DRDO and PSU's

Clawreed said:
:daru:
View: https://x.com/DefSysCI/status/1820832849345278366?t=RVTfXSrWOHfTV3RgEvuJrQ&s=19
Click to expand...

Don't these sarkari employees ever have shame. Not once do they look into mirror and think what have they actually contributed to make India self-reliant. 11,000 Employess in AVNL and All for what? And Why do we need another Light Tank again if L&T Zorowar is already out? Two types of Light Tank so as to fuck logistics of Army? Do they not even realize that Russia is in war? In another note, why even Russian? Even the so called turkroaches can make better vehicles. If your esteemed sarkari employees didn't have brains to come up with a prototype of your own and even then there are so many good companies- KNDS, Saab, BAE, BMC, General Dynamics, Rheinmetall and you go and choose the worst maggot out there aka russian maal. Atleast from above companies, you could learn what modern manufacturing looks like and now again we are back to square one with substandard junk.
 
SlayingHell said:
Don't these sarkari employees ever have shame. Not once do they look into mirror and think what have they actually contributed to make India self-reliant. 11,000 Employess in AVNL and All for what? And Why do we need another Light Tank again if L&T Zorowar is already out? Two types of Light Tank so as to fuck logistics of Army? Do they not even realize that Russia is in war? In another note, why even Russian? Even the so called turkroaches can make better vehicles. If your esteemed sarkari employees didn't have brains to come up with a prototype of your own and even then there are so many good companies- KNDS, Saab, BAE, BMC, General Dynamics, Rheinmetall and you go and choose the worst maggot out there aka russian maal. Atleast from above companies, you could learn what modern manufacturing looks like and now again we are back to square one with substandard junk.
Click to expand...
I think having a 2nd type of Light Tank production capability available in India will give MoD better negotiating terms with L&T.

Having full monopoly over Tracked Howitzer & Light Tank production in India, L&T will also have a monopoly over the pricing.

I checked the AVNL R&D site and these are their on going projects.

1000029153.jpg

Most of the western systems are out of reach for our market specially because of their pricing as well as the cost of licenceing. They can never be the L1 bidder in any of our tenders.
 
Last edited:
Chandra said:
I think having a 2nd type of Light Tank production capability available in India will give MoD better negotiating terms with L&T.

Having full monopoly over Tracked Howitzer & Light Tank production in India, L&T will also have a monopoly over the pricing.

I checked the AVNL R&D site and these are their on going projects.

View attachment 5526

Most of the western systems are out of reach for our market specially because of their pricing as well as the cost of licenceing. They can never be the L1 bidder in any of our tenders.
Click to expand...
L&T has developed the light tank in collaboration with DRDO, so it's not going to be the case that DRDO won't have a say over the pricing of the tank since they are the one who have initiated the program and developed most of the subsystems that go into it.
 
Chandra said:
I think having a 2nd type of Light Tank production capability available in India will give MoD better negotiating terms with L&T.

Having full monopoly over Tracked Howitzer & Light Tank production in India, L&T will also have a monopoly over the pricing.
Click to expand...
Nope, it doesn't make sense to have a second type of Light Tank when the overall requirement is just for 350 tanks. I understand that previously national defence related programs suffered problems but just having that as an excuse to have an open tender when one product is already under development doesn't make any sense at all.

What kind of monopoly are we talking about? They just had 100 K-9 and may be 200 more.
 
Fatalis said:
Nope, it doesn't make sense to have a second type of Light Tank when the overall requirement is just for 350 tanks. I understand that previously national defence related programs suffered problems but just having that as an excuse to have an open tender when one product is already under development doesn't make any sense at all.

What kind of monopoly are we talking about? They just had 100 K-9 and may be 200 more.
Click to expand...
It's the rules . If it's single tender there will be corruption allegations. Better to have a bali ka bakhra for the tender.
K9 was also procured after a tender . The later 100 are a follow on order as per the contract.
 
SwordOfDarkness said:
If this is used as a one way "attack" drone, even forest/urban areas will be fine... Since the spool is on the drone, if it snags on something it can just unroll more wire.
Click to expand...
Crappiest idea....these type of ideas have no significant use cases other than few one offs. If you ever worked in any serious engineering aspects, you know why.
 
SlayingHell said:
Don't these sarkari employees ever have shame. Not once do they look into mirror and think what have they actually contributed to make India self-reliant. 11,000 Employess in AVNL and All for what? And Why do we need another Light Tank again if L&T Zorowar is already out? Two types of Light Tank so as to fuck logistics of Army? Do they not even realize that Russia is in war? In another note, why even Russian? Even the so called turkroaches can make better vehicles. If your esteemed sarkari employees didn't have brains to come up with a prototype of your own and even then there are so many good companies- KNDS, Saab, BAE, BMC, General Dynamics, Rheinmetall and you go and choose the worst maggot out there aka russian maal. Atleast from above companies, you could learn what modern manufacturing looks like and now again we are back to square one with substandard junk.
Click to expand...
Most likely as with most, indigenous is not indigenous yet. General rot has this feel, put together a prototype and fool some forces in positions and fool people but operationalizing (producing and delivering and so on) something that is not what it is opens up all sorts of surprises. This is the general workings in a incompetent and dishonest organization filled with fools in managment not to mention quota idiots.

Pick 9 out of 10 programs and prove me wrong from low tech to high tech. Only areas are missiles and some other strategic ones. ISRO, and few others orgs are exceptions.
 
Kedar said:
Crappiest idea....these type of ideas have no significant use cases other than few one offs. If you ever worked in any serious engineering aspects, you know why.
Click to expand...
I have a good deal of experience in both software and hardware, but would you elaborate on why this is a bad idea? I dont see much difference in the idea between fibre guided ATGM and fibre guided one way drone.
 
SwordOfDarkness said:
I have a good deal of experience in both software and hardware, but would you elaborate on why this is a bad idea? I dont see much difference in the idea between fibre guided ATGM and fibre guided one way drone.
Click to expand...
If you do, then your tradeoff's are based on few major aspects ranging from maintenance to flexibility and performance and so on.....I don't have to expand more on this as you can weigh your own experience in software and hardware development.

With wired ATGM's, your LOS needs to be clear and they operate in somewhat linear envelope. Operational drawbacks are pretty evident using a spool specially out of sight applications and something that is flying in combat, these problems are addressed in a different way much more efficiently with autonomous regime switching without even a need for operators constant guidance. These ideas are reversions at best.
 
Kedar said:
If you do, then your tradeoff's are based on few major aspects ranging from maintenance
Click to expand...
Maintaining a one way drone?
Kedar said:
flexibility and performance and so on.....
Click to expand...
Performance will only be affected a little ig
Kedar said:
With wired ATGM's, your LOS needs to be clear and they operate in somewhat linear envelope. Operational drawbacks are pretty evident using a spool specially out of sight applications and something that is flying in combat, these problems are addressed in a different way much more efficiently with autonomous regime switching without even a need for operators constant guidance. These ideas are reversions at best.
Click to expand...
THere are LOAL ATGMS also, with fibre guidance... This could be used as a poor man's version of the same, non jammable as well.

Not saying there isnt a drawback here (cost is a big one) but it can be usefull, so I dont see the need to dismiss this outright.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

Donate via Bitcoin - bc1qpc3h2l430vlfflc8w02t7qlkvltagt2y4k9dc2

qrcode
Back
Top