Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

A

aksha

Captain
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
·
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
This will be ICBM Agni5's first canisterized-based launch.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
·
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
With a launch mass of 50T, Agni5 is capable of delivering a payload of 1T over a range of 5000 km.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
A

aksha

Captain
Ef9jTju.jpg
 
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
A Bar Brother said:
Sukhoi seems to have escaped many of the liabilities clauses. I believe it was introduced, along with offsets, in 2002. However they are responsible for HAL's quality.
Click to expand...

Does Sukhoi has permanent representatives in HAL's factories inspecting each and every Su-30 MKI produced there ?
 
A

A Bar Brother

Junior Member
thunderchief said:
Does Sukhoi has permanent representatives in HAL's factories inspecting each and every Su-30 MKI produced there ?
Click to expand...

Yes. They are present in every step of the manufacturing process. This is in order to ensure that ToT obligations are being met along with the quality of the finished aircraft. They are most visible when the MKI is coated with RAM because it is a pretty complex process.
 
A

aksha

Captain
Yes, It's A Big Deal: IAF Gets First Tejas Fighter

LCA%2Bflying%2BJan.JPG


With the media shut out, HAL quietly handed over the first series production Tejas light combat aircraft to the Indian Air Force today, marking the beginning of what will hopefully be a long series of handings over over the next few decades. With the Tejas still months away from final operational clearance, today's ceremony -- and it really was a ceremony -- was mostly for the cameras (which weren't there, so who was this for?). But seriously. For all the symbolism that today's 'handing-over' was about, I'm not about to rain on the programme's parade. Not today.

Ten years ago, when I began reporting defence, then IAF chief Air Chief Marshal S. Krishnaswamy was on his way into retirement. I ambushed him at a government event in October 2004 for a quote on the LCA Tejas, which at the time was having considerable trouble. He wasn't happy. But he did say something no other chief did say. Not that I remember at least. He said, "I'm fed up of the to-and-fro between us and the builders of the LCA. I'm willing to accept the aircraft right now, as is. I am willing to commit my pilots to start clocking numbers on this machine. We need to spend time learning about it, not fighting about it. I am willing to make that commitment."

He meant what he said. But he retired weeks later. And there isn't a lot you can do after that. Not for a moment am I suggesting that there weren't other chiefs who wanted to see the Tejas in service as soon as possible, but a book remains to be written about the schadenfreude that was the development of the Tejas. It is in that light alone, if nothing else, that the handing over of an airframe to the IAF today is an occasion that shouldn't be made light of.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
A Bar Brother said:
And I already gave you my answer every time you asked for it.
Click to expand...

No you haven't. You have given an attempted response but not an answer addressing specifically the issue. You claim that Dassault is reneging on its commitment of guaranteeing HAL's liabilities as specified in the RFP. To-date, you have not provided a shred of evidence that your claim has any foundation to it.

A Bar Brother said:
We don't know the exact specifics of the liabilities.
Click to expand...

We don't have to know the specifics. We just have to know HAL's role and its relationship to the supplier when such a supplier is selected. That relationship within the framework then defines the obligations and whether Dassault is responsible for HAL's obligations. Your only comment is that HAL is the lead integrator. That itself doesn't define the relationship between Dassault and HAL. Specific obligations has to be defined and agreed within that working relationship. Inferring that HAL as the lead integrator means Dassault is responsible for HAL's performance liabilities is stretching reasoning beyond breaking point.

You can't simply make claims without being called out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top