Tank Ex, ideal T-72 upgrades
By P. Chacko Joseph | January 26th, 2008 | Category: Opinions and Articles | 17 comments
It was a pleasure to see Tank Ex (experimental) rolling down the Rajpath today. Many would have wondered the status of the tank and the reason why it is getting displayed on the Republic Day parade. One thought might arise, is it going to be inducted in Army? As of now, certainly not.
Tank-Ex is a Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) product or idea. It’s a huge advertising opportunity to showcase it. If Indian Army is not going to induct it, then why display it? To understand it, we need to know its history.
Before that, since I mentioned Indian Army, let me put up my favorite saying’s on Indian Army on records. Mercifully, Tank – Ex is not an Indian Army requirement/product like Arjun tank. Tank-Ex is fortunately not going to witness the Indian Army unprofessional attitude as it displayed on the Arjun Tank project and it’s even more fortunate that Indian Army has already asked “we didn’t ask it, why you made it?” I hope I am clear that Tank Ex has got nothing to do with Indian Army and very good chances that it won’t. If ever has anything to do it Indian Army, god save it.
In the Defence Expo, 2004, Tank Ex was displayed for the first time. George Fernandes, the then defence minister standing on the top of the tank along with DRDO officials asked them the purpose of the tank model. The DRDO officials replied by saying that there are many T-72 tanks around the world that will be available for upgrades; Tank-Ex is an ideal choice.
Tank-Ex is popularly known as T-72 chassis and Arjun Tank turret. This is correct in principal but bit different in implementation. Arjun Turret is 20 tons and Arjun has 4 man crew, so how would Arjun Turret fit into a 3 man T-72 Tank? Arjun Turret has manual loading and the crew except driver sits inside. Some times Tank-Ex is called Karna, which is not true; karma was T-72 chassis with Arjun Turret and meant for testing platform for Arjun, it was very crude. Probably Tank-Ex evolved from there.
Arjun Tank Turret like most 55 ton + tank turrets has many advanced features. Arjun Tank also has many advanced electronics add-ons and a very good gun. The first task was to reduce the weight of the Arjun Turret for T-72 use. The armor of the Arjun Turret was rationalized and hence it brought down the weight of the Turret. An autoloader can be installed into the turret. The two changes along with advanced addon’s and Arjun Tank Gun will make it a very potent upgrade for T-72 tanks worldwide.
Along with Tank-Ex, DRDO has many technologies and service that can be ideally exported. DRDO has put up a request with the defence ministry to export its products. Unless India comes up with a credible arms export policy, the Tank-Ex potential will remain a potential. Meanwhile Tank-Ex is an DRDO research product and it has every right to parade it in front of the nation.
While most of what you have mentioned is true, there is a hint of derision in the way Indian Army is mentioned vis a vis the DRDO. At the onset, it must be understood that the DRDO exists because of and to support the Armed Forces, and not vice versa. To that end, when the Army says it has not asked for the X-tank, it is well within its rights.
What went wrong with Arjun has been a matter of intense debate in various forums. But the bottomline is that the customer is not happy. Even if it a ‘captive’ customer – seller relationship as in this case, the customer is still the king. This would probably be a unique case where the seller is stuffing his product down the cutomer’s throat, and then going to town complaining about the latter’s attitude.
The moot point in my view, apart from the numerous shortcomings of the Arjunj, it is not at the end of the day, an indigenous tank. At best, it is a conglomeration of components from a number of sources. X-tank is taking this approach a step further. So the basic argument of ‘indigenisation’ of tank design in both the cases is flawed. The other issue is that why should we look at re-inventing the wheel in this day and age? If we are not capable of developing our own tank engine or fire control system, why should we insist on window dressing?
Why not look at a model where we go in for joint development with others to produce an improved tank after giving Arjun a decent burial?
Its time people rise above their narrow turf wars and start looking at solutions that are pragmatic and in the larger interest of the country.
The Army and IAF Vs DRDO is an old debate. While it is true that DRDO exists because of 3 services, but, the other thruth is DRDO exists inspite of Army and Air Force.
When we say indegenisation, some concepts have become terribly outdated. For example the Rubberised tracks for Arjun. MRF set up a special factory for it. Its not just MRF, the industry is littered with Arjun Parts stories. Gen. (Retd.) Shankar Roychowdhury himself had scouted around for manufacturers. What happened? Army attitude killed all those investments. Wo will manufacture for army in such cases? The DPSU’s are forced to manufacture in piece meal fashion, where the qualities associated with serial manufacturing is absent. What was the result? Rubberised tracks are now being imported.
DRDO did the wisest thing what all manufacturers in rest of the world are doing, import and integrate in the Indian Design. When or if the bulk order wver come, indegenise it. Even Russia imports French TI Sights.
Time and again we have heard “DRDO Re Inventing the wheel” then next like is “it imports.” Typical commentators don’t answer, what is DRDO supposed to do? It cannot reinvent the wheel and it cannot import. Wow!
Ask Air Force, why it needs basic flying lessons, ask Army why it requires basic courses when there are advanced cources. DRDO built an awesome tank with absolutely no knowledge and no infrastructure.
Engine descision has been taken up. Which country can overnight build a engine? Even the US usses the german engine. Russian engine quality is something that DRDO wants western engine.
Its time we give these critics a decent burial who have been commenting without thinking. What you have just typed in also re inventing the wheel. You have not used your brains and typed in what was usually typed in 19980′s.
In late 1970′s at the same time Arjun Tank was almost ready as per the 1st GSQR, Israelis had Merkava tank ready too. Indian Army changed GSQR, while Israeli’s inducted inducted the probamalatic tank called Merkava Mark-1.
In 1983 IDF began to receive the Merkava Mk 2, Indian Army Changed its GSQR.
Merkava Mk 3 Baz entered service with the IDF at the beginning of 1990, in 1991 India declared Arjun tank ready for induction.
Merkava Mk 4 entered full production in 2001, Indian Army still dithers from inducting it.
I do not agree, that DRDo exists because of armed forces. DRDO is a research agency, it keeps researching and Tank-X is a laudable effort. Arjun has started spinning varients. Had DRDO not offered Tank-X, people would have called it sleeping and doing nothing. Tounges wag.
Looking at the logic of the article given for Tank-X, DRDO has hit the light tank upgrade nail in the head.
As for engine is concerned, India did make an engine and as uual it was Indian Army which rejected it. aggi should do more research on this before writing up all that ill informed comment. It could be that the engine did not match up, but, hey! it was Indian Army which tried it!
The customer is not “captive.” As events have shown. On the contrary, DRDO is not allowed to export and army is alllowed to import. The DRDO developed products should be allowed to export.
FCS is cheeper to import, every one imports it. Most tanks from the other parts of the world have Renk, Thales, MTU etc as standard suppliers. I don’t see the reason why Indians should not do it to save cost and time. Someone got the “indigenious” concept wrong here.
Finally, its funny to hear that the commentator first usses the word “captive” then he says pushing the product down the throat. Probably he studied in wrong school. its typically called monopoly. Bajaj, Ambassodor, Padmini etc are classic examples of such attitude. Indian Public unlike India Army went on buying it and made money. Had Indian Public had an attitude like Indian Army, the mighty private sector would have never grown. the lesson is make use of what you have.
its not important, but, let me just write it here. Addi, the commentators blog as I saw is copy paste and scan of all the news articles from other sources? Why bother maintaining it? Why can he be a bit original and write his on story?
The display (or should I say disarray) of Queens’s English in the two posts above is ample testimony to the schooling or subsequent education of the writers.
‘varients, as uual, usses’ and he goes on murdering the language ad nauseum. Grammar – the less said the better. To top it, he has the temerity to point fingers at other’s schooling !!!
Admittedly, I am a boor from a back of the beyond government school with little english. Be that as it may, language skills – mine or yours – are not relevant to the topic of discussion, so lets talk about issues at hand.
Firstly, I agree that products developed by DRDO (I think ‘DRDO developed products’ is wrong English .. what does your convent school english say?)should be permitted for export. Of course, whether they will be many takers for the same is anybody’s guess. Besides, what products are they talking about exporting? I do not recollect any runaway successes that DRDO has had in developing products fit for export. Unless you are talking about the ‘ready to eat’ meals, which probably Nestle could have produced if they wished to, at one tenth the cost and in a fraction of the time. They make Maggi 2 minutes noodles, in case you are wondering.
Oh yes – I forgot the INSAS – ask your Nepalese friends how ecstatic they are with it, after they are through wiping their faces of the oil that comes out everytime it fires. After inducting the rifle with whatever problems it had, and after a number of promised improved variants, it remains a failure.The LMG variant – where is it? If that is the state of development of small arms, aren’t we being rather ambitious in expecting to export tanks?
Can you please enlighten me, that what was the engine, fire control system, and the sights, on the Arjun that was ‘almost’ ready for induction in 1970s? And pray what were the changes in the GSQR made by the Army at that stage?
I am so glad that you have brought up the example of Ambassador and Padmini. (Ambassodor, if we go by your spelling). What an apt example. It is being fed on government largesse – even taxi drivers have stopped buying them. The Indian public went on buying them because it had no choice – much like the army. But the moment Maruti, Hyundai, Ford and other companies wiht superior (yes, superior)products entered the market, the public has exercised its freedom of choice and bought the products that give it the best value. How many people do you know who buy ‘Ambassodors’ today? The public sector did not grow because the people went on buying these – it grew because of entry of larger number of players, growth of healty competition and free enterprise. If you want to measure the growth, take a look at the sares of Hindustan Motors (your favourite Ambassodor) and Maruti – the former is still at approx Rs 20 and the latter, in this Bear rush, is at Rs 640 or so.
Are you aware of the term ‘self perpetuating mediocrity’? Let me quote you:-
“DRDO is a research agency, it keeps researching and Tank-X is a laudable effort. Arjun has started spinning varients. Had DRDO not offered Tank-X, people would have called it sleeping and doing nothing. Tounges wag.”
So, as per you, the purpose of DRDO is not to cater to the requirements of the Defence Forces, but to ‘keep researching’. BRAVO. So, if you can’t rectify the defects of Arjun, what do you do? You pick up the turret of one tank, the hull of another, join it together and ‘offer’ tank X – else ‘TOUNGES’ WAG !! I wonder why someone hasn’t thouht of the name Ganapati for this creation. For the un-initiated, it is the God with the Elephant head, placed by Lord Shiva when he cut off his head in a fit of anger.
As for my blog, it is serving the purpose it is intended to, thank you for your advice. You may like to check the comments of the audience it is intended for.
Aggi like a typical Army man who prides his Brithish Army tradition you pride in British english. Personally, I feel that your attack on the english shows that you have nothing substancial to tell. It’s a usual technique to hide ones intelectual impotence.
Your “not recollection” of DRDO run away successes is because you think DRDO develops only Arjun Tank or LCA or Missiles. Its total lack of knowledge. I told you you are hiding your intelectual impotence.
BTW, ready to eat meals is indeed important.
You come with some trash where Napalese friends couldn’t maintain the INSAS and prefered to blam the Riles. This was proven wrong later by the INSAS makers. You convinently forgot to mention that. Oh, by the way, the Napalese complained about the make (by the Defence PSU) and not the rifle design (by DRDO). May be the news articles were not in your esteemed Queens English, hence your Bhurra saheb nose could not pict it up.
Why don’t you google and find out what engine was made? You seem to be too lazy to even google or is google american and does not produce results in your queens english?
As your “technique to hide ones intelectual impotence” goes, you can’t even understand the context the bajaj scooters etc were made. It’s useless to even explain to you again.
Yes, DRDO is a “research agency.” A research agency by definitetion researches/develops. it is up o the production agency to produce it.
yes, Tank-ex is a laudable effort, else once DRDO has invented the wheel, why it should re-invent the wheel. Why should it re-develop the same products? And where is it written that its pure Arjun Turret with Pure T-72 chasis? This is also an example of your intelectual impotence.
Anybody who checks your impotent blogs Alexa rank, will tell you what purpose it serves.
I do not agree with the Aggi’s basic comment on “hint of derision in the way Indian Army is mentioned.”
Indian Army “if” have said that “we didn’t ask it, why you made it?”, then it has to be taken to task for that. Its no way to treat another person or institution engaged in “not their presonal business.”
I understand Sam bahadur using those words for the good of the country, but, this is a kind of arrogance that is considered “crass.”
I always thought Tank-x will be tried by army and was eagerly awaiting the news.
I also do not agree with the example of INSAS rifles. Royal nepal Army is not the best example. neither is the Srilankan Air Force which switched off the Indra Radar and then blamed the radar after the attack. Then they wanted more of the same radar.
Biggest blame should go to media for such issues. Since Aggi’s blog is just a collection of news from media, One can understand how influenced he is from these wrong or partial reports.
One can understand the Indian Army personnel’s capability to hide truth. Look at this example
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080702/main4.htm
{Bribery and scandal, which would have played with the lives of troops in Siachen, involving a middleman who was a relative of a serving top-level Army official and was trying to pass off a civilian helicopter as a military version, finally led to the scrapping of the $ 600 million Eurocopter deal.
(1) Trial reports accessed by The Tribune made available to the MoD and the watchdog Comptroller and Auditor-General (CA&G) reveal that a civilian model of the light reconnaissance helicopter was sought to be passed off as the military one.
(2) The acquisition wing of the Army tried to say that the “engine was broadly similar’’ but the CA&G did not buy the story.
(3) During field trials the helicopter meant to be the lifeline for the troops in Siachen failed comprehensively and yet the Army top brass tried desperately to push for its purchase.
(4) The most shocking allegation of a blood relation of a top-level Army official, actively involved in evaluating and giving the final favourable assessment to the deal, working as a middleman for Eurocopter was found to be correct.]
One can understand the attitude of the Army officers with respect to the Tank-X is such situation.
Let me begin by requesting you to take a look at the tone of my first post, and that of your replies to it. The question of language and adeptness in its usage was raised by you –
“Finally, its funny to hear that the commentator first usses the word “captive” then he says pushing the product down the throat. Probably he studied in wrong school. its typically called monopoly.”
I, in my reply, have merely replied. Incidentally, as far as covering up lack of substance through adjectives and generalisations is concerned, you haven’t been doing too bad yourself.
That having been said, may I suggest a halt in schoolboy like name calling, and let us actually debate the issues per se. It is very easy to resort to mud slinging in the anonymity of the net, but nothing is to be gained from that. On the other hand, a serious and dispassionate debate on the issues might result in a better understanding of the other’s points of view.
Let me tackle issues one by one.
1. Successes of DRDO – I admit I am ignorant about major items that have successfully been inducted into service – items that would justify the crores of Rupees spent on research by the nation. So, will you please list ten such equipment developed in the last 50 years to remove my ignorance?
2. I agree that ready to eat meals are important, but I am sure you will also agree that :-
(a) They are not in the same class of importance as a major weapon system.
(b) These should not constitute the core competence of DRDO, as they are well within the capability of private manufacturers and are of dual end use. As of now, they have been developed by DRDO and shared with the industry. It could well have been the other way round, which may have been a lot cheaper.
3. INSAS – yes, the manufacturing is to blame to a large extent. But the say that there has been no flaw in design would not be correct. The fact that the rifle has undergone 5 to 6 ‘marks’ is because of design flaws. Secondly, the concept was a ‘family’ of weapons, which was never realized beyond the rifle. The LMG has not been successful, and the army continues using the second world war vintage carbines.
4. Arjun engine in 1970s – I admit to being ignorant, and not lazy but probably inefficient in being able to search up details. All I can seem to unearth is that intially, indigenous developement was attempted since import was not allowed. Then, till mid 80s, attempts to design an indigenous engine had not succeeded, by which time foreign governments were becoming amenable to offering their engines. So, when it is stated that the Arjun was almost ready in late 1970s when the Army changed the QRs, which engine was it fitted with?
5. Research Agency – The aspect about DRDO being a research agency is agreed to. It must concentrate on research in pure sciences to come up with futuristic military applications. One reads of ‘Electro Thermal’ weapons, EM guns etc. (I am naming these as mere illustrations, lest the specific examples be seized upon for dissection.) Work done in such fields would qualify as research. X tank would fall in the ambit of the second role – development. While research must be undertaken unhindered by any user interference, the development part must be towards a purpose. It can be either as a ‘technoloy demonstrator’, or to meet a specific requirement of the user. X tank may be a laudable initiative, but if it does not meet the user’s requirement, you can not turn around and blame the user.
Now, as for comments by ajit, I can only say that he seems to contradict himself by pointing out that I am relying merely on media reports, and in the very next para quoting a media report giving out allegations of serious nature to imply that X tank is being rejected due to some ulterior motives.
And once again, if you don’t like my blog, please don’t visit it. I am not maintaining it for any rankings, but for a few selected friends.
I would be glad to discuss your replies to greater lengths if we can undertake these without further personal attacks.
I have no idea on the english language and other things you or others have posted. I can say, your 1st post is very ill informed. If you are not very net savy, such half baked and rethoric posts have been attacked everywhere on Internet.
You need 10 equipments for DRDO sucesses? I will satisfy you in more than 10 equipments, I will give you 10 equipment “classes” where it succeded.
1) NBC protection equipments: They are moving from 1st generation to second generation. It includeds a host of equipments, processes, training etc.
2) Ballastic Missile Class. I have not included tactical missile classes where except Trishul, all other missiles are successes. One question of Army Inductions, I will address that later. Army is the crux of all the problems.
3) Engineering equipments like Sarvatra, amphibious dozer etc.
4) Life Sciences class which includes your ration packs, glaciar drinks, iron metal removing from water, high altitude farmin/rearing (very important logistic in Ladhak and other high altitudes, visit them, you will be stunned).
5) Naval ship signature management class.
6) Electronic warfare for Army and Navy (As usual Army lags behind)
7) Avionics: DARE has made systems that go intSu-30 MKI, LCA etc.
8) INSAS family: Delink it from the production quality, the design is a success.
9) Naval Sonars and other Naval electrnics.
10) Radars.
Remember, the above is classes, the classes have several products. Next , if you take the sub systems and critical equipments which do not fall in classes etc are developed and deployed.
An important aspect of DRDO you must remember, it does “research projects.” Like Abhay FICV, its already in technology demonstrator (TD)stage, but, again its for Army and you know what will happen to it. The MCA aka fifth gen project, if it comes, it will be a research and TD project only. It will not be a deployable project untill one of the services decides to adopt it.
Now, if you look around, BEL and Navy have excelent working relations with DRDO. BEL has its budget that is dedicated to DRDO projects, it has a choice of not doing so.
Army and Air Force are really an issue. First let me tackle Air Force. If you read AM P Rajkumars book on LCA projects, you will understand how Air Force personnel would stop the Air Chief from attending the first flight. To quote “if you go, it will show our support to the LCA project.” You can understand how the national project is treated. Where as the Naval LCA progresses in a faster pace inspite of same sanctions that hit the Air Force project. You should understand that LCA project mandate was to create “only 2 TD’s”. DRDO, since had excess budget (means it spent less to create TD’s), it created PV-1 in same mandate. If DRDO would have waited for the next mandate, the LCA project would have been delayed more. The IAF gave its Staff Requirement in “2004.” If LCA project suffered, it is because of babudom, air force apathy, HAL attitude and sanctions. On it’s part, ADA has actually pulled out a rabbit out of hat. The design, CLAW etc. The MMR and Kaveri are eventually going to get in air. But it won’t stop the project.
Now I have been reading this particualr online news source since it was started. You should read the archives. The “project Devil” SAM. You see how the project was killed. The project performed better than the original missile, the Air Force decided that it does not want a missiles in that “class” anymore.
Comming to Army, this website is littered with horror stories. Read, “The First ATM” (anti tank missile) which was 1960′s project etc. Army has the worst attitude too. In army, if someone speaks good about Arjun Tank, will have its career threatened. But some have spoken up.
On that engine issue, DRDO actually has a 780 HP engine of T-72 tank. It seems it did not perform in heat. But the story dos not end there, instead of Army getting back and getting it perfected, it went ahead and purchased some foreign engine. It was foolish to kill that engine project. They have started a new project for 1500 HP powerpack now. It is not true that they did not develop and engine. We actually have an engine which no one is interested in.
You should know the nature of research is same as your life. There are hits and misses. But, its up to the services to get their job done. Best example in navy. It always gets its job done.
Ypour comment on my saying that “your perceptions based on media” is actually true, else you would not have asked for top 10 equipments. This is not what in my defination “called a discussion.” You are expected to do some basic research. Instead I had to spend a morning typing out something which is already avaliable on internet.
The onus is on you, if you ask informed matuare questions, you will get same treatment. If you post ill informed rethoric like Arjun Tank, INSAS, DRDO etc failure, what else you expect?
Correction: The engine is 1000 HP and not 780 HP I mentioned. I can be corrected on this HP rating.
Thanks for the insight. However, do you really think that it is all one sided, and that all that is wrong is because of the attitude of the Army?
Its 90% attitude of the Army, rest political. I will explain. Someone mentioned Merkava example, look at M1A2 Abrams etc. The Israeli and US Armies had de-facto reisted them initially. But the politicians stepped in. Today they are most admired weapons. Arjun Tank exceeds the GSQR requirements. It even runs on terrain that cannot be negotiated by lighter T-72 or T-90 tanks. Its very modular Engine can be replaced in 30 mins compared to 8 hours in T-90 (engine can be repaired and kept as back up, but Arjun does not stop for battle). It traveles class 1 in New Delhi railway station. Its firing performance is beyond question as per the people who have tested it. It carries more ammo and fuel than the T-series and has more room for the tankers. The Armor gives more survivability to the crew (Kanchan is very very good). Its has better electronics. it can stay in water (medium ford)for longer time. You may want to know why there is resistence. Multiple reasons. Corruption to foreign trips to vested interest to ego problems.
It’s like a permenant relay race. Develop and equipment, production, deployment, enhancing the system, production, deployment and it goes on. What happens with DRDO-DPSU-Army is that, after DRDO, DPSU runs as it wants then Army runs for the comptetior.
It is not that Army has not inducted weapons by DRDO design, like NBC equipment, INSAS etc. It’s the high decibel attention on Arjun Tank that has brought bad name to DRDO. You must have heard of Trishul Missile project. Indian Navy version was not a success, do the naval guys go and leak it to the press after every trial? One naval Vice Admiral said “I saw the trials, some succeded, some did not.” Its just not like Army, they go and talk failures to press anonymously. Its very unprofessional. IAF used to follow that, but, their current Chief is pro Indian weapons, hence the juniors refrain. We still saw Air Force personnel planting stories of Akash missiles falling during trials.
Army has a habit of complaining about everyone and anything. Like for example, they blamed Air Force, the intelligence after kargil. Gen VP malik, who was not willing to come back from arms purchasing trip from Poland during Kargil, is now going to town saying that since the NDA did not publish white papers, Kargil happened… etc. You should realise that Army blames everything. it like Congress (I), they just want scapegoats.
On the other hand, it wants to import high altitude helicopters that do not fit High Altitude operations, T-90 tanks which have more problems than Arjun tank, does not initate towed artillery which is ususaly imported etc. One exception is ALH.
There were 3 chances where they could have inducted Arjun in mark-1, mark-2 and mark-3 states like Merkava story. They did not. Those days, we did not have enough expertise to make tank but we tried our level best, just like Israelis.
I will point out a link http://www.subcontinent.com/sapra/weapons_indigenisation_20050408.html
Just a small correction to Gen. (Retd.) Shankar Roychowdhury when he says about the bolt in concluding para. To remind you the bolt is not manufactured by DRDO but PSU. You can clearly see DRDO gets hot with the stick that should have actually hot the DPSU (Avadi for this instance).
I can testify that its purely army and air force attitude. Like people mntioned about Tank-X, FICV etc and etc. Take the case of Kaveri Marine Engine derivative. It was a research stuff and now Navy is actually testing it. You will hear good news in few days, its a success till now what ever has been tested.
Now take the case of Kaveri aero engine, I can safely say India today has a Turbo Fan engine technology. It has issues going into LCA, but, it can be down rated, and used for say “IJT” program. Although, GTRE is still testing it for Kaveri 9.5 integration into LCA prototype, you can see air force sleeping and not making additional attempts in planning for the engine to come into smaller aircrafts. ADA or HAL will have to carry on the possibilities and Air Force will come and critise it.
How different are two attempts. Kaveri marine is more of naval project, kaveri Air Force is a GTRE project. You can understand the difference.
Result? Kaveri marine will com into production faster than kaveri Aero.
Thanks. However, my perception is a little different. I feel thatn in nine cases out of ten, corruption is not the actual reason. By and large, people are honest and work towards what they perceive to be in the best interest of the service and thereby the nation.
There are basically two reservations that the services probably have about indigenous development and production of equipment.
First is the delay factor, linked to which is the fact that technology is becoming outdated at a growingly rapid pace today. The delay therefore comes as a double whammy.
Second factor is quality, which as correctly brought out by you, is the responsibility of the production agency.
A combination of both these factors gives rise to preference for imports, whereby it is felt (wrongly or rightly, that is another question) that better quality equipment may be available in a faster timeframe.
Whether that actually happens is a different story altogether.
Delay? Which project on earth was not delayed? The problem again with you is rethoric. You do not mention any example on delay. Arjun Tank was not delayed in any of the GSQR implementation. Prove it with datelines that Arjun tank was delayed. You keep involved in empty rethoric, you cannot prove a thing. You just point out corruption, what about ego issues? What about babudom?
Take for example the Akash Missile trials. Airforce has already tried it, Army does not gives dates for trials. they will give delayed date for trials after musc bickerng and then they will delay it with some excuses. Nag missiles, it proved its original version, Army came up with requirement with extended version. Extended version is ready, where is Army avalible for trials? Talk about delays, it wouldn’t have happened with navy. Quality of DPSU is another thing. But originally you had blammed DRDO for all the ills. I just wanted to prove that you are dead wrong about it. Repeat this after me : DRDO Naval projects Do Not get delayed. Repeat 3 more times! DRDO Naval projects Do Not get delayed; DRDO Naval projects Do Not get delayed.; DRDO Naval projects Do Not get delayed..
http://frontierindia.net/npol-hands-over-next-generation-sonar-design-for-india-navy-ships
Read this, read the last para.
Stop your empty rethorics. DRDO designs + DPSU (BEL) + Naval involvement = success.
The army is the most incompetent out of the three services when it comes to indeginization of products even though its products require the least amont of technology amongst the 3 services a tank,howitzer or an IFV is less of a technical challenge than a nuclear submarine,fighter aircraft or aircraft carrier.
It should be ashamed of itself instead of pompously telling taxpayers of this country of how it has the divine right to give their money to russia they should take a page out of the indian navy’s book on how to build things at home.But in all fairness intelligence hasn’t really been the IA’s forte Sam Manekhaws of the world are few and far between.
I think the main hurdle in the idignisation of Indian Forces is the corruption spread at all levels in the armed forces. as we all know a huge amount of kikback is involved in each defence deal. vested interests in armed forces to keep their share intact do their best to stop such efforts of indignisation. Arjun, Tejas, Dhruv all suffered because of this reason.
[...] Tank-Ex upgrade, Indian Army did not want an T-72 upgrade. (you can read Indian Armies reaction here.) So Indian Army pushed for T-90. It was not the issue that enemy Pakistan bought T-80′s, the [...]