Irrespective of the status of the technology we should continue to support and buildup our National organisations in as many fields as is possible. None of the foreign countries are going to come to our rescue when the time comes. Pakistan had more sophisticated planes and bombers with them but our airforce won the issue hands down in the last war with them. Sometime the old and tested technology will come more handy. All the reports emanating from western press are to be taken with a bushful of salt. Every article has some agenda behin it and we have to read the right meaning at all times.
Re: Aviation Technology
by Ramesh on Feb 21, 2011 04:28 AM
To comprehend the size and complexity in aviation technologies is not easy. The HAL-NAL-ADA and other DRDO setups have done a commendable job but still a generation behind the Indian security needs vis-a-vis China. This gap must be bridged, but no realistic solution is in sight within the ideological mooring which led to creation of this defence production infrastructure. We need a second set of defence related infrastructure in private sector to help reduce the quality and capacity gap.
Since Indian manufacturing afford cost advantages and skilled manpower in huge numbers, given proper licensing arrangement is likely to invite capacity creation for sub-system and component needs for exports to developed civil democracies. This will help reduce the investment gap for production of such sophisticated technologies with development gestation of several decades. This fast forwarding the technology development and its assimilation on Indian soil is feasible if we think in terms of seeking realistic alternatives to match the rapidly emerging threats. This will not shrink the PSU setup,but only make them more competitive.
Indian technology need not evolve only in the crucible of PSUs, institutions which evolved per Soviet model.It needs to be complemented with a competitive and internationalized private defence sector to facilitate Indian assimilation.
Re: Re: Aviation Technology
by Ramesh on Feb 21, 2011 04:55 AM
However, any decision to introduce an alternate internationalized private defence sector base would be a momentous one, like the 1991 reform. Not easy to come by. The move to merely expand the PSU base is politically less risky and remains the official policy.
Hon Defence Minister had recently said that no developed nation would share its best technology, we would get only the second best. While this is true presently, this constraint can be met by enabling institutional arrangements which provide unfettered decision-making and policy making legally for their investors and management per Indian as well as international needs.
The old case study of Bokaro Steel plant is illustrative here. Later the steel sector expansion is coming thanks to private investments. Same story in Airlines, telephony, automotive and other sectors.
But aviation technology is of different grade in terms of system complexity and reliability needs. It would require incredibly complex set of negotiation to establish an autonomous policy decision making institutional structures amenable to the needs of both India and developed civil democracies.
Re: Re: Re: Aviation Technology
by Ramesh on Feb 21, 2011 05:04 AM
There are two American catch phrases which assume significant meaning in our current context. One is -- arsenal of democracy -- and the second one is -- military-industrial complex --. The first phrase makes new sense in the Indian context of emerging security threats. While the second phrase points to internal political risks due to such large-scale investments.
How to cope realistically with the emerging threats while safely managing the internal risk is the question which remains unanswered.
HAL and other govt companies lack professionalism and also the zeal to innovate. The technical competancy of the people in important positions is palpable. Execution of projects in right time is just some kind of magic which these guys have never seen in decades. Nobody questions their abilities. Thats why DRDO and HAL are developing the same thing from my childhood.
Get these companies some nice leadership who has both guts and the right management skills..
20 years.. or xyz years.. we all know that we are lagging in technology and also in understanding of the market. No doubt we need to gear up.. !
Was when Kurt Tank was heading HAL. You can google him and read about him.
Kurt Tank was a brilliant engineer who designed the FW-190
After the war after a brief stint in Argentina, Tank moved to India. First he worked as Director of the Madras Institute of Technology, where one of his students was Abdul Kalam (later Kalam became President of India and designed indigenous satellite launch vehicles and missiles). Kurt Tank later joined Hindustan Aeronautics, where he designed the Hindustan Marut fighter-bomber, the first military aircraft constructed in India. The first prototype flew in 1961; the Marut was retired from active service in 1985. Tank left Hindustan Aeronautics in 1967 and by the 1970s had returned to live in Berlin, basing himself in Germany for the rest of his life. He died in Munich in 1983.
Indians really do not have the zeal and expertise to design well.
indian engineers living in india working for govt agencies are lazy, unwilling to scratch their head, lack of creativity. with that, if we are only 20 years behind, it means the US envoy is afraid of telling the truth, afraid of his life as he made this statement in HAL. just to encourage the indian engineers that they are only 20 years behind.
Only 20 years! As long as 10 years ago we were 50 years behind. So we have quickly covered the gap and will continue to do so.
Thats why, irrespective of the foreign deals, we need to keep developing our own technology. We have shown time and again that we will never be constrained by any sanctions or force!
Tejas is a great start. Our engineers and defence people will develop better technologies and we will cover this 20 year gap even quicker.
With hard work and determination, in 10 years time, we will be at par with any other world power as far as defence technologies are concerned.
Re: Thats good news!
by varghese on Feb 20, 2011 06:49 PM
I am sure we are 100 yrs behind even those Vimanas which are ancestors have supposed to have flown.The Americans are interested in making an killing out of the deal..infact their nation could get out from recession if India gives the go ahead for the deal..so the Americans are just reaping praises upon us..By the way does anyone knows about the credentials of the American who made this comment..
We had Pushpaka Vimana 5 crore years ago, even before US was born, who says we are behind, we are ahead by light years, western intelligence is very poor.
Re: Pushpaka Vimana
by varghese on Feb 20, 2011 06:35 PM
That's nice we hope we till date had those Vimana's but sadly we do not even have their working designs..so more or less we have nothing..
What the americans said is actually over-rated..we are indeed 100 yrs behind in aviation tech..we do not even till date have an working engine..I am not making zero our R&D but make no mistake we are atleast 100 yrs behind..we still have long time to go..
China is 20-30 years behind USA in aviation industries. Do you guys think that india is at the same level as China? I do not think so. Saying that india is 20 years behind USA is another way of self boasting.
the engine installed to propelled plane imported from GE, USA. so tejas is 50% indegineous aircraft.
Main technology provided by the US only.. It clearly shows, we are still far behind in aviation industry. Whereas China, who got freedom same time as india got, had tested Stealth Fighter plane a month ago, a fully indigenous technology....
Re: Fighter Plane
by rama anne on Feb 20, 2011 12:48 PM
Hi Ramesh Kumar
1.It is true we got engine from USA
2.eVEN SWEDISH FIGHTER GRIPEEN HAS ALSO ENGINE from GE of USA
3.AIRBUS A380 also uses engines from RollsRoyce in some (depends on the airline) and some have GE Engines
Indias own engine called KAVERI is delinked from TEJAS due to falling short of parameters
As of now it has passed critical tests in RUSSIA and will get better as time progresses ,,and will one day power TEJAS MK 2
What we should note is that developing our own technology even late is better than nothing
Let me give examples imagine no TEJAS programm we buy all latest fighter aircarft like su 30 ,EURO TYPHOON etc
what about maintianence ? service and spares ? integartion and testing ? what about having new engineers in aeronautical technology ?
The above can be addresses only by doing it ourselves yes developing an aircaft will teach you integration ,testing ,aircarft design ,,and more
So it is all worth it ,also it depends on the transfer of knowledge from ADA to Univs in India Kota Harinarayana TEJAS man teachs Aircfraft design at Univ of Hyd
Also do u think we can all just learn Java ,sap,etc not really we need new engineers in power ,,renewables technogies ,electric cars and infra etc
