What's new

US still denying us technology

sudhir007

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
4,728
Reaction score
1
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/op-ed/‘us-still-denying-us-technology’-866

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is looking at providing technology for low-intensity conflicts such as terrorism and cyber warfare, as well as towards ensuring the security of Indian space assets, the DRDO chief and science adviser to the defence minister, Dr V.K. Saraswat, tells S. Raghotham in his first interview to the media since he assumed office in September 2009.

Q. The obvious first question — where are we on the missile roadmap?
A. We have two streams of missile programmes — strategic and tactical. There is a momentum, a certain push to achieve our requirements for strategic defence. Agni 3 is set for production in numbers. We have no doubt about the missile after three consecutive successful tests.
The 5,000-plus km range Agni 5 has moved out of the drawing board, developmental activities are on, subsystems work is in progress. We plan to do the first test flight by the end of the year.
After the successful test of Shourya, a canisterised missile with a range similar to Agni 1 — around 700 km— more and more of our missiles will go the canisterised way because then they can go on multiple platforms on land, air and sea. Next is a canisterised version of the 2,000-plus km range Agni 2.

Q. What about tactical missiles?
A. Nag, the anti-tank missile, will go in for repeat summer trials this year after we incorporated user (Indian Army) suggestions. It’s a third-generation anti-tank guided missile with infrared seeker. India will be only the third or fourth country to make such a missile.
We have led Akash, the air defence missile, to production. The Indian Air Force (IAF) has ordered eight squadrons of Akash missiles, the Army has ordered two batteries.
In new missiles, the Astra air-to-air beyond visual range missile has undergone four to five ground launch trials. We are now qualifying its infra-red seeker. Once ready, it will go on multiple platforms, including Tejas and Sukhoi fighters.
For the Navy, we are developing a canisterised anti-anti-ship missile, with a range of 70 km, and able to intercept manoeuvring targets. It is an advancement over the 15-km range Israeli Barak missile. We are developing the Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LRSAM) in collaboration with Israel Aircraft Industries. The first flight test will happen in mid-2010. We started developing a similar missile for the IAF in late 2009.

Q. What about Cruise missiles? Sub-launched missiles? K-15?
A. We are setting up a cruise missile development programme under Nirbhay. I won’t say more than that.

Q. What does the future look like for DRDO?
A. We have made a technology development plan for the next 25 years. It is dovetailed to projections made by the armed forces in their long-range plans, what they call the LTIPP (long-term integrated perspective plan), taking into account the changing nature of warfare and the threats that India is likely to face. It calls for directed basic research in technologies that are still in their infancy, customising technologies for different users and “productionising” the most mature technologies into platforms and systems. The focus is on improving the velocity of research. All research is now in mission mode.

Q. There has been criticism of the DRDO-military relationship.
A. Look, as I said, DRDO’s technology development plan is now dovetailed to the military’s LTIPP. Two, there is now increasing coordination between the services and DRDO. The military is now involved at every stage in our projects. Also, what we do now is, if a development project is estimated to take five years but the military wants the capability sooner, we say, go ahead and buy it from outside. So, the potential for conflict between DRDO and military does not arise.

Q. What is the status of the Rama Rao Committee report and DRDO reforms?A. A panel headed by the defence secretary is looking into the issue of implementing the recommendations.

Q. What are the focus areas in the 25-year technology development plan?A. There are three. The closest to our heart is low-intensity conflict (LIC). Many technologies that we have developed for the military have relevance for LICs. You will appreciate that many agencies in the country are today involved in LICs — the paramilitary forces, police forces, counter-insurgency and counter-terror organisations and so on. We have started a programme to customise DRDO technology for each of them. LIC is one of our key result areas now.
Another area is space security because future wars are going to be controlled from space as network-centric warfare becomes the new way of war-fighting. So, technologies that are relevant for space security such as ballistic missile defence, anti-satellite systems, are going to be part of our development process. Secondly, to be able to quickly launch satellites to regain space-based capabilities when existing assets are attacked or denied to our military during war. These are low-cost, quick reaction satellite launch systems and low-endurance satellites — they last just long enough to do their job. What will emerge through our programme are micro-satellites, mini-satellites etc. On the launch side, some of our missiles can be modified, a satellite put on top of them and launched.

Q. Can our current missiles be used for anti-satellite hits?
A. With modifications, yes. But that’s not our priority.

Q. What’s the third focus area?
A. Cyber security. As we move towards network-centric warfare, the security of the networks becomes a major requirement. DRDO already has a strong technological base in encryption and things like that. We want to enlarge that base to hardware and software to make our stand-alone systems impossible to penetrate, and harden for military usage those systems that have to work with commercial networks, such as the Internet. Cyber security will be most applicable in low-intensity conflicts. What we want is to be able to detect attacks on our systems and deny the attackers the pleasure.
Q. But much of the core electronics used in our defence equipment is imported.A. So what we plan to do is to set up a facility to detect Trojans — viruses, hidden locks, killer switches — in the chips that we buy from outside before clearing them for usage in sensitive equipment.

Q. What are you doing to give a fillip to the private sector defence manufacturing base?
A. The DRDO has been partnering with industry for the last 25 years and has a network of 800 small and medium enterprises and large public and private enterprises working with us on various projects.
Now, we are starting a commercial arm of DRDO to transfer technology to industry. We already have a programme called ATAC (Technology Assessment and Commercialisation), with industry body Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Ficci) as our partner which identifies potential technology buyers.
There are also technologies that have a larger relevance for the civilian market. For instance, what we do in our life sciences labs — high-altitude agriculture, biomedical engineering research, nuclear-biological-chemical technologies, etc. The ministry of home affairs requires them for disaster management. For DRDO, 2010 is the year of R&D collaboration with industry, universities and the military.

Q. Are we going to see the Hyperplane test flight happen any time soon?
A. We faced a problem in high-temperature materials for the scramjet engine. We needed to run the engine for 20 seconds, but could do it only up to three seconds. We were denied imports of the material required. So, we launched a separate programme and developed three materials. We have now been able to reach 20 seconds twice. We want to do five to six more ground tests. We expect to be able to do the first test flight by the end of the year.

Q. But hasn’t it become easier since the Indo-US nuclear deal to obtain technology?A. No. We are still victims of US denial regimes. Our labs are still on the “Entity List”. Technology denial continues. There is a big gap between American talk and action towards us.
 
.
The 5,000-plus km range Agni 5 has moved out of the drawing board, developmental activities are on, subsystems work is in progress. We plan to do the first test flight by the end of the year.
..................... more and more of our missiles will go the canisterised way because then they can go on multiple platforms on land, air and sea. Next is a canisterised version of the 2,000-plus km range Agni 2.

Good news with A-5 on track. Though having canisterized Agni is news to me. It would be better to focus on Agni - 3/5 series now that they are reaching maturity.

In new missiles, the Astra air-to-air beyond visual range missile has undergone four to five ground launch trials. We are now qualifying its infra-red seeker. Once ready, it will go on multiple platforms, including Tejas and Sukhoi fighters.

:what: IR seeker? This is news to me!!!

For the Navy, we are developing a canisterised anti-anti-ship missile, with a range of 70 km, and able to intercept manoeuvring targets. It is an advancement over the 15-km range Israeli Barak missile. We are developing the Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile (LRSAM) in collaboration with Israel Aircraft Industries. The first flight test will happen in mid-2010. We started developing a similar missile for the IAF in late 2009.

So there is a LRSAM which is different from NG. Clears up my previous confusion!! Good news :agree:

We faced a problem in high-temperature materials for the scramjet engine. We needed to run the engine for 20 seconds, but could do it only up to three seconds. We were denied imports of the material required. So, we launched a separate programme and developed three materials. We have now been able to reach 20 seconds twice. We want to do five to six more ground tests. We expect to be able to do the first test flight by the end of the year.

This should prove pivotal in some of the most crucial developments of the next 10-15 years!!

We are still victims of US denial regimes. Our labs are still on the “Entity List”.

Ofcourse they will be. No country would give technology for others to integrate and use in critical technology areas which include a lot in material sciences! Being a part of the academic circles here in US, I have realized that Materials is the key (and US has some of the best programs in materials in the planet!!!!) Everything else comes secondary!
 
.
How is India a victim of a denial regime? If a country is requesting a technology from India and if India say no. Does that make Indian government the denial regime and that requesting country a victim? Many Indian government official spins more than the TV news more than MSNBC's keith Olbermann.
 
.
I think its time we stopped regarding ourselves as victims of technology denial. Sure, US doesn't give us the best of best, but WHY SHOULD THEY? They developed the tech themselves, they should be free to decide who they want to give it to.

Look at China. They are denied tech more than us. So they went ahead and started developing their own tech. Its high time we went indegenous. As Dr Saraswat said, we developed 3 materials on our own. That wouldnt have happened if we imported the tech. Now we can focus on developing the rest of the materials.

we have made progress in indegenous defence equipment. We have to keep indegenous development as number one priority, and foreign procurement as a 'stop-gap measure' till our indegenous tech becomes world class
 
.
I think its time we stopped regarding ourselves as victims of technology denial. Sure, US doesn't give us the best of best, but WHY SHOULD THEY? They developed the tech themselves, they should be free to decide who they want to give it to.

Look at China. They are denied tech more than us. So they went ahead and started developing their own tech. Its high time we went indegenous. As Dr Saraswat said, we developed 3 materials on our own. That wouldnt have happened if we imported the tech. Now we can focus on developing the rest of the materials.

we have made progress in indegenous defence equipment. We have to keep indegenous development as number one priority, and foreign procurement as a 'stop-gap measure' till our indegenous tech becomes world class
 
.
I think its time we stopped regarding ourselves as victims of technology denial. Sure, US doesn't give us the best of best, but WHY SHOULD THEY? They developed the tech themselves, they should be free to decide who they want to give it to.

Look at China. They are denied tech more than us. So they went ahead and started developing their own tech. Its high time we went indegenous. As Dr Saraswat said, we developed 3 materials on our own. That wouldnt have happened if we imported the tech. Now we can focus on developing the rest of the materials.

we have made progress in indegenous defence equipment. We have to keep indegenous development as number one priority, and foreign procurement as a 'stop-gap measure' till our indegenous tech becomes world class

The problem is that India relie so much on foreign technology that India feel entitle to other's technology. I believe India should just relie on the US nuclear umbrella so it won't have to worry about getting technology from others.
 
.
The problem is that India relie so much on foreign technology that India feel entitle to other's technology. I believe India should just relie on the US nuclear umbrella so it won't have to worry about getting technology from others.

Mate, each to his own. If Taiwan wants to rely on US nuclear umbrella, thats fine. But as an emerging power, I think India should stop relying on others and become self sufficient in defence.

Currently our indegenous industry is quite far behind other military powers. So we have to import tech. But importing tech should be a learning experience and a stop-gap meausre, not the end solution in itself.

As for US nuclear umbrella, we never needed it. We did have Soviet support before our scientists developed nukes. Now we should be looking to move away completely from foreign defence products and go indegenous. Hoepfully in the coming decades that is exactly what will happen.
 
.
I think its time we stopped regarding ourselves as victims of technology denial. Sure, US doesn't give us the best of best, but WHY SHOULD THEY? They developed the tech themselves, they should be free to decide who they want to give it to.

Look at China. They are denied tech more than us. So they went ahead and started developing their own tech. Its high time we went indegenous. As Dr Saraswat said, we developed 3 materials on our own. That wouldnt have happened if we imported the tech. Now we can focus on developing the rest of the materials.

we have made progress in indegenous defence equipment. We have to keep indegenous development as number one priority, and foreign procurement as a 'stop-gap measure' till our indegenous tech becomes world class

sir

i want to bring ur attention to the highlighted part.

china apart from reverse engineering have got many technologies off the shelf which were denied to us also many sections against china were "Tienanmen Square Massacre of 1989" on the other hand India was sections for nuclear test in "1974".

So u can see that China get more time without sections to buy off the shelve technologies and materials which were denied to us and we have to reinvent the wheel.

Also, China got atom bomb and missile ready made and tech transfer transfer on large scale but we have to do it on our own.

China also involve in human intelligence, tech stealing and cyber spying for technologies etc. on the other hand our records are clean.

We have faced many problems economical, tecnchnologial etc. and It has taken but we have developed indiginious capabilities for future. I agree with u on that but was offended by glorifieing china the biggest thief on earth.

thanks
 
.
sir



Also, China got atom bomb and missile ready made and tech transfer transfer on large scale but we have to do it on our own.



thanks

Now according to TOI which country provided china with nuclear weapons.......
 
.
sir

i want to bring ur attention to the highlighted part.

china apart from reverse engineering have got many technologies off the shelf which were denied to us also many sections against china were "Tienanmen Square Massacre of 1989" on the other hand India was sections for nuclear test in "1974".

So u can see that China get more time without sections to buy off the shelve technologies and materials which were denied to us and we have to reinvent the wheel.

Also, China got atom bomb and missile ready made and tech transfer transfer on large scale but we have to do it on our own.

China also involve in human intelligence, tech stealing and cyber spying for technologies etc. on the other hand our records are clean.

We have faced many problems economical, tecnchnologial etc. and It has taken but we have developed indiginious capabilities for future. I agree with u on that but was offended by glorifieing china the biggest thief on earth.

thanks

You must come from Mars.:rofl:
 
.
sir

i want to bring ur attention to the highlighted part.

china apart from reverse engineering have got many technologies off the shelf which were denied to us also many sections against china were "Tienanmen Square Massacre of 1989" on the other hand India was sections for nuclear test in "1974".

So u can see that China get more time without sections to buy off the shelve technologies and materials which were denied to us and we have to reinvent the wheel.

Also, China got atom bomb and missile ready made and tech transfer transfer on large scale but we have to do it on our own.

China also involve in human intelligence, tech stealing and cyber spying for technologies etc. on the other hand our records are clean.

We have faced many problems economical, tecnchnologial etc. and It has taken but we have developed indiginious capabilities for future. I agree with u on that but was offended by glorifieing china the biggest thief on earth.

thanks

yes they did get tech up to '89. But they also developed their indegenous industry. That is why their military didnt fall to pieces when sanctions where imposed in 1989.

We are also developing our indegenous indystry, no doubt about it, but i feel that foreign procurement is still given more priority. Lets take artillery for example. We are still looking for suppliers. If we can develop nukes, missiles and space tech indegenously, why not artillery?

I didn't glorify china, just used them as an example. But i do respect them for doing whatever is necessary to ensure their security and progress. As for stealing, US and USSR got a lot of tech, including, missiles, jet engines etc from Germany after WW2. And both sides engaged in espionage throughout the cold war to learn of high tech weapons from each other. Soviets even admitted that they reverse engineered a sidewinder missile to develop their air-to-air missile program. So whether its reverse engineering or espionage, its part and parcel of the world we live in, and its something we have to accept.

And as for india's record being clean, how can you be sure the indians are not stealing tech. Maybe we just dont get caught! ;)
 
. .
Just Google 'China technology theft'! You will get thousand of results.

Just like google "India failed nation", you can also get thousand of results. Do you believe that, if you believe that I will believe what you said.:lol:
 
. .
Just like google "India failed nation", you can also get thousand of results. Do you believe that, if you believe that I will believe what you said.:lol:
:yahoo:
Bad choice of words. In the Failed States Index India is in number 87 while PRC is in number 57!!!

PRC rank 57
India rank 87


List of countries by Failed States Index

These are not written by some Indians....... lol...

How China Steals U.S. Military Secrets



How China Steals U.S. Military Secrets - Popular Mechanics
 
.
Back
Top Bottom