that mechanized attack won't come without a bridgehead, which greatly simplifies his task. I don't want any Pakistani commander to feel that confident when fighting India. There should be "darr ka mahaul"