Tag Archives: Army

Drdo

Tatra deal: CBI probes new company after Gen VK Singh accuses Vectra’s Ravi Rishi

1 Comment

Neeraj Chauhan, TNN Apr 13, 2012, 12.40AM IST

NEW DELHI: CBI is investigating Venus Projects, a second company belonging to London-based businessman Ravi Rishi of Vectra group, after the NRI was named by Army chief Gen V K Singh as the person behind a Rs 14-crore bribe offer made to him in September, 2010.

The CBI is scanning Rishi over a complaint by Gen Singh that he was approached by retired Lt Gen Tejinder Singh for a contract for supply of Tatra trucks that the Army chief has said were substandard.

Rishi is being investigated for his links with Venus Projects as agency sources said the company was used by him for purchasing spare parts for Tatra trucks. The agency believes that the deal was signed between Rishi’s Vectra Group and BEML officials within three days of their meetings in 1997.

Sources said, “There was a meeting between BEML officials, Ravi Rishi’s Vectra group, Tatra Slovakia and other associates on June 11, 1997, in Slovakia, and on June 14, 1997, the MoU for procuring 600 Tatra trucks was signed in Bangalore”. CBI suspects BEML, a defence PSU, did not have a board meeting before the hurriedly-signed MoU.

Venus Projects is being seen as another link between Rishi and the Czech firm that projected the UK-based businessman’s Vectra group as the original equipment manufacturer to ensure that it remained central to any deal signed with BEML for supply of Tatra trucks, and didn’t flout the procurement norms.

Agency sources say that they have sought time from Gen V K Singh to know more about the bribe offer. The probe team is hoping to meet the Army chief on Friday, and later call Tejinder Singh for questioning.

The agency has sought documents of Venus Projects and Tatra Sipox (UK) to know about the meetings held in June, 1997. CBI is also likely to call officials of BEML who were involved in the MoU signed on June 14, 1997. CBI is also examining a large number of documents related to contracts of BEML for procuring Tatra trucks since 1997. The agency will also be questioning BEML chief V R S Natarajan soon.

The agency is also in the process of sending Letter Rogatories (LRs) to Czech Republic (original Tatra a s is based there), Slovakia and the UK.

Drdo

Gen VK Singh stalled BEML’s 1,000 truck order in 2010

Leave a comment

TNN | Apr 14, 2012, 12.29AM IST

NEW DELHI: Bharat Earth Movers Limited (BEML), which is in the eye of the storm kicked up by the Army chief’s claim about a Rs 14-crore bribe offer, was preparing to supply 1,000 Tatra trucks in 2010 when General V K Singh stalled the entire acquisition.

Sources said BEML, the Bangalore-based defence PSU, had on the assurance of the then Master General of Ordnance (MGO) of the Army in 2010, had taken “advance action” for supply of 1,000 Tatra vehicles. All these vehicles were to of 6×6 and 8×8 variants.

It is not clear if Gen Singh refused clearance after September 22, 2010, the day he was allegedly offered the bribe by Lt Gen Tejinder Singh on behalf of Tatra.

Tatra truck purchases are usually sent by MGO directly to the ministry of defence (MoD), BEML later pointed out to the MoD. But in 2010, the Army chief had asked for the Tatra file and put the acquisition on hold. Instead, the Army moved a proposal to the Defence Acquisition Council, headed by defence minister A K Antony, for a competitive global tender for the purchase of 6×6 and 8×8 trucks.

The last order for Tatra trucks were placed with BEML in March, 2010, a few days before Gen VK Singh took over as the Army chief on March 31. The last order was for 788 vehicles out a total projected requirement of 3,296.

While the last order was placed by MGO Lt Gen Vinay Sharma, his successor told the BEML that there was no requirement for new vehicles to be acquired from revenue budget.

The Army is presently processing the global competitive tender, which could take several months to complete.

The forces’ stand on Tatra acquisition would be a key component of the ongoing CBI probe into Gen Singh’s allegation that he was offered Rs 14 crore bribe for clearing the purchase of Tatra trucks.

While many of the documents related to Tatra deal – from the Army HQ, MoD and BEML – have been handed over to the CBI, indications are that the agency is yet to get any ‘breakthrough’ documents to show corruption trail in the Tatra deal.

CBI officials would be meeting with Gen Singh, who was away in Punjab on Friday, for collecting further clarification to his written complaint about the bribe offer.

Drdo

Corruption will not be tolerated: AK Antony

Leave a comment

PTI | Apr 11, 2012, 02.42PM IST

KOCHI: In the backdrop of the recent storm over alleged corruption in defence procurements, defence minister AK Antony today said the country’s interests were paramount and there will be “no cover up and no vendetta”.

“India’s interests are our only concern. We are not against any company or country. But India’s interests are paramount”, he told reporters on the sidelines of a function at the Indian Coast Guard here.

Replying to questions in the light of Army chief General V K Singh’s recent claim about alleged attempts to bribe him to favour a sub-standard contract, he said “Corruption will not be tolerated. Even if there is suspicion, a probe will be ordered”.

“No cover up, no vendetta is our policy,” he said, adding if there is an iota of doubt, it would be looked into.

Antony said efforts were on to make defence procurement more transparent. “When people do not get contracts, there will be criticism and allegations. Some companies do try to influence officials and if it is proved action will be taken”.

He said six companies from Israel, Russia, Germany and Singapore and two from India had recently been blacklisted.

The Defence acquisition council meeting last week had sanctioned Annual projects, five-year projects and Long Term Plan from 2012-27, he said.

On reported differences between the Army and the Defence Ministry, he said, “Both are functioning from the same building. There is no communication gap, no confrontation. I function as a joint family. I am very comfortable. I respect the armed forces, their commitment, their dedication. I am proud of it”.

Antony said there was so much demand for joint exercises with the Indian defence forces that “everyone wants to do (it) … ,”

Drdo

Call for action against ‘coup’ scaremonger ‘Mischief’ By An Insider, Admits Govt

Leave a comment

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

New Delhi: With the government admitting that “mischief ” by an insider was responsible for the scare over a routine movement of two Army units, the demand for a probe into the matter is gathering momentum amid indications that Army headquarters may itself seek an inquiry.
The issue figured in the meeting of Parliament’s standing committee on defence on Monday. Asaduddin Owaissi of UPA component MIM demanded a probe to get to the bottom of the manner in which a normal military exercise on the night of January 16 was portrayed as a sinister development. TOI had reported on April 5 that the alarm may have been raised by insiders ranged against the Army chief in a bitter factional feud.
Owaisi made the pitch to defence secretary Shashikant Sharma who had to appear before the panel for the second time to clear the air over the way sections of the government cranked up a routine military movement into an extraordinary and dangerous maneuver.
Owaisi’s demand coincided with a similar stand by the BJP. “What has the government done about the mischief makers?” asked party spokesperson Prakash Javadekar. The defence secretary repeated to the House panel the government’s stand: The suggestion that Army units in the exercise were actually flexing their muscle was based on “wrong inference” drawn from “conjectures”.
Tank ammo stocks low, Parl panel told
Presenting a sobering account of long-term as well as immediate challenges, senior IAF and Army brass told a parliamentary committee that while India’s window to catch up with China’s defence modernization thrust could close by 2017 or earlier, stocks of certain tank munitions are down to four days of reserves. Meanwhile, in an extraordinary step, the committee decided to call the three service chiefs to give an account of the state of preparedness of the forces. P 10 ‘MoD nod not mandatory for routine troop movement’
New Delhi: Defence secretary Shashikant Sharma rejected the premise of panic in the government that the concerned Army units did not inform the defence ministry in violation of protocol. Sharma said there was no procedure requiring units to inform MoD of routine movements.
The day also saw retired Army and Navy chiefs, Gen V P Malik and Admiral Arun Prakash, respectively, asking for a probe.
On Sunday, minister of state for defence Pallam Raju confirmed the widespread suspicion in the top echelons of the government that it was somebody, seen as reliable, who misrepresented an exercise by a mere two units consisting of a few hundreds of soldiers as a potentially dangerous situation.
The subsequent alert saw police being directed to slow down the “advancing” columns. Although CRPF sources have denied that their elite COBRA units were deployed and a ‘lookout’ was mounted at railway stations, many in the government consider it frightening that insiders could precipitate such a situation.
Eventually, it took an intervention by defence minister A K Antony to quell the panic. Antony is learnt to have dismissed the alert sign hoisted by the authorities as misplaced.
Significantly, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi parried a question on Raju’s statement in a TV interview.
Sections in the government seem to have come around to suspect that the artificial scare may have been scripted to prejudice the government against the Army chief, General V K Singh As it happened, January 16 was also the very day when General Singh had, in an unprecedented development, moved the Supreme Court to challenge defence ministry’s rejection of his claim for the revision of his date of birth.
Several senior military officers are of the belief that the government should promptly fix responsibility and take action against those who created the unnecessary scare over routine military movements. The “apolitical and disciplined” Army has been “insulted”, either because of ignorance or deliberate design, they contend.

Uncategorized

Where is the Tatra scam whistle-blower?

Leave a comment

Reported by Tejas Mehta,   Updated: April 04, 2012 18:40 IST -NDTV

New Delhi:   Has the whistle-blower in the Tatra truck scam gone underground fearing for his life? Since the Army Chief General VK Singh disclosed last week that he was offered 14-crores as a bribe to clear “sub-standard” trucks, a new surge of attention is being paid to the 7000 Tatra trucks that have been bought by the Army since 1986. Tatra is a Czech-manufacturer. It is owned by Vectra, a London-based company, which supplies parts to a defence-run public sector unit, BEML, based in Bangalore. The trucks are assembled at BEML and sold to the Army. Their performance and price have both been questioned by military analysts in the past, but it took General Singh’s statement about the bribe to prompt close scrutiny. A CBI inquiry is looking at how the trucks were sold in violation of rules – all defence equipment has to be bought directly from the manufacturer but Tatra trucks allegedly come to the Army via middleman.

The man who may have some answers to the many questions about Tatra trucks is SN Ashoka, a former Assistant General Manager in the Trucks Division of BEML. “Ashoka is the real whistle-blower in this scam. He worked for BEML and knows A to Z details of the scam. He feared for his life. For the past week we have not been able to get in touch with him,” says Dr Hanumanthappa, the President of the All India Federation SC/ST and Minorities Employees Welfare Association, Karnataka, who submitted a confidential report written by Mr Ashoka to Sonia Gandhi, Defence Minister AK Antony and President Pratibha Patil. In August 2009, Mr Ashoka wrote a memorandum to his boss, the Chairman of BEML VRS Natarajan. Mr Ashoka enumerated various charges of corruption against the Chairman in that note. One of the allegations he raised was that Tatra trucks were being bought with the use of agents or middlemen. Mr Hanumathappa submitted the report to the Prime Minister, Defence Minister and Sonia Gandhi. But he claims that no action was taken.   “We have observed in the last few days suspicious movements around our office and home. There is an international mafia that is connected to this scam and we fear for our lives. We will seek police protection,” says Hanumathappa’s son Ananda Kumar in Bangalore.

Drdo

The Lab Optimists

Leave a comment

Open Magazine – feature

BY Madhavankutty Pillai 31st March 2012

From battle tanks to mosquito repellents to dosas in space, the DRDO is a laboratory of sweeping ideas, many of which will take a lifetime to execute.

Last year, the Indian Air Force got a taste of something they didn’t much like. The newspaper DNA reported that IAF officials had been to the Defence Food Research Laboratory (DFRL) in Mysore, where they were shown a tube from which food could be squeezed out. It might sound odd that anyone would eat like that but this was a necessity stemming from the IAF’s induction of long-range aircraft into its fleet—the pilot would have to be fed if he was going to be in air for hours. But the tube-food wasn’t what they expected. It wasn’t a paste or even semi-liquid; it was solid. Negotiating it would not only mess up the cockpit, it would be a minor battle in itself. The IAF rejected it and the DFRL went back to the lab to make it pastier. The same laboratory is also working on something equally unusual—what to feed Indian astronauts when they eventually go up in space. The lab director was quoted as saying that they were exploring all options—from north Indian chapatis to south Indian dosas, albeit in bits and bites.

The DFRL is part of what is known as the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), an umbrella for over 50 laboratories that make everything from tube-food to tanks to combat aircraft to mosquito repellents. Even toilets. In his recent Railway Budget speech, former Railway Minister Dinesh Trivedi announced that from next year, 2,500 rail coaches would have what he called green toilets to replace the holes that now exist in train latrines. These ‘bio-toilets’ have been developed by the DRDO. The DRDO’s mandate, however, is not to cater to the Railways or India’s space programme. It is to make India self-reliant in defence systems and equipment. Stated ends and realities do not always meet. The main criticism of the DRDO—and it comes mainly from its primary clients, the armed forces—is that its scientists are a bunch of optimists. This is why we hear announcements from them that seem fantastic. Consider this public statement by DRDO Director General VK Saraswat just a few months ago: “We are working on building soldier robots that can work like a human soldier. Such a robot needs a database and artificial intelligence to carry out its activities and the DRDO is planning to build such a robot.” Is he talking of the Terminator? In the same exchange with reporters, Saraswat also talked about robotic mules, which then leads to the question: why would anyone need robotic mules? If the purpose is to transport cargo, won’t a suitable vehicle do?

All this would not be so suspect if the DRDO did not have a reputation for routinely shooting off its mouth. We asked a former Chief of Army and a former Chief of Navy whether it was true that the DRDO was quick with announcements and slow with execution. Says former Army Chief General VP Malik: “I tend to agree with critics who say that. The track record of the DRDO so far, primarily on account of delayed/non-delivery of weapons and equipment promised to the armed forces, does not inspire confidence.”

And this was former Chief of Naval Staff, Admiral Arun Prakash: “That impression is correct. They are very optimistic and don’t live up to their time schedules, cost schedules, etc. They don’t consult the armed forces enough. They spend the budget the way they think best.”

The Navy, ironically, is the institution that has managed to get the maximum benefit (relatively speaking) from the DRDO and that’s because it made a practice of embedding naval officers into DRDO projects. Admiral Prakash said, “Whenever there’s a naval project going on, there are always naval officers associated with it. Even otherwise the Navy makes available some of its bright officers to the DRDO.”

The two projects for which the DRDO has got the most brickbats are connected to the Air Force and Army—the main battle tank Arjun and light combat aircraft (LCA) Tejas. The Arjun project took off in 1972. In 1974, Rs 15 crore was set aside for its development. The project, which finally cost around Rs 350 crore, got delayed by decades and even now many of its components are imported. The DRDO had initially hoped to make 2,000 tanks and, after about 40 years, has 124 operational. The Army is not happy with these and is pinning its hopes on the impending upgrade, the Arjun Mark II. Similar delays have plagued the LCA Tejas. It has been in the making for just under 30 years and is yet to become operational. Its second phase is now scheduled for completion by December 2012. The indigenous engine, Kaveri, for the LCA didn’t live up to standards and an imported engine is being used.

The problem, according to one view, stems from the DRDO wanting to reinvent the wheel. It was a patriotic thing to build everything from scratch, but, as everyone now recognises, it didn’t have the capability in most areas. This can have consequences. General Malik was Chief of Army when the Kargil war happened. In 2009, when he said in a television interview that Kargil casualties could have been lower if the DRDO had delivered on time, it instantly led to a furore. He elaborated on it in an email interview, ‘I was referring specifically to the non-availability of weapons-locating radars, which were required to engage Pakistani artillery and mortars quickly and effectively during the Kargil war. This would have reduced the effectiveness of Pakistani artillery and mortars. In 1997, after long negotiations with a manufacturer, some of these radars were about to be purchased. At the last moment, the DRDO caused this deal to be scuttled, with a promise that it would develop and produce these radars in the next two years; a promise that was never fulfilled. Incidentally, these very radars were purchased from the same manufacturer in 2003.’

There are areas in which the DRDO has been successful, like the missile programme. In the development of naval sonars, weapons avionics and torpedoes too, it is recognised to have done useful work. There is the counter-view that it is unfair to blame it for everything and that the DRDO has become a favourite punching bag. Wing Commander Ajay Lele, a weapons expert and Research Fellow with the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, says the gestation period in military technology is always long. The Lockheed Martin-developed F22 Raptor aircraft went to the drawing board in the Cold War era in the early 70s, but it formally entered the US air force in 2005. “Also, components for defence technology are not easy to come by. The DRDO cannot create everything on its own. It needs industrial back-up and our country lacks in that,” he says.

There is no clear accessible overview of the research DRDO does because there is no proper audit of it. A cloud called ‘Classified’ hangs over it. Prabhu Dandriyal, who worked in the DRDO from 1982 to 2003, is a whistleblower. After being forced into retirement when he started to expose corruption in the institution, he has been on a relentless mission. He says it has reached a stage where he is now called to assist the CBI and IB in corruption cases in DRDO labs because they don’t understand engineering concepts. He filed an RTI application asking how many technical papers DRDO scientists had published in international scientific journals between 1990 and 2010. He didn’t get it until the Chief Information Commissioner passed an order in his favour. “What is the surest way of showing that fundamental research is on? Publishing papers. The reply I finally got was ‘nil’. There had not been a single published paper. All these announcements they make, not one thing happens. All they do is talk,” he says.

Another criticism of the DRDO is that it expends time, money and focus on things that should not really be in its ambit. One journalist who went to a DRDO laboratory 15 years ago as a student was shown a banana that had been reduced to a tenth of its normal weight, the size reduced by 20 per cent. There are high altitude barfis for soldiers to partake of during festivals. There is a medicine for leucoderma. There are cockroach-killing tablets, instant idlis, betel leaf juice and chickenpav bhajis. A fungus found on a caterpillar has been cultured, which among other things is supposedly beneficial in the treatment of impotence. And so on goes the vast and bewildering list.

But, according to Ajay Lele, there is method to this madness. “The armed forces have set requirements. Until and unless the Government tells private industry ‘you provide us an alternative, this is the money, put it into R&D and give us the returns over a period of time’, the DRDO will have to make these things. Take the mosquito repellent. Anyone who is aware of conditions in the Northeast will tell you that the mosquitoes there are very different. Battle casualties are far lower than casualties from malaria. Good Knight [the repellent brand] is not going to develop such a mosquito repellent unless there’s some incentive for it,” he says.

The DRDO is now spinning these technologies commercially. Since 2008, it has a tie-up with Ficci to market products they think have demand. It goes by DRDO-FICCI Accelerated Technology Assessment and Commer- cialisation. Says Shyam Sunder, Deputy Director at Ficci’s Centre for Technology Commercialisation, “The DRDO has nominated more than 200 technologies to this programme. We shortlist them based on our assessment. We then contact Indian companies to introduce these technologies for manufacture or licensing. The response has been very good.”

Nearly everyone save the DRDO itself agrees that the institution has to be reinvented. A committee headed by P Rama Rao, former secretary, department of science and technology, made a number of recommendations. The main thrust of the recommendations was that the DRDO should focus on key areas like missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic warfare and so on. Its laboratories should be restructured and those not central to the new mandate must be hived off to civilian scientific bodies. The report is yet to be implemented because of opposition from the DRDO.

Another way to reinvent the DRDO, say some, is to make it like DARPA in the US, which does no research but instead mediates between the armed forces and the private sector. Unless the DRDO is remodelled, there will inevitably be situations in which the kit for the soldier in Siachen has to be imported while the DRDO works on a robotic mule.

Drdo

DRDO contradicts Army chief, says Tatra trucks ‘outstanding’

2 Comments

PTI | Mar 31, 2012, 08.18PM IST

NEW DELHI: Contradicting Army Chief General V K Singh, DRDO chief V K Saraswat on Saturday said Tatra trucks were “outstanding” and there was nothing substandard about the vehicles used as base for launching all important missiles like Prithvi and Agni.

“Tatra truck is an outstanding truck… They have a very good cross country capability and can move at good speeds,” Saraswat said at a press conference at Defence Expo here.

He was responding when asked about the performance of Tatra trucks in view of the Army Chief’s contention that these vehicles were substandard.

Noting that the launchers of all important missiles like the Prithvi and Agni are based on these trucks, the DRDO chief said the performance of these vehicles “has been good in armed forces and we have no complaints about it.”

Saraswat said “we will have more of them” if there was any further requirement of these trucks. However, if the government gives direction against using them, the premier research organization will stop doing so.

Asked to comment on the perceived tussle between defence minister A K Antony and the Army Chief, he said both were good people and should handle their differences, if any, with more caution.

“The harmony within the defence ministry with respect to our functioning and image is very important. I give my advise on technical issues but as a citizen of this country, I would say that I have known both the defence minister and the Army Chief and both of them are very good people.

Readers’ opinions (274)

sunny (Paris)
4 hrs ago (06:27 AM)
DRDO Chief is not a automobile engineer but a rocket propulsion scientist. Nice certificate for a truck, mate.

Joseph Stanis (India)
5 hrs ago (05:10 AM)
Hello DRDO Chief, Is it not your duty to also ensure that the price is right.The Internet price of a Tatra truck is about Rs 40 Lakhs but we are shelling out a Crore of Rs. Does it mean you will pay for a good item the moon? We are talking about cost effective defence equipment.The best for the least price. All these great defence organizations of the Nehruvian area are taking the nation for one BIG ride.

FREETHINKER (Switzerland)
8 hrs ago (02:10 AM)
IF THE DRDO THINKS TATRA TRUCKS ARE OUSTANDING THEN THERE IS SOMETHING RADICALLY WRONG WITH THEIR LEVEL OF STANDARDS. THIS IS THE SAME ORGANISATION THAT HAS MADE SEVERAL LOUSY PRODUCTS FOR THE ARMED FORCES STARTING FROM THE INFANTRY RIFLE TO ARJUN TANKS. NOT TO MENTION THAT ALL THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED HAS NEVER BEEN ON TIME. THE DRDO SHOULD SHUT UP LIKE THEY HAVE BEEN ASKING THE ARMY TO DO SO THROUGH POLITICIANS.

Surinder Jeet (USA)
8 hrs ago (02:03 AM)
V K Saraswat has not answered the general’s allegations. The general has said that Tatra is too expensive. DRDO has not disputed it. That Tatra is delivering the service is like saying Bofors Guns are firing. They should. Can Tatra or similar truck be bought from other suupliers? Will they give more for the same money or will they cost less. DRDO would be wise not to drag itself into lime light. As it is it is in trouble for its own scandals and poor performance. My question now is,”why did they enter the fray?. What is their interest”?

jk (delhi)
9 hrs ago (01:48 AM)
Everybody is trying to cover their as***, DRDO is a joke, even after many decades what indeginious product has come out of their stable?, even if there is one or two, are they being mass produced and are they world class that they are being exported?. This and other public sectors are a drain on the economy. I have a feeling DRDO’s palm has been greased and money exchanged to go for these trucks.

RAhul (Delhi)
9 hrs ago (01:35 AM)
DRDO is scinetists are just feeding on tax payers money.If we need to procure defense equipment from pverseas suppliers…Why not close down DRDO.

mahe (india)
9 hrs ago (01:09 AM)
I thought DRDO is a Reasearch and Development organisations, only now I understand they procure equipments and review the procurements..

ajay (delhi)
10 hrs ago (12:53 AM)
precisely, that is why we have outstanding things being manufactured by DRDO after being allocated huge budgets! its a shame that DRDO has failed to match with or come at par with other countries R& D wings!

D. Shaw (UK)
10 hrs ago (12:40 AM)
Mr. Sarsvat, isn’t a shame that India has to depend on import of major requirement of weapons and army equipment from abroad? Isn’t a shame for the scientists and technicals experts of DRDO that after fifty years’ in existence it cannot meet the Indian military’s major weapons requirements? How is that a small country like Israel without any major resources invents and manufactures most sophisticated weapons and a country of 1.2 billion people has to import such weapons from Israel inspite of the fact the India spends millions of dollars on its research organizations like DRDO? Obviously, there is something rotten in working of these government research organziations which work like any other government organization. They are managed by corrupt and third rate bureaucrats appointed by corrupt politicians. Even the Almighty creator cannot save India unless the corrupt and criminal politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen are prosecuted and hanged in public.
“If they have any differences, they should be handled with most cautious approach,” he added.

jyoti (up) replies to D. Shaw 
8 hrs ago (02:37 AM)
last year i did my summer training at drdo. there what i found, most employees come to office for time pass and chip food.

DRDO (Jeopardy ) replies to D. Shaw
9 hrs ago (01:25 AM)
Pity, these so called scientists from DRDO cann’t even reverse engineer the imported arms. Chinese are way ahead of these wannabe resaerch organization.

Suv (US/Mum) replies to D. Shaw
9 hrs ago (01:18 AM)
congress already cleaned the honest heads from DRDO.. (the resignation of scientists).. the ones that remains now are congress puppets.. can’t expect anything more from DRDO… wait few mroe days.. new Army cheif (Congress puupet) will say everythign is better thn expected..

Ram (Doha, Qatar) 
10 hrs ago (12:36 AM)
DRDO took more than 30 years to develop one missile with 1000s of staff ‘working’. It is yet another white elephant to the the state’s exchequer and most corrupt. The DRDO Chief seems to be in a hurry to cover up DRDOs role in supporting these trucks.

krishan (Pune.)
10 hrs ago (12:34 AM)
Now DRDO chief Saraswat is backing the Govt. just trying to be a ‘Chamcha’ of the govt. Or received a big kickbag few crore rupees.Now, every body knows that Gen.Singh is retiring and his opinion is not important. This is a bad Luck of India that good people are never appreciated only thing is appreciated. In India always is important money…money..monnneeey.

raja (india) replies to Vijay Veer

tatra trucks may be good, but the problem is they are not supplying the trucks, instead it was sold as CKD(completely knocked down kit) by the vectra group (ravi rishi- broker) to BEML inturn they assemble the trucks and supply it to army… the main problem is even a new truck supplied by BEML has fault spare parts such as old battery, old tyres, the life of the spares is very low, it takes two years to replace a spares and it costs ten times more than that of other trucks…..

aks (USA)
11 hrs ago (11:43 PM)
EXcept one or two divisions in DRDO all others are either doing nothing or are useless for nation, the so called scientists go to office to search internet play computer games and to gossip… I have tonnes of friends in DRDO and what I am saying here is there daily routine Most of the things made by DRDO is either obselete or useless for army and airforce… therefore we have to go for an MMRCA or BARHMOS as DRDO is incapable ….even the engine for LCA has still to come …DRDO is a political agency , where people know how to make comments like our incapable , despicable politicians

dkddn2 (delhi)
11 hrs ago (11:35 PM)
Saraswat should be ashamed of heading of an organisation that cannot create anything but rebrand the foreign products. Is he not ashamed of the fact that DRDO had not been able to identify an Indian manufacturer for these missiles ? DRDO is infact a middleman now.

Arif (India)
11 hrs ago (11:28 PM)
That shows intelligence of DRDO chief. Either he is on drugs or does not understand issue. Issue is about :(1) Bribe (2) Middleman (violation of rule) (3) When Tata and Ashok Leland can produce better trucks then why Tatra?

kumar (delhi)
11 hrs ago (11:06 PM)
This DRDO never completed one project on time , project which needs to complete in 5 years , they are taking 15 years and now this crook is saying about performance and quality. Definitely for DRDO its good truck . In DRDO scientists are preparing for engineering services examination or doing some private work . They are not developing any thing and they are even not scientists , they are clerk managing imported missiles and equipment files. performance

sambhav (gurgoan)
11 hrs ago (11:04 PM)
DRDO waalon ki ek goli bananey ki toh aukat hai nahin….yeh toh choro ki sabsey badi organization hai

Love my Country (Austin,TX)
12 hrs ago (10:56 PM)
Corrupt societies produces such institution [DRDO] , to support its’ onslaught without any responsibility. Just wanted to give my personal experience, for the Cost of Guns .. I had been to my Arms show [ very common in Texas] and there show guns of all kinds and first time in my life I saw guns so accessible and so very in-expensive. Semi-automatic , AKs , krinkov , Rugers and many Guns which were in range of 500$-1200$. I bought one at 780$ [AK56 of Bulgarian made] .So the question is I can procure this gun at the price I told, so how is Govt. [ which buys thing in bulk] cannot get at the price said. Its’ anyone’s guess How much these guns would have been bought by Raksha Mantralaya. So, people Enough is Enough… Throw this system out …

Surinder (Delhi)
12 hrs ago (10:55 PM)
So we are supposed to believe the word of a DRDO babu who has reached the top by just being a sycophant instead of an army general who is fighting a corrupt congie govt.

DRDO Sux (India)
12 hrs ago (10:51 PM)
incompetent agencies like DRDO is responsible for our pathetic situation for trillion dollar Arms imports. They are the one to speak about quality.

Noname (India)
12 hrs ago (10:49 PM)
V.K. Sarswat’s bank account should be checked now to find out how much he has been paid to give such a generous certificate!

TN (india)
12 hrs ago (10:39 PM)
Looks like this DRDO chief has some vested interest in this deal. Why this idiot is trying to divert the attention from the main subject. Its not the question of quality here ( that needs lots of testing and confirmation) its the question of bribe.Some one please tell this idiot not to poke his nose and try to defend a corrupt retired General. Please tell this DRDO chief to look after the inefficient and corrupt white elephant – DRDO

harimohan (India)
12 hrs ago (10:22 PM)
DRDO scientists are jack of all but masters of none. DRDO has done nothing to produce the the defence Equipments indigenously. They are simply functioning as inspectors and certifying agents for the equipments being imported . yes, they have successfully produced the half cooked packed food items for soldiers but to be produced by private industry. All the claims of DRDO are bungus and Untrue. If by any chance some thing is assembled in DRDO LAB , it the just variant of imported item with zero reliability. Basically DRDO creats the the employment opportunity for the under qualified and low IQ children of politicians and the babus of various ministries because there is no accountability and efficiency criteria for service and promotion. The real scientists feel suffocated in DRDO and that is why the brilliant scientists just get away after some years and join foreign or private industry. The claim of DRDO CHIEF for the best vehicle as heavy transporter for tanks etc is false and misleading a DRDO HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUITABILTY of TATRA in the hand of user ie ARMY. DRDO CHIEF – please do no mislead the nation. Had DRDO BEEN EFFICIENT, INDIA SOULD HAVE PRODUCE SERVICE WORTHY ARJUNA TANKS AND DEPENDENCY ON RUSSIAN TANKS SHOULT HAVE BEEN ZERO and TATRA like vehicles should have been produced by now.

peetee (delhi) replies to harimohan
12 hrs ago (10:45 PM)
Basically DRDO Scientist are from mediocre institutions,and not from IIT,S,as such. Which is the biggest drawback in totality. When we count the achievement of an individual as well as the institution of reckon,we definitely go by the standards,which can deliver and prepare its product to prove beyond doubt,thus DRDO HAS EVEN FAILED TO PRODUCE OR DEVELOP TRUCKS LIKE TATRA FOR ARMY FORGET TANKS AND ANY OTHER HARD METALLURGY AND ITS AVIONICS…………..?????????????

BOLD TONGUED (Chennai) replies to peetee 
11 hrs ago (11:40 PM)
perhaps iitians will come to drdo if its core objective of maximum employment (for mantri sabs’ and babus’ beta betis) is given up in terms of time bound programmes with enough money for all resources for trial and error R&D, and provided all those wasters who made entry with dubious merit, due to influence, were kicked out with a two month pay as compensation to open pan bidi shops, and keeping only the unfortunate few with zeal and merit wrongly strayed into DRDO.

A CONCERNED CITIZEN OF INDIA (Mumbai)
12 hrs ago (10:21 PM)
Dear Sir, DRDO’s certificate about Tatra Truck is very surprising. The Army Chief’s remarks are contradictory and confusing.. A thorough enquiry needs to be undertaken to find out the truth. No substandard material must be tolerated at any time.

Rahul (Raipur)
12 hrs ago (10:20 PM)
The credibility of DRDO and their Men can be well known from the fact that inspite of spending billions of dollars to develop a homemade defence system ,We are world’s largest importer of arms and Ammunitions and import nearly 95 % of the weapons … Tanta commission must be shared among DRDO ..& MOD as a bonus for non performance…

Deepak (India)
12 hrs ago (10:12 PM)
It a shame for DRDO that we are buying trucks from a czech republic with population less than Mumbai alone and GDP of $ 218 billion (India is $1.8 trillion economy) Building such trucks is not rocket science. And yes, we already are experts in rocket science and IT. Then WTF is DRDO doing?. As per news Rishi(Tatra’s promoter) misused his position in the board of Tatra Czech [the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of Tatra trucks] to enable Tatra Sipox (UK) Ltd, a company Rishi’s Vectra Group incorporated in 1994 and now owns, to buy knock down trucks from Tatra Czech at below production cost. Tatra Sipox then sold the trucks to India’s BEML at a profit, causing huge losses to Tatra Czech since profits from the sale were being made by Rishi’s company, Does DRDO not understand that Tatra trucks are brought below production cost and sold at inflated cost to BEML. Sab chor mile huwe hai.

gd (india)
12 hrs ago (10:09 PM)
Have these jokers in DRDO and BEML ever heard of a company called Oshkosh?Just imagine the guts of BEML MD when he says Tetra technology is the best in the world! Do these clowns think that others have dropped from the sky yesterday!Disgusting!

Prof. D P Misra (IITK)
12 hrs ago (10:06 PM)
Sarasvat is one of the most incompetant people around to head DRDO. He has done nothing except delivering some failed missiles to India, which can blast in the Barrel and never hit the target, if they fly. DRDO has never been able to deliver any successful product which is useful for Nation and its army therefore a white elephant. His integrity is obviously doubtful because he is giving certificate to Truck, where he doesnt not possess any domain knowledge. May god help India, where people like him call all the shots in various spheres of science and engineering.’

MP (US)
12 hrs ago (10:02 PM)
The whole world knows that the Indian politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt from head to toe. Any substandard hardware not sold anywhere else in the world is easily dumped in India, and at a higher price. Tatra Trucks are good only in name, those supplied to India are handicapped lacking in specifications and quality, with very poor maintenance facilities.Gen. VK Singh is right; he knows better than the sycophant DRDO Chief. They are trying to protect their corrupt deal. It has always happened in the Army since no previous Army Chief had the courage to blow the whistle as Gen. VK Singh had done. Hope the succeeding Army Chiefs will maintain this tradition of honesty.

S Rajendran (Chennai)
13 hrs ago (09:37 PM)
VK Saraswat , the DRDO Chief must be investigated on his connections with Tatra organisation. I have heard employees of BEML opining that the Tatra Trucks is a con job and made over to the Army on an understanding reached between Ravi Rishi, owner of Vectra, the shell company that promotes Tatra to the Indian Army and makes the pay-offs.

venkat (dubai)
13 hrs ago (09:20 PM)
DRDO chief is lying as DRDO is specialised in missile technology and not automobile technology. It is like a sattelite technologist giving certificate to the booster Wrocket manufacturer which have separate technologies.DRDO , DMRL,DRDL which comes under MOD are white elephants.When DRDO chief gets salary from MOD he has to side with MOD and not the Army.

spati (noida)
13 hrs ago (09:18 PM)
Because of DRDO our country is not self sufficient. You 1st explain why DRDO is not able to produced these types of trucks which is a basic transport for defense after thousands of crores spend in the name of research?? Who are you to say about the quality? Only the arm-force who are actually using it can comment. So we can trust the army chief not a DRDO official. Those officials satisfy 10 janpath are appointed there.

KMR (Overseas)
13 hrs ago (09:05 PM)
This DRDO chief V K Saraswat (or BEML chief) making statement to fool the public with a spin as usual without touching the sale price of truck which is more than double, ie. cheating. These guys are un-trustable, probably he in the loop of beneficiaries and it’s evident from timing of his statement that he in support of top crooks ……. Now I really doubt this Prithvi and Agni what he is talking about is fire-crackers or missiles!

spati (noida)
13 hrs ago (09:03 PM)
Can the DRDO answer why truck like TATRA cant not be produced after 30-40 yeras even though a technology transfer agreement is in place? Why the tatra trucks are still left handed drive? Why the company selling it around 1 crore to indian army while anybody can purchase it around 40 lakh on open market? Can he informed us how many trucks are dumped because of shortrage of spare parts? If the trucks are so efficient then why they are offering bribe? We all know the credibility of DRDO. Just shot your mouth. The truth is out dont try to cover it. We all are with general v.k.sing.

Shirish (Mumbai)
13 hrs ago (08:58 PM)
This DRDO officer is doing chaplusi of the corrupt Defence ministry officals…..DRDO is one of the laziest organisation in India……this idiot has been told by Govt. to speak against General V.K Singh!!

RAJA (CHENNAI)
13 hrs ago (08:58 PM)
DRDO dont certificate other countries sub-standard product…, your duty is to improve innovation and improvement in indian defence technology….., let CBI investigate DRDO chief V K Saraswat first………… why every officer in BEML and now DRDO is certifying the czech trucks??????? i think TATA and ashok leyland are paying to low to these officers( increase the bribe amount)………………….

 

Drdo

Defence lab wasted money on bridge Army couldn’t use: CAG

Leave a comment

THE INDIAN EXPRESS

Defence lab wasted money on bridge Army couldn’t use: CAG

Pranav Kulkarni : Pune, Sun Dec 25 2011, 02:47 hrs

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India has now targeted city-based Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) lab Research and Development Engineers (R&DE). A CAG report has revealed that the non-execution of a project to build a modular bridge by the R&DE resulted in wastage of assets created at a cost of Rs 21.46 crore as the users, in this case, the Army, found the bridge unusable. The report, however, mentions that the DRDO and the Army were aware of the project limitations but no attempt was made by either of them to resolve the matter beforehand.

The report says the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had, in October 2002, sanctioned a project to build a 46-metre single-span bridge of Military Load Class 70 (MLC 70). R&DE was supposed to complete the work by October 2006 at a cost of Rs 24.25 crore. In May 2006, it sought an extension of the Probable Date of Completion (PDC) up to October 2008. In October 2007, the R&DE, against specifications, submitted a trial report to the DRDO headquarters for a 20-metre bridge and MLC 40 standard, which was not acceptable to the Army. Also, the PDC of the project was again extended to December 2009.

During this time, the R&DE developed a 40-metre, MLC 70 bridge, which was usable after trials but was not what the users had specified (46 m). The report said in March 2010, the R&DE closed the project after having spending Rs 21.46 crore and proposed to develop a new project worth Rs 13.25 crore with original specifications, which was to be completed by July 2012.

“Thus instead of adhering to specifications, R&DE, Pune, developed a bridge which was not required by the users. The end result was — after an expenditure of Rs 17.89 crore, excluding the cost of five carrier vehicles being used in next project, the requirements of the user could not be served,” the report says.

“The details of the case, MoD’s reply and the clarification given by the users reveal that both the user and DRDO were aware that the bridge being built was 40 metres and MLC 70. Further, the DRDO had its limitations for construction of the bridge with original specifications. Though both the user and the designer were aware of the limitations of the project, neither of them took the initiative to foreclose the project,” it says.

Manish Bharadwaj, scientist and spokesperson, DRDO said, “We will have to speak to DRDO authorities before commenting.”

Drdo

Arjun, Main Battle Tanked

Leave a comment

Express Investigation: Delayed Research; Delayed Organisation – Part – Three

Arjun, Main Battle Tanked

Amitav Ranjan                                                                                                                  Posted: Tue Nov 14 2006, 00:00 hrs                                                                                New Delhi, November 13:

The Arjun tank has no future. It still cannot fire straight. The T-90, a far superior tank, can kill the Arjun. We would not cross any border with these tanks.

Strong words, from Brigadier D K Babbar, the Army’s pointsman for the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun project at the Mechanised Forces directorate until he retired last year from the 94th Armoured Brigade. Babbar, who spoke to The Indian Express, has reason to be disillusioned. So has Army chief General J J Singh who was more diplomatic last month: “We will see where we can use it to get optimum use.”

It’s not going to be easy.

Over 30 years after Project Arjun was sanctioned by Indira Gandhi’s Cabinet to make a home-grown battle tank that would address the armoured deficit identified during the 1971 war, the Army is now faced with a troubling prospect: inducting a lumbering, misfiring, vintage design tank like the Arjun, and that, too, in large numbers.

This, after DRDO over-shot Arjun’s project deadline by 16 years — from 1984 to 1995, finally closing the project only in 2000 — and the cost over-run is almost 20 times the original estimate. This is the highest percentage over-run for any DRDO project.

With five pre-production tanks forced upon the Army’s 43rd Armoured Regiment in 2004 and 23 tanks to be handed over shortly, MBT Arjun is about to be pushed into full-rate production outside Chennai, with the Army bound by its commitment to buy 124 for two regiments, all of which are to be delivered by 2008.

Still having 58 per cent of its content imported – including its engine, the integrated gunner’s main sight and tracks— the Arjun tank was put through confirmatory trials in the Mahajan ranges in July but the Army wasn’t holding its breath.

 

Consider these: At a mammoth 58.5 tons, Arjun is a full weight class over the Russian T-90 and nowhere near as agile.

• In May, the Defence Ministry publicized the Army chief’s inauguration of a product called Bogie Flat Arjun Tank (BFAT) built by Bharat Earth Movers in Bangalore. What it didn’t say: these were specially built rail wagons wide enough and reinforced to carry the massive 3.85-m-wide Arjun. For, the tank will crack the existing freight wagons.

• According to the Army’s latest trials, the decade-old problem of overheating persists. Two of the tank’s main subsystems, the fire control system (FCS) and integrated gunner’s main sight, which includes a thermal imager and laser range-finder, are rendered erratic and useless by the Arjun’s abnormally high peak internal temperature, which moves well beyond 55 degrees Celsius. This is in testimony to the Parliamentary committee.

• Following failed trials in summer 1997, which were criticized in a 1998 CAG report for a series of malfunctions, transmission failures and overheating, and an exodus of scientists from DRDO the same year, the tank’s production cost shot up steeply. Its unit price in 1997 was Rs 10.8 crore. It’s official unit price now: Rs 16.8 crore.

Former chief Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary had promised his service quick inductions, only to be faced with yet another extension by DRDO. In the same period, the Sino-Pak Al-Khalid tank was productionised and had begun inductions. When contacted, Roy Choudhary said: “I was a strong proponent of the Arjun tank but its performance was disappointing.”

• On October 12, Minister of State for Defence Production Rao Inderjit Singh told The Indian Express that it was decided — after the recent trials — that the production-series tanks will be stripped of their indigenous tracks and will have imported ones. So will the first few tanks that roll out of the Heavy Vehicles Factory outside Chennai. In other words, after three decades of research, Main Battle Tank Arjun cannot stand on its own “indigenous” feet.

• The project, according to testimony provided in January by the Defence Ministry to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, has produced virtually nothing. DRDO admitted to the same committee in June that it would be able to develop an indigenous engine, gunner’s main sight and tracks only if the Army places an order beyond 124 tanks. However, the Army has no such plans, making it uneconomical and non-feasible to reduce import content.

“License production of the above items may be feasible with enhanced order quantity for Arjun tanks and may result in reduction in import contents,” admits DRDO. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Army will progressively begin inducting between 800-1000 T-90 Bhishma tanks, which will be built under license from Russia, from 2008, making the letter ‘M’ in Arjun’s prefix not just superfluous but bogus. Why?

“It is important for the Army to maintain combat superiority over its adversaries. There have been delays and slippages in the MBT Arjun project,” Army Headquarters said in written replies to The Indian Express. Five months ago, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence said, “The Committee also desires that accountability for delay in production of the Arjun Tank may be fixed.” But the Arjun, which has cost the exchequer Rs 305.6 crore so far (representing one of the largest ever cost-overruns in percentage terms), has the influential DRDO high command unfalteringly behind it. DRDO chief Manthiram Natarajan, chief architect of the Arjun programme and a 2002 Padma Shri, has been associated with the programme since its birth in 1974 and became Programme Director in 1987. When contacted, he said, “Defence scientists are conscious that there have been time over-runs on some of the projects. But even today, it is much more cost efficient than tanks of same calibre being produced elsewhere.”

But DRDO is undeterred. With the Army’s armour perspective plan drawing out 60 regiments by 2020, DRDO told the Parliamentary panel that it’s now developing what it calls Tank-X, a hybrid consisting of an Arjun gun turret mounted on a T-72 chassis. Two tanks have been prepared, and DRDO has said it will shortly offer them to the Army for an evaluation. No guesses for why the Army isn’t terribly excited.

Drdo

Armed Forces wait as showpiece missiles are unguided, way off mark

Leave a comment

Express Investigation: Delayed Research; Delayed Organisation – Part – Two

Armed Forces wait as showpiece missiles are unguided, way off mark

Amitav Ranjan                                                                                                                            Posted: Mon Nov 13 2006, 00:00 hrs                                                                            NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 12:

 

It is the Defence Research and Development Organisation’s most prestigious undertaking. Yet the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP) remains a venture matchless for its repeated and expensive failures.

Of the five missile families that the DRDO announced at the IGMDP launch in July 1983, two ballistic missiles, the tactical Prithvi and long-range Agni, have been inducted into the Services. But investigation by The Indian Express reveals that even these are far from operational readiness. Among the other three missiles, the situation is worse.

DRDO claims its first success, Prithvi-I, is fully operational. However, the missiles were forced upon the Army even before crucial terminal accuracy trials were complete, according to a 2003 report by one of DRDO’s own top scientists. Even now, despite DRDO’s claims, the Army does not rely on the Prithvi as an effective deterrent and cannot do so unless serious technological issues affecting launch preparedness are resolved.

Former deputy director of the Prithvi project and now DRDO’s chief controller of missiles and strategic systems Dr V K Saraswat’s report RCI/PGT/PGM/1 admits: “Accuracy of missiles like Prithvi is acceptable in surface-to-surface theatre role, but precision strike without collateral damage is not possible with this system.”

Agni-I and Agni-II, the only strategic delivery systems in the Army’s arsenal, are considered risky. DRDO has told the Parliamentary panel, in testimonies available to The Indian Express, that the missiles have been successfully tested five times. What it conveniently leaves unsaid is the fact that this is out of at least 10 tests. Either way, the Army feels a handful of tests is not enough to prove a missile’s worth.

The Agni-III, which plunged into the sea after just five minutes of flight in July, will be tested again only towards mid-2007 as the teams at DRDL and the Integrated Test Range in Chandipur try to unravel the disaster.

As for the remaining three, anti-missile system Trishul is a closed chapter proving to be only a technology demonstrator, by former Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s own recent admission, after it was decided that persistent beam guidance glitches could not be put behind the project.

Even though the system’s radar is ready and functional, the Trishul team has never been able to correct the missile’s flawed trajectory — in all tests it has escaped out of its envelope. The project’s manpower has already been distributed among PSU Bharat Dynamics Ltd in Hyderabad, the Indo-Israeli Barak-II next generation missile project, the Project Nag and the submarine-launched missile, designated K-15.

A notional one-year extension granted to the project till December 2007, after hectic lobbying, is being seen as an outrage by the Army and Navy.

The Akash medium range surface-to-air missile, which DRDO publicly claims “is in the process of induction” will, according to the Ministry in testimony to a Parliamentary Standing Committee, only begin Phase-II user trials in December on a T-72 platform, a change that could pile up the massive time overrun further.

An exasperated IAF, which calls Phase-I user trials unsatisfactory, has decided to buy Israeli Spyder missile systems instead.

Realisation of the ramjet propulsion system has crippled the Akash programme, which continues to flounder when the missile is fired at its ceiling range of 25 to 27 km. The IAF, in fact, has certified the missile to a range of just 16-18-km, virtually declaring it a dud at maximum capacity. Officers in the IAF fear the Akash may go the Trishul way, but Natarajan claims: “The Akash missile defence system has been successful.”

The third missile, the anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) Nag, which DRDO brags as an “imminent success,” has not been accepted by the Army. After 57 flight trials, it has encountered unforeseen problems with its Imaging Infrared (IIR) seeker, rendering it inaccurate until the seeker is properly miniaturized for use. User trials are slated for June-December 2007. Saraswat’s report calls for integrating Nag’s seeker with Prithvi to make the latter a precision-guided munition (PGM) but that hasn’t worked either, since the Nag’s seeker is far from ready.

The result: After over two decades of research in seeker technology and expenditure of upto an estimated Rs 800 crore, all Indian missiles, even the Indo-Russian BrahMos,fly with foreign seekers. This is especially troubling since the North Korean and Chinese missiles are known to fly with far superior terminal guidance technologies.

The IGMDP should have wrapped up each of the projects by December 1995 using Rs 388.83 crore, but it got a 10-year extension from the then Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao after the then DRDO chief APJ Abdul Kalam managed to convince him that only a two-three year extension was not acceptable. Its revised funding: Rs 1771.43 crore, a budgetary overrun of Rs 1,382.6 crore. The time line has been further extended to December 2007 under the current chief M Natarajan.

“The Akash was to come at a certain time, and it didn’t. I had to change everything to make up for the delay.”

Air Chief Marshal SP Tyagi

“It was a troubling scenario. On the one hand, DRDO assured us of Trishul’s success, and on the other our Western fleet was sitting completely vulnerable to a Pak missile attack.”

Admiral Sushil Kumar (retd)