Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Indian Small Arms Thread

Discussion in 'Tactical Hardware' started by Gessler, May 20, 2017.

  1. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,421
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    Come on, bro. NDA or UPA don't matter, it's the DPP which matters.

    -------------
    Here's DPP-2013. As you know, DPP-2013 is under UPA.
    http://cgda.nic.in/pdf/DPP2013.pdf
    The Director General (Acquisition) will formally accept the report of the TEC on recommendations of the Technical Managers. If at the TEC stage, only one vendor is found complying to all the SQR parameters, then the RFP would be retracted on approval of the Director General (Acquisition). A review of the acquisition scheme would also be carried out by the TEC to derive the causes of such single vendor situation at TEC stage and details would be brought out in its report. The RFP would be reissued with the approval of DG (Acq)/Vice Chiefs of Service Headquarters/DG ICG, as the case may be, after taking suitable corrective measures including reformulating SQRs.

    The DPP says so clearly that single vendor has to be cancelled.
    --------------

    Here's DPP-2016. Now DPP-2016 is obviously under NDA.
    http://mod.nic.in/dod/sites/default/files/dppm.pdf_0.pdf
    In case of a single vendor situation, post technical evaluation by TEC, procurement process will continue as planned without retracting the RFP for this reason, provided the vendor agrees not to revise the commercial bid, during the remaining part of the 21 acquisition process.

    It's as clear as day. In Page 19, it says that even a single bid tender can go ahead.
    --------------

    NDA cannot overrule the procurement rules set under UPA. Their best bet is to retract the tender and reissue it under new rules that they made, ie, DPP-2016.

    NDA or UPA have nothing to do with a tender turning into a single vendor situation. The army decides that because it's the army that sets up the SQRs, not the MoD.

    The carbine tender happened under DPP-2008 IIRC.

    Parrikar did try to get a GTG for the carbines but the army rejected it.

    Multi-caliber assault rifle tender was a complete failure, to be replaced with 7.62x51 requirement.

    The tender we are referring to is for CQB carbines. I read an article which quoted a major general saying that the carbines are not a critical requirement.

    I think new tenders will be issued simultaneously for the assault rifles and the carbines.

    Anyway, I think removing the single bid and single vendor clauses are huge downgrades. But the forces can't complain anymore. The doors have been opened for the military to shop at whim, only subject to finances, nothing else. Competition and quality will now take a back seat, completely subject to the integrity of the man in charge.
     
  2. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    4,166
    Country Flag:
    India
    Convenient, right? Under which clause did Vajpayee extend the recommendations of Mandal Commission?

    I am sure you are aware that the rules are a farce and a recourse to justify failure to act in critical areas? Are you aware that as per rules and statuettes Government of India can not send military forces into neighbouring territory without a declaration of war and parliamentary sanction? Perhaps we should now ask for rules to be adhered to in this case too?

    In that case we must have tenders for missiles and our nuclear warhead too :D


    Let us go back to UPA-2. Modi and Co were lambasting the UPA for utter failure to modernise the military forces. What exists today? 3 years have elapsed and yet we have widening operational gaps.

    Heck, SFC units are not 'authorised' funds to have security walls in certain places as they get raised! WTF!!!!!

    For your link above, a fact:

    http://www.janes.com/article/73441/indian-army-scraps-lmg-tender

    The decision has been taken on 09 August 2017 ... by MoD of GOI of PM Modi.

    I am sure .. it is well within the ambit of your so called DPP-2016 Page 19's suppositions?


    So why is NDA overruling the Government's position over Triple Talaq and Lt Col Purohit? I hope you realise how pathetic excuse this is?


    So you mean to say that the decision to scrap the tender has to be blamed on the Army's GSQR resulting in a single vendor remaining at the end? I like that .... the typical DPSU and MoD excuse wherein they will delay stuff so much that when crises comes, we buy the exact same things at premium and they line their pockets as then the 'rules and oversights are secondary'.

    I hope you realise that what the MoD wants is that two companies i.e. 123 and 987, must both produce product of QR "A". If 123 produces A and 987 produces B. the process of tendering automatically eliminated 987. So, logically 123 goes on ahead. However, if 987 produces A1, then one can continue further evaluation in a cost versus benefit logic.

    Now, they expect both 123 and 987 to have a product which is QR "A" compliant and then they want the lowest bidder (L-1) ... otherwise they will scrap if it is only 1.

    Let us take another analogy.

    The standard of Egg in India for large is weight between 53 to 59 gms. Now if a supplier bids at 52, it does not make it large. So should eggs be scrapped as only 1 producer bought 53 - 59 gms?

    I am giving this analogy as that is how our ration procurement is done. I rejected whole Civil Truck loads of vegetables on basis of lack of ability to have a shelf life commensurate with time taken to induct the vegetables to remote posts and have a life of 2-3 days in-situ. Why? Because they were ripe at the base itself. The contractor said 'bahut dekhe aap jaise, raat tak aapko call aa jayega'. Unfortunately for him, I had photographs of products, and I promptly prepared a report of rejection of rations (this was October and roads were to be closed in another few weeks due to snow), dispatched them up the chain and copy to Command Headquarters and by night fall, he was calling me up to apologise and got me vegetables as desired by the day after.

    In the eggs case, suppose all bidders were at 52, because of criticality of requirement to feed troops, I would accept 52 with cost factors being the next logical step. That is what is the rule and the system. Not a strict adherence to lines. If there is no operative flexibility in any going concern, even that going concern is counting it's days.

    When such a system of rigidity is not existent in any branch of GoI or part of Indian Society, how do you expect this rationale to hold water for those who know how things work?

    Source this gem.



    Incorrect. IWI won ... it was scrapped.

    Stick to facts. Don't muddle up.

    Yeah? You want to know the deficiency state of weapons in units? Who is this Major General, was he named? I know ;a Lt General who said we must overthrow government ...

    Now take that as holy grail.
     
    surya kiran likes this.
  3. Hellfire

    Hellfire Devil's Advocate Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,721
    Likes Received:
    4,166
    Country Flag:
    India
  4. randomradio

    randomradio Mod Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    10,421
    Likes Received:
    5,436
    National security is different. Purchasing weapons is different.

    Breaking rules for the sake of national security will get you a cookie. Breaking rules for purchasing equipment will get you an election loss.

    The Rafale GTG broke rules. But Modi's reputation could survive it, hence the decision was taken for the sake of national security. But expecting this always is impossible.

    No. You initiate a tender under a specific DPP. For example, if you initiate a tender in 2013, you will be under DPP 2013 even if the present date is 2020.

    So all new tenders that start after 2016 will be under DPP 2016. Tenders have to follow the DPP of their respective years of initiation.

    Are they procurement? You can't bring in unrelated stuff into defence procurement.

    Triple Talaq is under Civil Code and Lt Purohit under Anti-terrorism. Triple Talaq and Purohit were under the courts, not the govt. Meaning, it didn't matter what the govt said or did, the courts decided. completely irrelevant.

    Yes, it is. Turning a tender into a single vendor situation is solely the responsibility of the forces.

    Yes. That's how it was under UPA.

    You see, the onus is on you, aka, the army. You made the decision about the 52gm egg, not the MoD. This is what I've been saying.

    The army asked for 53gm, but except for 1 vendor all others have only 52. But it is you, the army, who decided only 53 will be shortlisted. MoD had no part to play.

    The tender failed because you, the army, decided you will have a 53gm carbine or nothing.

    http://www.newindianexpress.com/the...-bypasses-rifle-tender-quicksand-1554859.html

    You are getting confused with all the tenders.
    There were three tenders. Assault rifle (MCAR), carbines CQB, LMG.

    CQB - Only IWI qualified with the Ace Carbine - Single vendor - To be re-tendered
    LMG - Only IWI qualified with the Negev - Single vendor - To be re-tendered
    MCAR - No one qualified - It was a complete failure - To be replaced with 7.62x51mm tender

    Now, it looks like all three will be transferred to SPM and fast tracked.

    He was named but was retired. He said we need a proper qualified CQB and until we get it the stuff we have now is enough.

    A GTG deal can only be initiated under the army's request. Apparently, it was an emergency purchase of 10000 carbines of the 52gm variety, not the 53gm. No different from the 50000 BPJs of the 52gm variety that Parrikar bought as an emergency measure until a 53gm vest was ready. But the army didn't want such a deal.

    And you have discounted the possibility of vested interests.
     
    Fat Bandit likes this.
  5. Gessler

    Gessler Mod MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,423
    Likes Received:
    8,501
    Country Flag:
    India
    Assam Rifles with the FAB modernized AKMs...

    [​IMG]
     
    Hellfire, Schwifty and GSLV Mk III like this.

Share This Page