4 ms·

Most people miss the real value of such projects. They serve two important purposes: First: they are intended to build a local pool of expertise and capability

Most people miss the real value of such projects. They serve two important purposes: First: they are intended to build a local pool of expertise and capability around semiconductor design and fabrication within the country. This has real strategic implications for India. So much modern military hardware depends on microprocessors. So what happens to India, if most of the chip fabs fall into the hands of hostile foreign powers? (Or, what happens if foreign powers who have or are near the chip fabs become hostile in the future?)

ip26 8y ago
In the first stage, AJIT has been manufactured in the government-owned Semiconductor Laboratory (SCL), Chandigarh, with a technology that offers the smallest building block of the size 180 nanometers. The researchers also plan to commercially manufacture the processor using more advanced techniques that provide the smallest building block of size 65 nm or 45 nm -- TFA Older nodes, being well-understood mature technologies, can be manufactured domestically.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Older nodes, being well-understood mature technologies, can be manufactured domestically. On the modern battlefield, one side having considerably more processing power than the other side might swing the strategic balance. This means more sophisticated missiles, ECM, battlefield coordination, targeting, etc... all on the side having access to the superior chip fab technology in wartime. Now think about the chip fabs in Taiwan.
  - wolfgke 8y ago
    > On the modern battlefield, one side having considerably more processing power than the other side might swing the strategic balance. This means more sophisticated missiles, ECM, battlefield coordination, targeting, etc... all on the side having access to the superior chip fab technology in wartime. At least for space applications, it is common to use very old processes because of certification and, more importantly, processors that use larger processes are easier to radiation-harden. I don't know whether this also holds for military applications, but it seems at least plausible to me.
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      I don't know whether this also holds for military applications, but it seems at least plausible to me. AFAIK, it is generally true. Military versions of the Intel x86 chips were generally one branding cycle behind. When hardened 486 chips were being used in F-16's 1st gen Pentiums were the norm for civilian use.
    - edge17 8y ago
      Do the sophisticated missiles etc. have powerful chips in them? I would assume the primary objective would be things like reliability, redundancy, etc. Beyond that, probably enough horsepower to deal with some control systems (so numerical differentiation, etc), but these I imagine would typically be microcontrollers and not full processors, right? I imagine the design process requires a lot of high power computing, but when one gets down to implementing field devices, they typically aren't doing anything too high powered.
      - HeWhoLurksLate 8y ago
        It depends, it really does. One of the local aviation companies I got to tour had two processes- one for SMD (mostly automated) and one for THT (mostly soldered by hand). On the newer SMD processes, the most popular computing chips were Xilinx FPGA's, which were everywhere. The way it was explained to me was that the FPGA can handle internal redundancy [1] without any additional space cost, and that one of the main reasons that they used FPGA's was that it makes it a lot easier to handle backwards-compatibility with older stuff. Another reason FPGA's are so useful is that they can cram a lot more calculations into less space, making the entire unit more compact. [2] With that out of the way, yes, missiles now have a lot more computing power in them, even if they do more or less the same job- accuracy is generally the thing that improves here, as the physics models can be expanded to be more correct, as the number of sensors, and the way they are combined evolves, the end result is a better product. (And more Defence money, to boot!) I've gotta say one more thing, though- a lot of the stuff in the military, and that goes to it, is built off now-ancient processes, because A) contracts, B) If it works, don't fix it, and C) standardization, so you may not see an FPGA in every missile, but they're getting there. [1] this doesn't count as far as redundant parts are concerned, but it does give the engineers (and, by proxy, the customers) more trust in the outputs from the devices. [2] It also costs way less space (and therefore money, to some degree, because mil-spec enclosures are expensive), to get two 1U servers than it does to have one vacuum-tube operated mainframe.
zaphirplane 8y ago
I don’t get it, you have a home grown chip how does that translate into spare parts for a mig? Or ammunition for the mig
- Aromasin 8y ago
  I think it's more-so an important stepping stone for centralising their future military hardware, and have it built in India - not necessarily that it will compatible with their current hardware.
- anbop 8y ago
  It’s a step towards a fully self-sufficient defense industry. Something the US had better learn (especially in infrastructure) if we are at war with China and suddenly nobody in the US can buy any electronics.

ip26 8y ago

In the first stage, AJIT has been manufactured in the government-owned Semiconductor Laboratory (SCL), Chandigarh, with a technology that offers the smallest building block of the size 180 nanometers. The researchers also plan to commercially manufacture the processor using more advanced techniques that provide the smallest building block of size 65 nm or 45 nm -- TFA Older nodes, being well-understood mature technologies, can be manufactured domestically.

stcredzero 8y ago
Older nodes, being well-understood mature technologies, can be manufactured domestically. On the modern battlefield, one side having considerably more processing power than the other side might swing the strategic balance. This means more sophisticated missiles, ECM, battlefield coordination, targeting, etc... all on the side having access to the superior chip fab technology in wartime. Now think about the chip fabs in Taiwan.
- wolfgke 8y ago
  > On the modern battlefield, one side having considerably more processing power than the other side might swing the strategic balance. This means more sophisticated missiles, ECM, battlefield coordination, targeting, etc... all on the side having access to the superior chip fab technology in wartime. At least for space applications, it is common to use very old processes because of certification and, more importantly, processors that use larger processes are easier to radiation-harden. I don't know whether this also holds for military applications, but it seems at least plausible to me.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    I don't know whether this also holds for military applications, but it seems at least plausible to me. AFAIK, it is generally true. Military versions of the Intel x86 chips were generally one branding cycle behind. When hardened 486 chips were being used in F-16's 1st gen Pentiums were the norm for civilian use.
  - edge17 8y ago
    Do the sophisticated missiles etc. have powerful chips in them? I would assume the primary objective would be things like reliability, redundancy, etc. Beyond that, probably enough horsepower to deal with some control systems (so numerical differentiation, etc), but these I imagine would typically be microcontrollers and not full processors, right? I imagine the design process requires a lot of high power computing, but when one gets down to implementing field devices, they typically aren't doing anything too high powered.
    - HeWhoLurksLate 8y ago
      It depends, it really does. One of the local aviation companies I got to tour had two processes- one for SMD (mostly automated) and one for THT (mostly soldered by hand). On the newer SMD processes, the most popular computing chips were Xilinx FPGA's, which were everywhere. The way it was explained to me was that the FPGA can handle internal redundancy [1] without any additional space cost, and that one of the main reasons that they used FPGA's was that it makes it a lot easier to handle backwards-compatibility with older stuff. Another reason FPGA's are so useful is that they can cram a lot more calculations into less space, making the entire unit more compact. [2] With that out of the way, yes, missiles now have a lot more computing power in them, even if they do more or less the same job- accuracy is generally the thing that improves here, as the physics models can be expanded to be more correct, as the number of sensors, and the way they are combined evolves, the end result is a better product. (And more Defence money, to boot!) I've gotta say one more thing, though- a lot of the stuff in the military, and that goes to it, is built off now-ancient processes, because A) contracts, B) If it works, don't fix it, and C) standardization, so you may not see an FPGA in every missile, but they're getting there. [1] this doesn't count as far as redundant parts are concerned, but it does give the engineers (and, by proxy, the customers) more trust in the outputs from the devices. [2] It also costs way less space (and therefore money, to some degree, because mil-spec enclosures are expensive), to get two 1U servers than it does to have one vacuum-tube operated mainframe.

zaphirplane 8y ago

I don’t get it, you have a home grown chip how does that translate into spare parts for a mig? Or ammunition for the mig

Aromasin 8y ago
I think it's more-so an important stepping stone for centralising their future military hardware, and have it built in India - not necessarily that it will compatible with their current hardware.
anbop 8y ago
It’s a step towards a fully self-sufficient defense industry. Something the US had better learn (especially in infrastructure) if we are at war with China and suddenly nobody in the US can buy any electronics.