All posts by Prabhu

Drdo

Defence industry may see spectacular growth after 2019 General Elections, says L&T’s Jayant Patil

2 Comments

May 16, 2018 12:28 PM IST | Source: Moneycontrol.com

The L&T Whole-Time Director expects capital spending, as part of the defence budget, to increase next year, resulting in higher project orders

Prince Mathews Thomas
@prince0879
Jayant D Patil spearheaded L&T’s foray into the defence industry in 1986, at a time few other private companies saw any promise in the heavily regulated industry. Patil, who joined the infrastructure heavy weight straight after passing out from IIT Mumbai in 1978, developed long-term relationships with the DRDO, and the Navy, among other defence establishments.

The early start is now helping the engineering giant. In 13 years since its debut in the market, L&T has become the largest private defence company in the country, and is bigger than most of the government-owned defence enterprises.

In an exclusive interview with Moneycontrol, Patil – Member of the Board & Whole-Time Director (Defence Business) at L&T – says that defence is one of the fastest growing businesses in the company. To reflect the growing importance of the vertical, the defence business is now an ‘independent company.’ And starting from this financial year, L&T will report the defence segment as a separate entity within its core businesses.

“We have the entire infrastructure in place. We have all the initiatives put in place. We have the R&D centres,” says Patil, adding that L&T is set for a spectacular growth.
For that growth to happen though, the central government will have to increase the proportion of capital spending in the defence budget. Patil is hopeful of that happening after the 2019 General Elections.

Excerpts from an interview:

The government has talked about developing capabilities domesticallyto reduce the dependence on imports. The Make in India campaign also focuses on the defence industry. Have you started seeing the difference?

The focus is there. The government has started putting programs in a competitive basket. Earlier projects would either go to a foreign player, or to a PSU. But now, for instance look at Navy. Earlier, 92 per cent of the warships or submarine contracts by value have been placed with government owned shipyards. As of now, except of old decisions, the government plans to allow private sector to participate in all future shipbuilding programs on competitive basis.

The issue is that things are not changing at the kind of pace what one would have hoped for and the quantum of money being allocated to enable new contracts. The current Budget allocations are just good enough to meet committed liabilities.

Why is that?
One should look at the budget allocation. Till 2014-15, 40 per cent of the defence budget would go into capital spending. Today, that has dropped to 20-25 per cent. And that it because of the huge increase in revenue costs (salary and pension payments).

That is something which the government did out of sheer respect for people who fought for the country. But the fact is that it has come at a huge cost for the future preparedness of Armed Forces. So money has become a constraint and allocations need to be enhanced.

And that has led to the slow pace?
Yes.

Do you think the situation will be better after the General Elections in 2019?
Yes, I believe that the reversal will possibly happen when the new Government comes around after the 2019 General Elections.

What has the present situation meant for L&T’s defence business?
So we have a scenario today where this is a market which shows huge promise. And we keep getting orders as and when a PSU gets a big contract. The public enterprises buy from us because we have developed these products in partnership with Defence Research Organisation (DRDO). So the business continues in “business as usual” state, the growth comes in with us getting few contracts directly from MoD.

But the growth could have been truly spectacular had Make-in-India programs taken off in a big way. We have the entire infrastructure, technologies, products and capabilities already in place. We have all the initiatives proactively in place. We have the R&D centers, design centers, and innovation groups in place. Earlier we used to have one, but now we have four R&D / Basic Design Centers to serve the defence sector.

What is your manufacturing presence?
Today we operate from Powai (Mumbai), Hazira, Baroda, Pune, Coimbatore, Vishakapatnam, Katupalli, New Mumbai and Bengaluru, which is more of an R&D unit, but also has a small production facility for strategic electronics.

Which is your largest segment?
The largest segment today is the artillery and Naval segments. The smallest segment what we are operating today is the space, missiles, communication, which are individually worth about Rs 100-200 crore per year.

What is the total order book now?
I can’t give you that number. But perhaps in another few months I can. From the 2019 financial year, we will be reporting defence business as a separate entity within the L&T core business. So wait for that.

Although we have been operating defence business for three decades, we had created defence as a separate independent company (IC) as an entity, with its own board, in the FY 2018.

A few reports last year said your order book was of about Rs 12-15k crore…Holistic if we look at it, we are bigger than that.

So all the defence businesses will be brought under this IC?
All the defence offerings are under this IC, except for very strategic construction programs.

Could you give an idea of how big your defence business is?
If I look at comparisons, HAL and BEL (Hindustan Aeronautics, which has revenue of about Rs 17,000 crore & Bharat Electronics, which has a revenue of about 10,000 crore, respectively) are larger than us. But we are slightly bigger than the other PSUs. You should remember, we were never allowed to produce until licensing began in 2002 and began getting direct orders from MoD only in 2005. In 2002, we got the first license. It’s just been 16 years now.

L&T forayed into defence even before that, with partnerships with DRDO and other defence establishments. How has the early start worked for you?

Across the segments, we have built capabilities that are unmatched. Be it warships, submarines or weapon systems, today our portfolio and offerings are ahead of competition. No other company has a portfolio range and depth as that of L&T. We don’t produce weapons as yet. But we make weapon launching systems and fire controls across the range. We can offer complete solution for an anti-submarine warfare, air-defence, land attack, or anti-ship warfare role to a warship. So, there is no domain in weapon programmes which L&T doesn’t touch.

And because we have in-house capability, we have forged partnerships where we also bring in unique value. As a result, L&T has 250 MoUs and just 4 joint ventures (equity based) while we have preferred to engage in non-equity JVs / partnerships through joint development and joint production mode. ​

Would you consider hiving off the defence business as a separate entity?

No, it is and will stay as a part of core of Larsen & Toubro.

But would you eventually list the business?
I don’t see that, not at least for the next decade or two. As for now, we are better off being part of the L&T core.

Is the defence biz growing faster than the other parts in the L&T core?

Percentage growth wise, I would say it’s among the better growing ones. But the fact is that the scale today is smaller than many other construction & hydrocarbon businesses. So if I look at the entire portfolio of L&T, defence, smart world, power transmission and water are businesses growing faster than others in percentage terms.
First Published on May 16, 2018 12:22 pm

Drdo

How a CAG report exposed DRDO’s mishandling of AEW&CS programme

3 Comments

The CAG report showed irregularities in the selection of aircraft for the programme

By Pradip R Sagar August 29, 2018

Indian Air Force’s indigenous AEW&CS in action during ‘Exercise Iron Fist’ in Pokhran | PTI

THE WEEK

As the indigenous Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&CS)—aircraft fitted with a radar system—flew over the Rajpath during the 2017 Republic Day parade, India joined an elite group of five countries that had this capability. But, before it could be formally inducted into the Air Force fleet, the ‘Eye in the Sky’ has flown into turbulence.

A report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, which was recently tabled in Parliament, has made startling observations about the programme, on which the Defence Research and Development Organisation has spent more than Rs 2,500 crore.

The CAG report showed irregularities in the selection of aircraft for the programme. The auditor slammed the DRDO for the cost overrun—the initial cost was Rs 1,800 crore—and its claims about indigenousness. Moreover, preferred vendors were selected to benefit certain companies, said the report. Though the Air Force had accepted the AEW&CS last year, it is yet to get the final operational clearance.
The AEW&CS is a moving surveillance platform, making it difficult for the enemy to locate the exact position of the aircraft. With its long range and detection capabilities, it gives a 360 degree view of the sky and can track many aircraft simultaneously.

China currently has 20 such airborne warning systems, while Pakistan has eight. The Indian Air Force has only three—Israeli Phalcon radar systems mounted on Russian IL-76 aircraft. India had bought the radar systems from Israel in 2004. According to experts, India currently does not have the capability to cover its entire airspace during a war.

A programme to develop an indigenous early warning system was taken up in 1994, but was shut down after a fatal crash. Subsequently, the defence ministry in 1999 approved the import of three airborne warning systems (the ones from Israel) and decided to meet further requirement through indigenous development.

In October 2004, the cabinet committee on security approved indigenous development of AEW&CS at a cost of Rs 1,800 crore. The deadline was April 2011. Under the project, two AEW&CS were to be supplied to the Air Force. DRDO’s Bengaluru-based laboratory, Centre for Air Borne Systems (CABS), was the nodal agency for design and development.

Considering the operational importance of this project, the CAG carried out an audit to know whether the system had everything that was promised. K. Subramaniam, principal director of audit, Air Force, recently sent the classified report to Dr S. Christopher, the then secretary of the Department of Defence Research and Development—which found serious irregularities in the programme.

The report has come down heavily on the programme over its claim of indigenousness. Despite the project being called home made, it was only 48 per cent indigenous. The DRDO had claimed it to be 81 per cent. And, the cost of foreign consultancy, about Rs 106 crore, was categorised as indigenous.

The CAG’s observations draw strength from the ongoing CBI investigation into alleged kickbacks in the process of selecting the aircraft. The Embraer EMB-145 aircraft from Brazil was shortlisted for the project in 2007. However, Brazilian media reported that Indian officials were bribed to swing the deal in Embraer’s favour. In 2016, the CBI registered a case against NRI arms dealer Vipin Khanna and two private companies based abroad. The case was about the alleged payment of more than $5.70 million as kickbacks to seal the deal for the aircraft.

The CAG report also pointed out inadequacies in management, which stretched the development period to 13 years. “And, the operational requirements, instead of being based on the functional needs of the Air Force, were being adjusted according to the aircraft that was ‘pre-selected’. It took seven years to finalise the operational requirements,” said the report.


During the design and development stage, some operational parameters were compromised because of the Embraer’s limitations. Also, there was no competitive bidding while selecting the aircraft. The Embraer was shortlisted through a nomination. Notably, several aircraft, such as the IL-76, and models from Gulfstream, Bombardier and Boeing were available at the time.

“The justification given for the selection of EMB-145 was not tenable,” the CAG observed. “No objective assessment of the merits and demerits of available options was done. The selection of EMB-145 was arbitrary and based on preconceived preference.”

Initial operational requirements stipulated that the system should be able to operate from high-altitude locations like Leh to have a much deeper view into the Chinese army’s activities. As the EMB-145 was incapable of doing so, claims the report, the Air Force had to drop this requirement in February 2006.

The report also said that the Air Force officials working with the DRDO reiterated that Embraer was not the suitable aircraft.

The CAG also criticised the project for the way the pilots were trained. “From the scrutiny of the expenditure on training, the audit found that the training commenced in June 2007. At this point, the procurement contract for EMB-145 was yet to be awarded and negotiations were underway between the CABS and M/s Embraer. Therefore, training of pilots on an aircraft even before finalising its purchase is highly unjustified,” CAG pointed out. Six pilots were trained abroad at a cost of Rs 23 crore.

Of the 18 requirements specified by the Air Force, AEW&CS could not fully achieve ten important ones. Despite this, the Air Force accepted the first system in February 2017.

“Since EMB-145 was selected, the weight of the mission system had to be adjusted to the optimum payload capacity of EMB-145, which was 3,000kg. The radar along with its associated systems, which was to be mounted on the fuselage, had to be limited to 1,500 kilos due to structural limitations,” the CAG said.

The probable date of completion was revised four times and the final date of completion was extended by over six years, said the report. The Air Force kept changing its requirements. In the middle of the programme, the Air Force demanded air-to-air refuelling and a de-icing system. It led to a delay of nearly two years.

Christopher, who was the head of CABS, said the repeated modifications in the operational requirement by the Air Force played a major role in the delay of the project. “It is all recorded in official documents and no one can find fault with me for it,” he said. “However, I believe that operational requirements is a prerogative of the user and you, as a developer of the equipment, cannot challenge it.”

Regarding the aircraft, he said, “Embraer was a well-proven aircraft. The decision to buy Embraer was taken in consultation with the then IAF chief S. Krishnaswamy. Four countries were using this platform as AWACS—the generic term for such a system. Moreover, the IAF decided that it has to be a turbo jet, not propellant. Turbo engine gives them the desired speed and efficiency.”

When contacted, Krishnaswamy said the selection of aircraft was purely DRDO’s decision. “The IAF was using Embraer for its VVIP fleet and thought of commonality if it is selected for AEW&CS. Since AEW&CS was DRDO’s project and budget was allocated to them, the final decision for selecting aircraft was DRDO’s only,” he said, adding that any modification in the operational requirements was a collective decision of the Air Force and the DRDO.

Drdo

Congratulations Dr. G. Satheesh Reddy

7 Comments

Dear Dr. G. Satheesh Reddy Congratulations for taking charge of Chairman DRDO, after long chase and waiting of one year three months finally you achieve your goal.

Now the time has come to see that what a young DRDO chief can deliver to nation.

some observations will help you to reshape the pathetic condition of DRDO

Whether DRDO: Ailing organisation in ICU needs Surgical Curtailment

1. One of the negligent aspect of DRDO is maltreatment of the valuable and scientific human resource. They are treated worse than a clerk, transferring non compliant officers, favouring own people for making good of office power. No link to promotions, awards and transfers to the performance of the scientists.
2. More pathetic is mishandling of finance, get funds, award tenders to favored vendor, either national or international, get cuts to fatten benami bank accounts.
3. Poorly specified technical requirements leading to manipulation during placing supply orders.
4. Transferring anyone not obliging for corruption, stopping their promotions and threatening them with dire consequences.
5. Forming a coterie and running the organisation as a family entity with vested interests further own progress rather than that of organisation.
6. No senior scientist including DGs, produce any worth technical paper having original research, because they don’t have time for R&D, since busy with producing fabricated data and bogus claims on scientific achievements.
7. Finally, DRDO ends up with a product that is obsolete, sub optimal and non- performing, handed over to armed forces forcefully. These inventories are a burden to the armed forces and finally junked without waiting for the final product.
8. Further, there’s a construction wing furiously doing research on arboriculture, estate maintenance and construction of quarters etc.
9. Reshape  this, about a dozen of labs like DEBEL, DFRL, DIBER, SASE, DIPAS, INMAS etc so called life sciences units of DRDO doing all sorts of non core activities and wasting funds and manpower.
10. DRDO having lost focus, breeding corruption and engaged in non scientific activities, takes huge funds and does whatever a head of the establishment fancies. No questions asked.
11. The organization has been on this path and its scientist are molded to work in this path and thought process

In nutshell, DRDO has forgotten raison d’être, namely, to serve and support the services. It, in present form and function, is not fit to continue. It is anachronism with the international defence R&D. It needs Surgical Curtailment that provides professional Human Resource management and corruption free financial handling. Let professional and trained civil servants handle administration while the users decide the areas under which DRDO has to focus, omit trivial projects and concentrate on the core defence R&D.
Please take your decision is in right direction for both DRDO as well for the country’s military future.

First and foremost is DRDO has chosen path of Reverse Engineering during 80s to quickly develop some products for emergency requirements of those turbulent periods be it IMDP or any thing
This mindset only encouraged nepotism in the organization… And made 80s 90s era scientists turned current bosses become intolerant to new generation and out of box thinking in the organization

Scientist of DRDO managing all aspects of the organization likes HR, Operations, Finance, and Materials etc… But never bothered to train themselves in these fields

Currently without realizing that Reverse Engineering can only cater the Hand to Mouth needs which can never bring competitive edge in the current scenario…. People are still working with the same mindset

Incompetent Scientists as Directors without leadership abilities are ruining the young talent of the organization

Poor succession planning, poor project management…

and at last, hope you will fulfill your commitment, which you gave to a officer in Jolly Grant Airport, your act will differentiate that you are not egoist, low mindset, running after construction, favoring nepotism, coterie man  like your most of predecessor DRDO chiefs, they spend their valuable time in these areas.

with lots hope and best wishes for your shiny Reddy tenure

www.corruptionindrdo.com ( working for clean DRDO)

Drdo

Dr. G. Satheesh Reddy appointed DRDO Chief

2 Comments

NEW DELHI, AUGUST 25, 2018

The post had been vacant since May after the then Chief Dr. S. Christopher stepped down
The Government on Saturday appointed eminent scientist Dr. G. Satheesh Reddy as the Chairman of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

The top post of the DRDO had been vacant since May after the then Chief Dr. S. Christopher stepped down.

“The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet has approved the appointment of Dr. G Satheesh Reddy, Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri to the post of Secretary, Department of Defence Research & development and Chairman, DRDO for a period of two years with effect from the date of assumption of charge or until further orders, whichever is earlier,” a Government order said.

A missile scientist, Dr. Reddy was holding charge as the Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister and also as Director General of the strategic missiles division.

As head of the Research Centre Imarat (RCI), he is credited with the indigenous development of seeker technology, a critical component in missiles.

Drdo

DRDO की प्रयोगशाला में छोटी सी चूक से 20 करोड़ की चपत

2 Comments

 

 

नई दिल्ली, मदन जैड़ा
Wed, 22 Aug 2018


रक्षा अनुसंधान एवं विकास संगठन (डीआरडीओ) की एक प्रयोगशाला की जरा सी चूक से सरकार को बीस करोड़ रुपये की चपत लग गई। चूक यह थी कि प्रयोगशाला ने ब्रिटेन से मंगाई गई मशीन को प्राप्त करने के बाद खोलकर चेक नहीं किया। मशीन की पैकिंग तीन महीने के बाद खोली गई तो वह टूटी हुई निकली। लेकिन इस बीच उसका बीमा कवर खत्म हो गया था।

नियंत्रक एवं महालेखा परीक्षक (सीएजी) ने इस रवैये पर चिंता जाहिर की है। सीएजी ने इस मामले में कहा कि ऐसी मशीनों के आयात के मामले में सावधानी बरती जाए और बीमा या क्षति की जिम्मेदारी तय करने के लिए स्पष्ट दिशा-निर्देश बनें ताकि इस प्रकार करोड़ों की चपत सरकार को न लगे।

दरअसल, यह मामला डीआरडीओ की देहरादून स्थित प्रयोगशाला इंस्ट्रूमेंट रिसर्च एंड डवलपमेंट इस्टेबलिसमेंट (आईआरडीई) का है। उसने ब्रिटेन से 19.68 करोड़ रुपये की पोलिशिंग मशीन खरीदी। मार्च 2016 में इसको लाने का जिम्मा सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र की कंपनी बॉमर एंड लॉरी को सौंपा। चूंकि मशीन को लाने के दौरान क्षतिग्रस्त होने और चोरी का खतरा रहता है, इसलिए बॉमर एंड लॉरी ने ओरिएंटल इंश्योरेंस कंपनी से इसका बीमा करा लिया।

Drdo

DRDO chief not appointed even after three months

1 Comment

Abhinandan Mishra,  Sunday Guardian: August 18, 2018

 

‘Selecting a new DRDO chief has become like walking on a landmine’.

The post of the chief of Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has been vacant for nearly three months now, courtesy the apparent pressure tactics being employed by various quarters—both from inside the government and outside it. A few posts had fallen vacant in the last week of May after the incumbent DRDO chief Selvin Christopher retired following a three-year long tenure which included a year long extension. The post of SA to RM (Scientific Advisor to Raksha Mantri), which was held by G. Satheesh Reddy for three years, including a year-long extension till 4 June 2018, is vacant too. DRDO chairman is also the Secretary of Defence, Research and Development.

Since the retirement of Christopher, Sanjay Mitra, a 1982 batch IAS of West Bengal cadre, is the Defence Secretary, and he is also holding the additional charge of the post of Secretary, Department of Defence Research & Development and Chairman, DRDO for a period of three months, beginning 29 May.

Official sources said that this was for the first time that the DRDO was staying headless for this long. They attributed this situation to various stakeholders who are involved in the functioning of the organisation. The DRDO has an annual budget of Rs 20,000 crore; it spends the same on the upkeep of over 50 laboratories across India.

“The post of the DRDO chief is a very coveted one and apart from merit, other factors like political interference, regional interference, import lobby and foreign vendors play a crucial role in the whole exercise. The government is not giving a very good message by displaying indecisiveness. Ideally, the next chief should have been identified and notified even before the term of the incumbent ended,” a former top official who worked with the organisation for more than three decades, said.

According to officials, selecting a new DRDO chief had become like walking on a landmine in recent times. “So many names are floating in the media; many of them are being planted by their adversaries, many by the claimants themselves. There is not a single name whose candidature will not generate controversy unlike at the time of appointment of Abdul Kalam or V.K. Aatre or V.S. Arunachalam, all of whom were well-known scientists. Earlier, the DRDO was headed by scientists who were really reputed, but now the situation has changed,” a scientist, posted with one of the DRDO laboratories, said.

Sources said that the government had come close to appointing a new chief when Selvin Christopher’s term was about to end, but at the very last moment, there was a “negative intelligence report” on the one who had been shortlisted and the whole process was abandoned.

“Prime Minister Narendra Modi had repeatedly expressed his concerns and apprehensions about the working of the DRDO. However, these concerns cannot be taken care of if the DRDO chief is appointed not because of merit, but due to his proximity to a particular minister or to a region,” the official said. In a not-so-covert hint that the organisation could be externally influenced, V.K. Aatre, who succeeded Kalam as DRDO chief, had once said that there were three non-state actors that influenced the working of DRDO: foreign vendors, mass media and the import lobby.

“If one traces back the history of the DRDO, one would come across names like Dr V.S. Arunachalam who had absolute freedom to walk into the office of successive PMs. He was close to Indira Gandhi and was able to secure a lot of money and autonomy for the organisation. Before him, we had people like Dr Daulat Singh Kothari, Professor S. Bhagavantam, Dr B.D. Nagchaudhuri, Prof M.G.K. Menon and Dr Raja Ramanna, who were scientists of international repute and were known for their work across the globe. Now it is not the same,” a senior official of the organisation said.

According to officials, the 2015 bifurcation of the post of the DRDO Chairman, Secretary of Defence, R&D and the SA to RM, which were earlier headed by the same individual, had led to two competing power centers within the organisation.

“This should not have been done as this has affected the value of the chair of the DRDO chief. Do you expect the SA to RM to give importance to the DRDO chief? Now every proposal that is brought by the DRDO is vetted by the SA to RM. There was a lot of friction between Selvin and Reddy because both of them thought they were more senior to the other,” an official of the organisation explained.

Former officials recalled how someone like Kalam, decorated with the , led the DRDO in the past. “He was the brain behind Pokhran-II; he was someone who stood shoulder to shoulder with the late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a stalwart Prime Minister. We are missing a man like him. He needed no recommendation or political approach to become the chief of DRDO. People like Kalam had assumed a huge stature much before they had joined the DRDO,” an officer recalled.

Drdo

CAG blows holes in DRDO’s early warning planes

Leave a comment
The auditor has said that operational requirements specified by the IAF were not met and added that there has been a 70% time overrun. (Representative image)

By Shaurya Karanbir Gurung, ET Bureau, Aug 08, 2018
After a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into corruption allegations, the Comptroller and Auditor General has also cast a shadow on an indigenous program for Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) system ordered by the Air Force.

In a detailed report, the CAG has stated that the project is yet to be fully realised even though it was conceived in 2002, leaving gaps in the IAF’s air-surveillance capability.

The auditor has said that operational requirements specified by the IAF were not met and added that there has been a 70% time overrun.

The central auditor also said selecting the Embraer aircraft as the platform created design constraints and caused the delays. It may be recalled that the CBI is probing allegations that kickbacks were paid in the Embraer aircraft deal that DRDO had struck with the Brazilian aircraft manufacturer in 2008.

The AEW&C is an airborne surveillance system which detects incoming hostile fighters, cruise missiles and drones much before ground based radars.

It also detects enemy troops build-ups, warships and directs friendly fighter jets during combat. The project for the indigenous development of the AEW&C of the IAF was approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security in October 2004 at a cost of `1,800 cr. The CAG, however, said that the project’s total cost up till August 2017 was `2,425 Crore.
Under the project, two AEW&C were to be supplied to the IAF. Banglore based Centre of Air Borne Systems (CABS) of the DRDO was the nodal agency for developing the system.

The CAG says that the IAF had accepted the first AEW&C in February 2017. “However, out of the 18 operational requirements specified by the IAF, eight parameters could not be fully achieved by the AEW&C,” said the CAG report.

Some of these operational requirements are the primary surveillance radar for scanning the airspace to detect targets, the secondary radar to identify friends and foes, and the self protection suite to warn about incoming weapons. The IAF insisted that the eight parameters should be met in the second aircraft. The DRDO agreed to meet five of them, while arguing that the remaining three would not impact operations.

Comments

Drdo

Start with how to make a Rifle

Leave a comment

We pay a price when we let other countries set our pace. One day Donald Trump includes India in the list of those “who are robbing America” and threatens to levy high taxes on “thousands and thousands

US and Indian flags (File photo | Reuters)

Published: 05th August 2018 04:00 AM
By T J S George
We pay a price when we let other countries set our pace. One day Donald Trump includes India in the list of those “who are robbing America” and threatens to levy high taxes on “thousands and thousands” of Indian motorcycles imported into America. This was when India cut duty on the glamorous Harley-Davidson from 75 per cent to 50 instead of the 0 per cent Trump wanted. Another day Trump praises India and green-lights the sale of unmanned aerial combat vehicles to India, a deal that was previously denied. These missile-firing drones have a sea variant reputed to be effective in coastal defence. No doubt, they can be decisive in beating back attacks such as the 26/11 terror strike in Mumbai.

Is India expected to cringe when Trump threatens it, and feel elated when Trump flatters it? Our concern should be not that this is a man the world mistrusts because of his unpredictable mood shifts; our concern should be the assumptions that are taken for granted, seemingly by all, in US-India dealings.

The American turnaround on the sale of hi-tech weapons such as the drone is a case in point. This looked like a systemic shift rather than a Trumpian twinkle. Nevertheless, India needs to be cautious for at least three reasons. First, America now recognises India as a full partner in its defence strategies and considers this as an “upgradation” of India. Second, Delhi sought a favourable nod from Washington before moving to buy an anti-missile defence system from Russia. Both these factors are linked to the third: Washington’s eagerness to block China’s growth as a world power.

Barack Obama’s America had formally accepted India as a “major defence partner”. But the partnership gained muscle only when Trump moved India into America’s tier-I list of countries to which sensitive weapon systems could be exported without special licences. Trump has repeatedly stressed India’s importance in what he calls the Indo-Pacific region. This recognition led to Washington waiving its sanctions provisions and thereby enabling India to buy Russia’s 39,000-crore air defence missile system.
What does all this really mean from India’s standpoint?

It is easier to see what it means to America: It opens a big market for American weapons and gets a major regional power to be involved with American defence policies in the region. There could well be a section of Indians who see it as a sign of progress when (a) America upgrades Delhi to tier-I for military sales and (b) permits Delhi to buy Russian weapons. Other sections may see it as demeaning when (a) India is expected to feel good about upgradation for purposes of buying American weapons and (b) sanction-scared Delhi seeks American permission to buy Russian weapons.

Both schools will have to see as unacceptable the extent to which India is dependent on other countries for its essential defence needs. The proud exhibit on our weapons front is the Brahmos missile. But 65 per cent of it consists of imported components. INS Vikramaditya, the pride of the Indian navy, was formerly a Russian vessel mothballed because of age. , our first “indigenously built” nuclear submarine, took in extensive help from Russia. HAL, a competent public sector company, has received discouragement from successive governments.

Its Tejas aircraft has been waiting for decades to get operational clearance. Its plans over Rafale jet fighters fell flat when the project was taken out of its hands and given to Anil Ambani’s company. Last year an Indian-made rifle was rejected by the Indian Army. Even bulletproof jackets made in India are unpopular with our defence personnel. Despite a long history of defence research, proud achievements in rocket science and slogans like Make In India, India remains the world’s largest arms importer.

When America recognises as a “major defence partner” a country that cannot produce even a rifle, it is clear that it sees India as a profitable market for its pricey weapons. In the process India loses opportunities to develop foreign policy, especially China policy, for India’s benefit as distinct from the benefits of “Indo-Pacific”. China is currently producing weaponry so sophisticated that the US has started to worry. India need not have been left so far behind. The achievements of its space programme and of its scientists in Silicon Valley point to the talent available to India. But the defence ministry is manned by IAS generalists while the country is at the mercy of parties and politicians who put their interests above the nation’s. How can one get more than what one deserves?

Drdo

HAL’s Light Combat Aircraft project to come under IAF control

Leave a comment

Dinakar Peri   NEW DELHI, AUGUST 04, 2018 THE HINDU

 

Slow takeoff: The development of the Tejas-Mk 1A with specific enhancements has been delayed.

To prevent time and cost overruns, the IAF will soon have effective control over India’s indigenous LCA programme
The government is poised to hand over control of the Bengaluru division of State-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to the Indian Air Force (IAF). This is to prevent more time and cost overruns on the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project. This comes at a particularly crucial time as the next phase of the LCA project, development of the MK2 variant, as well as the country’s next fighter aircraft programme, the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), begin to take shape.

“The government has given the go ahead to hand over the entire Bengaluru complex of HAL to the IAF. With this, the fixed wing aircraft division will come under the IAF. The modalities are being worked out,” an official source told this reporter of the process that may take a few months.

HAL resists
HAL manufactures and assembles a range of aircraft and helicopters. However, it has faced criticism for its time and cost overruns and lack of professionalism in project execution. HAL has opposed this move for a long time, fearing erosion of its autonomy.

The LCA programme was sanctioned in 1983 and the aircraft made its first flight in 2001. The IAF had signed two contracts with HAL, one for 20 aircraft in the Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) configuration signed on March 31, 2006, to be completed by December 2011, and another for 20 aircraft in the Final Operational Clearance (FOC) standard signed on December 23, 2010, which was to be completed by 2016. It is in the process of ordering 83 jets in the Mk 1A configuration.

The IAF constituted the first LCA squadron with just two aircraft in 2016 and, as of July 2018, has inducted only nine aircraft. Tejas has once again missed the FOC in June and the development of the Tejas-Mk 1A with specific enhancements has been delayed. With this development, HAL’s aircraft division will be headed by a serving three-star officer or an Air Marshal of the IAF, and effectively give the IAF control over the country’s indigenous LCA project.

In addition, three institutions — Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE) and Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) — which are under the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) are likely to be brought under the direct control of the Chief of the Air Staff. Thus, the entire development cycle of the LCA will have the IAF’s oversight and will ensure timely execution and prevent blame games over delays, the source observed. Details of the specific contours of the move are awaited.

‘Long overdue’
“The IAF should have taken over the LCA programme two decades back, but [it is] good it’s happening at least now,” said Air Marshal M. Matheswaran (Retd), who oversaw the IAF’s fighter procurement in the past. He felt that to make a real difference, the IAF should get the entire cycle under its control, from design, standardisation, production and supply chain. Otherwise, just having one officer at the helm will not change things much, he added.

“Production for 20 FOC aircraft will be taken up after FOC clearance by the ADA, for which the current target is December 2018,” Minister of State for Defence Subhash Bhamre said in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha last week.

However, a Defence Ministry official said this is likely to be delayed by another six months as several parameters like gun firing, air-to-air refuelling and new data-linked software defined radios, among others, are yet to be validated. The IAF wants new data links as a standard feature on the FOC variant as communications are an essential feature for an aircraft to operate in a network-centric environment.

HAL is setting up a second assembly line to ramp up production from eight to 16 aircraft a year, in addition to outsourcing major modules to private partners.

Design reboot
The LCA is powered by an American GE-404 engine, which the IAF has stated is underpowered. This is to be corrected in the LCA-Mk2 which would be a larger aircraft powered by the GE-414 engine producing 98kN thrust compared to 84kN thrust of the current engine.

“The design change has been launched sometime back. We don’t want just some superficial changes, but a real increase in performance. The target is to meet or exceed the Mirage aircraft in performance,” an IAF official said.

To accommodate the larger and more powerful engine, which also needs more fuel, requires a larger wingspan for the aircraft. This calls for a major design and engineering effort.

“There are concerns and challenges but it is doable,” the officer noted.

The first prototype of the Mk2 is expected to make its debut flight in 2022-23, and complete the IOC and FOC approvals in the next five years. The current target is to have the first squadron ready by 2028.

The IAF intends to have several squadrons of the LCA-Mk2 as it has to replace three Mirage squadrons, three Mig-29 squadrons and six Jaguar squadrons. A squadron typically has about 18 aircraft, 16 fighters and two trainers. However, this can vary, depending on the type of aircraft and the necessity.

Drdo

Exclusive: Defence research at risk due to delay in filling key posts

Leave a comment

By Pradip R Sagar August 04, 2018 THE WEEK

(File) Visitors look at a display of DRDO communication aircraft at the DefExpo 2018 in Chennai | AFP

The Narendra Modi government has undone one of its own major defence sector reforms. Soon after it had come to power, the Modi government had bifurcated the posts of the chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and of scientific adviser to the defence minster for better efficiency and ease of functioning. Now, both posts are vacant.

The last scientist to head the DRDO, S. Christopher, retired on May 29, and the government has not yet found a scientist to succeed him. So it has asked the defence secretary, an IAS officer, to also function as head of the prestigious body of defence scientists.

And two months ago, the term of Satish Reddy, scientific adviser to the defence minister, ended. The post has been lying vacant since.

Earlier, the director of the DRDO also used to function as scientific adviser to the defence minister. As many as 12 eminent scientists had held the post, including such illustrious names as A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, V.S. Arunachalam, V.K. Saraswat and Avinash Chander. Under their stewardship, the prestigious body with nearly 8,000 defence scientists—and having an annual budget of about Rs 20,000 crore and about 50 laboratories—developed a host of ballistic missiles, Light Combat Aircraft, Arjun battle tank and hundreds of critical weapons systems and components, which are not even available for import.

After the Modi government came to power, it first granted an extension to the then DRDO chief-cum-scientific adviser Chander, who was to retire in November 2014. The extension was for 18 months, but less than two months later, the Modi government abruptly cancelled the extension, sent Chander packing, and asked the defence secretary R.K. Mathur, an IAS officer, to function also as DRDO chief.

The then defence minister, Manohar Parrikar, defended the Modi government’s decision to cut short Chander’s tenure, saying that the government wanted someone younger to head the DRDO, as at that time, nearly a dozen of its topmost scientists were on service extensions after retirement.

Subsequently, the Modi government bifurcated the posts. The DRDO chief’s job was given to aeronautics scientist Dr S. Christopher, while Dr Satish Reddy, a missile scientist, was appointed scientific adviser in May 2015, both for two-year terms. When their terms expired, the government gave both of them one-year extensions.

Finally, Christopher’s tenure expired on May 29, on which day he demitted office. The post has since been held as an additional charge by Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra, an IAS officer, for the period of three months.

Reddy’s extended tenure ended on June 4, and he has since gone back. The post he held in Delhi, that of the scientific adviser, “has since been lying vacant, and no fresh order for extension of his service or naming his successor has come,” said an informed source.

There is a buzz in the defence ministry that Reddy, who is also director general (Missiles & Strategic Systems) is being considered for the post of DRDO chief. Other names being considered include P.K. Mehta, director general of armament and combat engineering systems; Jillelamudi Manjula, currently posted as the director general, electronics and communication systems and Sudhir Mishra, head of BrahMos.

There is also speculation that the Modi government is toying with another experiment—of merging the posts of secretary, Research and Development (who is also chairman, DRDO) and secretary, defence production. The ‘IAS lobby’, too, is learnt to be pushing for the move because the defence production secretary’s job is held by an IAS officer.