What's new

TWO MAJOR WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS EXIT INDIAN ARMY’S SMALL ARMS TENDER

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Colt_M4_Assault_Rifle.jpg



A Colt M4 Carbine

Colt & Beretta were offering weapons for 7.62x51 mm battle rifle and 5.56x45 mm carbine requirements. Army plans to import 72,000 assault rifles and 94,000 carbines on a fast track basis. The army hopes to complete the acquisition of all the weapons in 12 months
by Sandeep Unnithan

The Indian army quest to equip its soldiers with modern rifle and carbines suffered a setback this week when two major weapons manufacturers, US gunmaker Colt and Italy's Beretta, pulled out of the contest. Both Colt and Beretta were offering weapons for the 7.62 x 51 mm battle rifle and the 5.56 x 45 mm carbine requirements. The two companies were not among the dozen-odd firms which had responded to the Indian army's Request for Proposals (RFP) by May 7.

While the exact reasons for the pullout are not known, at least one of the manufacturers is believed to have written a letter to the army citing unrealistic timeframes and stiff financial clauses.

The army plans to import 72,000 assault rifles and 94,000 carbines on a fast track basis for over Rs 3,500 crore. It had issued RFPs on 17 global arms manufacturers in February this year citing urgent operational requirements for its troops. These small arms are meant to replace the armys stock of INSAS rifles and vintage Sterling 9 mm carbines. A fast track procedure bypasses the lengthy trial process associated with regular purchases. The army hopes to complete the acquistion of all the weapons in 12 months, a time frame stipulated by the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) 2016.

The bids from the other firms in the assault rifle and carbien tenders are believed to have been opened on May 8 and the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) that convened on May 10 and is to submit its report in 10 days.

Global arms makers have been largely lukewarm to the army's small arms procurement. Two of the largest gunmakers FN Herstal of Belgium and Germany's Heckler & Koch did not even participate in the small arms tender.

Some clauses in the contract which have made it unappealing to foreign vendors include parking nearly 15 per cent of the value of the contract as a performance bank guarantee, the removal of the force majeur clause which allows a manufacturer to suspend a contract due to unforeseen consequences like war or a natural disaster.

The foreign vendors too have to secure export licenses from their own governments in the limited time available. Other clauses which make the contract unappealing are clauses for the winning firm to deliver the first batch of 25,000 weapons (assault rifle and carbines) in the first nine months and the remainder within three months. This deadline can be extended only by another three months after which financial penalties kick in.

It doesnt make commercial sense for us to participate in the tender, said the representative of a leading small arms firm said at the biennial Defexpo India 2018 inaugurated in Chennai on April 12. The army is also looking to buy 5,719 sniper rifles and 17,000 light machine guns. Israel Weapons Industries (IWI) is the only small arms firm in the reckoning for all three infantry weapon types battle rifles, carbines and light machine guns.

The new RFPs for rifles and carbines is the armys third attempt to buy new small arms since it decided to replace its indigenous but glitch-prone INSAS rifles in 2007. The process has been delayed by the armys own changing requirements. Between 2011 and 2017 the army issued three requirements for small arms, or roughly one every two years.

The first tender in 2011, for a dual-calibre rifle chambered for two types of ammunition (7.62 x 39 mm and 5.56 x 45 mm) was withdrawn in 2015. A second attempt, in 2015, to buy modified INSAS 1C rifles was scrapped after the army opted for a battle rifle chambered for the heavier 7.62 x 51 mm round.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/sto...n-army-s-small-arms-tender-1232033-2018-05-12
 
.
Oh dear.. Indians can send rockets up to space but they are having difficulties getting an indigenous rifle to its troops? SP2012
 
.
What a flop.

Indians are loosing touch with business ethics.
 
.
Good news.

Hope others exit as well.

The first tender in 2011, for a dual-calibre rifle chambered for two types of ammunition (7.62 x 39 mm and 5.56 x 45 mm) was withdrawn in 2015. A second attempt, in 2015, to buy modified INSAS 1C rifles was scrapped after the army opted for a battle rifle chambered for the heavier 7.62 x 51 mm round.
Two homemade options avoided with change in requirement. Let's see what the next requirement is.
 
.
Most foreign companies are well aware that IA's top brass end up scrapping the tender once they receive their share of kickbacks and start an entirely new tender with new specs. Even if they intend to seriously procure, the specs will be designed to favor a particular type like how the new FRCV's specs are designed to favor the Armata.

But, companies pulling out of the tender is also a good sign where there is a high possibility that we may end up procuring indigenous weapons like the Ghaatak, Trichy AR, Amogh Carbine, MCIWS etc which have performed exceptionally well in performance trails and are being procured by over 12 state police forces along with CRPF & CAPF.

The only issue here would be the quality as indigenous guns are great when it comes to design but quality isn't upto the mark as they are being produced by the lazy OFBs. I hope they transfer the tech of private Indian defense firms so that rifles on par with international quality standards could be produced
 
.
Most foreign companies are well aware that IA's top brass end up scrapping the tender once they receive their share of kickbacks and start an entirely new tender with new specs. Even if they intend to seriously procure, the specs will be designed to favor a particular type like how the new FRCV's specs are designed to favor the Armata.

But, companies pulling out of the tender is also a good sign where there is a high possibility that we may end up procuring indigenous weapons like the Ghaatak, Trichy AR, Amogh Carbine, MCIWS etc which have performed exceptionally well in performance trails and are being procured by over 12 state police forces along with CRPF & CAPF.

The only issue here would be the quality as indigenous guns are great when it comes to design but quality isn't upto the mark as they are being produced by the lazy OFBs. I hope they transfer the tech of private Indian defense firms so that rifles on par with international quality standards could be produced
Then why such big drama, Float tender for local companies only. SP2012 at her best
 
.
Then why such big drama, Float tender for local companies only. SP2012 at her best
Looks like you didn't get my point. Local companies wouldn't offer kickbacks to IA's top brass as DPSU's themselves end up eating a lot of funds and produce subpar quality products. Why do you think IA floats a tender, invites global firms to participate while DRDO/OFB etc will start developing a weapons system based on the specs or modifies if there is one in existence, but IA ends up cancelling the tender bcoz they received their share of kickbacks from a foreign firm and in the process, they wouldn't hesitate to kill any indigenous project in the making, re-issues a whole new tender all over again and the process repeats.

Arjun MBT has been exactly developed based on IA's spec sheet but IA came up with a lame reason saying it's overweight even though it is in the same class of other MBT's like Abrams, Leopard etc. Even after DRDO made considerable changes and reduced the tank's weight, IA said the specs are obsolete and floated a whole new tender where the specs were designed to favor only the Armata
 
.
Looks like you didn't get my point. Local companies wouldn't offer kickbacks to IA's top brass as DPSU's themselves end up eating a lot of funds and produce subpar quality products. Why do you think IA floats a tender, invites global firms to participate while DRDO/OFB etc will start developing a weapons system based on the specs or modifies if there is one in existence, but IA ends up cancelling the tender bcoz they received their share of kickbacks from a foreign firm and in the process, they wouldn't hesitate to kill any indigenous project in the making, re-issues a whole new tender all over again and the process repeats.

Arjun MBT has been exactly developed based on IA's spec sheet but IA came up with a lame reason saying it's overweight even though it is in the same class of other MBT's like Abrams, Leopard etc. Even after DRDO made considerable changes and reduced the tank's weight, IA said the specs are obsolete and floated a whole new tender where the specs were designed to favor only the Armata
Read again and Govt can restrict that
 
. .
15 per cent as performance guarantee ? Those are top gun makers. Lol
 
.
Looks like you didn't get my point. Local companies wouldn't offer kickbacks to IA's top brass as DPSU's themselves end up eating a lot of funds and produce subpar quality products. Why do you think IA floats a tender, invites global firms to participate while DRDO/OFB etc will start developing a weapons system based on the specs or modifies if there is one in existence, but IA ends up cancelling the tender bcoz they received their share of kickbacks from a foreign firm and in the process, they wouldn't hesitate to kill any indigenous project in the making, re-issues a whole new tender all over again and the process repeats.

Arjun MBT has been exactly developed based on IA's spec sheet but IA came up with a lame reason saying it's overweight even though it is in the same class of other MBT's like Abrams, Leopard etc. Even after DRDO made considerable changes and reduced the tank's weight, IA said the specs are obsolete and floated a whole new tender where the specs were designed to favor only the Armata
arjun is outdated because whenever your military provides specs.. the final product is ready only after decades & that too with faulty design and quality issues.
Arjun for example was started in 1970s or 80s with data required in those times...

Which is obsolete in 2018.

Examples of Abrams n Leo’s isn’t relatistic because they were produced decades ago and constantly upgraded... and were designed keeping NATO fighting philosophy and infrastructure in mind...

And still beat arjun in performance.

Even arjun is a copy of leopard 1.. designed by the Germans.. but isn’t even half the tank Leo was.. has flaws but not even half the performance..

The WtP ratio itself is a giveaway and so is the low pressure rifles gun on it..
 
.
arjun is outdated because whenever your military provides specs.. the final product is ready only after decades & that too with faulty design and quality issues.
Arjun for example was started in 1970s or 80s with data required in those times...

Which is obsolete in 2018.

Examples of Abrams n Leo’s isn’t relatistic because they were produced decades ago and constantly upgraded... and were designed keeping NATO fighting philosophy and infrastructure in mind...

And still beat arjun in performance.

Even arjun is a copy of leopard 1.. designed by the Germans.. but isn’t even half the tank Leo was.. has flaws but not even half the performance..

The WtP ratio itself is a giveaway and so is the low pressure rifles gun on it..
Looks like you're having serious comprehension issues. I was comparing the weight of Arjun with western MBTs but you talk as if you were the lead evaluator in testing the Arjun MBT. If it was that bad, it wouldn't beat T-90 in performance trails when they were pitted against each other. Moreover, I was talking about the upgraded Arjun where modifications were made as specified by IA.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom