Indo-Israeli LRSAM / Barak-8 /MRSAM

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,189
13,065
Mumbai
The person in question you're quoting once actually posted that he had multiple perspectives on the R&D efforts we were undertaking

  1. One was the developer's PoV .
  2. The 2nd was the user's perspective.
  3. The final one was the layman's / amateur defence enthusiasts / garden variety defence correspondent's as opposed to say someone employed by reputable publication's like Jane's PoV.
Your first task ought to be to seek clarifications on the said issue before proceeding ahead else it's going to be a case of - " join me down the rabbit hole for ages to come & merrily too ."


We actually took those observations as the usual display of hubris we're grown accustomed to by now out of sheer habit on account of our interactions over an extended period of time.

However ,on 2nd thoughts it occurred to us that this was highly unusual. How you ask ? It's like this - This candid admission came out of the blue in that it wasn't forced or extracted but was purely voluntary in as much that it was a confession of the state of mind as it was a cry for help . It was much later that the truth dawned on us.

The diagnosis is MPD.

Stick around . You'd learn more of this condition going ahead. You're in luck . A lot of things are going to be cleared this year . Known Unknowns , Unknown Knowns , Unknown Unknowns & believe it or not Known Knowns too.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,566
10,790
India
Before starting an argument, are you talking about AMCA Mk 1 or Mk2 here?

Doesn't matter. The point I was making is specific to some posters who prefer living in denial than reality, not meant for general discussion.

The KM-SAM, L-SAM, Hyunmoo-3, Cheonryong, Brahmos copy etc. don't count as imports; Patriots, AAMs, Taurus etc. do. There is a distinction.

You are talking about the complete system. I am not. It doesn't change much from R&D PoV, since the Koreans are yet to create new competencies in designing missiles for SAMs and CMs. A JV is done when a country lacks the technology after all.

Well, probably not. TEDBF may be more comparable to KF-21 Block1 but ig it'll be inferior to the Block2. Not to mention, TEDBF will be inducted by 2032 (that's the schedule and we don't have a great record with schedules), while KF-21 Block2 will probably end production by 2032 (40 Block1 by 2028, 80 Block2 by 2032).

In terms of flying sophistication, we have LCA Mk2 < KF-21 Block 1/2 < TEDBF. In terms of avionics sophistication, all three are likely similar, LCA Mk2 is likely similar to Block 1 and TEDBF could be similar to Block 2. In fact you can say that whatever the Koreans are trying to accomplish in terms of avionics for B1, we have already achieved it. In terms of engine sophistication, all three are the same.

AMCA is next gen compared to all three. Our goal is different. The Koreans are working on their aircraft to complement the F-35 in a hi-lo mix. We want to make our jet superior to the F-35.

In the interim measure, the Koreans are developing tech required to make a future KF-21 Block3 i.e. their F-35 equivalent (not official except for a few comments by KAI officials). So, should they go for a Block 3, they'll have their AMCA Mk1 analogue not too behind AMCA. Now, this is all speculation, so take it as you will.

That's the plan, but they don't have it, they lack the design experience at this point.

First about scramjets -


1. they had tested components of scramjet in 2008 -


and

2. their Hycore prototype uses a scramjet engine -

According to DongaIlbo and BizHankook, Hycore uses a cramjet and its maiden test is scheduled for this year. So, if the 2 newspapers are to be trusted, given that they will test their missile this year itself and that they have been dabbling in that tech since 2008, its probably safe to assume that they have a functional scramjet engine.

Now, ChosunIlbo cites some sources corroborating that Hycore has a scramjet engine, while some other sources say that Hycore is gonna use a dual mode ramjet or double ramjet (got lost in google translate). So, by this year, we'll probably know about that.

All "major" aerospace powers have scramjet programs and all have showed off models, 'cause it's the next big thing. The difference is whether they have actually tested it or not. That's the difference between haves and have-nots. Once they achieve it, that's when it counts.

The next step is figuring out how much of it is imported, if any, or if there is a foreign partner involved. There's no point if materials come from outside Korea. You either make it on your own, or bust.

Now coming to drones, as I've said earlier, both India and Korea have comparable systems. But they have built a prototype for their KUS-FC called the KAORI-X and have flown it (apparently to validate control algorithms), while SWIFT is in taxi trials. So you can probably say, this is one of the things that fly that we aren't a gen. ahead.

They managed to fly a TD, but they don't have a weapons program yet, like we do. It makes a huge difference. The SWIFT TD is part of a weapons program.

It's the same with KF-21 and AMCA. They did not go for a F-35 equivalent design because they do not have the capability to make one. Hence the need to go for iterative improvements based on a 4.5th gen design. The Koreans are today where we were back in 2005. AMCA was originally no different than the KF-21 Block 2 back then. AMCA later transitioned from "equal-to-F-35" in 2010 to a "superior-to-F-35" design in 2015.

At this time, they are working on stealth tech, which they plan to complete in 2025, post which they can apply what they learnt in weapons systems. So they are doing by 2025, what we achieved in 2010-12. Plus they are doing it with a lot of outside help.

Finally, it isn't about inferiority complex. For some people like me (and I dunno abt you, but I'm relatively young and thus, new in this), watching them go from not having a half decent green water navy to building one of the largest naval forces would have that effect. Like, they didn't have a proper submarine until 1993. Now, they're building some of the best conventional submarines and in good numbers no less. They didn't have a destroyer until 1998; they'll have 18 (6 KDX2, 6 KDX3, 6 KDDX) of those by 2030s. Meanwhile, we don't have an indigenous sub yet. We haven't been able to build a decent indigenous tank (Arjun is a bad design) or an IFV yet; they have the full spectrum of armoured vehicles in their domestic portfolio.

Now, these aren't related to "everything that flies", but these do lead to questions. That isn't inferiority complex (imho, with exams and academics etc. a new entrant in this not knowing everything and thus questioning is not that shocking). I mean, questioning and getting to know things is better than pretending to be a king ...... with no clothes. So, it may be better if you didn't make blanket statements abt the "ridiculous amounts of inferiority complex some members have".

My post wasn't targeted towards you.

Anyway, my post was in reference to stuff that flies, not tanks, ships, subs etc. So, missiles, fighters, helicopters, aeroengines etc. We are a generation ahead compared to Korea in this area today.
 

Arctic Wolf

Member
Sep 7, 2021
75
45
Odisha
A JV is done when a country lacks the technology after all.
L-SAM, Cheonryong and Hyunmoo 3 projects were/are not part of any JV.
In terms of flying sophistication, we have LCA Mk2 < KF-21 Block 1/2 < TEDBF.
According to figures given by Janes, the KF-21 is faster and stealthier than the TEDBF with a similiar MTOW.
The Koreans are working on their aircraft to complement the F-35 in a hi-lo mix.
The main aim of the KF-21 Block1 and Block2 is to replace the F4/F5s in service with the ROKAF. Any further iterations/development will likely replace their F-16s.
That's the plan, but they don't have it, they lack the design experience at this point.
They have successfully developed conformal antennae as of Nov 2021. And are improving their radar to 1200-1300 TRMs.
Once they achieve it, that's when it counts.
Hycore's maiden test is scheduled for this year. It'll make things clear.
They managed to fly a TD, but they don't have a weapons program yet, like we do.
Apparently they do; its called KUS-X.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,566
10,790
India
L-SAM, Cheonryong and Hyunmoo 3 projects were/are not part of any JV.

L-SAM uses the Russian 48N6. Russia-Korea SAM cooperation dates back to 1992. The S-300 has been the basis for the development of the KM-SAM and now the L-SAM.

Cheonryong and Hyunmoo 3A, B, C are basically the same family. Weird that the Hyunmoo-3 family looks exactly like the Tomahawk. But great if they did it by themselves.

According to figures given by Janes, the KF-21 is faster and stealthier than the TEDBF with a similiar MTOW.

Speed doesn't really matter. Neither jet would exceed mach 2 anyway, so the standard speed would be mach 1.8. One is a land-based fighter, the other is a carrier fighter. Carrier fighters come with design limitations. And we do not have full details about their specs. What really matters is empty weight, internal fuel load and payload. Also, I don't think the B1 will be any stealthier than the TEDBF, neither have been designed for stealth.

The TEDBF has been designed for aerodynamics, even more so than the Rafale. So a lot of what's relevant to the IN is gonna favour TEDBF.

The main aim of the KF-21 Block1 and Block2 is to replace the F4/F5s in service with the ROKAF. Any further iterations/development will likely replace their F-16s.

Sure. But that's something else entirely. AMCA is meant to compete with post F-35 fighters, KF-21 is not, 'cause it's a generation behind.


Being supplied by Cobham.

And are improving their radar to 1200-1300 TRMs.

Using French TRMs from UMS. It's yet to become fully Korean. Possibly by the time it hits production, or for Block 2. Dunno yet. Along with Swedish software and Israeli processor and testing.

Anyway, on an 800mm radar, 1200-1300 TRMs is not very impressive. The current prototype has 992 TRMs, it's for testing. LCA Mk2 will also have 992 X band TRMs, but on a 650mm radar. Using the same TRMs for 800mm, the Uttam can have 1500 X band TRMs. Quite a bit of space on the Uttam is used up by L-band TRMs too.

The IRST is almost fully Italian.

Hycore's maiden test is scheduled for this year. It'll make things clear.

Okay. But, as I said, let's see after it happens. This is one of those technologies where they simply have to do it before they can be taken seriously. And plenty of things can still go wrong.

Apparently they do; its called KUS-X.

Yeah, but it's not an official program yet.
 

Arpit

Vox Populi
Nov 30, 2017
306
282
Delhi
Making blanket statements like "we are better at everything flying" is not knowledge but a lack of what you don't know. More knowledge will only make you question things.
Then show your knowledge, and counter it with hard evidence. Why doing personal attacks?

The fact that India already built and commissioned nuclear submarines is proof enough that the Indian MIC in design is light years ahead of Koreans.
Design and development is one aspect, manufacturing is another. But even in manufacturing, India is taking leaps with help of like Europe and France.

The person in question you're quoting once actually posted that he had multiple perspectives on the R&D efforts we were undertaking

  1. One was the developer's PoV .
  2. The 2nd was the user's perspective.
  3. The final one was the layman's / amateur defence enthusiasts / garden variety defence correspondent's as opposed to say someone employed by reputable publication's like Jane's PoV.
Your first task ought to be to seek clarifications on the said issue before proceeding ahead else it's going to be a case of - " join me down the rabbit hole for ages to come & merrily too ."


We actually took those observations as the usual display of hubris we're grown accustomed to by now out of sheer habit on account of our interactions over an extended period of time.

However ,on 2nd thoughts it occurred to us that this was highly unusual. How you ask ? It's like this - This candid admission came out of the blue in that it wasn't forced or extracted but was purely voluntary in as much that it was a confession of the state of mind as it was a cry for help . It was much later that the truth dawned on us.

The diagnosis is MPD.

Stick around . You'd learn more of this condition going ahead. You're in luck . A lot of things are going to be cleared this year . Known Unknowns , Unknown Knowns , Unknown Unknowns & believe it or not Known Knowns too.
So you diagnosing without being a doctor? That isn't hubris? Hmmm. Interesting.
 

Arctic Wolf

Member
Sep 7, 2021
75
45
Odisha
L-SAM uses the Russian 48N6.
Sorry, any source? The available sources (ADD, LiG Nex1, Korean websites) specifically mention that the L-SAM missile is domestic in development.
What really matters is empty weight, internal fuel load and payload.
First, the KF-21's max speed is Mach 1.8, while for the TEDBF, its Mach 1.6.

Empty Weight :

KF-21 - 11,800 kg
TEDBF - 11,000-12,000 kg

MTOW :

KF-21 - 26 tons
TEDBF - 26 tons

And the KF-21 Block 2 (scheduled for mass production in 2028) will be stealthier than TEDBF.
Being supplied by Cobham.
Well, about that ........

The original press release by Chelton (parent company) says this (and please pay attn. to the italicised words) -

Chelton has been awarded a contract from Korean Aerospace Industries Ltd (KAI) to design and supply the fully conformal antenna suite for the future KF-X, next-generation indigenous multi-role and fighter aircraft.
The contract makes no mention of Hanwha and ADD for any collab.


Now, the Janes article I linked says this -

The agency said in a statement that it had succeeded in locally developing a small conformal antenna
ADD noted that the new technology was developed in collaboration with Hanwha Systems under a four-year project launched by South Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration in 2017.
This, therefore, maybe a different antennae than the ones supplied by Chobham. Because, if Chobham were to supply the antennae in question, they wouldn't be locally developed or.

Yonhap News also makes similiar observations -

South Korea has developed a new homegrown antenna designed for stealth aircraft that will help reduce the possibility of detection by enemy radar systems, its state-run defense development institute said Tuesday.
Again, antennae designed and supplied by Chobham won't be "homegrown".

So probably the Chobham antennae will be used for Block2 while the "homegrown" antennae will be used in Block3.
Yeah, but it's not an official program yet.
Bu all developments point at an eventual weaponisation by the mid- to late-2020s.

Cheonryong and Hyunmoo 3A, B, C are basically the same family.
There's another Cheonryong - an air launched long range cruise missile meant to be used alongside the Taurus KEPD but on lighter aircraft.
 

thinkingcap81

Active member
Jun 2, 2019
308
132
India
Again mods will issue multiple warnings. People do understand that almost certainly no one cares about what we think, and people finding a platform to put across their thoughts are usually communicating with one or two folks only; the rest just waltz by. Only some posters / posts are given importance for the right reasons.

We should learn to ignore. There's no point in winning a useless battle.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,226
8,632
Bangalore
Sorry, any source? The available sources (ADD, LiG Nex1, Korean websites) specifically mention that the L-SAM missile is domestic in development.

First, the KF-21's max speed is Mach 1.8, while for the TEDBF, its Mach 1.6.

Empty Weight :

KF-21 - 11,800 kg
TEDBF - 11,000-12,000 kg

MTOW :

KF-21 - 26 tons
TEDBF - 26 tons

And the KF-21 Block 2 (scheduled for mass production in 2028) will be stealthier than TEDBF.

Well, about that ........

The original press release by Chelton (parent company) says this (and please pay attn. to the italicised words) -


The contract makes no mention of Hanwha and ADD for any collab.


Now, the Janes article I linked says this -



This, therefore, maybe a different antennae than the ones supplied by Chobham. Because, if Chobham were to supply the antennae in question, they wouldn't be locally developed or.

Yonhap News also makes similiar observations -


Again, antennae designed and supplied by Chobham won't be "homegrown".

So probably the Chobham antennae will be used for Block2 while the "homegrown" antennae will be used in Block3.

Bu all developments point at an eventual weaponisation by the mid- to late-2020s.


There's another Cheonryong - an air launched long range cruise missile meant to be used alongside the Taurus KEPD but on lighter aircraft.
Why are you nitpicking as such? Everything Korean comes out of collaboration. That is their way of doing things. They never had to face technological denial and sanctions. They chose the same route for the armored vehicles. For K2 MBT they are replacing germen engine and transmission with their own. The story is the same for submarine development.

AMCA, KF-21, and TEDBF all have similar weights and the same engine. It's not possible to give drastically different results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Arctic Wolf

Member
Sep 7, 2021
75
45
Odisha
Why are you nitpicking as such?
Asking for sources isn't nitpicking. There is a significant difference between devloping your missiles/antennae and using Russian missiles/antennae.
They never had to face technological denial and sanctions.
They did. Just, when they were blocked by the Americans, they went to the French, the Germans and the Russians. We did have access to Soviet technology or else we wouldn't be flaunting out SSBN project today.
They chose the same route for the armored vehicles.
Exactly.

Step 1 - Buy directly

Step 2 - Build under license

Step 3 - Build indigenously with some foreign tech.

Step 4 - Build indigenously with all indigenous tech

They are currently in Step 4; we are stuck in Step 2.

The story is the same for submarine development.
So, both India and Korea started with the same model - the German Type 209 - under essentially similiar deals i.e. 3 to be built in Germany, 6 to be built under license in the buyer country.

We blacklisted HDW mid-way and disposed of the tech blueprints we had received.

And they went forward with the deal and once they had completed, proceeded to deepen their partnership with HDW by going for the Type-214 with even more tech transfers.

And by the mid 2010s, they were building their own submarines (KSS-3) and today, they are in a position to export their submarines to us. We on the other hand, broke the deal with HDW, imported from Russia, imported from France and are importing from France/South Korea again.

This isn't an argument neither is it intended to start one. If this as well appears as nitpicking, my apologies.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,189
13,065
Mumbai
I think we're already in Step 3 going by the parameters you've set. And they aren't completely in Step 4 .

Barring Submarines & Tanks as per the discussions here , which field have they achieved 100% indigenization in? Or even 80-90% ?

But the larger points regarding them being in a position to develop & productionize technologies faster remains which seems to be the plan & which essentially is a function of their massive technology base.

After all, SK is an industrialised nation. We aren't. Plus the users , developers & the government appear to be on the same page regarding the path taken / to be taken & a more cohesive unit as compared to India.

The submarine deal with HDW & later Scorpene is a good case in point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,226
8,632
Bangalore
Asking for sources isn't nitpicking.
It is when same line of questioning is going on for a few pages. A simple google search would suffice.

They did. Just, when they were blocked by the Americans, they went to the French, the Germans and the Russians. We did have access to Soviet technology or else we wouldn't be flaunting out SSBN project today.
It's not sanction or technological denial. If one western nation is not willing to share they can always go to another.

Exactly.

Step 1 - Buy directly

Step 2 - Build under license

Step 3 - Build indigenously with some foreign tech.

Step 4 - Build indigenously with all indigenous tech

They are currently in Step 4; we are stuck in Step 2.


So, both India and Korea started with the same model - the German Type 209 - under essentially similiar deals i.e. 3 to be built in Germany, 6 to be built under license in the buyer country.

We blacklisted HDW mid-way and disposed of the tech blueprints we had received.

And they went forward with the deal and once they had completed, proceeded to deepen their partnership with HDW by going for the Type-214 with even more tech transfers.

And by the mid 2010s, they were building their own submarines (KSS-3) and today, they are in a position to export their submarines to us. We on the other hand, broke the deal with HDW, imported from Russia, imported from France and are importing from France/South Korea again.

This isn't an argument neither is it intended to start one. If this as well appears as nitpicking, my apologies.
You are just reiterating the same point. SK had open access to technology and deep pockets to buy any state-of-the-art technology from the west. Because of the threat of technological denial, we had to skip a few steps and aim for full self-reliance from the get-go. End of the day we will have serious advantages because of that. ADA is going ahead with 3 different fighters and a flying wing design development in parallel. HAL is going for a 13-ton helicopter design from scratch. Even the Chinese didn't have such audacity. If we get better access to R&D funds future will be brighter and smoother.
 

Chain Smoker

Well-Known member
Mar 2, 2020
721
574
india
It is when same line of questioning is going on for a few pages. A simple google search would suffice.


It's not sanction or technological denial. If one western nation is not willing to share they can always go to another.


You are just reiterating the same point. SK had open access to technology and deep pockets to buy any state-of-the-art technology from the west. Because of the threat of technological denial, we had to skip a few steps and aim for full self-reliance from the get-go. End of the day we will have serious advantages because of that. ADA is going ahead with 3 different fighters and a flying wing design development in parallel. HAL is going for a 13-ton helicopter design from scratch. Even the Chinese didn't have such audacity. If we get better access to R&D funds future will be brighter and smoother.
Indeed seems like only Funding is the current road block.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,566
10,790
India
Sorry, any source? The available sources (ADD, LiG Nex1, Korean websites) specifically mention that the L-SAM missile is domestic in development.

We will naturally have to wait for development to complete before they reveal anything.

The current goal of the program makes it look like the 48N6. And, in any case, they are trying to do what we did back in 2006. Even if this new missile is fully Korean, they are still a generation or more behind.

First, the KF-21's max speed is Mach 1.8, while for the TEDBF, its Mach 1.6.

There really is no difference, the standard speed will still be mach 1.4-1.5 for both. And both jets will be able to do almost mach 2 during emergencies.

You are actually nitpicking irrelevant details between two different jets. All I said was while we are working on a post-F-35 fighter, which the Koreans have admitted they can't at this time, their best aerospace project is still nothing more than a side project for us.

With AMCA, IUSAV and FUFA, we are already a generation ahead today. By the time they catch up with the B3, if they actually do, we will have moved on to beyond AMCA by then.

Empty Weight :

KF-21 - 11,800 kg
TEDBF - 11,000-12,000 kg

MTOW :

KF-21 - 26 tons
TEDBF - 26 tons

And the KF-21 Block 2 (scheduled for mass production in 2028) will be stealthier than TEDBF.

That's about the limits of what the F414 can do. It doesn't tell us much though. Since the most crucial details are still missing.

Which was my point all along, that the TEDBF and KF-21 are similar. It doesn't matter if B2 is better than the TEDBF in stealth, the AMCA will beat the B2 by a wide margin. We are not comparing the capabilities of the jets, we are comparing the capabilities of our industry.

Well, about that ........

The original press release by Chelton (parent company) says this (and please pay attn. to the italicised words) -


The contract makes no mention of Hanwha and ADD for any collab.


Now, the Janes article I linked says this -



This, therefore, maybe a different antennae than the ones supplied by Chobham. Because, if Chobham were to supply the antennae in question, they wouldn't be locally developed or.

Yonhap News also makes similiar observations -


Again, antennae designed and supplied by Chobham won't be "homegrown".

So probably the Chobham antennae will be used for Block2 while the "homegrown" antennae will be used in Block3.

The amount of information released is not enough. They have an official deal with Cobham.

Also, if they have developed an alternative, and are still going for Cobham's, then you can say that B1 will get the import and B2 will get the Korean one. It's natural to assume B2 will be much more indigenous than B1. Which was the point I made before, that they are doing today what we did with MKI, LCA, Mig-29 and Jaguar since the 90s.

There's other stuff coming in from Cobham too.
Cobham has received a contract from Korean Aerospace Industries Ltd (KAI) to design and supply a pilot Oxygen System for the future KF-X, an advanced multirole fighter aircraft currently under development. This represents the fourth contract award Cobham has earned from KAI in support of the KF-X program. Other Cobham solutions selected by KAI for KF-X include Missile Ejection Launchers (MEL), a full range of Communication, Navigation and Identification (CNI) conformal antennas, and external fuel tanks and pylons.

It's not really as Korean as you think yet.

Bu all developments point at an eventual weaponisation by the mid- to late-2020s.

Look, only program starts show promise, it shows confidence in the program. Until that happens, it's nothing. Unlike us they need to figure out their engine options and then design their aircraft around it.

Step 1 - Buy directly

Step 2 - Build under license

Step 3 - Build indigenously with some foreign tech.

Step 4 - Build indigenously with all indigenous tech

They are currently in Step 4; we are stuck in Step 2.

They are entering Step 3. We are already deep within Step 4.

Case in point, the KF-21's indigenisation goal is 60-65% in 2026. LCA Mk2's goal is 70% in 2023 and 80% in 2026.

Our stealth drones in particular will be almost fully indigenous given we have our own engines now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,566
10,790
India
Sorry, but that reply was to another user regarding armoured vehicles. It wasn't for the aviation/missiles.

My bad then.

When it comes to armoured vehicles, it's the other way round. Nevertheless DRDO has achieved significant amounts of indigenisation, including propulsion-related tech, which has allowed them to catch up. But there's a lack of trust from the army because of HVF's dismal quality, unrealistic timelines and poor adherence to deadlines, hence the need to look to the private sector with foreign support instead.

It will be interesting to see what comes out of the FICV program within this year in terms of indigenisation. L&T is apparently teaming up with Hanwha. It's also my favourite consortium for FICV.
 

Arctic Wolf

Member
Sep 7, 2021
75
45
Odisha
L&T is apparently teaming up with Hanwha. It's also my favourite consortium for FICV.
Yep. L&T and Hanwha have established a good track record by delivering all K9s ahead of schedule, with the requisite indigenous contents and without budget overruns.

Now the last thing FICV needs is for OFB to win the contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SammyBoi

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
14,566
10,790
India
Yep. L&T and Hanwha have established a good track record by delivering all K9s ahead of schedule, with the requisite indigenous contents and without budget overruns.

It's a very promising JV.

Now the last thing FICV needs is for OFB to win the contract.

DRDO+OFB's FICV is a joke. They plan to release an Mk1 in a few years, and Mk2 5+ years after Mk1. Plus it seems to be an evolutionary design.

The only real advantage is their design will be significantly more indigenous than others, unless private companies end up making their own engine and transmission.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker