What's new

Is Reverse engineering a Good Option for India?

There is no system in the planet to destroy a missile if its mirved whether it is IRBM or ICBM.

Its not so simple. AMB systems become useless because they can be overwhelmed in numbers. AMB systems can still take on MIRV warheads given that they do not get overwhelmed.

By the early 1960s, US research on the Nike Zeus missile system (see Project Nike) had developed to the point where small improvements would allow it to be used as the basis of a "real" ABM system. Work started on a short-range, high-speed counterpart known as the Sprint to provide defense for the ABM sites themselves. By the mid-1960s, both systems showed enough promise to start development of base selection for a limited ABM system dubbed Sentinel. However, due to political debate, Sentinel never expanded beyond defense of missile-bases.

An intense debate broke out in public over the merits of such a system. A number of serious concerns about the technical abilities of the system came to light, many of which reached popular magazines such as Scientific American. This was based on lack of intelligence information and reflected the American nuclear warfare theory and military doctrines. The Soviet doctrine called for development of their own ABM system and return to strategic parity with the US. This was achieved with the operational deployment of the A-35 ABM system and its successors, which remain the only operational ABM systems.

As this debate continued, a new development in ICBM technology essentially rendered the points moot. This was the deployment of the Multiple Independently targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) system, allowing a single ICBM missile to deliver several warheads at a time. With this system the USSR could simply overwhelm the ABM defense system with numbers, as the same number of missiles could carry ten times more warheads. Upgrading it to counter the additional warheads would cost more than the handful of missiles needed to overwhelm the new system, as the defenders required one rocket per warhead, whereas the attackers could place 10 warheads on a missile with more affordable cost than development of ABM. To further protect against ABM systems, the Soviet MIRV missiles were equipped with electronic countermeasures and heavy decoys, with heavy missiles like R-36 carrying as many as 40 of them. These decoys would appear as warheads to ABM, effectively requiring engagement of 50 times more targets than before and rendering defense ineffective.

ABM systems are still capable of providing defense

Missile defense categories


Missile defense can be divided into categories based on various characteristics: type/range of missile intercepted, the trajectory phase where the intercept occurs, and whether intercepted inside or outside the Earth's atmosphere:

Classified by type/range of missile intercepted

The types/ranges are strategic, theater and tactical. Each entails unique requirements for intercept, and a defensive system capable of intercepting one missile type frequently cannot intercept others; however there is sometimes overlap in capability.

* Strategic missile defense: Targets long-range ICBMs, which travel at about 7 km/s (15,700 mph). Example of currently active systems: Russian A-135 system which defends Moscow, and the U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system that defends the United States. Geographic range of strategic defense can be regional (Russian system) or national (U.S. system).

* Theater missile defense: Targets medium-range Theatre ballistic missile, which travel at about 3 km/s (6,700 mph) or less. In this context the term "theater" means the entire localized region for military operations, typically a radius of several hundred kilometers. Defense range of theater defensive systems is usually on this order. Examples of deployed or soon-to-be deployed theater missile defenses: THAAD, Airborne laser and Russian S-400 Triumf.

* Tactical missile defense: Targets short-range tactical ballistic missiles, which usually travel at less than 1.5 km/s (3,400 mph). Tactical ABMs have short ranges, typically 20-80 km (12-50 miles). Example of currently-deployed tactical ABM: MIM-104 Patriot, S-300V.

Classified by trajectory phase

Ballistic missiles can be intercepted in three regions of their trajectory: boost phase, midcourse phase or terminal phase.

* Boost phase: intercepting the missile while its rocket motors are firing, usually over the launch territory. Advantages: bright, hot rocket exhaust makes detection, discrimination and targeting easier. Decoys cannot be used during boost phase. Disadvantages: difficult to geographically position interceptors to intercept missiles in boost phase (not always possible without flying over hostile territory), short time for intercept (typically about 180 seconds). Example: aircraft-mounted laser weapon Boeing YAL-1 (under development).

* Mid-course phase: intercepting the missile in space after the rocket burns out. The coast period through space before reentering the atmosphere can be several minutes, up to 20 minutes for an ICBM. Advantages: extended decision/intercept time, very large geographic defensive coverage, potentially continental. Disadvantages: requires large/heavy anti-ballistic missiles, sophisticated powerful radar often augmented by space-based sensors, must handle potential space-based decoys.

* Terminal phase: intercepting the missile after it reenters the atmosphere. Advantages: smaller/lighter anti-ballistic missile required, balloon decoys won't work, smaller, less sophisticated radar required. Disadvantages: very short reaction time, possibly less than 30 seconds, less defended geographic coverage. Possible blanketing of target area with hazardous materials in the case of detonation of nuclear warhead(s).

Classified by intercept location relative to the atmosphere

Missile defense can take place either inside (endoatmospheric) or outside (exoatmospheric) the Earth's atmosphere. The trajectory of most ballistic missiles takes them inside and outside the Earth's atmosphere, and they can be intercepted either place. There are advantages and disadvantages to either intercept technique.

* Endoatmospheric anti-ballistic missiles are usually shorter ranged. Advantages: physically smaller/lighter, easier to move and deploy, endoatmospheric intercept means balloon-type decoys won't work. Disadvantages: limited range and defended area, and limited decision and tracking time for the incoming warhead. Example: MIM-104 Patriot and Advanced Air Defence.

* Exoatmospheric anti-ballistic missiles are usually longer ranged. Advantages: more decision and tracking time, larger defended area with fewer missiles. Disadvantages: larger/heavier missiles required, more difficult to transport and emplace than smaller missiles, must handle decoys. Example: Ground-Based Midcourse Defense and Prithvi Air Defence.

Some missiles such as THAAD can intercept both inside and outside the Earth's atmosphere, giving two intercept opportunities.

Given the fact they are not overwhelmed, by numbers. and AMB systems are capable of differentiating decoys. from real warheads.

Or

Early warning rads and sensors are in place to take down the missiles before reentry.



f125dc6806474502fb5217cb9b4352b6.png


a414919b5ccc9662de51112095286f99.jpg


what the real challenge for AMB systems is

The maneuverable reentry vehicle (abbreviated MARV or MaRV) is a type of nuclear warhead capable of shifting targets in flight. Refer to atmospheric reentry.

There are several types, of which examples include:


* the version designed for the Trident missile, which had to be able to evade Soviet anti-ballistic missile systems.

* the active radar terminal-guidance version with pinpoint accuracy for the MGM-31C Pershing II missile

* the high hypersonic land-based anti-ship ballistic missile variant of the DF-21

* the warheads used by the Russian Topol-M missile which are designed to defeat any US ABM systems.

Although in full scale conflict Any current AMB system can be overwhelmed. in sheer numbers

Its existence ensures that Your nation is not held hostage by rogue groups, who may have acquired scuds and Nukes.
 
Last edited:
.
What I see the difference between the approach between China and India is that China is strive to be indigenous while India seek to import the weapon. The problem for China is that it would take a long time. However, its likely that Chinese defence technology will supass that of Russia and then Western Europe in 20+ years. India will not be able to buy weapons from these countries to have any technical advantage over China so its only option will be the US. I would urge India to join the US camp if it wants to counter China. Otherwise, fail at your own peril. Without US protection and assistance, India would not be able to provide minimal deterrance against China in 20 years.

The reality of the world in which we live is so cold and cruel that one have to believe something to sustain their self-esteem and intoxicate themselves. Although our curry brothers repeatedly told us "you copy, we innovate" stuffs. These stories sounds inspiring but it is even diffcult convince themselves if they have the least commonsense. Actually, they can't be any clear that reverse-engineering can be beneficial and China is also making significant achievements in indigenous design nothing less than they do. J-10 of PLAAF, ZTZ-99G of PLAA, DF-31A ICBM of PLA2nd Artillery, 094 nuclear submarine. I shall say15 years for them to catch up with waht mentioned above is an understatement. what beneath this is the terrible gap between the two nations' research system and industry.

Speaking of reverse-engineering, few of the indian members here even know that the difficulty of "copy" one. For a country which is chasing the US and Russia like china, RE seems to be a shortcut to catch up with the forerunners. In the aircraft engine's case, China decided develop a engine for China's 3rd generation jet fighte in reference to Russia's Al31f. With the advance of the project, they realized that the design of an engine is not crux. How to produce is, because they don't have qualified materials to endure the high-temperature, they can't produce componets precise enough for the demand, even how to wind a prestressed strand is a great problem. After decade-long effort, they finally made one, namely ws-10. After the test of the prototype, they got to realize the greatest problem is not even how to produce it, the reliablity and stablitiy of its function is. It took them almost another decade to improve it. Chinese finally understood the fact that the astronomical amount of money US and Soveit Union lavished in the cold war was not a wasted. There is few shortcut in R&D of cutting-edge tech.

China's aviation industry alone have nearly a million staffs, there are hundreds of institutes, labs, factories dotted in all parts of China. Chengdu Aircraft Complex, Shengyang Aircraft Complex, and Xi'an Aircraft Complex are among the most notable. Besides, more resources are invested in the fields of avionics, radars, propell and weapons. The airframe of J-10 was tested in wind-tunnels for more 10,000 times. There happens to be a institute complex in the neighborhood of my home which develops radars for Y-8 balancebeam AWACS aircraft. even this small insitute has nearly a thousand employees. Still, the achievements we made in avation is very limited because the bottleneck of industry infrastrcuture and the accumulation of tech, For a country which doesn't even has a decent wind-tunneling like india, "copy" one is not even on the schedule. The core componets of its "indigenous design" like Arjun, LCA, Dhruv, etc. are imported without exception. Their joint-programs are merely customized products ordered from the western arm producers. They can't produce their own without the western aid. Because they can't make modernized engine, avionics, radar, etc, missiles. Again, for a country weak in industry and tech, there is no mirache.

Finnally, I think it is unnecessary to blame india for its weapon supply strategy. India and China have different international environments and technology basis. India has long been viewed as the participant of the world order while china is considered to be challenger of that established by western world. In the forseeable furture, india's role as a important strategic partnar of western society in the asia to contain the growing threat arising from the rise of China will be fortified. Therefore, they are accessable to better technology in defense and civil industry in international market than us china, and are less worried about the stablity of weapon supply. What is a realistic and pragmatic choice for them is to take its advantage. Resort to direct purchase, licensed production, or joint-programs which are essentially purchase because they still have to import core components. The reality doesn't permit indian army to depend on or even wait for self-development and imitation completely. it's not that they will not copy, but they can't copy, and dare not copy. if they pissed off these armmongers, they are doomed, but china don't care.
 
Last edited:
.
Like to point out some mis-conceptions out there:

China's major joint defense partners are Turkey, a NATO nation, Egypt, Brazil, and French (the Z-15 is a perfect example). you can google the Sino-Turkey projects like the B-611 or the WS-2 family of missiles.

B-611 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Turkey, though a NATO member, is by no measure a "Western nation". In fact, Turkey is the complete opposite of how Western nations behave - its openly criticizes Israel, makes grand state visits to Iran and explicitly refuses to acknowledge some of the worst violations of human rights (the Armenian genocide). So don't get too excited about your "military relationship" with Turkey. Turkey is drifting apart from Europe and it is natural for it to seek new allies.

Oh, and as far as I know, the B-611 were bought by Turkey. There was little joint-development involved.

Regarding Z-15, Eurocopter entered the deal with Harbin with a purely commercial intention. The helicopter is meant to target European and American civil and law enforcement market, not military market. There was no sensitive technology involved in the manufacturing of this helicopter. So much for your "perfect example".
 
.
no, india with incredible mind shall not do the fucxing reverse engineering as you know it may destroy your creativity!!!!! and you will be despised internationally by the white people like what china now suffers.....china is so stupid.... so india must never follow the wrong path taken by china!!!! show your creativity to the world that you wont have copied craps and never become copycat!!!!create them in house!!! drdo efforts must not be wasted, keep going for the sake of incredible india!!!!!!
 
.
Its not so simple. AMB systems become useless because they can be overwhelmed in numbers. AMB systems can still take on MIRV warheads given that they do not get overwhelmed.



ABM systems are still capable of providing defense



Given the fact they are not overwhelmed, by numbers. and AMB systems are capable of differentiating decoys. from real warheads.

Or

Early warning rads and sensors are in place to take down the missiles before reentry.



f125dc6806474502fb5217cb9b4352b6.png


a414919b5ccc9662de51112095286f99.jpg


what the real challenge for AMB systems is



Although in full scale conflict Any current AMB system can be overwhelmed. in sheer numbers

Its existence ensures that Your nation is not held hostage by rogue groups, who may have acquired scuds and Nukes.

Good article. The US system that is not going as well as it should is the U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system. This is a national wide system that should be able to defeat incoming missile with decoys and counter-measurements. I'm not too sure if it can defeat an MRIV warhead.

If India wants to defeat a free falling theater ranged RI for with no maneuverable warhead, it should be doable. I believe if this is what India is targeting, than it make sense to do it without too much knowledge. But if its trying to emulate the U.S. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system. Good luck and the money should be going some where else.
 
.
no, india with incredible mind shall not do the fucxing reverse engineering as you know it may destroy your creativity!!!!! and you will be despised internationally by the white people like what china now suffers.....china is so stupid.... so india must never follow the wrong path taken by china!!!! show your creativity to the world that you wont have copied craps and never become copycat!!!!create them in house!!! drdo efforts must not be wasted, keep going for the sake of incredible india!!!!!!

India is trying to do that now. That is why its not going any where for most of its weaponry.
 
.
The reality of the world in which we live is so cold and cruel that one have to believe something to sustain their self-esteem and intoxicate themselves. Although our curry brothers repeatedly told us "you copy, we innovate" stuffs. These stories sounds inspiring but it is even diffcult convince themselves if they have the least commonsense. Actually, they can't be any clear that reverse-engineering can be beneficial and China is also making significant achievements in indigenous design nothing less than they do. J-10 of PLAAF, ZTZ-99G of PLAA, DF-31A ICBM of PLA2nd Artillery, 094 nuclear submarine. I shall say15 years for them to catch up with waht mentioned above is an understatement. what beneath this is the terrible gap between the two nations' research system and industry.

Speaking of reverse-engineering, few of the indian members here even know that the difficulty of "copy" one. For a country which is chasing the US and Russia like china, RE seems to be a shortcut to catch up with the forerunners. In the aircraft engine's case, China decided develop a engine for China's 3rd generation jet fighte in reference to Russia's Al31f. With the advance of the project, they realized that the design of an engine is not crux. How to produce is, because they don't have qualified materials to endure the high-temperature, they can't produce componets precise enough for the demand, even how to wind a prestressed strand is a great problem. After decade-long effort, they finally made one, namely ws-10. After the test of the prototype, they got to realize the greatest problem is not even how to produce it, the reliablity and stablitiy of its function is. It took them almost another decade to improve it. Chinese finally understood the fact that the astronomical amount of money US and Soveit Union lavished in the cold war was not a wasted. There is few shortcut in R&D of cutting-edge tech.

China's aviation industry alone have nearly a million staffs, there are hundreds of institutes, labs, factories dotted in all parts of China. Chengdu Aircraft Complex, Shengyang Aircraft Complex, and Xi'an Aircraft Complex are among the most notable. Besides, more resources are invested in the fields of avionics, radars, propell and weapons. The airframe of J-10 was tested in wind-tunnels for more 10,000 times. There happens to be a institute complex in the neighborhood of my home which develops radars for Y-8 balancebeam AWACS aircraft. even this small insitute has nearly a thousand employees. Still, the achievements we made in avation is very limited because the bottleneck of industry infrastrcuture and the accumulation of tech, For a country which doesn't even has a decent wind-tunneling like india, "copy" one is not even on the schedule. The core componets of its "indigenous design" like Arjun, LCA, Dhruv, etc. are imported without exception. Their joint-programs are merely customized products ordered from the western arm producers. They can't produce their own without the western aid. Because they can't make modernized engine, avionics, radar, etc, missiles. Again, for a country weak in industry and tech, there is no mirache.

Finnally, I think it is unnecessary to blame india for its weapon supply strategy. India and China have different international environments and technology basis. India has long been viewed as the participant of the world order while china is considered to be challenger of that established by western world. In the forseeable furture, india's role as a important strategic partnar of western society in the asia to contain the growing threat arising from the rise of China will be fortified. Therefore, they are accessable to better technology in defense and civil industry in international market than us china, and are less worried about the stablity of weapon supply. What is a realistic and pragmatic choice for them is to take its advantage. Resort to direct purchase, licensed production, or joint-programs which are essentially purchase because they still have to import core components. The reality doesn't permit indian army to depend on or even wait for self-development and imitation completely. it's not that they will not copy, but they can't copy, and dare not copy. if they pissed off these armmongers, they are doomed, but china don't care.

India lack total weapon development requirements. China has more capability in this area.

Everyone want to sell India weapons. No one except China want to sell China weapons. That is why China need to reverse engineer. Also, India lack capability to reverse engineer.

No wonder Indian members are so against reverse engineering.

Very good analysis that explain why China choose to go its way of producing indigenous weaponry and why India choose to go with foreign suppliers. Thats why in my opinion, India is wasting money buying ToT or developing its own weaponry if everyone want to sell their latest weapons (except of course, the US) to India. US only sells older tech any way. :usflag::usflag:
 
.
Is Reverse engineering a Good Option for India ?

Answer= No, not a option at all, because India simply lack the needed

technonogy to reverse engineering.


India never reverse engineering any weapon ?

Answer=Wrong=Proof=The Indian armed forces had been equipped with an unlicensed reverse-engineered copy of the famous Belgian FN FAL rifle since the 1950s
INSAS rifle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :smitten::pakistan::china:

thats not true my friend if there is technology to build by R&D then certainly there is tech for reverse engineering.

Our scientists have chosen a different rout :cheers:
 
.
thats not true my friend if there is technology to build by R&D then certainly there is tech for reverse engineering.

Our scientists have chosen a different rout :cheers:

Seems like the scientist are more systems scientist. Shop around the world for the best components and put them together. This actually take a strong systems integration knowledge as one component can be from Russia and another from France. So India and China has different knowledge.

China=Reverse Engineering Knowledge
India= Foreign Component and systems integration knowledge
US = :usflag::usflag::usflag::usflag:
 
.
Turkey, though a NATO member, is by no measure a "Western nation". In fact, Turkey is the complete opposite of how Western nations behave - its openly criticizes Israel, makes grand state visits to Iran and explicitly refuses to acknowledge some of the worst violations of human rights (the Armenian genocide). So don't get too excited about your "military relationship" with Turkey. Turkey is drifting apart from Europe and it is natural for it to seek new allies.

Oh, and as far as I know, the B-611 were bought by Turkey. There was little joint-development involved.

Regarding Z-15, Eurocopter entered the deal with Harbin with a purely commercial intention. The helicopter is meant to target European and American civil and law enforcement market, not military market. There was no sensitive technology involved in the manufacturing of this helicopter. So much for your "perfect example".


The point is that Russian is not the only source of china's military tech. Z-15 is a military chopper.

even after all the copyright issues, western companies are still rushing in to China for dual-use tech. Airbue, Boeing, GE, to name a few.


Sorry, it was a "perfect example" as Turkish engineers were in China for a period of three years and since it is a JV, turkey can sell the B6111 if there is a buyer.

Of course, you can believe whatever you want, I am not here to change the Indian view that Russian and Pakistan are the only nations with military R&D relationships with China. So, do continue.

There was no sensitive technology involved in the manufacturing of this helicopter
More power to you.


Turkey is drifting apart from Europe and it is natural for it to seek new allies.

Trash talking about turkey does not change the fact that it has a military relations with China, someone other than Russia/Pakistan. So are Egypt, Brazil, and French
 
Last edited:
.
I already said my 2 cents on the reverse engineering issue, a while back.
Have a read if you have not already.

Gogbot, this was a truly GOOD post buddy ..... much appreciated! :tup:

Wish someone gives it a positive ranking too in addition to the many thanks you're sure to receive .....

Cheers, Doc
 
.
The point is that Russian is not the only source of china's military tech. Z-15 is a military chopper.

Call it whatever you want but Eurocopter EC175 is just a utility helicopter primarily targeted at the civilian market.

even after all the copyright issues, western companies are still rushing in to China for dual-use tech. Airbue, Boeing, GE, to name a few.

Yes but they are only rushing to China to capture its civilian market, not military market.

Sorry, it was a "perfect example" as Turkish engineers were in China for a period of three years and since it is a JV, turkey can sell the B6111 if there is a buyer.

Of course, you can believe whatever you want, I am not here to change the Indian view that Russian and Pakistan are the only nations with military R&D relationships with China. So, do continue.

Trash talking about turkey does not change the fact that it has a military relations with China, someone other than Russia/Pakistan. So are Egypt, Brazil, and French

Ahm... dude... it's obvious that China has quite a few military partners. Obviously developing nations like Brazil and Egypt will look to China so as to get their hands on military equipment for a low price. The entire point of my argument was that almost all military partners of China are military technology recipients. There are very few nations, especially among Western nations, who want to share their military technology with China.

I hope that makes things clearer.
 
.
Call it whatever you want but Eurocopter EC175 is just a utility helicopter primarily targeted at the civilian market.


Ok, I see what you are saying, but my point is that while China has an military embargo against it and for the right reason. However, that did not stop China from getting dual-use tech as listed below (just some examples)



It is Z-15, a military designation. It's core is serving as basis for the WZ-10 project, the WZ-10 is also powered by the same Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC)'s PT6C-67C engines

The Type054 FFG build on the French La Fayette FFG design, Z-8F again powered by three Canadian engines.

Type 69/79/85 MBT are equipped with Israeli's 105mm L-7 TankGun, All PLAAF's AAAM are equipped with Israeli seekers.


Yes but they are only rushing to China to capture its civilian market, not military market.

The Brits are into the actions too and there is nothing civilian about deep sea subs, the same tech DSRV uses can easily applied to elsewhere.



'Most advanced' rescue sub tested
BBC NEWS | UK | Scotland | Highlands and Islands | 'Most advanced' rescue sub tested
Wednesday, 10 September 2008 12:27 UK

visit link for video clip


Rescue vessel
The rescue sub can operate in depths of up to 300 metres.

The world's most advanced rescue submarine, commissioned by the Chinese Navy, is undergoing trials at an underwater centre in Fort William.

Capable of operating in depths of more than 300 metres, its size means it can rescue up to 18 people at once.

The trials are taking place in Loch Linnhe, where water depths are up to 150 metres.

The vessel could deal with incidents such as Russia's Kursk disaster 2000, in which 118 sailors died.

Once the first phase of tests are completed, the LR7 will take part in a simulated rescue.

The final phase of trials, part of an extensive testing and design process, will include pilot training.

The vessel was designed and developed by Perry Slingsby Systems, part of the Aberdeen-based Triton Group.

BBC reporter Ben Geoghan described the experience of going down in the submarine as "quite comfortable". He said the main advantage of the LR7 is its large size.

He added: "There is, what someone described to me, as something of an underwater space race going on. One which presumably the Chinese now are leading, but the Koreans and Singaporeans are not far behind.

"The real test will come when we do get another accident at sea involving a sub to see which vessel is deployed and whether they do manage to bring back survivors."

The rescue submarine itself has a relatively quick turnaround time and can stay underwater for up to four days.

Martin Anderson, chief executive of Triton Group, said it was an "extremely exciting development".

After the trial is complete, the LR7 will undergo further checks and be fitted with ancillary equipment before being delivered to China for sea trials.
 
.
...

India will never pursue reverse engineering because India always stands by its commitment to its military suppliers. ....

So Chinese people... continue showing off your awesome "reverse-engineering skills".


Friend, please enjoy the following slaps on your high-moral-ground ugly face: :lol:

Indian Workshop on Reverse Engineering(IWRE).
Home
Call for Papers
Important Dates
Submission of Papers
Keynotes
Location
Contact Us
Organizers
CDAC
TCS


The first Indian Workshop on Reverse Engineering (IWRE) organized by Center for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), Mumbai and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) will be held on 25 Feb. 2010 in Mysore, India.

IWRE provides an international forum for researchers, developers and users interested in Reverse Engineering issues and its applications. Participants will include practitioners and researchers from industry, academia and government. The workshop aims at discussions and active participation which will help evolve the future directions for the field of reverse engineering. The idea of the workshop is to bring together end users, researchers, solution providers together to get an overall understanding of the state of art and where it should be headed.

Design Engineering services Delhi | Product development centre in ...
Reverse engineering services India. Injection Moulds design India. CNC machining services Delhi. » Reverse Engineering ...
Design Engineering services Delhi | Product development centre in Delhi | Offshore Mechanical CAD services | 3D Graphic Design Services India | Product Design Services delhi

Digitizing & Reverse Engineering Services Exporter,Pune ...
We are an organization which is equipped with the facilities for undertaking reverse engineering activity along with full product development activity.
www.tradeindia.com/.../Digitizing-Reverse-Engineering-Services.html

Rapid Prototyping Services Punjab: Reverse Engineering Service ...
Netgains provides Low-cost and efficient Outsource rapid prototyping, reverse engineering services including architecture prototyping services India.
Netgains | Website Development Services | Software Development and Design | Business IT Support Services | Graphic Design Solutions | AutoCAD Drafting | Architectural CAD Drafting Outsourcing

PCB Reverse Engineering - Established by Qualified Engg
PCB Reverse Engineering - Delhi, India - Specialist in PCB reverse engineering from bare or component loaded PCB.Established by Qualified Engg. from Elect ...
PCB Reverse Engineering - Established by Qualified Engg

3D Reverse Engineering Services, delhi, India 2437475
Providing product design solutions, light scanning services, 3D white light scanning, 3D CAD modelling, 3D reverse engineering, reverse engineering services ...
3D Reverse Engineering Services, delhi, India 2437475

Silobreaker: Reverse Engineering
Reverse engineering is a very common practice in semiconductor business. .... India is already one of the top players in global generic pharma industry. ...
Reverse Engineering - Silobreaker
 
.
The reality of the world in which we live is so cold and cruel that one have to believe something to sustain their self-esteem and intoxicate themselves. Although our curry brothers repeatedly told us "you copy, we innovate" stuffs. These stories sounds inspiring but it is even diffcult convince themselves if they have the least commonsense. Actually, they can't be any clear that reverse-engineering can be beneficial and China is also making significant achievements in indigenous design nothing less than they do. J-10 of PLAAF, ZTZ-99G of PLAA, DF-31A ICBM of PLA2nd Artillery, 094 nuclear submarine. I shall say15 years for them to catch up with waht mentioned above is an understatement. what beneath this is the terrible gap between the two nations' research system and industry.

Speaking of reverse-engineering, few of the indian members here even know that the difficulty of "copy" one. For a country which is chasing the US and Russia like china, RE seems to be a shortcut to catch up with the forerunners. In the aircraft engine's case, China decided develop a engine for China's 3rd generation jet fighte in reference to Russia's Al31f. With the advance of the project, they realized that the design of an engine is not crux. How to produce is, because they don't have qualified materials to endure the high-temperature, they can't produce componets precise enough for the demand, even how to wind a prestressed strand is a great problem. After decade-long effort, they finally made one, namely ws-10. After the test of the prototype, they got to realize the greatest problem is not even how to produce it, the reliablity and stablitiy of its function is. It took them almost another decade to improve it. Chinese finally understood the fact that the astronomical amount of money US and Soveit Union lavished in the cold war was not a wasted. There is few shortcut in R&D of cutting-edge tech.

China's aviation industry alone have nearly a million staffs, there are hundreds of institutes, labs, factories dotted in all parts of China. Chengdu Aircraft Complex, Shengyang Aircraft Complex, and Xi'an Aircraft Complex are among the most notable. Besides, more resources are invested in the fields of avionics, radars, propell and weapons. The airframe of J-10 was tested in wind-tunnels for more 10,000 times. There happens to be a institute complex in the neighborhood of my home which develops radars for Y-8 balancebeam AWACS aircraft. even this small insitute has nearly a thousand employees. Still, the achievements we made in avation is very limited because the bottleneck of industry infrastrcuture and the accumulation of tech, For a country which doesn't even has a decent wind-tunneling like india, "copy" one is not even on the schedule. The core componets of its "indigenous design" like Arjun, LCA, Dhruv, etc. are imported without exception. Their joint-programs are merely customized products ordered from the western arm producers. They can't produce their own without the western aid. Because they can't make modernized engine, avionics, radar, etc, missiles. Again, for a country weak in industry and tech, there is no mirache.

Finnally, I think it is unnecessary to blame india for its weapon supply strategy. India and China have different international environments and technology basis. India has long been viewed as the participant of the world order while china is considered to be challenger of that established by western world. In the forseeable furture, india's role as a important strategic partnar of western society in the asia to contain the growing threat arising from the rise of China will be fortified. Therefore, they are accessable to better technology in defense and civil industry in international market than us china, and are less worried about the stablity of weapon supply. What is a realistic and pragmatic choice for them is to take its advantage. Resort to direct purchase, licensed production, or joint-programs which are essentially purchase because they still have to import core components. The reality doesn't permit indian army to depend on or even wait for self-development and imitation completely. it's not that they will not copy, but they can't copy, and dare not copy. if they pissed off these armmongers, they are doomed, but china don't care.

Excellent analysis!

India, since the day one of its independence, has been a listening pet child of the west. It never challenges western norms; instead, it follows the west in every step with the most careful servitude, even the political systems. Some Indians I met are more proud of traveling in Europe than traveling to their home country India.

In fact, modern India, unlike the great ancient Bharat, dares not challenge, or can not afford to challenge, the west. Once it challenges, it finishes itself, from political system to military industry, from ideology to social value…

I’m not saying it is not good: it is the way for India to survive (not to lead, though). And the west loves it, too.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom