Tag Archives: CAG report

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

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.

CAG blows holes in DRDO’s early warning planes

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

Why Indian Railways Need To Buy 3,350 Truckloads Of Cow Dung For Rs 42 Cr

Srinand Jha, January 6, 2018- IndiaSpend

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Indian Railways need to buy 3,350 truckloads of cow dung at Rs 42 crore in 2018 to “recharge”–add bacteria to activate degradation–leaky, malfunctioning ‘bio-toilets’ that it has fitted on 44.8% of trains and hopes to expand to all trains by 2018, according to IndiaSpend projections of data released by the national auditor to Parliament.

Bio-toilets are small-scale sewage-treatment systems beneath the toilet seat: Bacteria in a compost chamber digest human excreta, leaving behind water and methane. That’s how they were supposed to work.

The Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) report on these bio-toilets echoes the findings of our November 2017 investigation into their widespread malfunctioning: The CAG found 199,689 defects in 25,000 toilets.

Responding to the CAG findings, the railway ministry said its criticism was “not correct” and that “some problems of choking were occurring on account of misuse of toilets by passengers”. An official note from December 20, 2017, said: “These issues are being dealt with promptly.”

“By November 2011, the performance issues of each design of bio-toilets were clearly showing up,” the note said. “Therefore, the ministry did not wait until the end of the trial period to make the decision (to order the procurement of bio-toilets from private manufacturers).”

Our November 2017 story quoted studies from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras and IIT Kanpur that said the bio-toilets were no better than “septic tanks” and the water they let out no better than “raw sewage”.

Each bio-toilet requires 60 litres–or three large bucketfuls–of inoculum, a mix of cow dung and water, according to the December 19, 2017, CAG report. This inoculum begins the process of breaking down 3,980 tons of human excreta that is released untreated by trains on rail tracks nationwide every day.

The bio-toilets originally used a bacterium found in Antarctica by a defence scientist, who cultured it in 2005 and 10 years later, got a patent on its use. Over seven years to 2017, 97,761 such toilets were fitted in new coaches or retrofitted in existing Indian trains.

The railways went ahead with the toilet installation even though the flaw in the basic model designed by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) had been pointed out by an expert panel in 2007. In an interview (to be published tomorrow), Vinod Tare, an IIT professor of environmental engineering, who headed this panel, told us that these bio-toilets had been found ineffective at two venues: Kumbh Mela, the massive gathering of Hindu pilgrims held every 12 years at a river bank, and the army base-camp at Siachen glacier.

The panel’s two-year study was completed in November 2017 by IIT Madras, as IndiaSpend reported on November 23, 2017.

The railways sent a rejoinder to our story–you can read it here–and soon after announced they were exploring airplane-style vacuum toilets.

The railways bought 3,600 litres of inoculum for Rs 68,400 in May 2016, said the CAG report. Based on this cost, we estimate that to recharge the 97,761 bio-toilets currently in use, the railways will need 23.46 million litres–or 3,350 truckloads–of cow dung.

With the railways failing to produce enough bacteria, the cow dung will be sourced from private sector at Rs 19 per litre. The railways have a workshop–with an installed capacity to generate 30,000 litres of bacteria each month–in Nagpur, but no action has been taken on a 2011 proposal to set up two more facilities, at Kapurthala and Perambur.

No clarity on funds or manpower for bio-toilet project

There is no clarity on two other critical issues relating to bio-toilets on trains: The infrastructure costs involved in installation, including procurement and installation of evacuation machines and hydraulic lifts, and anticipated expenses on training and deployment of manpower.

Further, if all 54,506 rail coaches are to be fitted with vacuum toilets atop the bio-toilets being installed–as is being planned–there will be an additional cost of Rs 10,900 crore. The current market price of a vacuum toilet unit is approximately Rs 200,000.

The additional expense might have been worth it if the bio-toilet scheme, 24 years in the making, had been efficient. But the CAG has amplified concerns about its performance and has endorsed the findings of the IndiaSpend investigation.

The flaws in bio-toilets, according to the CAG

In an evaluation of 25,000 toilets for the period under review (2016-17), the CAG detected 199,689 defects and deficiencies. Here are some major issues, according to the report:

Highest number of problems/ defects (41,111) found at the Bengaluru coaching depot, followed by Gorakhpur (24,495) and Wadi Bunder (22,521);
Complaints per bio-toilet were highest at the Bengaluru coaching deport (98), followed by Wadi Bunder (32), Rameshwaram (28) and Gwalior (17);
Of the 102,792 instances of choking, 10,098 (10%) cases reported in March 2017;
Of the 102,792 cases of choking in 25,080 bio-toilets, the highest (34%) were reported from Bengaluru. This implied that one bio-toilet got choked 83 times a year;
Choking incidents have risen from 2015-16: One bio-toilet got choked four times a year during 2016-17.
Quantity and quality of material used criticised by CAG

In an email dated May 21, 2016, to then defence minister Manohar Parrikar, Y Ashok Babu, a scientist at the DRDO, had alleged that a “nexus of bureaucrats and industrialists” was pushing for what was “nothing but gobar gas plants involving no technology”.

The CAG report too slammed the railways for the “quality and quantity” of material being procured.

As the report observed, there were complaints pending against seven of the nine firms against with which the Railway Board placed orders. These are: Ms JSL Life Style Limited, Ms Omax Auto Limited, Ms Mohan Rail Components Limited, Ms Rail Fab, Ms Amit Engineers, Ms Hindustan Fiber Glass Works and Ms Rail Tech.

In July 2017, the railways ministry barred three companies (Ms Rail Tech, Ms Rail Fab and Ms Hindustan Fiber) from being considered for railway contracts for an unspecified period. The ministry also proposed that the contract of another company, Ms Mohan Rail, be cancelled.

Negligence in testing of effluents and bacteria culture

The CAG report found that 12 coaching depots of nine railway zones had not finalised the annual maintenance and operating contracts (AMOCs) for bio-toilets.

“Evaluation of performance is a continuous process resulting in addition or deletion from the approved list,” the railways ministry said in a press note in response to the CAG report. It added that “all major coaching depots now had the AMOC contract, while this was progressively being extended to other depots”.

As the CAG found, Indian Railways have not adhered to the guidelines on testing the effluents released by bio-toilets. The tests had not been conducted at all at the Dhanbad coaching depot and records of the samples sent for testing and the results of these tests were not maintained at five coaching depots.

At the Lower Parel workshop in Mumbai, 18 drums of bacteria procured at a cost of Rs 68,400 in May 2016 had been lying unused even after their shelf life had expired.

After 2011, the railways placed bulk orders for the supply, installation and commissioning of approximately 80,000 bio-toilets. The CAG criticised the railways for failing to come up with a “standardized design” for these units. It also pointed to the “large scale proliferation” of 10,000 tanks in November 2011 “before test results of trials on seven different variants had been analyzed”.

Earlier news reports had suggested that the land-based variants of these toilets were unsuccessful.

This is the first of a two-part series. You can read our November 2017 report on railway bio-toilets here.

Next: ‘Railways Went Ahead With A Failed Bio-Toilet Model’

(Jha is a New Delhi-based freelance journalist.)

Tweets

‘Railways Went Ahead With A Failed Bio-Toilet Model’ IndiaSpend

Tech solutions to train-toilet problem exist, but ‘the intention to find a lasting solution is not there’. Bureaucrats only interested in fulfilling targets, ensuring tenures are trouble-free: IIT engineer & professor Vinod Tare tells us. http://bit.ly/2CIZKAY

Some yrs back Jairam Ramesh took initiative & DRDO installed some bio toilets in the villages near Wheeler Island. No one used them.
Biotoilets don’t work in Indian context

द.ध्रुव से आयातित खास बैक्टीरिया से लैस करवाए गये हमारी रेलों के बायो- टायलेट करोड़ों खर्च करके भी नारकीय क्यों बने हुए हैं? जानकारी ।

So much for biotoilets http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/why-indian-railways-need-to-buy-3350-truckloads-of-cow-dung-for-rs-42-cr-78722 

Wow, that’s some sh*t!

On-board treatment of human excreta in trains is difficult; evacuation facilities & treatment plants–for compost or biogas–can be set up in the rail yards: IIT’s Vinod Tare, head of 2007 team that studied bio-toilet project in Indian trains.

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J’Railways  Went Ahead With A Failed Bio-Toilet Model’ – IndiaSpend http://ift.tt/2CN31jx

Who took decision to install bio-toilets in Railway, it appears that decision was taken decades back but installed during UPA regime but NDA is blamed

Failed bio-toilet model?

Bio-toilet model used in Indian trains failed to work at 2013 Kumbh Mela and Siachen but railways still pushing for use in all trains. Our interview with engineer & prof Vinod Tare, head of 2007 IIT study on train bio-toilets. http://bit.ly/2CIZKAY

Huge waste of your and mine..The Indian taxpayers money

Cc @PiyushGoyal @PiyushGoyalOffc

A 2007 study, jointly conducted by the Lucknow-based Research Designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO) and IIT Kanpur, also concluded that excreta wasn’t being treated in the bio-digesters. The railways has not made this report public. http://www.indiaspend.com/cover-story/railways-went-ahead-with-a-failed-bio-toilet-model-17151 

they planted the septic tank in the coaches.

Dr @PiyushGoyal ji ये हो क्या रहा है

Railways target 80,000 bio-toilets in 2018, vacuum bio-toilets next in line A day after a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report revealed that there were over two lakh complaints about choking, foul-smelling and non-functional bio-toilets in trains from the passengers in 2016-2017 alone, the national transporter said its target was to achieve a complete shift to bio-toilets in all the train coaches by December, 2018.

Dec 20, 2017 09:55 PM IST | Source: PTI Money Control

A day after a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report revealed that there were over two lakh complaints about choking, foul-smelling and non-functional bio-toilets in trains from the passengers in 2016-2017 alone, the national transporter said its target was to achieve a complete shift to bio-toilets in all the train coaches by December, 2018.
PTI
@moneycontrolcom
The railways would not only install 80,000 bio-toilets in trains in 2018, but would go one step further and install vacuum bio-toilets, like those in aeroplanes — odour-free and choke-free, it said today.

A day after a Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report revealed that there were over two lakh complaints about choking, foul-smelling and non-functional bio-toilets in trains from the passengers in 2016-2017 alone, the national transporter said its target was to achieve a complete shift to bio-toilets in all the train coaches by December, 2018.

Ravindra Gupta, a member of the Railway Board, refused to comment on the CAG report, but said the ministry was planning to roll out the first 100 coaches with bio-vacuum toilets.

Ravindra Gupta, a member of the Railway Board, refused to comment on the CAG report, but said the ministry was planning to roll out the first 100 coaches with bio-vacuum toilets.

“These bio-toilets will be odour-free, will cut down the water usage by 1/20th and have much lesser chances of getting blocked. We will first install these toilets in 100 trains, then gradually scale it up,” he said.

The vacuum bio-toilets will cost the railways Rs 2.5 lakh per unit, while the present bio-toilets cost Rs 1 lakh each.

The Chennai-based Integral Coach Factory (ICF) will roll out 100 coaches fitted with bio-vacuum toilets, starting January 2018.

Initially, these toilets will be in the AC-I and AC-II coaches of select trains.

Gupta also said 22 green corridors were planned for 2017 -2018, while six such corridors were commissioned in 2016- 2017.

Chinks in the Armour – What ail DRDO, India’s Premier Defence Organigation?

Rediff.com – News-Special Part- II

‘The LCA won’t take off in the near future’

George Iype

The Light Combat Aircraft is perhaps the most ambitious of all DRDO projects. But 17 years and four postponements of its test flight later, the multi-role fighter meant to replace the MiG-21 is still a dream.

What has happened to the LCA, the most technologically complex challenge that DRDO had taken up? Air force officers, DRDO scientists and defence experts say it remains grounded because of “scores of technical problems.”

The delay has hurt the air force badly and dented the DRDO’s image. A country that has not designed a jet fighter in decades had been waiting long for one. India had designed and produced the HF-24 aircraft in the early 1960s, but its engine was British.

Such was the enthusiasm behind the LCA that in 1985 the then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi showcased it as a symbol of the new era of co-operation and friendship between India and the United States. Gandhi even overrode the claims of the French and Germans who had been collaborating with DRDO and the Bangalore-based Hindustan Aeronautical Limited for the LCA production.

The original deadline to fly the aircraft was 1993. The cost, Rs 5.6 billion. The DRDO and HAL did roll out an LCA in the presence of then prime minister P V Narasimha Rao on November 17, 1995. DRDO top brass then announced that the maiden flight would take place in early 1997. The dates were revised to June 1998 and then to February 1999.

Years passed by, but no test flight took place. Today the deadline for the LCA has become a joke in defence circles.

The most scathing criticism of the project came from the Comptroller and Auditor General of India who, in his 1999 report, said: ‘Even at the end of 1998, the LCA had not crossed the development stage. Its production and induction into the air force remains only a distant possibility.’

The CAG report went on to add that the airframe for LCA developed by the DRDO’s Bangalore laboratory, the Aeronautical Development Agency ‘is deficient in vital parameters of aerodynamic configuration, volume and most importantly, the weight.’

The first phase of the project consumed Rs 25 billion, overshooting the estimated Rs 5.6 billion. Worse, due to the delay, the air force was compelled to upgrade its MiG Bis aircraft at a cost of Rs 21.35 billion.

Scientists at DRDO, ADA and HAL concede one thing: the LCA has run into some serious technical problems. LCA is a meticulous fly-by-wire aircraft, which is critically dependent on software to fly.

“But over the years, we have not been successful in fully testing the software. Therefore, we face difficulties in integrating the system,” admits an engineer at HAL.

Since the aircraft depends on computers, no pilot wants to risk a flight test without thoroughly validating the system. Scientists say the trials intended to test the dynamic stability of the airframe and the LCA’s engine-flight control system has been successful. Though the engine and the electronics are in the advanced test mode, the aircraft’s ability to withstand low pressure and temperature at high altitudes is suspect.

“There is reason enough to worry that the LCA will not take off in the near future,” says Bangalore-based aviation expert P N Srivastava.

I feel the delay is primarily due to the fact that it took years for a country like India to get the advanced technology for the project,” he says. “The idea for LCA was born without having any requisite technology on our side,” Srivastava points out.

DRDO officials put forward one reason for the project delay — sanctions from the United States after the Pokhran nuclear blasts. In a bid to force India to put the nuclear genie back into the bottle, the US has pulled out of the project soon after the tests.

Thus, just one week after the explosions in May 1998, many scientists working on different fields linked to the LCA at aerospace giant Lockheed Martin in Binghamton, New York, were asked to pack their bags for India by the United States. The Indian engineers were working to validate a computerised control law software for onboard computers which will ultimately fly the aircraft.

As it imposed sanctions, the US also denied key components like hydraulic actuators — that help manoeuvre the aircraft, gain altitude and determine the trajectory — and the ring-laser gyros to make inertial navigation systems.

“One of the main reasons for the delay is that technological sanctions from the US hit us badly. Had it not been for the nuclear blasts, our deadline to test fly the aircraft would have been successful in December 1998,” says a senior DRDO official.

Lockheed Martin refused to give the DRDO the flight control computer, which was in the US for testing, when sanctions were announced, he added.

Another major hurdle for DRDO is the LCA’s engine. As per its agreement with the US, India was allowed to purchase frontline 404 engines from General Electric. In fact, DRDO imported 11 such engines and fitted them on to the early versions of the aircraft, pending the development of the indigenous Kaveri engine being developed by Bangalore’s Gas Turbine Research Establishment.

But after the nuclear tests, GE withdrew its technical support personnel from India and DRDO was forced to depend only on Kaveri. Sources now say it will take at least two years to determine whether Kaveri engines can withstand the low pressure and temperature at high altitudes.

No one at DRDO, ADA and HAL believes that the LCA will fly before 2005.

Experts say the delay should be examined in the context of a country that has not designed and produced a jet fighter since the 1960s. Development of every vital component of the LCA — airframe, multimode radar, flight control system, Kaveri engine, digital electronic engine control – are said to be beset with problems.

Scientists at DRDO, for their part, hold the defence ministry partially responsible for the delay. Between 1990 and 1994, all work came to a virtual standstill as the defence ministry refused to release the much-needed foreign exchange because of economic stringency.

But the biggest worry for DRDO is not the bureaucratic delays and sanctions, but the Indian air force. Faced with diminishing number of its ageing fleet, the IAF holds DRDO responsible for promising to deliver the LCA before year 2,000, thereby considerably upsetting many of its aircraft acquisition plans.

Suspecting that DRDO will never deliver the LCA, the IAF has now embarked on an ambitious project to upgrade 100 MiG-21 aircraft.

Despite the heavy odds, DRDO still remains confident that it will roll out the country’s first indigenous aircraft before 2002.

We will induct 200 LCAs into the Indian Air Force between 2003 and 2010,” Dr Abdul Kalam told a group of aeronautical scientists before he handed over DRDO’s charges to Dr Vasudev K Aatre.

But there aren’t many who believe that promise will be fulfilled.