DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

[Azaad]

So, guys I just noticed somethingView attachment 232280View attachment 232281

Both stabilisation platforms are exactly the same. Apparently such things have to be screwdrivergiri as well. Why design our own stuff when we can 🪛. And here I thought Kalyani was any different. Its just a mix of mandus+elbit+Gcn gun factory bought and mashed up screwdrivergiri. And when they try to make somethin of their own, it looks fu*kin atrocious and highly screwed design.

Man, these big Indian companies are really look brain-dead sometimes. Just salivating after money while not really interested in any kind of design and development effort.

Tell me if any decent private designed major product came out of these companies other than Mahindra UAE branch which made armado ALSV. Hopefully they will learn something from their UAE branch.

I hate GOI trying to give contracts to these companies rather than the ones who really put their money on the line and design and develop systems.
DRDO should seriously considering giving ToT to only deserving firms.
Only if we reward those simple to honest R&D doing companies and not try to woo companies who are hell bent on assembling MRFA while at the same time getting sh*t scared of AMCA/TEDBF/Tejasmk2 assembly proposals.

I am telling you, hope C295 to TASL doesn't comes out in another list of failed opportunities.

Woo Indian companies to defense field they said, it will really bring true indigenous products they said.

Basically most of the prominent howitzers in operation around the world today among OEMs viz Denel , Soltam or countries fielding howitzers as diverse as China & Israel owes itself to the Gerald Bull designed GC-45 & his ERFB ammo including Noricum the former Austrian based howitzer mfg co which was bought lock stock & barrel by Kalyani along with the patents & designs it owned which found its way into the ATAGS , Bharat -52 etc.

Kalyani isn't doing anything out of the ordinary as in trying to re invent the wheel . All they've to do is continuously work on iterations to better their designs like all armament cos across the world have been / is undertaking . That's the only way you refine your designs & every now & then come with a break thorough.

They've been at the job for slightly over a decade & so far have come up with good results. The aesthetics & functionality as well as the final finished product leaves something to be desired. For perspective one can always compare the Archer to our MGS bearing in mind that AB Bofors now a part of BAe has been in the business for 350 yrs mfg the arms & armaments as compared to Kalyani.

Give them a decade or two they'd be among the top 3 globally in this biz.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Basically most of the prominent howitzers in operation around the world today among OEMs viz Denel , Soltam or countries fielding howitzers as diverse as China & Israel owes itself to the Gerald Bull designed GC-45 & his ERFB ammo including Noricum the former Austrian based howitzer mfg co which was bought lock stock & barrel by Kalyani along with the patents & designs it owned which found its way into the ATAGS , Bharat -52 etc.

Kalyani isn't doing anything out of the ordinary as in trying to re invent the wheel . All they've to do is continuously work on iterations to better their designs like all armament cos across the world have been / is undertaking . That's the only way you refine your designs & every now & then come with a break thorough.

They've been at the job for slightly over a decade & so far have come up with good results. The aesthetics & functionality as well as the final finished product leaves something to be desired. For perspective one can always compare the Archer to our MGS bearing in mind that AB Bofors now a part of BAe has been in the business for 350 yrs mfg the arms & armaments as compared to Kalyani.

Give them a decade or two they'd be among the top 3 globally in this biz.

Hope so you are right.
One thing though, comparing our MGS to Archer is like comparing it to K9. Archer is basically a automatic turret on back of a truck while our MGS is a much cheaper option which is a whole different class of SPH.

A common turret can be developed for both a tracked SPH and a Archer class SPH by Drdo if the user demands so. But then again it will be heavier and expensive.

 

[Blood+]

This data is from the horse's mouth,ie from the actual user manual of VT-4 for Thai Army.

Pakistan is currently license producing this MBT at Taxila as Al Haidar. It's their latest and Pakis say it's evern better than their T-80.

View attachment 232310

Here is the data on armour protection of the VT-4.

View attachment 232309

Max LOS thickness of hull armour = 670 mm RHA

Max LOS thickness of turret armour = 634 mm RHA


Against HEAT, the base armour offers 750 mm protection and the corresponding figure for FSAPDS is 550 mm.

According to the manual, the ERA FY- II offers an additional >750 mm RHA against FSAPDS which is just impossible since this era module is only 35 mm thick.



View attachment 232311

Our indigenous 125 mm mk1 has a DOP of 500 mm RHA.

A 120 mm FSAPDS mk2 with a DOP of 550 mm was in user trials as of 2017. Don't know it's status now.

View attachment 232312

So, we any KE penetrator with 550 mm+(max 150 mm for ERA) dop figures can punch through the frontal turret armour of VT-4.

Both our Arjun and T-90S have much higher RHA figures for both the upper glacis and turret based armour. ERA figures are extra.

Typical of Chinese MBTs - comparatively weak armor protection but excellent electronics and decent ammo.

 

[binayak95]

Typical of Chinese MBTs - comparatively weak armor protection but excellent electronics and decent ammo.

See first, kill first. Those electronics are a worry.

 

[Chinmoy]

Don't know if this was posted before but here it is------ Second List Systems and Subsystems for Industry to Design, Development and Manufacture

https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/inline-files/SLoSaSfItDDaMP.pdf

This is from this link------ https://www.drdo.gov.in/systems-and-subsystems-industry-design-development-and-manufacture
Here are the screenshotsView attachment 232275View attachment 232276View attachment 232277

Tank based artillery gun caught my attention.
So, will drdo after mgs programme not develop a fully automated turret for tracked vehicles? Although that should be the logical next step for complete atmanirbhartaa.

DRDO should not have got involved in design of the gun in first place.
But now, since the gun has been developed, manufacturers should invest in mating it with suitable platform. Else what are they there for?

 

[Chinmoy]

So, guys I just noticed somethingView attachment 232280View attachment 232281

Both stabilisation platforms are exactly the same. Apparently such things have to be screwdrivergiri as well. Why design our own stuff when we can 🪛. And here I thought Kalyani was any different. Its just a mix of mandus+elbit+Gcn gun factory bought and mashed up screwdrivergiri. And when they try to make somethin of their own, it looks fu*kin atrocious and highly screwed design.

Man, these big Indian companies are really look brain-dead sometimes. Just salivating after money while not really interested in any kind of design and development effort.

Tell me if any decent private designed major product came out of these companies other than Mahindra UAE branch which made armado ALSV. Hopefully they will learn something from their UAE branch.

I hate GOI trying to give contracts to these companies rather than the ones who really put their money on the line and design and develop systems.
DRDO should seriously considering giving ToT to only deserving firms.
Only if we reward those simple to honest R&D doing companies and not try to woo companies who are hell bent on assembling MRFA while at the same time getting sh*t scared of AMCA/TEDBF/Tejasmk2 assembly proposals.

I am telling you, hope C295 to TASL doesn't comes out in another list of failed opportunities.

Woo Indian companies to defense field they said, it will really bring true indigenous products they said.

I always maintained this, "Kalyani is Raj Kapoor of Indian MIC".

 

[shiphone]

According to the manual, the ERA FY- II offers an additional >750 mm RHA against FSAPDS which is just impossible since this era module is only 35 mm thick.

Base armour + FY-2 ERA offer the '750mm RHA against FSAPDS '/'1300mm RHA against HEAT' level protection... this is the front protection upper limit of Thailand Army VT-4....around 10 years ago, the chief designer had given this figure...lol

PA's VT-4 was offered with FY-4 ERA which means the upper limit would be higher.

 

[AnantS]

I always maintained this, "Kalyani is Raj Kapoor of Indian MIC".

you mean they are all show and nothing substance ?
more details please.


Indian industry was given independence to design or develop their own artillery while allowing collab with foreign vendors. Because Indian industry was first time foraying into same. Tata and Kalyani invested into same. Both bought rights for Gerard Bull based guns. Tata went for Denel GC 45 and Kalyani I believe went with Soltam based. In addition to Soltam they had JV with Mandus for light artillery. You have to give accolades to Kalyani they atleast invested in bringing something in field of Light Artillery - even when not explicitly mandated to do so.

These companies first couple of rounds of vehicles shall be licensed produced or mix and match products - till they generate enough funds for streamlined R&D in collab'ing with DRDO. I am sorry to say but none of the pvt Indian Industry is geared to turn their hired engineers to weapon developers. DRDO spends lot of money making their recruits in specific field academics - before they are slowly bought into practical work. Pvt shall not only need to hire experienced DRDO or from elsewhere researchers & developers - but also need to invest lot into infra development for research and sustained development.
And for the Latter they shall need to win massive contracts for their JV products and partial Govt funds injection(esp in shared goal oriented research and development)

 

[Arihant Roy]

Typical of Chinese MBTs - comparatively weak armor protection but excellent electronics and decent ammo.

Even their electronics - FCS , sights etc are average at best . Nothing to be worried about.

Here are some pages from the user manual.

First round hit probability is only 68 percent.

Both Arjun mk1 and mk1A have better vectronics , sights and FCS compared to VT-4.

Our T-90S is only lacking the automatic target tracker . Once it is introduced across the fleet, it will usher in true hunter killer capability for our Bhismas.

 

[Blood+]

Even their electronics - FCS , sights etc are average at best . Nothing to be worried about.

Here are some pages from the user manual.

View attachment 232352

View attachment 232353

First round hit probability is only 68 percent.

View attachment 232354

View attachment 232355

Both Arjun mk1 and mk1A have better vectronics , sights and FCS compared to VT-4.

Our T-90S is only lacking the automatic target tracker . Once it is introduced across the fleet, it will usher in true hunter killer capability for our Bhismas.

Plus a CITV.

 

[binayak95]

Plus a CITV.

Not just a CITV, you need a multi cam near 360 degree awareness with a VR headset in all honesty. the BMP 2 AJna project is promising.

 

[Blood+]

Base armour + FY-2 ERA offer the '750mm RHA against FSAPDS '/'1300mm RHA against HEAT' level protection... this is the front protection upper limit of Thailand Army VT-4....around 10 years ago, the chief designer had given this figure...lol

PA's VT-4 was offered with FY-4 ERA which means the upper limit would be higher.

True but both Arjun and T-90S base armor provides a higher level of RHAe equivalent not including the ERA tiles.

 

[Blood+]

Not just a CITV, you need a multi cam near 360 degree awareness with a VR headset in all honesty. the BMP 2 AJna project is promising.

True, the see-through armor system.

 

[shiphone]

LOL...the real world might be much different from your so called 'thinking'/ 'cognition' especially about the 'figures'...

Export projects are very interesting and helpful for some understanding.

 

[AnantS]

LOL...the real world might be much different from your so called 'thinking'/ ;cognition' especially the 'figures'...

Export projects are very interesting and helpful for some understanding.

Yes Xinese tanks have heavy duty LOL armor and ultimate LOL power-packed and superior g Lolified electronics which makes enemy tanks ROFL. Truly lethal LoLerior Xinese tanks.

 

[Arihant Roy]

Base armour + FY-2 ERA offer the '750mm RHA against FSAPDS '/'1300mm RHA against HEAT' level protection... this is the front protection upper limit of Thailand Army VT-4....around 10 years ago, the chief designer had given this figure...lol

PA's VT-4 was offered with FY-4 ERA which means the upper limit would be higher.

The data on FY-2 is vogus .

There is no way in hell that a 35 mm thick ERA provides 550 mm RHA protection against HEAT rounds.

And even the 750 mm RHA against FSAPDS is blatantly false. FY-IV is said to be comparable in performance to Kontakt 5. K5 offers a protection of only 140-160 mm RHA against FSAPDS. It is described in a chinese service manual as being equivalent to 180mm of RHA vs APFSDS (manual says "30 percent of reduction of APFSDS capable of penetrating 600mm").

So FY-2 will in all probability have even more inferior protection figures.

Even with FY-4 + based armour, Paki Al Haiders have 550+180 = 730 mm RHA protection against FSAPDS which is much less than the base armour protection figures of T-90S. The later tranches made from raw material stage has import substituted steel developed by DRDO. Upwards of 300 BHN. Plus indigenous Kanchan composite filler. Has even higher protection than the earlier T-90A and S with cast turrets imported from UVZ.
@Blood+

 

[Blood+]

LOL...the real world might be much different from your so called 'thinking'/ 'cognition' especially about the 'figures'...

Export projects are very interesting and helpful for some understanding.

Sure, while we don't know about the exact materials that goes into the armor array and therefore, their true properties, certain things like the LOS thickness of the armor can be estimated quite accurately by simply examining photographs of the tanks, if one knows what and where to look for.
Anyway, in the case of VT-4, we don't even need to speculate since we have got official documentation available to us.
And ~640 mm at 0 degrees is, dare I say, quite underwhelming and I'm being modest here.
For comparison, here's a turret armor schematics of the T-90S released by the manufacturers - the Uralvagonzavod:

As you can see, even the thinnest section of the turret armor is thicker than the thickest section in VT-4. So, on that account alone, we can conclude the protection level of T-90S to be higher than that of VT-4. Plus, VT-4 suffers from the same design weakness as any other Chinese MBTs - a total lack of side protection.

And lastly, if you think my long-ass rant has got anything to do with the origin of the respective MBTs, then you'd be dead wrong. It's just a fact, the same way as VT-4s having better engine and therefore higher mobility, a better vectronics suite as well as better ammo are also objective facts.

 

[Blood+]

The data on FY-2 is vogus .

There is no way in hell that a 35 mm thick ERA provides 550 mm RHA protection against HEAT rounds.

And even the 750 mm RHA against FSAPDS is blatantly false. FY-IV is said to be comparable in performance to Kontakt 5. K5 offers a protection of only 140-160 mm RHA against FSAPDS. It is described in a chinese service manual as being equivalent to 180mm of RHA vs APFSDS (manual says "30 percent of reduction of APFSDS capable of penetrating 600mm").

I believe those figures were meant to be for ERA + base armor and not just the ERA panels alone, perhaps there was some translation error.

So FY-2 will in all probability have even more inferior protection figures.

Yeah.

Even with FY-4 + based armour, Paki Al Haiders have 550+180 = 730 mm RHA protection against FSAPDS which is much less than the base armour protection figures of T-90S.

That's almost a given, yeah. But considering our pathetic APFSDS situation, that is more than adequate.

The later tranches made from raw material stage has import substituted steel developed by DRDO. Upwards of 300 BHN. Plus indigenous Kanchan composite filler. Has even higher protection than the earlier T-90A and S with cast turrets imported from UVZ.
@Blood+

That info might very well be outdated as of now. They were testing a medium hardness steel of ~457 VHN (~425 BHN) as a possible replacement for the 300 VHN RHA plates back in 2015.
Here, check it out -

source - https://www.researchgate.net/public...als_and_Technologies_for_Combat_Platforms#pf4

Has even higher protection than the earlier T-90A and S with cast turrets imported from UVZ.

Sometimes, I feel like it was a blessing that the Russians refused to share the ToT for the armor, lol.

 

[Chinmoy]

you mean they are all show and nothing substance ?
more details please.


Indian industry was given independence to design or develop their own artillery while allowing collab with foreign vendors. Because Indian industry was first time foraying into same. Tata and Kalyani invested into same. Both bought rights for Gerard Bull based guns. Tata went for Denel GC 45 and Kalyani I believe went with Soltam based. In addition to Soltam they had JV with Mandus for light artillery. You have to give accolades to Kalyani they atleast invested in bringing something in field of Light Artillery - even when not explicitly mandated to do so.

These companies first couple of rounds of vehicles shall be licensed produced or mix and match products - till they generate enough funds for streamlined R&D in collab'ing with DRDO. I am sorry to say but none of the pvt Indian Industry is geared to turn their hired engineers to weapon developers. DRDO spends lot of money making their recruits in specific field academics - before they are slowly bought into practical work. Pvt shall not only need to hire experienced DRDO or from elsewhere researchers & developers - but also need to invest lot into infra development for research and sustained development.
And for the Latter they shall need to win massive contracts for their JV products and partial Govt funds injection(esp in shared goal oriented research and development)

I have zero issues with JV. Many of our drone manufacturer are doing JV for which we have given the tag of screwdriver-giri to them.
Mu problem with Kalyani is all in their showmanship which they do for screwdriver job. They do impact negatively. They would market the screwdriver job as if they have done it inhouse. Look at the sentiment in this forum itself. In almost all of their product, 60% product wise is either based on foreign OEM or been brought off-the-shelf. This impacts its sell. But they would show as if its because of MoD or service that they are not getting order.

 

[AnantS]

I have zero issues with JV. Many of our drone manufacturer are doing JV for which we have given the tag of screwdriver-giri to them.
Mu problem with Kalyani is all in their showmanship which they do for screwdriver job. They do impact negatively. They would market the screwdriver job as if they have done it inhouse. Look at the sentiment in this forum itself. In almost all of their product, 60% product wise is either based on foreign OEM or been brought off-the-shelf. This impacts its sell. But they would show as if its because of MoD or service that they are not getting order.

actually from baba kalyani interview it seems they have been positive about new policies. the only thing Kalyani and others have complained long gestation time and uncertainty of requirement around it. Which any business would be because of sunken costs in keeping production line open.