What's new

India wants technology co-production with US

SpArK

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
22,519
Reaction score
18
Country
India
Location
India
India wants technology co-production with US


27-indo-us-flag.jpg


Washington, Sep 27: Defence Minister, AK Antony stated that India is more concerned about the technology transfer and co-production with US rather than mere buyer-seller relation.



"Now, our approach is rather than buyer-seller relations, we want technology transfers, and if possible co-production and joint production,"Antony said during his US tour on Sep 27.


US defence secretary Gates also expressed their willingness to build strong military-to-military ties with India.

"We are looking to expand this relationship in ways that are mutually beneficial," Gates said.

He continued, "They (India) have a big competition going on for a new modern fighter. We'll probably have some conversations about that."

Antony also hinted that they would raise their concern before US that Pakistan is misusing the arms, which were supplied by US to fight against terrorism.

However, Antony claimed that Pakistan used the supplied arms against India.




India US Relationship | AK Antony | Technology Co-production - Oneindia News
 
Hmm I believe we offered the ToT with MRCA competition with our F-16 IN, and our F-18 SH, especially made for India with specifications.. But looks like you're not going with our Fighter Jets in your competition.. So, No ToT for you :(.

-But other than we that don't even give our most sophisticated technology to the Israeli's even with their Jewish lobby in our government. So what makes you think we're going to give it you lol??
 
Hmm I believe we offered the ToT with MRCA competition with our F-16 IN, and our F-18 SH, especially made for India with specifications.. But looks like you're not going with our Fighter Jets in your competition.. So, No ToT for you :(.

-But other than we that don't even give our most sophisticated technology to the Israeli's even with their Jewish lobby in our government. So what makes you think we're going to give it you lol??

Thats true , no fighters.... no ToT of them..

Pure Genius.!!!!!:tup::tup:
 
technology transfer and co-production are two different thing..

a boat full of written material could be send as ToT , which would be of no prectical use ,

the only little prectical benifit that india going to get will be throgh industrial offset.

under offset policy the vendor is mandatery will have to buy 30% of the cost matrial from local indian menufecturer , if then vendor won't find the existing facility of the matrial in india then they will have form a JV with a indian company and this way not only give the tech but also help them to prectically produce that material for them..

there is a nice article written on this issue :
Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?


Transfer of technology has been a buzz phrase in India for defense acquisitions since decades. So far India has little to show for all the technology transfers and license production that have taken place.

I have heard the phrase being bandied by politicians, bureaucrats and technocrats, since my school days, nearly 40 years ago.

India has been manufacturing MiG-21 variants since the 70s. Let alone developing a new aircraft based on the MiG-21, HAL was never able to even improve the aircraft in any way - Adding a dorsal fuel tank, for example, as in the MiG-21 Bis.

India designed and developed the Marut HF-24 in the late 1960's with assistance from German designer Dr. Kurt Tank and a lot of British help. HAL could never come up with a follow up.


Whether transfer of technology works or not is linked to the technology base that a country has developed.

Talk to any DRDO official and they tell you the Russian never transfer technology.

At Aero India 2009 the DRDO chief publically termed Russian TOT as a farce.

What DRDO officials mean is that the Russians don't tell us how to build their products from scratch. The question is not only - Should they be telling you how to do so? - but also - Can they effectively tell how to do - considering that we do not have a technological base matching theirs?

A large amount of metal alloys and composites goes into an aircraft. The alloys used differ from each aircraft component. The strength of the metal varies with the manufacturing process used to produce it. When transferring technology should the manufacturer tell from where to source the metal or how to manufacture it? If your country hasn't mastered the manufacturing processes what good would that do?

Recently someone referred to the possible French and Swedish readiness to part with source code for their AESA radars. (I am not aware this is true.)

While getting the source code along with the radar helps, it cannot be construed as transfer of technology.

Anyone who has worked with software knows the complexities of imbibing code.

Any code is based on thousands and thousands of lines of library code. Is the library source also being offered? Even if it is being, you will need to spend months, possibly years, to understand its flow and logic.

How generic is the code? How much generic can it be? Hardware specific code tends to be less generic to facilitate faster development and processing. Reuse of code is also limited by continuous improvements in hardware and software.

Code that took 100 person years to develop cannot be mastered within one or two months, even if you deploy 2,000 people for hacking it, assuming the cost of deploying 2,000 top notch software professionals on the project makes economic sense.

The example, is applicable to most electronic components fitted on a fighter aircraft, each of which uses software.

No transfer of technology allows you to copy manufacture. You can only license produce the quantity negotiated. So the vendors hold back a lot of data, like wind tunnel and flight testing data that would make it easy to modify the aircraft.

Broadly speaking, with a TOT agreement in place, the manufacturer will share with you just enough information to allow sourcing non critical components from the domestic market, or certain acceptable foreign markets.

If we buy the Rafale, the French are not going to teach us how to build a fifth generation version of the Rafale.

Talking about French friendliness, here is a detail that I have mentioned elsewhere on this site. When they supplied us the Durandal runway denial bombs for use on the Jaguars, they missed out on a small detail that prevented the Jaguar from dropping it.

The IAF discovered the flaw years after acquiring the bombs, when Jaguars attempted to test fire them on a target runway in Pokharan for the first time.

Pre acquisition trials were conducted in France and since the bomb was so expensive IAF waited for the life of the first lot of bombs to nearly expire before testing them. Three Jaguars unsuccessfully attempted to release the bombs in front of the Defense minister, COAS and other top officials.

There were a lot of red faces that day, not just in the squadron tasked with the trials but right up the chain of command.

The software patch, when it arrived from France, took minutes.

the squadron was flying HAL manufactured Jaguars.


Transfer of Technology (TOT): Myth or reality?
 
Hmm I believe we offered the ToT with MRCA competition with our F-16 IN, and our F-18 SH, especially made for India with specifications.. But looks like you're not going with our Fighter Jets in your competition.. So, No ToT for you :(.

-But other than we that don't even give our most sophisticated technology to the Israeli's even with their Jewish lobby in our government. So what makes you think we're going to give it you lol??

Yeah buddy US never shares the tech with any one and it is not something new.... For country like ours it is like nearly impossible.. TOT is not for Fighters but for other deals which we will have with US in future...
And only for MMRCA most of us share the same feeling .. no no for US....and it would be better if Lockeed and Boeing pulls out of competition.. so that New Delhi wont be under pressure for Washington while it can be awarded to technologically less advance fighters compared to US...
 

After reading this article, all I can say is that we need to start new projects within the country itself.

I was initially hesitant abt MCA since we would already be having FGFA/PAK0FA and possibly the naval version of JSF, if offered to Indian Navy.

But I now feel, we must throw our industrial and financial might behind the MCA project.
 
India wants technology co-production with US


27-indo-us-flag.jpg


Washington, Sep 27: Defence Minister, AK Antony stated that India is more concerned about the technology transfer and co-production with US rather than mere buyer-seller relation.


"Now, our approach is rather than buyer-seller relations, we want technology transfers, and if possible co-production and joint production,"Antony said during his US tour on Sep 27.


US defence secretary Gates also expressed their willingness to build strong military-to-military ties with India.

"We are looking to expand this relationship in ways that are mutually beneficial," Gates said.

He continued, "They (India) have a big competition going on for a new modern fighter. We'll probably have some conversations about that."

Antony also hinted that they would raise their concern before US that Pakistan is misusing the arms, which were supplied by US to fight against terrorism.

However, Antony claimed that Pakistan used the supplied arms against India.




India US Relationship | AK Antony | Technology Co-production - Oneindia News

Transfer of Technology..:usflag:
Two words - "Not possible."

Co-Production..

1)Probably a partnership in the F-35 JSF program (If chosen for the Indian Navy)

2) A production facility for F-16s if chosen for the MMRCA. (Like that of Turkey)

Other than these two, I'm not very positive that anything, what Mr Anthony has suggested, would materialise.
:coffee:
 
The article talks about Co-developement of projects and not TOT.

These are two different things.
 
-But other than we that don't even give our most sophisticated technology to the Israeli's even with their Jewish lobby in our government. So what makes you think we're going to give it you lol??

Simply money! Your economy is in a crisis and needs exports, we have a big requirement for arms and techs, as well as the money to pay for these deals. We don't need loans, or even fundings of you like Israel (how much does Isreal really pay for the 20 x F35 that are worth $3 billions and how much does US gov pay?). You can simply make much more money with these big deals with us, than with smaller deals with Israel, not to mention that co-production in India will reduce the costs of your arms and techs too. That's why the Europeans are ready for it and are offering these things, so if you want to win these big deals, you should offer us the same too.
 
Indian Delegation in Arms Talks With Washington
By Vivek Raghuvanshi
Published: 27 Sep 2010 11:31

NEW DELHI - Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony has begun talks with U.S. officials in Washington to win approval to purchase unspecified numbers of weapons and equipment that could be inked during President Barack Obama's visit to New Delhi in November, said Indian Defence Ministry sources.

Antony arrived in Washington on Sept. 26 heading what a senior Indian Defence Ministry official called a "high-powered delegation" to hold talks with U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Adviser James Jones. The delegation includes Indian Permanent Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar and the defense minister's adviser, Sundaram Krishna.


The Defence Ministry official said that while New Delhi is concerned over U.S. arms sales to Pakistan and the continuation of U.S. export controls against several Indian entities, New Delhi wants to increase defense ties with Washington.

Indian Defence Ministry sources said the weapons under discussion will include anti-ballistic missile systems and the sale of C-17 transport aircraft.

India plans to procure the David's Sling and Iron Dome missile defense systems. David's Sling is a joint effort between Rafael of Israel and Raytheon of the United States. New Delhi, which has already discussed the program with Israel, also needs to gets clearance from Washington because it is a joint Israel-U.S. program. :tup::tup::tup::tup:

The Indian military wants David's Sling and Iron Dome to protect against cruise missiles. The Indian Air Force favors David's Sling because it is an effective hit-to-kill interceptor against short-range ballistic missiles, rockets and cruise missiles.


Indian Delegation in Arms Talks With Washington - Defense News
 
David's sling missile

David_sling_missile.jpg




David's Sling , also sometimes called Magic Wand is an Israel Defense Forces military system being jointly developed by the Israeli defense contractor Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and the American defense contractor Raytheon, designed to intercept medium- to long-range rockets.


The interceptor is a two-stage missile, with two targeting and guidance systems installed in its nose-tip (a radar and an electro-optic sensor).

In 2006 Rafael was awarded a contract to develop a defense system to counter the threat of medium- to long-range rockets with ranges between 70 km and 250 km.

In order to enable Israel to make use of the financial aid provided by the United States to further develop the system and to produce it, a partnership was established with Raytheon which will be developing missile firing unit and overall logistic system and assist Rafael with developing interceptor. In some of Raytheon's publications, the interceptor is referred to as "Stunner." First live fire test of missile is scheduled for 2010.


The increasing danger of rocket and missile fire against Israel (Qassam rocket fire from Gaza, Katyusha rocket fire from southern Lebanon, and Iran's ballistic missile arsenal) has led to the development of defense systems to counter this threat. In addition to the David's Sling system, which is designed to intercept medium- and long-range rockets, the Iron Dome system, with which it will be used in conjunction, has also been developed in order to intercept short-range rockets (4–70 km), while the Arrow missile, designed to intercept ballistic missiles, is already in use.
 


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top Bottom