What's new

Ukraine offers to co-develop transport aircraft with India

Invest $10 Billion in DRDO+ADA+M&M+TATA Joint venture over next 6 years, for making transport aircraft which can carry atleast 40 tons payload.

MTA as a joint development, with huge commonality to IL 76 is said to be ready only by 2015, so how on earth should we develop an transport aircraft from the scratch in the heavy class, in just 6 year?
Besides that $10 billions? Are you aware that we could buy at least 50 x C17, or even 200 x IL 76 for that money? But the need of such heavy aircrafts are maybe only around 30 aircrafts.

India won't get anything by begging to Russia or USA. You will get it when you start doing yourself.

Where do you see us begging for anything? Actually they are offering us anything, even without us asking for it!

LCA is the perfect example of what happen when we do it on our own without experience, or knowledge, but if we use co-developments instead, we get these, faster induction and more export chances. Co-developments are a huge chance for our industry to improve in those fields, where we can't offer comparable techs, that's why co-developments, especially with western countries would be great for us!

This co-development with Ukraine would not be a good idea, because we already went with the Russians for a replacement of Hawker Siddeleys and AN 32 and there is only a need for some few lighter aircrafts between MTA and Saras. Why should we invest that much money into it then? Also the export chances are not that good anyway, because the west has the Airbus C 235, C-295, or the Alenia C-27J and even the Russians will field the Ilyushin Il-112 in this field below C 130 and MTA.
Who should buy it if Europeans, Americans (C-27J has high commonality to C130) and the Russians have alternatives?

Also why not simply convert NALs RTA into a transport varient, that fits between Saras and C130/MTA?
 
.
LCA is the perfect example of what happen when we do it on our own without experience, or knowledge, but if we use co-developments instead, we get these, faster induction and more export chances. Co-developments are a huge chance for our industry to improve in those fields, where we can't offer comparable techs, that's why co-developments, especially with western countries would be great for us!

Buddy,new paper knowledge is not good all times.Some names makes us feel sooo sweet on hearing, but not during application.For example this very said Co-development/JV.

Before jumping,we should know whats the main concept behind this.
Maybe the word itself sounds deceptive,but once we get into it its all blank. Its all about the agreements you sign before starting this JV.
No one transfers technology.period.
both parties only bring in thier part of expertise.Same as what has happened with Brahmos. We didnt mastered the liquid fueled ramjet and seeker tech,but the russians did.And still we need russian engineers and technicians for assembling work in India.This is how work gets shared.Indian engineers work on the avionics and control systems part.Neither parties swapped the technologies.
In the end,we got the missile but not the full technology.

Same happened with Barak-LR SAM.We mastered the dual pulse rocket and sent the developed one to Israel with few of our engineers.

As said earlier,these JV,Co-development are only meant for cutting costs and time frame,but they will never gift you any technology from the unknown world.

But if party A is smart enough,it can get a chance to interract with Party B scientists who were specialised and mastered this X tech.He can get clues only clues,but not schematics and other stuff. but the most sad part is that we being a party A often fell inthe trap laid by party B and start leaking our technological matters.

Even we are doing a JV with PAKFA.Again we are bringing our sphere of knowledge while russians bring from their sphere(unfortunately their spheres dia bigger than ours).So it only speeds up the process, but not guarantees the tech know-how.

Hence was the need for MCA which is where we can pool our resources to get along with the technological curve.

As many people often gets into wrong track over LCA investement.But infact LCA was a life line to indian defence industry in the high end-tech domain. With the start of LCA we almost put our heads into everything.From materials,electronics,fluid dynamics,.....
It was a much needed part in the indian technological movie.without which the movie will be utter flop.

LCA though running late(which is acceptable after dire consideration of circumstances at diffferent periods and domestic infra availability)churned a lot of heads who actually never got a chance to develop one after applying their research effort and knowledge.We shouldnt be expecting to run without walking.
After all 20 years timeframe is not yet all a big deal to cry over.We are even witnessing some advanced nations to just get their flights fly even after decades of experience and excellent infra.
 
.
Exactly.....

I personally think its not about having two different jets for the same purpose or single to do that, its about building one's capacity to do something. Right now Its a joint venture but in future it could be India all alone. Indian doctrine of doing everything on its own and re-inventing the wheel hasn't been very successful. May be its good time when you guys review that.
 
.
.Same as what has happened with Brahmos. We didnt mastered the liquid fueled ramjet and seeker tech,but the russians did.And still we need russian engineers and technicians for assembling work in India.This is how work gets shared.Indian engineers work on the avionics and control systems part.Neither parties swapped the technologies.
In the end,we got the missile but not the full technology.

That's the real point behind it, we still lack behind in so many fields and that's why we need help from partners that has the knowledge and experience and Brahmos is a good example that shows the success of this way. Ind developing it together from the start, not only when an indigenous try fails.
It's also not only to cut costs, but to get weapons and techs that we fail, or couldn't develop on our own yet! Even if these development wouldn't comes without ToT (which I doubt!), we would get latest weapons/techs and the experience how to develop such things. This is clearly one of the major points behind the delays in LCA and if we go the same way again, we will see the same problems.
As I just said in the LCA thread, Dhruv is also a perfect example where we developed something with help, learned and improved by that and now are at a level to do it on our own at LCH and LOH.

They tried the fast way at LCA, but I hope they learn from their mistakes!
 
.
The An-148 is a good plane, Iran is producing 50 of them under license.
 
.
That's the real point behind it, we still lack behind in so many fields and that's why we need help from partners that has the knowledge and experience and Brahmos is a good example that shows the success of this way. Ind developing it together from the start, not only when an indigenous try fails.
It's also not only to cut costs, but to get weapons and techs that we fail, or couldn't develop on our own yet! Even if these development wouldn't comes without ToT (which I doubt!), we would get latest weapons/techs and the experience how to develop such things. This is clearly one of the major points behind the delays in LCA and if we go the same way again, we will see the same problems.
As I just said in the LCA thread, Dhruv is also a perfect example where we developed something with help, learned and improved by that and now are at a level to do it on our own at LCH and LOH.

They tried the fast way at LCA, but I hope they learn from their mistakes!

You didnt get my point.did you?
A JV/co-development will bring no technology home which we are not aware of.Even after Brahmos sucess as a JV,we are still at the same learning phase(in terms of liquid prop ramjet) where we were before.
A JV is needed on a priority basis,but shouldnt be applied every where.Dont you realise whats happening to UK who is a partner of F-35? Do you expect them getting the stealth tech and other avionics technologies which they are not providing as an input?

Here in this JV, you only get whatever your input is unless your partner provides you know-how of his own technologies.

If Team A input is less, then while exporting it will get same %. Here we are considering reality.

UK went for a joint development of N bum with US. Do you know the reality of UK position today?

Buddy, fast pace shouldnt be a criteria all the time.You should leave a bit of time for the leaning curve.India as a nation is not yet in a dire situation ,where it cant match up its enemy if a war breaks out today.
Dont go my media reports.

If a person blames the development of LCA, simply attests his ignorance.No offence intended.
Today DRDO is so confident that ,for the first time they spoke to the ACM with real nerves and the most conservative developmental time frame for MCA while providing proofs of on-going developmental efforts for the sub-systems which can be crucial.
If LCA might have been a JV, again we have to go for a JV for MCA.When will we be building our own 100% system?
Whole life will become JVs and co-developments due to the fear of cost-escalations and time over runs.

Look at the Brahmos-II JV this way.We did mastered the scramjet tech.And we are inputing the engine tech this time.will do the seeker lateron. The scramjet achievement was due to 24/7 hardwork for nearly 15 years. How can you expect wonders turned up overnight?
Same with LCA or any other thing.
 
.
Does Ukraine even have the infustructure or know-how to develope an aircraft, and if it does just how advanced will it be? Another important factor to consider is Ukraine's willingness to sell to Pakistan, does India want their technology to end up in Pakistan, does India even want to take a chance?
 
. .
No Ukraine is China's turf.

China got most of the old soviet stuff from there. After the collapse

as well as that hull they call Varyg .
 
.
A bold NO!!!

Well, may be we failed in stopping the tank and plane deals because we had no leverage over Ukraine, this investment is one way to get our foot in the door and tell them to stop supporting countries inimical to us.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom