[null, null, {"document_url": "http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/2012/05/must-read-for-all-submariners.html", "unformatted_src": "http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T9t1gln7qg0/T8KVGqOKZqI/AAAAAAAABVo/M1_ffAASCBQ/s320/BOOK+Cover.jpg", "src": "http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T9t1gln7qg0/T8KVGqOKZqI/AAAAAAAABVo/M1_ffAASCBQ/s320/BOOK+Cover.jpg", "formatted_filename": "BOOK Cover", "rendered_width": 235, "rendered_height": 320}, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null, null]
Monday, May 28, 2012

A Must-Read For All Submariners This is the first and only definitive account  the dry-leasing of the Project 670 Skat/K-43 INS Chakra/S-71 SSGN, written by Capt Alexander Ivanovich Terenov and titled titled Under Three Flags The Saga of the Submarine Cruiser K-43/Chakra, which is now available in English after being translated by Vice Admiral (Retd) R N Ganesh, INS Chakra’s first Captain. Since this book is a translation from the original Russian script, both the Indian translator and its publisher are outside the purview of India's Official Secrets Act of 1923, which would otherwise have been applied against both had the narrative been of totally Indian origin. What this book reveals are the following:

· A detailed account of the origins of India’s quest for acquiring the Project 670 Skat/K-43 Chakra SSGN, beginning in 1982 when the then Rear Admiral V P S Shekhawat a pioneer submariner trained in UK and who later became the Chief of Naval Staff (CNS), inspected the K-43 in 1982 in Murmansk and recommended its dry-lease. The book describes how the K-43 was tropicalised at the Zvezda Shipyard, and how the three Indian Navy Captains-designate R N Ganesh, S C Anand and R K Sharma along with their three sets of crew complements (whose training programme began in batches from 1985 and involved 100 days of supervised underwater operations), operated the K-43 for the three years of the dry-lease. Though the K-43 had 70 crew-bunks, it at times had a crew complement of 200. During one training sortie the SSGN was continuously at sea for 13 days.

·  The writer, then as a young Captain 3rd Rank Terenov, was appointed as Commanding Officer of K-43 in 1983 for type-rating the Indian Navy’s submariners for the K-43 at the training centres at Obininsk, Kamchatka and Vladivostok’s Vtoraya Rechka suburb of Vladivostok and the nearby Bay of Ulysses. Captain 1st Rank Dmitri Sergeivich Kasper Yust was appointed CO of the training centre, with the entire type-rating and SSGN operationalisation schedule being supervised by Admiral A A Belousov through to April 1986.

· The K-43’s final dry-lease contract was due for signing by July 1987, followed by commissioning in December 1987 at Vladivostok. However, at the last minute, the Kremlin had second thoughts about allowing foreigners on board the K-43, ostensibly due to pressure applied on Russia by the US. About 10 days after this happened, the then Indian PM Rajiv Gandhi made a personal plea to the then Soviet Communist Party’s Secretary-General Mikhail Gorbachev, following which the ban imposed on the Indian submariners was lifted and they were allowed back into the SSGN.

· The K-43, by then already 20 years old, was finally commissioned as S-71 INS Chakra on January 5, 1988 as part of the Navy’s 6th Submarine Squadron at a low-key ceremony held in -25 degrees Celsius by the then Indian Ambassador to the USSR, T N Kaul and the C-in-C of the Soviet Navy’s Pacific Fleet, Admiral G A Khvatov. While positioned in the South China Sea en route to Vizag, the submerged S-71 was met by an Indian Navy escort vessel and as the two of them entered the Singapore Straits, the S-71/Chakra had to surface while transiting the Malacca Straits, during which she was first photographed by the P-3C Orions of the RAAF that were operating out of TUDM Butterworth air base off Penang, as part of the ANZMIS arrangements.

· S-71/INS Chakra was used extensively, travelling 72,000 nautical miles (133,000km), and the SSGN’s PWR remaining active for 430 days during a three-year period (rather low by Western standards). Five Ametist-15 (SS-N-7) anti-ship cruise missiles and 42 torpedoes were fired, all under Russian supervision. An accident on board the SSGN in 1989 resulted in a fire breaking out and loss of on-board power, but was successfully contained, there was no radioactive leakage to the SSGN or the environment, and the vessel succeeded in returning to Vizag on its own power. Subsequent repairs at Vizag supported by representatives of the Afrikantov Design Bureau took three months to complete.

· The book describes for the very first time the layout of the berthing facilities and the Shipbuilding Centre (SBC), plus related logistics facilities located alongside such as a navigation systems/sensors repair workshop, a three-storey decontamination and radioactive safety service building, captive power-generation installations, high-pressure air and chilled water storage tanks for air conditioning, and shore-based accommodation facilities for the SSGN’s crew complement.

· In 1990, India had requested an extension of the SSGN’s dry-lease, but this was refused by the Kremlin. She subsequently went back to Vladivostok in January 1991 while being escorted by an Indian Navy AOPV, under the command of Captain R K Sharma, who is presently serving with India’s National Security Council Secretariat.
Posted by Prasun K. Sengupta at 2:27 AM saurav jha said...

Hi Prasun,

Any chance of inducting another AKULA class as people in some forums are saying.?

Wont it be wise to retire the Jaguars and induct LCA-II to fill up the numbers considering the fact that both upgraded Jags and LCA-II will come at the same time now.


May 28, 2012 at 9:49 AM 
Hi Prasun, 'Kamon katlo Jamai Shasti'. Regarding the INS Vikramaditya, u haven't answered points 1. & 2.
1. Is the complement of 16 MiG-29 and 4 Ka-31 & 2 Ka-28 the standard complement or the maximum no it can carry?
2. HMS Hermes couldn't carry more than 17 Harriers. But it's okay considering it s smaller vessel at 28000 tons. With this smaller displacement it also have some amphibious capabties with 750 troops and LCVPs. The Gorshkov at 44000 tons can carry only such a small no of jets. Why is it so? Isn't there enough deck space? What had been done with so much space?
3.In Wiki it is given that the Gorskhov has 8 Kashtans. So it is intact wrong. Also Kashtan is a CIWS. U talked about installing CIWS. Will a new CIWS system be installed? The current Barak system is incapable of intercepting supersonic ASHM .
4.What will the 16 MiG-29 be used for?Fleet defense? But they are too few in nos .
5. One thing I can't understand. Why does the MiG-29 have only 8 hardpoints? Why do the Russians don't include wingtip pylons. The MiG-29 was intended as an air superiority and area defense fighter. It's closest nemesis, the f/a -18 super hornet can carry a total of 16 AAM. The MiG-29k on the other hand can carry a total of only 8 AAM. So in a persistent air-air fight, the Super Hornet is really the winner.

May 28, 2012 at 12:39 PM KSK said...

Why cant India just BUY PAKFA from Russia, as IAF decided to procure Single seat versions first ?

May 28, 2012 at 10:51 PM 
Hi , what is the status of Akash mk2? When will it be tested ? What will it be it's range- 35 or 40 km?
When this missile enters operational service, will the previous batch of Akash Mk1 be converted to mk2?

What's all the fuss with the Nirbhay cruise missile? Is this the name of 2 distinct projects, supersonic ALCM and a GLCM? Or is it standard disinformation protocol being followed by DRDO? When reports about it first emerged , it was described as a Timahawk type long range subsonic cruise missile.

When will the Barak -8 LRSAM for the IAF enter operational service? Are the Barak -2 and Barak-8 distinct missiles?
Pls reply.

May 28, 2012 at 11:40 PM 
Prasun, are we likely to see the replacement of the MP5 with the MP-7 (or any other SMG) any time soon with the NSG or (espceially) MARCOs?It seems most western operators of the MP5 have transtioned to the MP-7 including the SEALs. The MP5 has major drawbacks and toaday is pretty obsollete and it's pretty dangerous to issue these to operators potentionally who will face kevlar touting bad guys.

May 29, 2012 at 4:53 AM joydeep ghosh said...


sorry to raise a different topic

but do you think what the link really increases Paks ability and does it agur good or bad for India



Joydeep Ghosh

May 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM 

which secret missile are they talking about
are the russians providing the technology for multiple independently-targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRV) and manoeuvring re-entry vehicles (MaRV)

whats our role in them,is it only integration with our agni 5

May 29, 2012 at 3:05 PM 

Does IAF or MoD release such findings?

May 29, 2012 at 10:54 PM Prasun K. Sengupta said...

To Saurav Jha: I sincerely hope not! Just look at the figures that I will soon be posting above. As it is, the lease of a single Akula-2 poses a severe liability & does not translate into any operational benefit. Between the Jaguars & Tejas Mk2, there is big difference: the Jaguar is already a proven product & currently exists, whereas the Tejas Mk2 doesn’t and no one can guarantee today when the latter will enter service.

To email@example.com: That’s the maximum that it can carry. The Vikramaditya won’t have any amphibious assault capabilities. Probably the Viraat can act as a LPH after the Vikramaditya enters service. The MiG-29Ks being far more advanced than the Sea Harriers, more deck-space is reqd for the maintenance bays & workshops. Wiki talks about 8 Kashtans because the drafters of Wiki’s narratives haven’t yet seen the definitive scale-model of the aircraft carrier that was displayed at DEFEXPO 2012. The best combination of CIWS on board the Vikramaditya will be two pairs of AK-630mm six-barrelled guns & two pairs of RAM-type missile launchers, supported by two sets of seduction decoy launchers. The MiG-29K’s primary role will be air defence & 16 MiG-29Ks backed up by the Ka-31s is more than enough for a carrier battle group. After all, such a battle group is hardly expected to fight against a US Navy carrier battle group. Between the MiG-29K/Ka-31 & Super Hornet/E-2C Hawkeye, the latter will prevail any given day.

May 30, 2012 at 12:44 AM 
To KSK: Of course that option does exist. Nothing is ruled out as of now.

To Unknown: Such force modernization efforts are routine. But Kevlar-touting bad guys facing the NSG inside India? Most unlikely. Maybe in Europe & North America, but not in India.

To Joydeep Ghosh: I don’t know who these “experts” are, but they sure don’t sound like experts. Why? Because, firstly, any country that boasts of a credible nuclear deterrent MUST under all circumstances have a sea-based deterrent force in existence, without which n-deterrence doesn’t make much sense. Secondly, if the first is true, then it would make sense of my earlier assertions that Pakistan from 1996 had been planning to raise a sea-based n-deterrent force. In fact, the Babur LACM project had been originally conceived by Pakistan as a naval procurement project (and I had met the PN’s first project director for the Babur way back in 2005 in an unnamed country), since the Ukrainian Korshun (from which the Babur & CJ-10 are derived), was originally designed as both a ship/submarine-launched LCAM as well as an air-launched LACM. It was only in mid-2001—after India first test-fired the BrahMos—that the Pakistan Army stepped in to order the Babur in large numbers in a land-launched LACM configuration. Therefore, the nuclear warhead-armed Babur’s entry into service with the Pakistan Navy was never in doubt. All that was needed was the carrier/launch platform for this version of the Babur, which as we all now know, will be the Qing-class AIP-powered SSKs that are now being built in China at Wuhan for Pakistan. This augurs well for Pakistan, since it will at last have a credible & survivable n-deterrent. For India it will be extremely worrisome, since India’s sea-based n-deterrent (i.e. a SSBN loaded with SLBMs) is nowhere in sight.

To email@example.com: It’s a non-story as far as I’m concerned. I can’t fathom how ballistic missile R & D activity in a friendly foreign country will necessarily ‘fire up’ the DRDO’s ASL, especially since as of now, Russia has not committed itself to providing any such cutting-edge technologies to India. And why should it, when it stands to lose much more by incurring China’s wrath! Just look at the bilateral trade figures of Russia-India & Russia-China & you’ll see the reality staring at you.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: May the MoD will, in the next century.
 

U think there is a 1991 kind of crisis in the making as far as fiscal deficit goes and foreign investment drying up?

Now China will bcome a regional henchman for the west if by 2016 it has an economy as big as the US(rumours on the net abt devalued US dollar).What wil India do in that case?it will have to openly enter a mil alliance with the US as the new EU foreign minister will b busy building an independent (of the US)relationship with the chinese in order to compete for the large chinese market and may strike partnership with the chinese in other developing countries(New French president wants greater cooperation with the BRICS economies).

May 30, 2012 at 2:32 AM 
Now when General V.K. Singh is going to retire, whats your take about his tenure? Was he a good General? Some DESI journos have started bashing him like he was a curse on the army. Do you think the same or otherwise?

May 30, 2012 at 9:26 AM 
Sorry for off topic Q
Does JF-17 fighters have any sales prospects in Africa and the Middle East?
Will LCA be sold to any other country?

May 30, 2012 at 10:29 PM Austin said...

Prasun where can i buy this book ? I tried contacting the author about a month back and he replied saying only few copies were available and that he cannot ship it to India.

This is perhaps the only semi-official account we would hear on old Chakras stint with Indian Navy.

May 30, 2012 at 11:00 PM 
Don't know whether the following link will help or not.


Also got a reference from the blog:

Good Luck.


May 31, 2012 at 12:40 AM 
To email@example.com: The freefall of the Indian Rupee, due in large part due to macro-economic mismanagement, will definitely have a deep impact on the force modernisation plans of the Indian armed forces. While the 1991 financial crisis definitely put a pause on several force modernisatrion programmes for almost seven years, the present-day crisis could well result in similar programmes being postponed by at least four years.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: No, I don’t think he was a curse on the Army or on any other institution. Quite to the contrary, it was due to his flagging of various issues that put enormous pressure from both the public & the opposition parties on the MoD & A K Antony to not only approve the 12th Defence Plan & the LTIPP in such a degree of haste that was unheard of for the past 15 years. Also, it was during his tenure that the MoD recovered from ‘mass amnesia’ & realised that it was indeed possible to indigenously build the FH-77B howitzers. Therefore, definitely not a wasted tenure in office. On the other hand, can we really blame any armed service chief for flagging such issues not just to the MoD, but to the public as well through TV interviews? After all, the MPs of India have over the years brushed several critical issues under the carpet either because the issues were deemed ‘too sensitive’ or were not seen as ‘facilitating national security’. For instance, not one BJP MP can even today state with clarity why exactly was Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat sacked as CNS. The same goes for MPs of all parties for failing to explain what was the reason or justification for not allowing the OFB to begin producing the FH-77B since 1991. Lastly, and most importantly, is futile to expect the armed forces to produce or ensure conventional military deterrence when the national security parameters are not spelt out & articulated by the Govts in power. First & foremost there must be strategic visioning to define what exactly a country is all about & how it ought to become a nation-state. From that flows a national security strategy that details the higher directions for war-waging. As a result of this emerges a national defence posture that lays down the military security doctrine & consequent integrated warfighting doctrines, which in turn dictate the country’s war-waging operational art & force modernization programmes, plus the related military-industrial achievements roadmap. Deviate from this sequence & all one will have is disaster, which is what India seems to be heading for. Without adherence to this sequence, all defence plans & LTIPPs are next to useless, especially when it comes to strategic deterrence. For example, no one from the Govt of India has as yet asked the armed forces to come up with a single integrated threat assessment & consequently, there’s no integrated defence plan for either conventional or strategic deterrence. Consequently, the MoD has been unable to issue specific directives aimed at force modernisation & neither has the country’s military-industrial infrastructure been issued with any guidelines for achieving self-reliance. The grand consequence of all this is that each armed service HQ can at best only second-guess what the Govt of India wants & may possibly sanction in times of national emergencies. Based on such assumptions, compartmentalised & service-specific warfighting doctrines like ‘Pro-Active Strategy’ are crystralised and tried for implementation at a time when any sensible/discerning person knows that for long as the Govt-in-power does not formally approve of such doctrines, they will never be put to practice—something which India’s western & northern neighbours know only too well. This is the great curse that has befallen India, not Gen V K Singh.

May 31, 2012 at 2:47 AM 
To email@example.com: Of course any weapon system has sales prospects. But whether such prospects turn into reality is a totally different matter. And which LCA are you talking about? The Tejas Mk1 & Mk2 are no longer LCAs. They’ve put on much more weight since they were first conceptualised as LCAs.

To Austin: You may try: http://www.kvest.com/book.asp?tvr_code='259008'
And no, this will by no means bethe only semi-official account we would hear on the old INS Chakra stint with Indian Navy. The book that I’m drafting now (since the past 1.5 years) will have many many more details not only on this issue, but on several more such issues dating back to the late 1960s and how several classes of frontline warships imported from the former USSR & UK were selected, evaluated, ferried, inducted and deployed into service, be they aircraft, helicopters, FAC-Ms, or corvettes, or DDGs or SSKs or SSGNs. Several retired IN officials who over the years have been the respective project directors of such inductions have already been interviewed by me in detail, as have various procurement officials serving in Navy HQ since the late 1960s. The book’s sections will also contain details of the Indian Navy’s role during EX Brass Tacks & OP Pawan, especially the special operations carried out against the LTTE Sea Tigers, all of which are still a ‘secret’ inside India. These are vital introspections that have not yet seen the light of day & it is my intention to bring them out into the open for posterity. And of course, the book will be published abroad (since I don’t want to be targetted by the archaic Indian OSA) & will be made available for sale within India so that you may be able to lay your hands on one copy via e-bay, that is only if you wish to procure it, for I have no intention of forcing you to invest your hard-earned money on this book.

May 31, 2012 at 2:50 AM 
To Austin: The book will also contain details on the Indian Navy's 'OP Laal Dora'.

May 31, 2012 at 2:52 AM 
Hi Prasun, the Jaguar may be a proven product. But the Tejas 2 is altogether a better aircraft.
1. In the Jaguar the pilot has to visually acquire , track  and identify the target. The ground targets to be engaged is visually acquired by the pilot coz theres no radar.
2. The absence of radar means it cant engage in air - air fights rather than with short range missiles in WVR combat. It is not multirole.
3. Absence of radar means it cant fly at low level over undulating topography. In adverse weather conditions, the Jaguar has to sit tight on the ground. It cant engage its targets. Its weather dependent.
4. It has a very sparse defensive suite comprising of chaff and flare dispenser and a RWR. No MAWS, Rf jammer.
5. It can carry only 4.6 t  of ordance.

The Tejas Mk2 can carry 5.5 t. It is also meant to have a MMR radar, a irst. It also a good IDAS. After so many years in IAF service the IAF still hasnt fitted them with MMR radars by enlarging the nose bay or fitting of minitiuarised versions on the existing nose. And now the Tejas mk2 is indefinately late. What a shame for the IAF, DRDO !!!

May 31, 2012 at 7:07 AM 

Broadsword has carried out an article regarding a scam in WZT-3 ARV deal..
Any input from ur side..

Is any army deal which is not a scam..?

May 31, 2012 at 1:36 PM Anand said...


When wil INS Sahyadri be commissioned? And any chance of inducting INS KOlkata by theis year end?


May 31, 2012 at 5:48 PM KSingh said...

Prasun, when can we expect to see the first EH-101 Delivered to the IAF. I thought it was meant to be around now ie Q2 2012.

And What is your personal view of the new COAS? Will he be good for the IA?


May 31, 2012 at 7:49 PM 
+ how many ALH and MKI is HAL delivering per annum now and are the production lines expected to expand anytime soon?

May 31, 2012 at 7:50 PM amey said...

Sir does india really has 6 regiments of S-300?
Or its just a hoax planted to deter pak/china
and if we hav them why doesnt MOD acknowlede it?

May 31, 2012 at 10:02 PM 
Sir, has the MoD planning to expand HAL production facilities to fasttrack induction? When will the MMRCA contract be signed? And why will the 1st aircraft start arriving 3 years after contract signature ? Why can't MoD fast track the procurement and induction process? Why can't ac delivery take place within 6 months of contract signature?

May 31, 2012 at 10:16 PM 

well well well ... is it true or like everything else.

May 31, 2012 at 10:33 PM 
Would love to buy your book, please consider putting it on Amazon as well

May 31, 2012 at 10:34 PM 
You've been an inspiration for "satyameva jayete" for the past few years. Your book will be very worth reading. Please tell us when it comes out.

May 31, 2012 at 10:36 PM 
Hi Prasun, regarding the INS Vikramaditya,
1.Due to it's larger displacement, will not the Vik have greater endurance, larger aviation fuel capacity, more weapon stowage space than the Hermes.
2.Can more than a single AAM round be carried on any of the hardpoints. Can more than 8 AAM be carried.
3.According to you, the purpose of the carrier air group is provide air cover for the carrier battle group. But the carrier battle group exists solely for providing defence and protection against all types of threats - air, sea, underwater to the INS Vikramaditya.
4. The carrier battle group was meant to provide bastion to the carrier. USN uses the carrier for power projection operations. The Royal navy initially wanted the carrier for ASW and after the Falkswand war realized it's importance fir power projection. What is Indias need for a carrier ?
5. Besides providing air defence, can't the MiG-29K be used for strikes against the enemy fleet, for area denial roles and for striking targets of opportunity on ground.

May 31, 2012 at 10:37 PM 

I think even US selected AW101.
But why did Agusta not offer MAWS,# year Warranty and field trials in India??

May 31, 2012 at 10:51 PM 
To email@example.com: For both the Jaguar IS & Tejas, ground targets are acquired by Litening LDPs, not by the naked eye. The Jaguar can always obtain real-time air situational updates from airborne AEW & C platforms. An integral MMR is not reqd. Using NVGs, the Jaguar IS can indeed fly low-level flight profiles. Even the Tejas using the EL/M-2032 can’t fly such a profile since the EL/M-2032 is not a terrain-following radar. All combat aircraft are weather-dependent & vulnerable to lightning strikes if their MMRs don’t have a weather-search mode. But this does not necessarily ground such aircraft since they can always fly ‘above’ low cloud-cover thereby avoid lightning strikes. The upgraded Jaguar IS will have a comprehensive defensive aids suite, which is not there for the Tejas Mk1. It will also be able to carry dar more ordnance once it is re-engined with the F-125 turbofan.

To Saurav Jha: This is a rather dated story going back to the late 1990s and has been extensively documented at:
Therefore, everything about the VT-72B/WXT-3 ARV scam is already well-known. What has not yet been unearthed—and what the real scams are--are the following:
1) If the DRDO & Larsen & Toubro could successfully combine forces in the mid-1990s to jointly develop the far more complex BLT-72 armoured bridgelayer, then why was the MoD at that time firmly opposed to the DRDO & L & T being allowed to co-develop an ARV for the T-72 tank fleet? This is something the then NDA-led govt’s alliance partners should answer & I hope the UPA-2 govt takes full advantage of this & confronts the BJP & Samata Dal, so that the truth comes out.
2) Why is BEML being allowed to brazenly strike industrial vendor agreements with foreign companies all aimed at importing solutions for building an estimated 30 ARVs for the Arjun Mk1 MBTs? Why is BEML being allowed to import track-width mine ploughs from US-based Pearson Engineering for the Arjun Mk1?
3) Why has BEML teamed up with Bumar Labedy of Poland to develop such a 65-tonne ARV, when neither BEML nor Bumar Labedy were in any way involved with the design & development of the Arjun Mk1 MBT? Could all work not be done in-country by an R & D team comprising the CVRDE & Larsen & Toubro?
Alas, the ‘desi’ journalists/reporters don’t have the kind of depth/intellect required for unearthing all this, leave alone asking such questions. Is it because they too are under the influence/payroll of certain unnamed and opaque arms sales lobbies????

June 1, 2012 at 5:38 AM 
To Anand: AS I had stated earlier, the IN is facing a severe shortage of trained/skilled manpower and all the delayed new-build warship commissionings are a result of such a shortage. Things are goinf begind schedule by as much as four months at this critical juncture.

To KSingh. The VVIP AW-101s will start arriving from this October onwards. Regarding the new COAS, things can only get as better as the prevailing environment that exists in and around the MoD. I had already explained the dysfunctionalities above yesterday that are preventing the armed forces from being developed and used optimally. Therefore, expecting too much from a solitary service chief will be too much to ask for, unless he is empowered with a pro-active enabling operating environment. Regarding the production lines for ALH & Su-30MKI, there’s no scope for any further expansion of existing industrial infrastructure facilities. But a lot more can be down to increase productivity & man-hours of work.

To Amey: No one in India has any S-300s, be they batteries or regiments. The S-300s were never ordered by anyone in India, ever.

To email@example.com: HAL will only set up an additional final assembly facility for the LOH/LUH, and not for the Dhruv ALH. Bulk-production of the M-MRCA involves the placing of orders for several long-lead items, which take at least 2.5 years to produce. Therefore, their production runs cannot be fast-tracked. Nothing is ever speedily inducted. There are no short-cuts.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: It is true. The information comes out from a Boeing press-release, and not from BEL.

To email@example.com & 10.36PM: VMT. Will do so.

June 1, 2012 at 5:39 AM 
To email@example.com: Answer to 1) is YES. As for 2), the Ruskies are yet to design & produce triple-ejector racks for guided-munitions. AS for 3) in the Indian scheme of things, most of the undersea/surface threat neutralisation efforts will be handled by the ASV/ASW helicopters that are deployed on the escorting warships. AS for 4), neither the MoD nor the IN have ever believed in power projection concepts or gunboat diplomacy concepts. Consequently, the IN’s carrier battle groups will be employed for multi-dimensional expeditionary warfare only. As things now stand, the MiG-29Ks will also be employed for maritime strike/anti-ship strike. For land attack, only if the situation is in India’s favour (like attaining a 22:1 air superiority as was the case in 1971 over East Pakistan), will such assets be employed.

To KSK: I’ve already covered this subject in a previous thread earlier this year. It is not for AgustaWestland to offer MAWS, but for the IAF to specify which MAWS it wants, which is what it did. I’ve very clearly identified the MAWS fit on board the IAF’s AW-101s with watermarked red arrows, an illustration that was picked up from my blog & used extensively by HEADLINES TODAY TV & LIVERFIST, with only the latter acknowledging the source of this illustration after it was brought to his attention by me.
 
Looks like the US now wants a firm foothold at Bangladesh's St Martin's Island off Chittagong. Check this out:


That's great news indeed!!! This will give strong shore-based logistics support to those US Navy undersea 'oceanographic survey' assets reqd for monitoring Indian & Chinese naval activities, especially those pertaining to nuclear-powered vessels, throughout the Bay of Bengal.

June 1, 2012 at 6:09 AM 
How true Prasun it is indeed LIVERFIST. Better still will be STOMACHFIST because we lately discovered that Aroor blogs to feed himself - entirely new application of blogging.

June 1, 2012 at 6:41 AM 
Prasun let us know when the book gets released and i would get to get my hands on it. Best Wishes.

June 1, 2012 at 7:48 AM 

What is great inUS setting up a nava base in our backyard?

June 1, 2012 at 10:50 AM 
Yes Please let us know the publication date so that I can get one copy of ur book . Till now I know that operation EX Brass Tacks was a regular practice but navy was involved in it means we need to know more about it.

Regarding ARV scam I guess Army had no other option but to order what is available to them in-house. actual culprit is the MOD .

June 1, 2012 at 3:14 PM 
@prasun 6:09 am,China ok, but Why is it great news if the US can spy on Indian assets from st martins? Please explain.

June 1, 2012 at 4:39 PM 

Thanks fore getting back to me.

Jut wondering can we expect any follow on orders for the VVIP configured AW-101s over and above the 12 (8+4) already on order?

Also is it possible the IAF on receiving the AW-101 will be so impressed by it that they will order more but in other roles such as SAR/CSAR or a Spec Ops platform or utility versions?

And does the IAF/IA have a requirement for a rotary wing Spec Ops platform?

Also I have read you post on yello Desi journalism where you talk about e AW-101 deal and there is a render showing the IAF AW-101 in a grey low-VIs paint scheme. This this just the paint scheme the non-VVIP verisons ordered will be in whilt the VVIP ones will be in the standard IAF communication SQD blue and white as with present Hips (Mi-8s)?

June 1, 2012 at 4:40 PM 
Sir, with respect to the Tejas & Jaguar.
1. U said, the ground targets are aquired, identified, and engaged using the Litening LDPs. But using them , the aircraft will have to come very close to the target (10-15 km) and will fall prey to QRSAM, AAA, MRSAM and is likely to be shot down.
2. The Litening LDPs are not capable of all weather target acquistion & engagement. They are unable to look through snowfall, cloud cover and dust storm. Adverse weather posses a huge impediment to their operation. Whereas a radar is all weather capable and is able to see , id targets from 60-70 km distance away.
3. Using NVGs how can the pilot fly low level missions at night and under adverse weather conditions. NVGs just improve situational awarness. It helps to see what the naked eye will see upto some distance with a greenish tinge.Night flying over undulating terrain will be possible only when the ac is fitted with pods like LANTIRN or the Litening pod provides Flir imagery of the terrain below upto appreciable distance and this is displayed in the Head down display since the HUD is not holographic.
4. Reenging the Jag with the F-125 will increase the weapons payload from the 4.6 t to 5.5+ t. But the Jag has too few hardpoints for weapons carriage. It has 7 hrdpts. 2 above wings which carries nly air-air missiles. The rest 5 hrdpts carries air-ground ordance. But the carriage of a LDP reduces this to 4. And if under the new IDAS, the Jag carries a RF Jammer pod externally. Then the no further reduces to 3. What HAL should have done is to strengthen the wings and add more hardpts to the wings.
5. I was under the impression that all the fighter Jets, transport aircrafts & helos were lightning proof. If not the Jaguar but aren't the Sukhois, Mig-29, Mirage 2000. All the airbuses and commercial airliners are full lightning proof. Then why aren't the jets. Is there no way to make the jets lightning proof?
6. DRDO and HAL could have restructured the nose and install a 4th gen FLIR or IRST, laser rangefinder and a slighty enlarged Elta 20600 RTP. There is room for installing a larger diameter antenna version of this pod. Then more hardpoints would have been available.

June 1, 2012 at 6:34 PM 

Did DRDO showed any mock ups in any air show and
how r they doin in development of uavs?

June 1, 2012 at 9:03 PM 

How do you rate the chances of the UAC/HAL MTA project coming to fruitiion and when? As it seems like only negative information is coming out on this front.

And if the MTA isn't ready in time will the IAF wait around? And if the project fails completely what contingencies have the IAF got in place? More C-130Js?

June 2, 2012 at 3:47 AM 

Will the IAF get the Litening or Damaceles LDP for the M2K UPG and Rafale

June 2, 2012 at 3:48 AM 
To Austin: Will do for sure. VMT.

To Dashu: Will do so. VMT. EX BRASS TACKSA was a combined tri-services exercise in which senior officers from the three armed services were handpicked to simulate ‘enemy’ operational decision-makers as part of ‘Red Land’. The objective then was to learn the lessons from both Ex BRASS TACKS (on the western front) & the subsequent EX Checker Board (along the northern front) and after another three years, sometimes by 1990 have a combined two-front exercise called EX BRASS BOARD. Regarding the ARVs, the main scam was two-fold: why was the Army told to wait for almost 18 years (since the arrival of the T-72Ms & T-72M1 in the early 1980s) to begin acquiring the ARVs? The universal norm is that when one procures MBTs, the ARVs & AVLBs are also part of the deal. Why was this not so in India’s case? Secondly, when it was decided by the MoD that the AVLB (the BLT-72 bridgelayer) would be developed in-country by DRDO and L & T (which was done between 1993 & 1999), why was it decided NOT to develop the ARV indigenously? This too could have been developed by 1999? Instead, why was the import option chosen for this class of armoured vehicle? Thirdly, when the CVRDE & R & DE(E) had already succeeded nu 2007 in developing the Arjun-based armoured bridgelayer, why were these two MoD-owned R & D entities not authorized to develop an indigenous Arjun-based ARV? Where was the need to sign the agreement between BEML & Poland’s Zakłady Mechaniczne Bumar-Łabędy SA on 17th January 2012 that calls for developing the Arjun-based ARV? What uniques expertise does Zakłady Mechaniczne Bumar-Łabędy S.A. possess about the Arjun MBT which qualifies it, and not the CVRDE & R & DE(E) to be the only one to be selected as foreign partner for developing such an ARV? And why is the TWMP being imported by BEML from US-based Pearson Engineering for the Arjun MBT? Are the CVRDE & R & DE(E) so intellectually bankrupt so as not to be able to design & develop even a track-width mine plough when they have developed and delivered far more complex solutions thus far????

June 2, 2012 at 4:02 AM 
To email@example.com & 4.39PM: You will both get the answers within the next 24 hours.

To KSingh: No follow-on orders for the AW-101 will be placed by the IAF. CSAR roles will be performed by the Mi-17V-5. All AW-101s will have the standard low-visibility grey colour paint scheme. The blue-white paint scheme was discarded long ago.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: With Litening LDP one can stay 50km and 45,000 feet away from the target. During snowfall, low cloud cover and dust storms, no one in the world will be able to fly strike sorties. Pilots wear NVGs to fly low-level flight profiles, not terrain-hugging profiles. Terrain-hugging profiles can only be flown by those aircraft that have LANTIRN-type pods or terrain-following radars. In India’s case, none of the two are available. Therefore, NVGs are made use of to fly at least 200 feet ASL. Hardpoints for Jaguars can easily be increased by using triple ejector racks. No extra hardpoints are reqd. There’s no aircraft in the world that’s lightning-proof. The only way to escape lightning is to fly around the storms. Nose-mounted low-cost IRST can be installed since there’s no need for a laser rangefinder (as this work will be done by the LDP).

To email@example.com: No DRDO exhibits were showcased there. Let’s see if the DRDO can deliver on its promise to deliver the all-singing-and-dancing Rustom-1 MALE-UAV this fiscal year itself. I, though, have grave doubts about it.

June 2, 2012 at 4:03 AM 
To Unknown: The IL-214 MRTA won’t fail, just as the FGFA won’t fail. There may be delays, but there will be no failures. For the M2K UPG and Rafale, Damocles will be used.

June 2, 2012 at 4:05 AM 

June 2, 2012 at 5:11 AM aswin said...

prasun will the DRDO AURA de a clone of Dassault NEURON
is there any hand of france in AURA project
wats auras specifications

June 2, 2012 at 12:04 PM An India said...

Prasun Da,
Quoting this new development..
>Looks like the US now wants a firm foothold at Bangladesh's St Martin's Island off Chittagong. Check this out:

I doubt this base will only be used for monitoring and collect Electronic Signatures of Chinese and Indian nuclear powered subs.
Chinese will need another 5 yrs atleast to operate Nuk Subs and CBGs in Bay of Bengal but India will be operating 3 Arihant and 1 Akula 2 from Eastern Base.

My Analysis is...
This Bangladeshi US base will have Navy Seals teams permanently positioned and Ready 24x7 for protections and EVAC missons of US human assets(in India)missions.

Some more developments related are...

1.The kind of treatment given and disinformation campaign ran by few pockets within government in last few months towards Honest & Deshbhakt Retd. Army Chief Gen V K Singh and therefore unhappiness lingering within Indian society and forces.

2.All Special forces are being brought under one single command hurriedly under COASC to protect the civilian government against any armed challange.

3.Agreement between India and US on co-ordination and cooperation between Special forces of both the countries.

What's your analysis say ?


June 2, 2012 at 1:20 PM 
1.What is diff bet scorpene and super scorpene subs?
are there any vls tubes in super scorpene to fire brahmos/sm-39?

2.HDW was fined by S.Korea for problems in type-214? so are we still consedering U-214?
214 is noisy boat...heard from many sources!!

3.When will MiG-27 fleet be airworthy again ?

4.Are there any chances of carrier mortar tracked being inducted in army?

5.M-46 when will it be upgraded and who will win contract?

June 2, 2012 at 3:35 PM Mr. Ra 13 said...

OMG! How a nation so vehemently defeated by China in 1962 can afford to practice such relaxation and luxury. If it can not be changed, then enjoy such situation and perish.

June 2, 2012 at 7:15 PM 

How many C-17s are the IAF expceted to operate above the initial, concrete, 10 already on order? As there have been some saying it may be 6-8 more and others saying even more than that to bring the fleet to 20-30 such units in operation with IAF.

And won't these descions have tobe made pretty soon as the C-17 production line at Long beach will close down as orders dry up. So the descion will have to be made within the next 2-3 years.

June 2, 2012 at 8:00 PM 
Sir, with respect to the Jaguar,
1.With the Litening LDP , it is possible to acquire, identify, track & engage ground targets from 50 km away and from an altitude of 45000 ft. Now,in what way does the LDP acquires the target? Does it take a photo of the target in the IR spectrum & tracks the target using the Flir.
2. This means the Jag will remain outside the engagement envelope of AAA, point defense sam and most mrsam.
3. Will u pls give a brief description of the Litening LDP. From what i read in wiki, it consists of a 3rd gen FLIR, a laser range finder, a low light CCD, a laser designator. Just as the same way the Flir takes infrared imagery of the ground target and acquires the target, cant it be used for obtaining imagery of the terrain below . And if not, why.
4. According to you, no aircraft can engage ground targets when there is cloud cover, sandstorm, snowfall. Using radar one can. Infact radar are all weather sensors . Radar emissions can penetrate cloud cover, sandstorm. The Elta 20600 RTP is a all weather sensor. The IAI website states so. Using  the SAR, ISAR modes u can obtain real time imagery, pass the info to terminally guided and having inertial navigation pgm. Using the IIR seeker , MMW seeker, the pgm will take a pic of the target, correlate it with the stored info and if a match is obtained , home in on the target. One has to depend on the weather when one resorts to laser designated bombing techniques. Because laser beam cant penetrate cloud cover.
5. Can all of the 5 pylons support multi ejector racks. These racks can nly support bombs , that too upto 500 lb. Can more than one air - surface missile be carried on a hardpoint using multiple ejector racks.
6. The Elta 20600 RTP can easily be integrated into the nose along with an IRST.

June 2, 2012 at 10:30 PM 
Hey Prasun,
I have some info from u my father's friend who is a logistician for ongc,regarding India stopping oil exploration in Vietnam, he said that the results were not as expected n he used a lot of words i dont understand but the fact of the matter is India didn't chicken out as u said that due to chinese objections.

June 2, 2012 at 11:46 PM 
If the navy goes for Naval Rafale for IAC-2 along with E-2D Hawkeye how will the air superiority ratio against Pak will be ?
Will it attain the 22:1 ratio so that they can be used for land attack.
If the navy goes for 5 th gen Naval PAK-FA in future, how significantly can the air superiority ratio change.

June 3, 2012 at 1:18 AM 
To An India: China first sent its SSNs into the Bay of Bengal & the Indian Ocean way back in the mid-1980s. It doesn’t need five long years to establish a firm foothold in the Bay of Bengal. There are no Chinese plans for deploying its CBGs into the Bay of Bengal, simply because it is not required. However, PLAN’s CBGs have every right to roam around the bay of Bengal or Indian Ocean under regulations of freedom of navigation in international waters. Secondly, no one from the US has sought any bases from Bangladesh, but merely logistical support facilities of the type obtained from Singapore. None of the Indian SOFs are being brought under a single command. That’s just a recommendation that was proposed more than a decade ago. It won’t be a reality until the post of CDS is created.

To Amey: The Super Scorpene is the S-80 variant of Scorpene that’s developed by Spain’s Navantia. Any SSK is noisy for as long as it uses diesel engines. It goes super-quiet the moment the batteries or AIP kicks in & the diesel engines stop functioning. For your last three questions, only the MoD has the answers.

To Mr. RA 13: A country so vehemently defeated by China in 1962 can not only afford to practice such relaxation and luxury, but also has the capability to persistently produce Class-1 traitors & elevate them to the highest constitutional offices of India. It is these traitors that have nurtured & sustained separatist movements of the Khalistanis, ULFA, Nagas, Bodos, etc—all this while they were in power. No wonder India is not even eligible to be described as being a nation as yet, leave alone a nation-state with clearly demarcated territorial boundaries. Here’s another OMG(!) poser for all: of the 7 Su-30MKI squadrons of the IAF, exactly how many of them are qualified to engage in operational offensive air campaigns? Do all the squadrons have their complement of cockpit procedures trainers & part-task trainers reqd for practicing the launch of PGMs? Why were such vital training aids acquired in small numbers & that too only in 2009?

June 3, 2012 at 1:43 AM 
To Unknown: The reqd no of C-17As is 30.

To email@example.com: No man-made sensor can see through sandstorms or heavy rainfall. Description of Litening LDPs can be found at RAFAEL’s website. There’s no room inside the Jaguar IS’ nose bulkhead for any radar targetting sensor.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: No one in today’s world undertakes prohibitively expensive exploratory offshore drilling while prospecting for hydrocarbons without first conducting confirmatory geological surveys. If anyone discovers that the results are not as expected AFTER conducting exploratory offshore drilling, then that entity has no right to be in the business of offshore oil exploration. Does ONGC Videsh fall under this category? Kindly ask any other offshore oil exploration firm & get a second opinion in order to seek a convincing answer to the question that I’ve posed above.

To email@example.com: A nuclear-powered IAC-2 hosting some 40 M-MRCAs or FGFAs & four E-2D Hawkeye 2000s will give India the decisive air supremacy that’s required for neutralising the PAF’s air superiority/airborne maritime strike capabilities. Another viable option is to induct land-attack ‘Prahaar’ vertically-launched missiles that are carried on board a new-design DDG (24 missiles per DDG) that uses only marine gas-turbine propulsion (which does away with the need for diesel engines for propulsion & consequently offers more space on board for hosting such NLOS-PGMs). IN my view, the IN acted most strangely when it decided that its three Project 15 DDGs & four Project 15B DDGs will both have CODAG propulsion, using both diesel engines & marine gas-turbines. Use of CODAG propulsion should have been limited to the first three Project 15 Delhi-class DDGs only, & just like the Project 1135.6 FFGs & Project 17 DDGs, the new DDGs should have made use of gas-turbines for cruise & boost.

June 3, 2012 at 1:56 AM 
You mean we need to invert the global maps and put the south pole on the top. Perhaps in this manner the top ocean waters may fill up on the whole lands. It should be a shame on to them that your revelations are not only sensitive, but also true. Thanx!

June 3, 2012 at 2:28 AM 
To Mr.RA 13: VMT. By the way, those WZT-3 ARVs are only meant for the fleet of T-72 MBTs. Which in turn means that for the fleet of T-90S MBTs, there's still no ARV in sight!
Will upload the piece on Bangladesh later today, along with the definitive artist's impression of the S-5 SSBN, which has now been 'released' by the decision-makers of the ATV project office.

June 3, 2012 at 4:34 AM 
1.U-214 was noisy due to cavitation noises when running on batteries.
This problem was reported by S.Korea,Greece and other countries too.Also AIP output power was less than expected.HDW has been fined for this by many countries, so why are we still consedering such a sub?

2.Why is the cost of 6 subs is as high as US $10 billion ?
(cmp to cost of aug90b of pak ,even u-214 of other countries)

3.Is IN consedering Marlin ssk?
Thanks in adv!!!

June 3, 2012 at 9:18 AM 
Sir, with respect to the Jaguar, pls give ans to points 1,2,3 and 5..Pls go through them. Point 4 describes the way in which modern day bombing ops are carried out. Utilising real time imagery ,it is possible to carry out all weather operations. Sir, u yourself said so in some previous comments. Also i went to IAI and viewed the Elta 20600 RTP and it was mentioned there it was an all weather sensor. It was mentioned there that it can map the terrain in SAR,ISAR modes in any weather conditions.
pls reply.

June 3, 2012 at 1:22 PM SK said...

The C-17A Globemasters although a very potent & capable aircraft are exorbitantly priced.

Instead of going ahead with the follow on order for C-17A can the IAF opt for Modified An-124-300 ? An-124 production is about to get restarted. IAF can specify a higher performance Western engines in-place of Stock Progress D-18T like the PW4000 or GE CF6.

With these modifications An-124 will have a similar short take-off and landing performance like C-17A and it can carry twice the load . Most of all the aircraft will be in same "Price" ball park.

Russian may not match the Western Standards but a mix of Western Engines and Avionics on Russian platform will be good proposition Capability and price wise.

June 3, 2012 at 1:44 PM 

cockpit looks great

June 3, 2012 at 2:41 PM 

When do you expect we will see the deal for additional C-17s to be signed. And will the IAF be getting the most advanced version avaloble of the C-17? As you said the IAF will be gettin C-17As but I'm pretty sure the ER version is the latest version. So is the IAF getting less capable version of the airplane??

June 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM 
Finally a Submariner is Deputy Chief of Naval Staff, so can we aspect that there will be more emphasis in procurement of SSNs,SSBN instead of ACs.

June 3, 2012 at 10:29 PM 
I am email@example.com
You got a point I will ask the same Question and get back to you.

June 3, 2012 at 11:24 PM 
U said IN needs a DDG with 24 Prahaar Missiles...wat shud be their range and wat type and weight of warhead ?

Earlier u said pure electric propulsion is best for DDG now u r saying only marine gas-turbine propulsion...clarify.

Project 17 ships are Frigates..u wrote DDG.

also the issue u have raised regarding 7 Su-30MKI squadrons is troubling , but i think IAF is competent enough to maintain our frontline fighters battle ready , dont u think so?

if Super Scorpene is the S-80 variant , then is S-80 a modified scorpene? i hope this project is scrapped n SSN is fasttracked as u said Navy is considering.

looking forward for the artist's impression of the S-5 SSBN.

June 3, 2012 at 11:54 PM 
Does Tejas Mk1 or Mk2 have export potential ?
How many will IAF acquire in total?
And how many have to be produced for the project to be economically viable ?

June 3, 2012 at 11:57 PM 
The shortfall in qualification for 7 Su-30MKI squadrons to engage in operational offensive air campaigns and non-availability of ARVs for T-90 tanks may be due to the irritating problems of burocratic planning and procurement. Or does somebody really forgets the matters and the list till you remind them.

June 4, 2012 at 1:03 AM 
To Amey: As I had explained a long time ago earlier this year, U-214 is NOT being evaluated or considered for procurement. The IN wants a proven SSK with a proven AIP and all indications that the Super Scorpene equipped with a Stirling AIP module will be selected. Having acquired six Scorpenes, it makes no sense in today’s world to acquire a totally new-design SSK. And as I had explained earlier, the decision in the 1980s to acquire both the Class 209/Type 1500 SSK & the Type 877EKM Kilo-class SSK was disastrous, when the IN wanted only a SSK of Western origin. For as yet unexplained reasons, the 10 Type 877EKM SSKs were acquired, thereby posing a huge financial burden on India, something which India today cannot afford at all. And when one decides to licence-build new-generation SSKs with progressively more local content, the procurement costs will definitely be much more than that for procuring them off-the-shelf.

To email@example.com: Acquring targetting data using RTPs is not the same as target acquisition by LDPs. Real-time imagery can be acquired by combat aircraft flying may over the storm at much higher altitudes, but this does not mean that a LDP will be able to do the same. For LDPs, IIR sensors & MMW sensors to function, one requires clear weather conditions. Therefore, all-weather availability of ISAR sensors does not mean that LDPs too will automatically become all-weather target acquisition/engagement systems.

To SK: What makes you think that the An-124-300s will be way cheaper than the C-17As? Long gone are the days when weapons of Soviet/Russian origin were sold at friendship prices. Today, Russian products may be 15% cheaper, but they don’t come with vital flying training aids like flight simulators. That’s why the IAF’s IL-76MDs & IL-78MKIs don’t have any flight training simulators till today. One must understand that the Russian military-industrial complex has been in a steady decline, not because of financial difficulties, but due to brain drain. Russia’s population is declining in numbers, and the best technocrats are no longer joining the military-industrial complex. Just look at how long it is taking Russia to produce even a far simpler product like the IL-476 fly-by-wire flight control system-equipped transporter.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: FYI that’s the cockpit of the Hongdu L-15 Falcon LIFT from China, and has nothing to do with any Tejas.

June 4, 2012 at 2:54 AM 
To email@example.com: Kindly do so. VMT.

To KSingh: Given the current freefall of the Rupee, no one can predict when the follow-on C-17s will be ordered. C-17ERs may be good for those air forces tasked with global expeditionary air campaigns, but not for the IAF, which is concerned with only regional air campaign scenarios.

To firstname.lastname@example.org: It won’t make any difference. Naval force modernization plans are not subject to the whims & fancies of the CNS’ professional vocation.

To KSK: The existing version of Prahaar will do. Marine gas-turbine propulsion is readily available within India today, while electric propulsion isn’t & would therefore take years to obtain and master. As for Su-30MKI squadrons, not all are combat-qualified, since it takes a minimum of five years to acquire full spectrum combat proficiency. SBM is of the view that only four squadrons are fully combat qualified as of now. The S-80 Super Scorpene fitted with a Stirling AIP module will be the best choice for the IN under project 75(I).

To Mr.RA 13: it could well be the latter (i.e. forgetting) & I shit you not. For instance the reason DEFEXPO 2012 was held in late March instead of early February was that the MoD’s Directorate of Defence Exhibitions, along with the CII and FICCI had collectively ‘forgotten’ that DEFEXPO is normally held in early February and consequently, failed to make reservations of floorspace at Pragati Maidan with the ITPO latest by last year. Consequently, when it was discovered in early January that DEFEXPO 2012 had to be held a month later, everyone went berserk but it was too late by then and therefore the expo was rescheduled for late March. Strange(!) but very much true!!! And one still expects a person like A K Antony to remain as Defence Minister/Raksha Mantri???? For me he’s totally unfit to hold that office, since he even ‘forgot’ to order the CBI enquiry about the Rs14 crore bribe offer to the former COAS, & reportedly developed amnesia till March 26, 2012.

June 4, 2012 at 2:56 AM 

At this stage is there any chance of the MMRCA being cancelled and the EFT being selected? When will we see a definite signing of MMRCA contract?

When exactly will F-INSAS be complete and trailed on an active IA unit? Especially the new gear like rifle, modular body armour, personal computers, new helmets etc?

Is the IAF doing anything to address the issues you have highlighted regarding the MKI inabilty to carry out offensive air ops and the such?

June 4, 2012 at 3:01 AM 
Prasun K. Sengupta
