off topic, but it would be fun to see an Arjun taken to Russia for the next biathlon. It would definitely help answering some questions.
It's not imports. The army wants the private industry to design the tank. They don't want DRDO to call the shots.
And FRCV is under "Make" category.
Acquisitions covered under the „Make‟ category refer to equipment/system/ sub-system/assembly/sub-assembly, major components, or upgrades thereof, to be designed, developed and manufactured by an Indian vendor, as per procedure and norms detailed in Chapter III of this DPP.
DPP 2016: Salient Features and what distinguishes it from DPP 2013
Make category has been totally delinked from other categories of Acquisition
Acquisition under Make will be in two stages i.e. Prototype Design and Development Stage and Acquisition Stage under Buy (Indian-IDDM).
The IA is also setting up their own design bureau.
I doubt there are two different plans like that.
DRDO will be the technology partner, so they will be expected to continue development of technologies that will actually go into the FRCV, like the armour, guns, engine etc.
The idea is to give private industry control so that they can punish DRDO with penalties if they are late.
The biathlon has less to do with the tank itself and more to do with the tank crews.
I have uploaded the RFI on the first page. Show me where it says this 'Make' category?
It's under 'strategic partnership ' DPP-2016. Relay on the actual document rather than some ill-informed sources.
It's hilarious to even assume somehow private companies are more equipped to design and develop a MBT than DRDO.
not when the white elephants breakdown on endurance courses and wheels flying out of the tracks.
Only the design aspect will be from SP clause. The tank itself will be prototyped and manufactured in India itself.
The program has three stages.
Stage 1: Select foreign OEM who will help the private company design the tank. Obviously this comes under SP.
Stage 2: This part is a bit sketchy right now. It's either select the same private company to prototype the tank, or have a new competition to find out the private company that will perform R&D. This may also come under SP clause, a foreign company that will help perform R&D, but I think that's unlikely. A bit sketchy on the details.
Stage 3: Pick a company that will produce the tank. It may not be the same company that won Stage 1 or Stage 2.
The RFI is for Stage 1.
Do you understand what SP is? There are no stages (Show me a document which says it), Its just license production. Where is your 'Make' category again?
Stop building on your assumptions.
I'm not making any assumptions.
All those who have followed the program know about the 3 Stages involved.
Design - Handled by foreign company and private company.
Prototype - Handled by private company or OFB. May include foreign company.
Production - Handled by private company or OFB. No foreign company.
In each stage, the companies may all be different.
Your own RFI talks about using the design of the foreign company with production handled by an Indian company. It doesn't talk of a JV for production.
Not okay, especially not at a showcase event. Sure if Russians had the same failures, but when the beloved T90s (and both of them) are knocked out due to malfunction and are beaten by stock T72B3's, it raises a hell lot of questions. When India send the creme-de-la-creme of it's tanks and tank crews and places last behind Kyrgyzstan; it does raise some questions. Thus I would love to see Arjun compete the next year, if the T90 are shit in Biathlons, I don't see the harm in fielding Arjuns given the reports of it squarely beating the shit out of T90's in head to head trials.
All that's great, but biathlons aren't a tank vs tank competition. It's all about the crew.
As for the T-90's failure there, it happens to the best of tank crews. It happens even during war time. The tank was flogged at high speeds for long periods of time. It was most likely the failure of the tank crew there. The same thing has happened to the Arjun also.
4:00
Shit happens.
Developing nationwide infrastructure to support the Arjun (and tanks in it's weight class) is a humongous task. So far infrastructure to support the Arjun (MLC-70 standard bridges, suitable broad gauge rail etc.) have only be developed & deployed in the specific theatres where the paltry number of 124 Arjun Mk-1s are used. Rest of the infrastructure can only support tanks of the T-72/T-90 weight class, which we use in massive numbers (thousands).
If a large order of tanks in the weight category of Arjun has to be placed, that has to go hand in hand with development of infrastructure to support them. Otherwise they'll just sit around unused, unable to get to the location where the fighting is. In other words, we need to shift the Army's MBT weight average from the current ~50T to about 70T. That is a massive change, and a very expensive one - which I don't see happening anytime in foreseeable future.
Little wonder then, that Army has no choice but to stick with tanks of lower weight...and as ALL Western standard MBTs are much heavier (65-70T), and so is Arjun, this leaves us with nothing but Russian & Ukrainian options for deriving the hull from. Leave Ukraine out - they are 10 times as unreliable as the Russians. That gives us a very good chance of any international offer for FRCV in a competitive tender ending up in a single-vendor situation and being cancelled because of that. Only way for us to get Armata platform for our requirements is probably if we go Govt-to-Govt.
Personally - I support whichever tank can fight our wars better. I'm not one to support Russian dalals, but I'm neither someone who wants Arjun JUST because it was designed & made in India. If it's unsuitable for the infrastructure we have, then buying it in large numbers would amount to nothing but having scores of showpieces.
The Arjun was conceived as a counter for a then-plausible reality of M1 Abrams entering service with Pak Army. But that has never happened (and seems WILL NEVER happen, given how US-Pak relationship turned out)....so I think it's pretty realistic if one imagines the future Indian tank fleet's bulk to be made of up ~50T Universal Platform designs, and relatively small numbers of ~70T heavy MBTs deployed for the Western theatres.
I imagine that these words of wisdom were penned remembering what brought up the end - a sheepish confession that the specs of the Arjun were laid down in the first instance, not by the Taliban faction of the RDSO, but by a stealth organisation little known to the outside world called the Indian Army. It is difficult not to laugh at this pompous 50 tonnes of codswallop unleashed on us in an effort to make a meaningful case for specifying one thing, getting precisely what was specified and then coping with the consternation by finding reasons why the supposed 'safe' option should, in fact, be the only option. So, no Abrams, no Leopard, no Leclerc (just check their specs), no Arjun, if the Pakistanis run out of friends, out of money and out of options, as gallant and chivalrous warriors, we must immediately zoom down to their level; it is our bounden duties as Kshatriya warriors. If they decide wars are to be won by single combat between left-handed arms wrestlers. away with brigade battle groups, down the Himalayan rafting route with the RAPID, front and centre, the Dangal squad.
I've found you ridiculous before, @Parthu; I now find you obnoxious as well. You are one step away from my ignore list; unlike the four others, it is not for bigotry. In your case, it will be for wilful stupidity, over and beyond the call of duty.
This might be the only factor that might justify this Byzantine manoeuvring. Quite frankly, I think Occam's Razor applies; it's a crude attempt at re-building the Military Industrial complex that served the US Military and US Industry so well from Hiram Maxim's failure onwards.
Lol - the know-it-all is back.
Unfortunately you do not seem to know squat. As you seem to have so skillfully deduced the agency responsible for laying down the specs of the Arjun, may you also be skillful enough to figure which was the agency responsible for laying down this new '50 ton' requirement? Was it ISRO?
Then maybe you would also be skilled enough to figure out why the requirement for a ~65T tank was laid down in the first place? Was it to beat Pakistani-operated Chinese T-55/T-62 copies? Please dedicate some brain cells of your's (if you still have any) to figure that one out.
It's truly unfortunate that you appear to disbelieve in the existence of such a thing as changing requirements and threat-assessment.
Looking back in the thread it's laughable that the most sophisticated explanation you could come up with was 'Russian Dalals!' Note that I'm not saying it is untrue - just that it is nowhere as sophisticated an explanation as was expected of you.
That's great. BTW, I find you condescending. And hilarious.
That's a rare combination.
I asked you simple questions. Is it under 'Make' or SP? and what is SP?
And what did you learn from it? Already ready design -> license production by a private company under ToT.
Basically, IA wants Armata. (with the weight constraints)
You didn't get it. Foreign company supplies the design, this is under SP. It has to be under SP because the only other options are the regular Buy and Buy & Make when it comes to dealing with foreign companies.
The actual program itself is under Make. So someone has to prototype it, test it and then produce it, all Indian companies there.
I would recommend reading about the Chinese Z-10.
It's not 'already designed', it's a new design. What the foreign company has to show is they have an existing model (we don't know if it should be production ready or simply prototype ready) which demonstrates their ability to carry out the task.
The actual tank itself will be owned by the Indian govt. So it cannot be Armata. It's more like FGFA, but with full ownership with GoI. Now, if the Russians happily hand over their Armata with full ownership to GoI, then I have a bridge to sell to you.
So if the ownership is held by GoI, how will it become license production?
There's only one thing you can get out of it, the procedure is unprecedented, it's never happened in India before. But the Chinese have already done it, read Z-10. So you cannot apply your knowledge on previous deals to compare with the FRCV. It's not like the T-90 deal, it's not like FGFA either. It's a brand new process.
You should join PKS and write stories. Or else back up with sources.
One post ago you mentioned "Make" Which is used in FICV program which follows the Designing -> developing -> producing with a foreign partner. Did you skip that to mix it up with SP?
Should I post 'Strategic Partner' chapter of DPP? or Maybe you should to prove your fictional new process.
What Z-10 have to do with anything Indian?
FGFA is under SP?
