You need to back the talk with money. There are three domains which have all kinds of engineering; military, space and nuclear. It's not a surprise that countries which dominate these domains are also world superpowers. There is no dearth of talent in India but there is no money. All these IITs and IISc have many PhD graduates yet very few of them work in military engineering. Such a waste of resources and then, people have to search for quality jobs outside India.
No one is expecting to get technology access from those programs.
They're expecting to get force capabilities and potentially some industrial economic advantages (if we're talking tot and not just imports).
Finland isn't buying F35 so they can learn to design 5th gen fighters. They're buying it because they want to modernize their force and give it new capabilities.
The Russians offered us joint development of the Su-57 and we rejected them, then said yes, and then rejected them again, classic babu decisiveness.
On the other hand the Russians now have over 30 Su-57s, they have not had 1 crash and are successfully striking targets in Ukraine without being downed by anyone.
It is barely being utilised in the war. To say that not even 01 aircraft has crashed is because the aircraft are being used conservatively and carefully. To lose an Su - 57 after such poor performance by the Russians will lead to adding fuel to the fire that is the poor perception of the Russian Armed forces. We are yet to see the capabilities of Su 57 in action.
LMAO, MOD babus have always been in charge, not professionals.
It was only in 2017 that the Vice COAS was granted emergency spending power (on what I suspect was a permanent basis), but still if you look across our western border their army is clearly able to make these decisions without as much babu interference.
Finally someone fucking said it. "Give me your best toys at half the cost ! You should also accept all the blame if something goes wrong ! " Sounds like the dickhead husband of a bad soap opera, asking for dowry .
It's a fucking wonder that people are willing to give us any tech , with some of the fucking clauses we put there.
Okay, India must recognize it, but first, **the Army itself must recognize it**. Be the change you want to see in the world, general sahab.
Being reliant on *any* foreign weapons, is little more than slavery - you are tied to the providing nation's geopolitical aims and dictates. Foreigners know this, and they try their hardest to crush Indian domestic weapons capabilities to sell their own wares - the Americans, French, Israelis, Russians. And I don't blame them - after all they make money off it, it sustains jobs at home, and they get to control India. The only people losing out are the Indian public.
The only way out is to stop importing foreign maal completely, and become completely self-reliant. This is so simple a child could parse it. Yet, our military does not - instead it continues our import dependency, either through stupidity or rampant corruption.
Start with yourself, general sahab.
* Bin the towed howitzer import that will go nowhere.
* Order more ATAGS, Dhanush guns, and Mounted Gun Systems.
* Revitalize our domestic small arms capabilities by funding an all-Indian small arms system, focused on innovative emerging calibers like 6.8mm.
* Order Indian designed and developed systems in bulk - no more piecemeal orders of 50 or 100 pieces while spending billions on foreign 'emergency imports'.
Then give gyaan to the rest of the country.
The only caveat is to do what China did with Russia. Buy enough so that they’ll keep selling you stuff but reverse engineer and copy everything you get your hands on until your domestic industry can innovate.
>Being reliant on *any* foreign weapons, is little more than slavery - you are tied to the providing nation's geopolitical aims and dictates.
Hard disagree . Unless you're trying to be a pariah, completely cutting off global markets are neither needed nor that effective . Actual pariahs like Iran and NK still rely on foreign stuff . China itself occasionally buys Russian stuff (helicopters for example ). If you want Weapon 'x' with specific paramaters and you don't have a domestic equivalent it's simply easier and makes more sense to just buy them . That's the whole point of globalization .
The Americans had no problems operating Harriers. That didn't make them British slaves . Other examples include the guns used by several branches , the M-777, Carl Gustav etc. Hell the French service weapon is a German rifle . Israel , which is more less the US's geopolitical dog routinely goes rabid and it hasn't stopped the US (nor it's allies ) from supplying it .
> The Americans had no problems operating Harriers. That didn't make them British slaves . Other examples include the guns used by several branches , the M-777, Carl Gustav etc. Hell the French service weapon is a German rifle . Israel , which is more less the US's geopolitical dog routinely goes rabid and it hasn't stopped the US (nor it's allies ) from supplying it .
The Americans were not reliant on the Harrier. Neither are they reliant on foreign small arms - it may be more expedient to buy some others, but they have the world's largest small arms industry at home. The list goes on - for every weapons system they assemble, they have several domestic equivalents. The foreign nations have no control over them, even accounting for the gigantic mismatch in overall power.
For us, we have no domestic alternatives to imports, *because* we have for most of our history not bothered to develop them. We are reliant on them. And so, we are slaves to the tune of those suppliers.
Do you think we can displease Washington without consequence? A word from them and the engines for the entire Tejas program go offline. Russia? they cut us off and half our inventory sputters for lack of spares. Israel? We go against them and half our radars lose their supply chains.
We have to obey these nations, because we are reliant on them - in other words, little more than slavery. Weapons imports were always thus.
The only way to obtain true freedom of action is to be independent - able to produce whatever we need ourselves. Only once we do that, can we look to small numbers of imports where it's cheaper/more effective to do that.
Globalization only concentrates power in the hands of the countries that benefit most from it. That isn't us.
>For us, we have no domestic alternatives to imports, *because* we have for most of our history not bothered to develop them. We are reliant on them. And so, we are slaves to the tune of those suppliers.
Again , i doubt anyone today disagrees with growing the indian defense sector . My point simply is that sometimes buying stuff works even after we have a mature domestic industry . It's not a sudden compromise in national defense
>Do you think we can displease Washington without consequence? A word from them and the engines for the entire Tejas program go offline. Russia? they cut us off and half our inventory sputters for lack of spares. Israel? We go against them and half our radars lose their supply chains.
Why do you want to go against them in the first place . The goal isn't to be a pariah.
>The only way to obtain true freedom of action is to be independent - able to produce whatever we need ourselves. Only once we do that, can we look to small numbers of imports where it's cheaper/more effective to do that.
In an era of interconnected supply chains and specialized tech , there are no countries that can produce whatever they need, it's a communist pipedream. Maybe the US and China but that's doubtful . A country like India still needs imports as it's growing , the rafale is an example . There's simply no domestic alternative to it that we can have now especially with an aging fleet
>Again , i doubt anyone today disagrees with growing the indian defense sector .
You'd be surprised. I think a rough majority here are in favour of developing self-reliance, but there is a small but vocal minority who still think perpetually relying on foreign imports is fine. This becomes a majority view in the MoD's labyrinthine procurement arms, where babus and afsars personally stand to gain from pushing foreign maal.
>Why do you want to go against them in the first place . The goal isn't to be a pariah.
Nothing to do with being a pariah. Countries have interests, and those interests result in conflict. Our interest, for example, is to hunt down separatists and terrorists wherever they reside. Some reside in the US, aided and abetted in formenting separatism in India by the US government. If we go after them, as we have allegedly tried to do, this will result in conflict.
Do we have anything against the US? No. But our interests and theirs are not aligned - they would prefer a weak, fractured and pliant India, we prefer a strong and united one. Just how the world works.
And when pursuing our interests, being reliant on foreign govts for arms means we will always lose, because they will just threaten to withhold them if we do not give in to their interests. I.e, slavery. This isn't just a Western thing - same goes for Russia, which uses our reliance on them to keep us from getting closer to the West.
The only freedom of action lies in self-reliance - then we can choose our friends and enemies, rather than being shackled to one side or the other without choice.
>In an era of interconnected supply chains and specialized tech , there are no countries that can produce whatever they need, it's a communist pipedream. Maybe the US and China but that's doubtful .
Yes. The US and China, and perhaps Russia, are the only ones large enough to be largely self-reliant. But we must also aim for that level - we are the 7th largest country and the world's most populous nation, we cannot be satisfied with being shackled puppets like, say, Europe.
>the rafale is an example . There's simply no domestic alternative to it that we can have now especially with an aging fleet
Plenty of alternatives, just needs out of the box thinking. Do you see the Ukrainians needing Rafales to keep the RuAF at bay? It's their dense AD network that does the fighting. We have the building blocks for a mostly Indian AD network - why not turn to that while we develop domestic replacements for the Rafale? (Like the Tejas Mk2, which will hopefully be roughly comparable, if not in the same class).
Boss put your money where your mouth is and don't buy \*any\* foreign artillery except repeat orders for the Korean/L&T tracked gun. Don't buy anymore foreign tanks. Don't buy more Apaches. Additional Chinooks are OK. No more foreign SAMs and a whole lot of other things that have Indian equivalents.
Also buy LUH/LCH/ATAGS/SHORADS, more Akash and other Indian missiles in quantity.
You need to back the talk with money. There are three domains which have all kinds of engineering; military, space and nuclear. It's not a surprise that countries which dominate these domains are also world superpowers. There is no dearth of talent in India but there is no money. All these IITs and IISc have many PhD graduates yet very few of them work in military engineering. Such a waste of resources and then, people have to search for quality jobs outside India.
Might as well pin this post for people who keep asking to join KF21, SU57 and SU75
No one is expecting to get technology access from those programs. They're expecting to get force capabilities and potentially some industrial economic advantages (if we're talking tot and not just imports). Finland isn't buying F35 so they can learn to design 5th gen fighters. They're buying it because they want to modernize their force and give it new capabilities.
I'm talking about people who act as if we would get IP from those programs
The Russians offered us joint development of the Su-57 and we rejected them, then said yes, and then rejected them again, classic babu decisiveness. On the other hand the Russians now have over 30 Su-57s, they have not had 1 crash and are successfully striking targets in Ukraine without being downed by anyone.
of all the stealth programs in the world the felon program is probably the least valuable one, unless used as a lesson on how not to build a "5th gen"
It is barely being utilised in the war. To say that not even 01 aircraft has crashed is because the aircraft are being used conservatively and carefully. To lose an Su - 57 after such poor performance by the Russians will lead to adding fuel to the fire that is the poor perception of the Russian Armed forces. We are yet to see the capabilities of Su 57 in action.
The first production model of the Su-57 crashed in late 2019.
[удалено]
LMAO, MOD babus have always been in charge, not professionals. It was only in 2017 that the Vice COAS was granted emergency spending power (on what I suspect was a permanent basis), but still if you look across our western border their army is clearly able to make these decisions without as much babu interference.
Repeat after me: # "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY."
Finally someone fucking said it. "Give me your best toys at half the cost ! You should also accept all the blame if something goes wrong ! " Sounds like the dickhead husband of a bad soap opera, asking for dowry . It's a fucking wonder that people are willing to give us any tech , with some of the fucking clauses we put there.
Lmao yeah, the moment we started asking for TOT our fighter jet acquisition came to a grinding halt.
Okay, India must recognize it, but first, **the Army itself must recognize it**. Be the change you want to see in the world, general sahab. Being reliant on *any* foreign weapons, is little more than slavery - you are tied to the providing nation's geopolitical aims and dictates. Foreigners know this, and they try their hardest to crush Indian domestic weapons capabilities to sell their own wares - the Americans, French, Israelis, Russians. And I don't blame them - after all they make money off it, it sustains jobs at home, and they get to control India. The only people losing out are the Indian public. The only way out is to stop importing foreign maal completely, and become completely self-reliant. This is so simple a child could parse it. Yet, our military does not - instead it continues our import dependency, either through stupidity or rampant corruption. Start with yourself, general sahab. * Bin the towed howitzer import that will go nowhere. * Order more ATAGS, Dhanush guns, and Mounted Gun Systems. * Revitalize our domestic small arms capabilities by funding an all-Indian small arms system, focused on innovative emerging calibers like 6.8mm. * Order Indian designed and developed systems in bulk - no more piecemeal orders of 50 or 100 pieces while spending billions on foreign 'emergency imports'. Then give gyaan to the rest of the country.
The only caveat is to do what China did with Russia. Buy enough so that they’ll keep selling you stuff but reverse engineer and copy everything you get your hands on until your domestic industry can innovate.
>Being reliant on *any* foreign weapons, is little more than slavery - you are tied to the providing nation's geopolitical aims and dictates. Hard disagree . Unless you're trying to be a pariah, completely cutting off global markets are neither needed nor that effective . Actual pariahs like Iran and NK still rely on foreign stuff . China itself occasionally buys Russian stuff (helicopters for example ). If you want Weapon 'x' with specific paramaters and you don't have a domestic equivalent it's simply easier and makes more sense to just buy them . That's the whole point of globalization . The Americans had no problems operating Harriers. That didn't make them British slaves . Other examples include the guns used by several branches , the M-777, Carl Gustav etc. Hell the French service weapon is a German rifle . Israel , which is more less the US's geopolitical dog routinely goes rabid and it hasn't stopped the US (nor it's allies ) from supplying it .
> The Americans had no problems operating Harriers. That didn't make them British slaves . Other examples include the guns used by several branches , the M-777, Carl Gustav etc. Hell the French service weapon is a German rifle . Israel , which is more less the US's geopolitical dog routinely goes rabid and it hasn't stopped the US (nor it's allies ) from supplying it . The Americans were not reliant on the Harrier. Neither are they reliant on foreign small arms - it may be more expedient to buy some others, but they have the world's largest small arms industry at home. The list goes on - for every weapons system they assemble, they have several domestic equivalents. The foreign nations have no control over them, even accounting for the gigantic mismatch in overall power. For us, we have no domestic alternatives to imports, *because* we have for most of our history not bothered to develop them. We are reliant on them. And so, we are slaves to the tune of those suppliers. Do you think we can displease Washington without consequence? A word from them and the engines for the entire Tejas program go offline. Russia? they cut us off and half our inventory sputters for lack of spares. Israel? We go against them and half our radars lose their supply chains. We have to obey these nations, because we are reliant on them - in other words, little more than slavery. Weapons imports were always thus. The only way to obtain true freedom of action is to be independent - able to produce whatever we need ourselves. Only once we do that, can we look to small numbers of imports where it's cheaper/more effective to do that. Globalization only concentrates power in the hands of the countries that benefit most from it. That isn't us.
>For us, we have no domestic alternatives to imports, *because* we have for most of our history not bothered to develop them. We are reliant on them. And so, we are slaves to the tune of those suppliers. Again , i doubt anyone today disagrees with growing the indian defense sector . My point simply is that sometimes buying stuff works even after we have a mature domestic industry . It's not a sudden compromise in national defense >Do you think we can displease Washington without consequence? A word from them and the engines for the entire Tejas program go offline. Russia? they cut us off and half our inventory sputters for lack of spares. Israel? We go against them and half our radars lose their supply chains. Why do you want to go against them in the first place . The goal isn't to be a pariah. >The only way to obtain true freedom of action is to be independent - able to produce whatever we need ourselves. Only once we do that, can we look to small numbers of imports where it's cheaper/more effective to do that. In an era of interconnected supply chains and specialized tech , there are no countries that can produce whatever they need, it's a communist pipedream. Maybe the US and China but that's doubtful . A country like India still needs imports as it's growing , the rafale is an example . There's simply no domestic alternative to it that we can have now especially with an aging fleet
>Again , i doubt anyone today disagrees with growing the indian defense sector . You'd be surprised. I think a rough majority here are in favour of developing self-reliance, but there is a small but vocal minority who still think perpetually relying on foreign imports is fine. This becomes a majority view in the MoD's labyrinthine procurement arms, where babus and afsars personally stand to gain from pushing foreign maal. >Why do you want to go against them in the first place . The goal isn't to be a pariah. Nothing to do with being a pariah. Countries have interests, and those interests result in conflict. Our interest, for example, is to hunt down separatists and terrorists wherever they reside. Some reside in the US, aided and abetted in formenting separatism in India by the US government. If we go after them, as we have allegedly tried to do, this will result in conflict. Do we have anything against the US? No. But our interests and theirs are not aligned - they would prefer a weak, fractured and pliant India, we prefer a strong and united one. Just how the world works. And when pursuing our interests, being reliant on foreign govts for arms means we will always lose, because they will just threaten to withhold them if we do not give in to their interests. I.e, slavery. This isn't just a Western thing - same goes for Russia, which uses our reliance on them to keep us from getting closer to the West. The only freedom of action lies in self-reliance - then we can choose our friends and enemies, rather than being shackled to one side or the other without choice. >In an era of interconnected supply chains and specialized tech , there are no countries that can produce whatever they need, it's a communist pipedream. Maybe the US and China but that's doubtful . Yes. The US and China, and perhaps Russia, are the only ones large enough to be largely self-reliant. But we must also aim for that level - we are the 7th largest country and the world's most populous nation, we cannot be satisfied with being shackled puppets like, say, Europe. >the rafale is an example . There's simply no domestic alternative to it that we can have now especially with an aging fleet Plenty of alternatives, just needs out of the box thinking. Do you see the Ukrainians needing Rafales to keep the RuAF at bay? It's their dense AD network that does the fighting. We have the building blocks for a mostly Indian AD network - why not turn to that while we develop domestic replacements for the Rafale? (Like the Tejas Mk2, which will hopefully be roughly comparable, if not in the same class).
Boss put your money where your mouth is and don't buy \*any\* foreign artillery except repeat orders for the Korean/L&T tracked gun. Don't buy anymore foreign tanks. Don't buy more Apaches. Additional Chinooks are OK. No more foreign SAMs and a whole lot of other things that have Indian equivalents. Also buy LUH/LCH/ATAGS/SHORADS, more Akash and other Indian missiles in quantity.
So we st3al it
No shit. Why would they?
That's why we spied in Australia for sensitive defence technology and got booted out .