IAF vice-chief prefers reverse engg to build defence systems

[gubbi]

So what if these big corporations don't want to do business with us how long we as a nation are going to buy weapons from others.Going by your theory does the systems produced by ISRO are third grade tech.Reverse eng is just a starting point we have expertise to create a second version with our added input in any reverse eng products which will be better than original.

That is exactly what the Chinese believe, and we all know the reputation of Chinese made goods! Reverse engineered products being better than originals is a fallacious argument!

 

[lhuang]

^ *facepalm*

Reverse engineering means having to understand how things are done, it doesn't mean you just blindly copy everything.

 

[AVADI]

That is exactly what the Chinese believe, and we all know the reputation of Chinese made goods! Reverse engineered products being better than originals is a fallacy!

Well that is what westener's made every one believe.Matter of fact is no one knows how good Chinese systems are they may be bad as you claim they may also be good.

 

[Pride]

Without permission from OEM, reverse-engineering or copying, both are the same - same wine - different bottles!

True.. same I was quoting...

 

[Honor]

Well that is what westener's made every one believe.Matter of fact is no one knows how good Chinese systems are they may be bad as you claim they may also be good.

That's a good interpretation. .

 

[prototype]

So what if these big corporations don't want to do business with us how long we as a nation are going to buy weapons from others.Going by your theory does the systems produced by ISRO are third grade tech.Reverse eng is just a starting point we have expertise to create a second version with our added input in any reverse eng products which will be better than original.

we need big corporation as far as we develop technology that have the same features as what they offer

france took 20 yrs to develop rafale,so did they abandoned the program and stuck with the reverse eng theory,no,they took time and produced 1 of the finest fighter in the world

and isro never indulged in any reverse eng

dude their is a big difference between technical assistance and reverse engineering

 

[lhuang]

This is probably coming from frustration at slow development times.

 

[prototype]

and that is nice way to defend copy pasting

 

[HariSeldon]

Well that is what westener's made every one believe.Matter of fact is no one knows how good Chinese systems are they may be bad as you claim they may also be good.

Then why PK is looking for French Avionics? They must have some adv in that. And the report has cited the theft of tech as one of the many reason which might be holding this deal.

Beside reverse copying does not garuntee success. If I am not wrong Engine tech is still one area where CN is struggling. We are also struggling, but we are able to get the help of leaders in this field to sort out the problem area.

And what happens if some new Weapon Sys comes into picture tommorow which is not the linear progression of todays tech. Nobody will offer us any product to reverse engg.

Regarding the comment made by VC, If this remarks are off-the-cuff then this is matter of concern. Any public comment by senior person represent POV of Govt.

 

[Donatello]

Oh man, what a lovely moment for our Indian members!

Reverse Engineering? So that's a nice way of saying 'Copying and stealing', the funny part is that the IAF vice-chief plainly says to go the Chinese way...


Tsk Tsk....

 

[Donatello]

we need big corporation as far as we develop technology that have the same features as what they offer

france took 20 yrs to develop rafale,so did they abandoned the program and stuck with the reverse eng theory,no,they took time and produced 1 of the finest fighter in the world

and isro never indulged in any reverse eng

dude their is a big difference between technical assistance and reverse engineering

Actually it took France such a long time because they were alone on the program costing tens of billions of dollars and had to slow the research and production quite a few times. 20 years for a fighter that will last at least 3 decades ain't bad at all.

 

[prototype]

Actually it took France such a long time because they were alone on the program costing tens of billions of dollars and had to slow the research and production quite a few times. 20 years for a fighter that will last at least 3 decades ain't bad at all.

i never said here they were alone or they were having partners

u completely missed the bottomline,they developed it at the cost of time rather than going for reverse eng

 

[prototype]

Then why PK is looking for French Avionics? They must have some adv in that. And the report has cited the theft of tech as one of the many reason which might be holding this deal.

Beside reverse copying does not garuntee success. If I am not wrong Engine tech is still one area where CN is struggling. We are also struggling, but we are able to get the help of leaders in this field to sort out the problem area.

And what happens if some new Weapon Sys comes into picture tommorow which is not the linear progression of todays tech. Nobody will offer us any product to reverse engg.

Regarding the comment made by VC, If this remarks are off-the-cuff then this is matter of concern. Any public comment by senior person represent POV of Govt.

yes true,thats what i was also saying,reverse eng is a temorary solution not a permanent

 

[Donatello]

i never said here they were alone or they were having partners

u completely missed the bottomline,they developed it at the cost of time rather than going for reverse eng

I didn't miss anything...

To reverse engineer you need something that has already been fully developed. Take the Mig 21 for example. It did take Chinese some time and testing to make their F-7. You cannot simply make Rafale of the standard that it is today by reverse engineering.

The program started in 1986. The top fighters in development at the time were F-16 BLK 52 and F-15C/Ds and F/A 18 plus the new JSF and F/A 22. Which one could have been used for reverse engineering?

USA wouldn't provide the samples. And obviously you are not going to reverse engineer F-16 because then you will end up with a cheaper f-16, not more advanced. Rafale is half a gen ahead of the F-16 BLK 15/20s. That's what is going to make it last 30 more years. I don't see F-16s going that long. When you start from scratch, it takes hell lot of time, but you learn alot, your R&D increases substantially.

I am studying engineering in USA. The way they teach us to think originally and innovatively is something that Pakistan, China or India can not do at the moment. We have to put money into R&D at the university level and then corporations. The western world from the start has been original. Look how many patents they get every year and look how many actually turn into excellent ventures.

Reverse engineering solves the time problem. Less time, less development costs. But you learn nothing. There is a reason why we the south asian countries lack in Metallurgy and composites. Had we been developing our own fighters/ships/submarines from scratch, we too would be leaders of innovation. The French had immense experience with the Mirage series. That's what helped them.

What is it that they say......'that need is the mother of invention '


Long post but please do try to read it.

 

[prototype]

I didn't miss anything...

To reverse engineer you need something that has already been fully developed. Take the Mig 21 for example. It did take Chinese some time and testing to make their F-7. You cannot simply make Rafale of the standard that it is today by reverse engineering.

The program started in 1986. The top fighters in development at the time were F-16 BLK 52 and F-15C/Ds and F/A 18 plus the new JSF and F/A 22. Which one could have been used for reverse engineering?

USA wouldn't provide the samples. And obviously you are not going to reverse engineer F-16 because then you will end up with a cheaper f-16, not more advanced. Rafale is half a gen ahead of the F-16 BLK 15/20s. That's what is going to make it last 30 more years. I don't see F-16s going that long. When you start from scratch, it takes hell lot of time, but you learn alot, your R&D increases substantially.

I am studying engineering in USA. The way they teach us to think originally and innovatively is something that Pakistan, China or India can not do at the moment. We have to put money into R&D at the university level and then corporations. The western world from the start has been original. Look how many patents they get every year and look how many actually turn into excellent ventures.

Reverse engineering solves the time problem. Less time, less development costs. But you learn nothing. There is a reason why we the south asian countries lack in Metallurgy and composites. Had we been developing our own fighters/ships/submarines from scratch, we too would be leaders of innovation. The French had immense experience with the Mirage series. That's what helped them.

What is it that they say......'that need is the mother of invention '


Long post but please do try to read it.

sir i never discussed here anything abt chinese reverse engineering capacity

by giving example of rafele i am just quoting that india should go their way even if it take time and even if we have to start from scratch as only self development can bolster our R@D capability