Modernisation of Indian Army Infantry

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
Ambassador
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,123
Likes
40,884
BEL support electronics ONLY ..

BP , Head gear etc is probably MKU ..
 

Ky Loung

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
147
Likes
82
There are many people in such standing committees, who make statements that have no relation with reality. This is not surprising, given that military men come up with unrealistic expectations, like the original requirements of the Arjun tank.



There is no private company that can compete with DRDO. Every private company knows that if they invest in R&D like DRDO, they will go bankrupt.

There is always a loss of revenue in R&D. Failure is part of research. Success is built on failures as well.
India economy will stagnate without privatization. China became an economic power due to privatization. There is no reason India and other countries can't do it.

In regard to military, if India want first class military weapons it needs to disband DRDO and start the painful process of privatization. The result will be better equipments for the Indian military at a cheaper price. It will provide large amount of work of retire military personnel as well as non military citizens. It a win win for India.

In the US with a few exception our military complex is 100% privatize. R&D tax payer money is given to private companies to do R&D. For example Lockheed Martin figure out it was possible to do a Stealth plan with the current technology. They show it to the military and immediately got classified as top secret and R&D tax payer money given to Lockheed Martin to make it possible.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,263
Likes
19,533
India economy will stagnate without privatization. China became an economic power due to privatization. There is no reason India and other countries can't do it.

In regard to military, if India want first class military weapons it needs to disband DRDO and start the painful process of privatization. The result will be better equipments for the Indian military at a cheaper price. It will provide large amount of work of retire military personnel as well as non military citizens. It a win win for India.

In the US with a few exception our military complex is 100% privatize. R&D tax payer money is given to private companies to do R&D. For example Lockheed Martin figure out it was possible to do a Stealth plan with the current technology. They show it to the military and immediately got classified as top secret and R&D tax payer money given to Lockheed Martin to make it possible.
Ok, let's step away from guns, bullets, and tanks.

What about skiis? What about army knives? What about military fatigues? What about optics? Why aren't private companies coming up with products and offering them to the military? Even the high altitude high yield crops have to be developed by DRDO. Name one private company that has achieved half of that?

You are trying to project the US example onto India.

We can speculate what will happen if DRDO is disbanded. I just don't see much of anything happening anytime soon.

Let private companies develop products and we can encourage them, but we need to keep our hands off DRDO. DRDO may only be privatized after one private company proves its mettle that it can match DRDO's expertise in at least a subset of fields.
 

DingDong

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
2,511
Likes
4,481
Country flag
Ok, let's step away from guns, bullets, and tanks.

What about skiis? What about army knives? What about military fatigues? What about optics? Why aren't private companies coming up with products and offering them to the military? Even the high altitude high yield crops have to be developed by DRDO. Name one private company that has achieved half of that?

You are trying to project the US example onto India.

We can speculate what will happen in DRDO is disbanded. I just don't see much of anything happening anytime soon.

Let private companies develop products and we can encourage them, but we need to keep our hands off DRDO. DRDO may only be privatized after one private company proves its mettle that it can match DRDO's expertise in at least a subset of fields.
Let me tell you three reasons why Private Companies don't do it:

A. The average incubation period before a defence contractor (doing something valuable) starts generating good profit is around 10 years (worldwide). A private company needs to remain afloat eating up it's own resource for that duration. No VC or incubation fund is available to keep the start-ups afloat for such long duration, not in India.

B. The oldies like Reliance, TATA don't give a damn about R&D and IP creation, these companies are traders. Most of the large defence contractors further subcontract to smaller companies at almost zero margin and keep the profit for themselves. Even organizations like DRDO break-up and subcontract their projects, but many of these projects go nowhere because of the shoestring budget. Because of budgetary constraints the real developers fail to hire good people for the job, while the overpaid people in the chain make absolutely zero contribution.

C. It is almost impossible for smaller companies to reach the decision makers directly. Artificial entry barriers have been erected because this situation is profitable for politicians, officials and large industrialists.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,133
Likes
23,789
India economy will stagnate without privatization. China became an economic power due to privatization. There is no reason India and other countries can't do it.

In regard to military, if India want first class military weapons it needs to disband DRDO and start the painful process of privatization. The result will be better equipments for the Indian military at a cheaper price. It will provide large amount of work of retire military personnel as well as non military citizens. It a win win for India.

In the US with a few exception our military complex is 100% privatize. R&D tax payer money is given to private companies to do R&D. For example Lockheed Martin figure out it was possible to do a Stealth plan with the current technology. They show it to the military and immediately got classified as top secret and R&D tax payer money given to Lockheed Martin to make it possible.
The concept of governance in our democracy is way different from the US concept of democracy, where the individual is on a free wheeling trip and little concern there is for social justice and equality. It is good in a way for it encourages individualism and the self being the sole engine of his future and well being.

That is not the ethos of Indian democracy. India, having emerged from colonialism where the fruits of the nation was funnelled for British interest, the Indians were never allowed to grow or share the fruit in a constructive way. And during the Colonial times, the British had ingrained the "Mai Baap" culture, namely, the British were the Provider and the Sole Authority to look up to for everything and the Indian were the beneficiary of the crumbs thrown their way.

Thus, on gaining Independence, the wealth, whatever India inherited, was with the Govt and not the Individual.

In that inherited culture, India gained Independence.

The wealth that India inherited was with the Govt. Hence, the Govt became the 'Mai Baap'. There was very little scope for capitalist form of economy, Hence, the sole option was a mixed economy with the major share to put up the building blocks of the Nation was with the Govt.

Thus, all major endeavours in building infrastructure, development, research, cash intensive development were all undertaken by the Govt, as the private entrepreneurs did not have the capital to undertake such cash intensive projects.

DRDO is one such institution that the Govt perforce had to undertake. DRDO has built up expertise and are capable of delivery if only they shake themselves off from the typical Govt bureaucratic approach and is made accountable, and hired and fired as per performance. Disbanding DRDO and laving it sole with the private industry would be counterproductive. The answer is joint ventures with the Govt being the major funder to engine the industry. Also, if the private industry can obtain foreign partners with proven track record, they would also be able to feed the defence requirements. That is why the FDI in Defence has been hiked to a very satisfactory level.

Thus, the sum total would be that with the DRDO revamped, the private industry in collaboration with foreign partners would be a win win in all ways, economic as also employment. It is when such a situation comes to be, will the Govt give money to the Private industry for R&D.

In fact, the recommendation is that once the private industry matures and is established, DRDO would become something like DARPA (Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency).
 

sgarg

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,480
Likes
981
The need is for government to exit manufacturing. R&D, education etc. are appropriate for government sector.

OFB must be corporatized first, and private sector needs to be given several projects. Even some R&D projects should be given to private sector. However it is necessary that government funds R&D projects given to private sector.

Nobody will do things for free.
 

Sameet Pattnaik

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
123
Likes
36
The need is for government to exit manufacturing. R&D, education etc. are appropriate for government sector.

OFB must be corporatized first, and private sector needs to be given several projects. Even some R&D projects should be given to private sector. However it is necessary that government funds R&D projects given to private sector.

Nobody will do things for free.
still OBF is not incorporated no wonder there is no one to bother about there ! heck with the babus !
 

jouni

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
3,900
Likes
1,137
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/world/europe/21finland.html?referrer=

http://www.fibrotex-tech.com/node/201

Finnish Military Suspects Russia Copied M05 Camouflage Pattern
(Source: STT Finnish government news; issued Nov. 11, 2008)

The Finnish Defence Forces are investigating what they suspect is unauthorised copying of the M05 camouflage pattern by the Russian military, Finnish business daily Taloussanomat reported on its website Tuesday.

The M05 battledress pattern is a protected design.

According to Taloussanomat, a pattern bearing striking resemblance to the M05 had been seen in Russia's Yeger battledress in news footage.

Raija Ketola of the Finnish Defence Force's quartermaster depot was quoted as saying by Taloussanomat that the issue would be raised with the Russian authorities if need be.



 
Last edited:

SafedSagar

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Messages
195
Likes
169
Country flag
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/world/europe/21finland.html?referrer=

http://www.fibrotex-tech.com/node/201

Finnish Military Suspects Russia Copied M05 Camouflage Pattern
(Source: STT Finnish government news; issued Nov. 11, 2008)

The Finnish Defence Forces are investigating what they suspect is unauthorised copying of the M05 camouflage pattern by the Russian military, Finnish business daily Taloussanomat reported on its website Tuesday.

The M05 battledress pattern is a protected design.

According to Taloussanomat, a pattern bearing striking resemblance to the M05 had been seen in Russia's Yeger battledress in news footage.

Raija Ketola of the Finnish Defence Force's quartermaster depot was quoted as saying by Taloussanomat that the issue would be raised with the Russian authorities if need be.



......................................
Can you f*cking read?
 

SPIEZ

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
3,508
Likes
1,020
Country flag
In my humble opinion, one should customize it with twigs and leaves or just about something else from the surrounding.

This joke probably sums my opinion up.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Kay

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,157
Likes
12,184
World-Class Body Armour Made in India. But Our Cops Do Without.

Last Monday, Baljit Singh, a brave Punjab police officer dared three terrorists who had entered the police station in Gurdaspur to come out and face him man to man.

Within minutes, Mr Singh was dead. He took a bullet to the head.

He was wearing neither a helmet nor an Indian Army innovation called the bulletproof patka, that gives Sikh men limited protection from gunfire.

Mr Singh's courage, or for that matter, the courage of the Punjab policemen around him cannot take away from the fact that guts alone cannot defeat highly trained terrorists armed to the gills.


RELATED

Elsewhere, some policemen of the Punjab police wearing neither helmets not bullet proof vests engaged the terrorists with primitive Self-Loading Rifles (SLRs), which was no match for the firepower of the enemy's AK-47s. A short distance away, burly cops of the police force moved up and down a roof throwing grenades at the terrorists and then ran for their lives before the grenades exploded. When the Punjab Police's Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams arrived, they were seen rushing to take up positions wearing their knee pads. They had not worn either their helmets or their bullet proof jackets.

14 years after the 2001 attack on Parliament, little seems to have changed for the policemen on the ground. Back then, some policemen tried engaging the heavily armed terrorists who attacked Parliament with pistols. During the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008, some gutsy cops facing the likes of Kasab had nothing more than their lathis. Some had primitive Lee-Enfield .303 rifles. Very few had bullet proof jackets and almost no one had helmets other than cricket helmets which have somehow become standard issue for police forces across the country.

It doesn't take rocket science to understand that a helmet designed to stop a cricket ball can never stop a high velocity round from an AK-47, the infantry weapon of choice not just for terrorists but also Indian armed forces.

Why in 2015 are our policemen less protected than soldiers fighting the First World War a century ago? Believe it or not, there are solutions easily available right here in India.

Did you know that India is considered a world leader in body armor technology? Did you know that bullet proof jackets and helmets built to the highest specifications of personal protection are not just built in India but exported to more than 230 forces in over 100 countries?

Among the users - the British, German, Spanish and French Armies - and police forces stretching from Japan in the East to the US in the West.

At the Kanpur-based MKU, India's largest manufacturer of body armour, the biggest problem often lies with the mindset of the police forces that they have to deal with.

According to MKU Chairman Manoj Gupta, "Most of our police forces and reserve police as well in our states are mostly equipped for anti-riot protection, not for anti-terrorist operations. There has to be deep thinking over this by policy makers."

According to some estimates, there is a standing requirement of at least 50,000 bullet proof kits in India's police forces but there is never a clear indicator since individual states handle their own law and order decisions and rarely spell out a requirement until they finally come out with a tender.

But the problems begin when the acquisition process starts. Deadlines for acquisition are frequently extended. State forces refuse to reveal the methodology they use in assessing the capability of a particular system. Vendors looking to sell to police forces have serious questions with the evaluation process and often have to wait indefinitely for answers to queries they may have. All of this happens before time consuming price negotiations even begin with a shortlisted vendor.

Ironically, the manufacture of bullet proof kit in India comes at a time when the Centre is trying to push Make in India as one of its primary manufacturing strategies. In the case of companies like MKU, not only are they manufacturing in India, they are exporting their equipment to highly discerning foreign customers while looking to expand their footprint across the globe.

For the policeman or policewoman on the ground, the more things change, the more they remain the same. Bamboo shields, the trusty bamboo lathi, the .303 and Self-Loading Rifle are a constant. The only other constant is the courage that our police display on the ground. After all, that's all they have to take on a determined enemy who are better trained, better equipped and perhaps better motivated.

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/worl...for-our-cops-1202871?pfrom=home-lateststories
 

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,157
Likes
12,184
Did you know that India is considered a world leader in body armor technology? Did you know that bullet proof jackets and helmets built to the highest specifications of personal protection are not just built in India but exported to more than 230 forces in over 100 countries?:biggrin2::biggrin2:

Among the users - the British, German, Spanish and French Armies - and police forces stretching from Japan in the East to the US in the West.:shock::shock::shock:

At the Kanpur-based MKU, India's largest manufacturer of body armour, the biggest problem often lies with the mindset of the police forces that they have to deal with.:rofl::rofl::rofl:
 

Abhijat

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
601
Likes
651
Country flag
According to MKU Chairman Manoj Gupta, "Most of our police forces and reserve police as well in our states are mostly equipped for anti-riot protection, not for anti-terrorist operations. There has to be deep thinking over this by policy makers."

This is the main reason , and requires change in mindset as , ISI's targeting changed to "soft targets", which are primary responsibility of states police.
 

Shadow

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Messages
496
Likes
1,069
Country flag
Images of ill-equipped security forces battling terrorists on Monday near Gurdaspur, again reminded planners that much of the military and most policemen face serious shortfalls of basic body armour.
The problem is especially acute for the army, with lakhs of soldiers exchanging bullets everyday with Pakistan on the hostile Line of Control (LoC), and with militants in Kashmir and the northeast.
During the last three years alone, 17 Indian jawans were killed on the LoC in 357 gun-battles with Pakistan, the defence ministry told parliament on March 13. Yet the army, paramilitary and police forces continue going into harm’s way with out-dated bulletproof jackets (BPJs), and helmets designed for motorcycle riding, not for the impact of a 9-millimetre bullet.
The difficulties of buying multi-role fighters and ultralight howitzers --- such as astronomic prices, and negotiating technology transfer to build in India --- do not hold back the purchase of BPJs and helmets, which are currently manufactured in India for discerning users like the German Army.
Yet the defence ministry told parliament on July 21 that just two purchases are in the pipeline for the 12 lakh-strong army. One lot of 1,86,138 BPJs is under trials, while the purchase of another 50,000 BPJs is before a “technical evaluation committee”.
A visit to MKU, a medium scale company in Kanpur, illustrates quality options that the goverment does not avail of. MKU supplies North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) militaries, and can build 5,000 BPJs and 25,000 helmets per month --- one of the world’s largest installed capacities. It is building 42,000 sets of body armour for Ecuador, 8,000 for Egypt and 16,000 for another West Asian country. It is supplying protective plates for the German Navy’s F-125 frigate, and ballistic panels to protect fast interceptor craft (FICs) that a Sri Lankan shipyard, Solas Marine, is building for the Indian Navy.
But MKU and its rivals in this field, companies like Tata Advanced Systems and SM Pulp, have received only token orders from the army, mostly from the Northern Command under local financial powers.
MKU, despite its modest annual turnover of Rs 250 crore, is a multinational company. To obtain a world-class research & development (R&D) facility where live ammunition could be fired to test protection levels (Indian rules make this well-nigh impossible for a private company), MKU acquired a German company near Hamburg that is now MKU GmbH. Last year, MKU established a production facility in Ras-al-Khaimah, UAE. While manufacture is cheapest in its Kanpur facility, MKU supplies European customers from Germany and West Asian customers from Ras-al-Khaimah.
Says Manoj Gupta, the MKU chairman: “We are a medium-scale enterprise, but we spend 6-8 per cent of our annual turnover on R&D.”
This has provided MKU a major price advantage. While many rivals offer ready built products in response to tenders, MKU develops mix-and-match protection solutions, precisely meeting the tender requirement. This allows crucial savings in raw material --- synthetic fibre produced in bulk by a handful of global giants --- that constitutes 70 per cent of production cost. Newly developed products then undergo ballistic testing in Germany with live bullets.
With all this, MKU’s first substantial army order is impending: a Rs 300 crore contract for 1,58,000 helmets. In trials concluded last year, MKU’s helmet was the only one to pass every test, says Gupta.
A key problem that MKU faces is that Indian government buyers do not frame requirements precisely. Tenders usually demand either Level III protection (against 9 millimetre bullets) or Level IV protection (against a 7.62 millimetre armour piercing rifle bullet). However the Terminal Ballistics Research Laboratory, Chandigarh finds that the same Ordnance Factory ammunition has a velocity varying from 345 metres per second, to 790 metres per second.
“With such a divergence, how can we offer a tailored product? The army would get the product it wants if it specifies precisely the velocity of the bullet it wants to protect against”, says Gupta.
In the absence of domestic orders, MKU flourishes on export orders, which constitute 90 per cent of its revenues. This has protected the company against the sharp business cycles that have buffeted rivals more dependent on Indian orders.
MKU executives suggest the defence and home ministries should place small orders, in a staggered manner, with multiple vendors, rather than a giant order with one company that would take years to deliver.
“Technology advances rapidly in this field. Specifications framed in 2015 would be outdated by 2017-18. So there should be small orders, placed annually, with improved specifications each year”, suggests Gupta.

http://ajaishukla.blogspot.in/
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top