Defence Acquisition Archives - Page 8 of 10

The Maturing of Russia-India Defence Relations

Defence cooperation between Russia and India remains strong because of shared security concerns, geopolitical imperatives, and economic benefits. Both countries fear radical Islamic terrorism, share concerns about regional instability in Central Asia, and are uneasy with US military hegemony and the rise of China. Powerful interest groups in both countries also have a common interest in sustaining Russian arms sales to India.

Transformation of the Indian Air Force over the Next Decade

The ongoing transformation involving the induction of advanced weapon and combat support systems is aimed at developing the IAF’s capabilities to deliver what is required of it.

Vivek Kapur
June 13, 2012
Issue Brief

Applying Failure Mode, Effects And Criticality Analysis (FMECA) for Ensuring Mission Reliability of Equipment

FMECA of equipment is an effective scientific tool to identify the assemblies, sub-assemblies and components that are critical for the satisfactory performance of equipment.

Defence Acquisition Institute: A Viewpoint

While delivering the keynote address at the International Seminar on Defence Acquisitions on July 12, 2011, Defence Minister A.K. Antony accepted the need to impart training to the defence acquisition functionaries. Further, he agreed that a dedicated institute needs to be set up for the purpose. It is the first time that the training of acquisition staff has received the attention that it deserves as reforms in India’s defence acquisition regime have so far been limited to procedures only.

The Rafale : An Opportunity Towards Indigenous Aircraft Design And Manufacture

In the wake of the selection of the Rafale the offset clause currently in force must be used to revamp India’s domestic aerospace industry, making it more technologically current and capable of taking on advanced design and development tasks in future.

Vivek Kapur
February 17, 2012
IDSA Comments

The US Defence Acquisition System

This paper makes an attempt to analyse and evaluate the US Department of Defence Acquisition System by highlighting the relationship of the requirements generation and budgeting process, the key actors, the major phases in an acquisition programme, and the major categories of acquisitions. It argues that the Department of Defence Acquisition System represents an ever evolving system-of-systems that attempts to translate Warfighter requirements into actual developed, purchased and fielded systems.

Striking Balance among Diverse Oversight Concerns in Defence Acquisition

Transparency in public procurement bears an immediate cost both for government and bidders. However, it is a key element to support fundamental principles of the public procurement system, especially competition and integrity. The drive for transparency must therefore be tempered by making transparent what sufficiently enables corruption control. If the level of transparency is adequately defined, the benefits will outweigh the cost, especially when comparing the initial cost of transparency with the potential negative consequences of corruption.

Streamlining Defence Acquisition Process

The process for Defence Acquisitions in India has evolved considerably in the last decade or so, and is being refined further. The Ministry of Defence recognizes the importance of timely modernization, and of balancing the operational needs with the requirements of transparency and probity. There are a number of areas where further initiatives are being considered and the Ministry of Defence, in consultation with all stake holders, would be moving forward in this regard.

Dynamics of Rules and Regulations in Defence

During application of prescribed procedures, many contradictions and ambiguities crop up, resulting in delays in decision making and, in some cases, to even faulty decisions.

Arms Acquisition Accountability Processes

Most of the advanced democracies agree that confidentiality is needed in terms of technical performance parameters; the numbers to be procured and methods of deployment, which may provide unique advantages to the user. Instead of the military or the civil servants treating these aspects exclusively as military capability issue, legislative intervention is needed for professionalizing and institutionalizing public accountability of security sector. Parliamentary processes have constitutional legitimacy and duty to examine security sector accountability.