US offers help for next generation aircraft carrier

[Capt.Popeye]

We shall see what we shall see......

Why, are you blind right now?
Anyway we can help arrange a corneal transplant at the very least.........

 

[MST]

Whether or not the F-35 will fly with the IN remains to be seen. "Access" to technology though will never come.

That is quite a pessimistic view. I do agree that no one gives 100% TOT but still a collaboration/join effort is way better than buying and selling. A part of development will come to India. And we will learn something. The rest we will find from someone else. Like we are trying to do in case of Rafale.

A lot of things comes out of collaboration. Even if nothing material its still will be a huge experience for our DRDO babus.

 

[Dillinger]

That is quite a pessimistic view. I do agree that no one gives 100% TOT but still a collaboration/join effort is way better than buying and selling. A part of development will come to India. And we will learn something. The rest we will find from someone else. Like we are trying to do in case of Rafale.

A lot of things comes out of collaboration. Even if nothing material its still will be a huge experience for our DRDO babus.

The developmental cycle is nearly over or composed of already initiated projects- what one sees now is the extended debugging cycle being carried out due to the complexity of the system. Neither will Rafale impart know-how to the nation for radars, engines (even the SNECMA offer on the Kaveri was using their M-88 core as it is or derivative of the same). There is nothing left for India to collaborate on in that field.

 

[MST]

The developmental cycle is nearly over or composed of already initiated projects- what one sees now is the extended debugging cycle being carried out due to the complexity of the system. Neither will Rafale impart know-how to the nation for radars, engines (even the SNECMA offer on the Kaveri was using their M-88 core as it is or derivative of the same). There is nothing left for India to collaborate on in that field.

You are only looking at big ticket item. Even though it will ideal to have their TOT that is not going to happen. At the same time there are still many other stuff we can learn from them in a collaboration including small items such as seekers and those related to r&d process and manufacturing. E.g. If an Indian company gets to product 50% of javelin components that itself will be a step forward and a great learning.

 

[acid rain]

That's because the bread and butter folks refuse to understand what ToT means, consider that even the software codes for the F-35 have been denied to UK. Now for those who know what that signifies- best of luck ever modifying the interleaved modes on that radar. Israel has been told to stuff it with regard to employing their own ESM/ECM on the F-35. Turkey hasn't got access to the F-16 codes- Japan got away with it by going the Mistubishi way and employing their own radar. No one will ever hand you technology, when the do had you the know-how they will do so in a very limited manner and the IP/IR will never be yours. Once in a blue moon, in 3-4 out of a 100 projects does appreciable tech transfer occur (in India's case- the 1500s, bofors and shielding/safety measures for PWR for eg.). Otherwise access to Greenpine and being allowed to increase the TRM count didn't teach us how to fabricate our own TRMs- we had to do it ourselves in a project that began in 98- just an example.

F35 is a one off case, one needs to look at the complete defense cooperation these countries enjoy both ways, UK, Israel are great tech countries in their own rights compared to our rather rudimentary industry..a visit to HAL or ADA or a talk with any HAL contractor would reveal the level we are at...I have done that and its not exactly pleasing. NAL is trying to get Sarang off the tarmac for the last 17 years and a visit to their facility will be an eye opener. Our OFB's aren't in the lap of great tech either. Hence an expertise sharing at any level will bring some coherance to our state run organizations.

 

[Dillinger]

You are only looking at big ticket item. Even though it will ideal to have their TOT that is not going to happen. At the same time there are still many other stuff we can learn from them in a collaboration including small items such as seekers and those related to r&d process and manufacturing. E.g. If an Indian company gets to product 50% of javelin components that itself will be a step forward and a great learning.

Yes, my post was contained to the ambit of discussing the F-35. The rest is indeed VALID!

 

[Dillinger]

F35 is a one off case, one needs to look at the complete defense cooperation these countries enjoy both ways, UK, Israel are great tech countries in their own rights compared to our rather rudimentary industry..a visit to HAL or ADA or a talk with any HAL contractor would reveal the level we are at...I have done that and its not exactly pleasing. NAL is trying to get Sarang off the tarmac for the last 17 years and a visit to their facility will be an eye opener. Our OFB's aren't in the lap of great tech either. Hence an expertise sharing at any level will bring some coherance to our state run organizations.

The idea is apt, the organisational structure here not so much. First people need to realize why despite accruing experience from license manufacturing everything from T-90 components, to assembling BMPs to RCLs- the production process and shop-floor level QC/QR refuses to improve. The OFB cannot absorb squat- what will it do with what it absorbs? Does it have its own established R&D unit, I mean every single OFB or OFB cluster for a specific segment? No? Do the people know the organisational structure of the OFB management, those who manage OFB units- what is their relation to the MOD- which committees they sit on ergo creating a conflict of interest in terms of any change which drags them from their comfort zone occurring? The US can send over what it wants, the OFB at least will not absorb squat except for the odd unit or two. The other DPSUs will vary in their receptiveness.
@MST @acid rain

Consider that the OFB comes under the ambit of the Department of Defence Production, which is part of the MOD. Now do the math, why no R&D units exist by and large in this setup and only license production and assembly seems to be their contribution by and large in terms of the appreciable equipment/segments.

 

[MST]

The idea is apt, the organisational structure here not so much. First people need to realize why despite accruing experience from license manufacturing everything from T-90 components, to assembling BMPs to RCLs- the production process and shop-floor level QC/QR refuses to improve. The OFB cannot absorb squat- what will it do with what it absorbs? Does it have its own established R&D unit, I mean every single OFB or OFB cluster for a specific segment? No? Do the people know the organisational structure of the OFB management, those who manage OFB units- what is their relation to the MOD- which committees they sit on ergo creating a conflict of interest in terms of any change which drags them from their comfort zone occurring? The US can send over what it wants, the OFB at least will not absorb squat except for the odd unit or two. The other DPSUs will vary in their receptiveness.
@MST @acid rain

Consider that the OFB comes under the ambit of the Department of Defence Production, which is part of the MOD. Now do the math, why no R&D units exist by and large in this setup and only license production and assembly seems to be their contribution by and large in terms of the appreciable equipment/segments.

There is no denying that the our R&D units are lagging behind. Also that fact that these are all govt. institutions and Babudom is ripe doens't help either. Funding from govt is also at the minimum. As you rightly pointed that the root cause needs to be found before some corrrection can take place.

I just feel American Co development with more Private Players (which is now happening) is a step in the right direction.

 

[Dillinger]

There is no denying that the our R&D units are lagging behind. Also that fact that these are all govt. institutions and Babudom is ripe doens't help either. Funding from govt is also at the minimum. As you rightly pointed that the root cause needs to be found before some corrrection can take place.

I just feel American Co development with more Private Players (which is now happening) is a step in the right direction.

If the corrective measures are not taken then nothing will work. The reason the Americans have demanded flexibility with offset conditions and will continue to do so up to the point of demanding that they get to pick the company/consortium they want to cooperate with, transfer M-ToT to or get into a JV with AND other modalities is simple- they have been watching the fiasco that occurred in Hyderabad and what DCNS had to do to try and rectify it. At the end of the day, JVs pertaining to a specific deal still depend upon the MOD nod- now if a JV is setup beforehand and unconnected to any prior acquisition program or offset requirement- a product developed and then offered- that becomes a different case since the MOD can't really do squat about that. On the other hand even our big co.s like TATA SEAD have shown a proclivity towards less research/innovation/contribution and more "back-door importing" (where majority components of the JV product remain OEM designed and owned) due to the inability of the apex decision making body (MOD) to provide either incentive or rationalize the whole defense production/acquisition environment.

 

[That Guy]

Like I said in another thread, keep signing deals with the US and keep pushing Russia away. In the end, you're only shooting yourselves in the foot and giving Pakistan an opportunity to play nice with Russia.

 

[Lostsoldier]

The one's who never let go of history are even bigger fools.

USA is not our enemy, today. It needs us to balance China which unfortunately is a country with which we are not on best of our terms.

Unless you suggest that we should cede territory and respect to China, being an ally of USA, howsoever superficial is in our interest.

And shove that notion of non-alignment from the very hole that it came forth. Even strongest of the countries could not survive alone, let alone a second rate power like India.

so u mean we shud be france of east nd USA can't be trusted untill it stops all aids to pak

 

[faithfulguy]

US is offering all these help. Its time for India to reciprocate and offer up some bases for US drones in Indian ocean and himalaya mountain area.

 

[Abhishek_]

^^^^^that was quite comedic, thanks for the laughs.

 

[faithfulguy]

^^^^^that was quite comedic, thanks for the laughs.

India should offer port Blair for US drone bases. This will keep the sea lanes open. As we all know, US navy owns Indian ocean, Malacca straite and persian gulf.

 

[Abhishek_]

^^^^this wasn't as funny. try again