Tag Archives: Defence Ministry

Drdo

CVC probe sought in Navy’s procurement of torpedoes

Leave a comment

Apr 08, 2012 | PTI | New Delhi – The Asian Age

The Navy’s deal for procurement of torpedoes for Scorpene submarines from an Italian company has come in for questioning with a Member of Parliament writing to the Central Vigilance Commission seeking a probe into alleged corruption in the selection.
Jainarayan Prasad Nishad, who had earlier written to Defence Minister A K Antony, has alleged that WASS heavy water torpedo was selected for procurement “without validation of critical parameters at sea for speed and range” as specified in the Request for Proposal (RFP).
The RFP clearly stated that only those vendors who could successfully perform dynamic trials of the offered torpedo would be considered but “this was totally ignored in the case of WASS, Italy and the deal was pushed in favour of WASS, thereby ignoring the technical conditions laid in the RFP, Nishad has said.

Citing “(defence) ministry sources” and articles published in some defence magazines, the JDU MP from Bihar has claimed that in the case of the deal, the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) was “manipulated and violated for pecuniary financial gains”.
In his letter to Antony, Nishad has contended that the then DG Acquisition had recommended re-issuance of the RFP as the Defence Procurement Procedure was “not being followed and the RFP was ab-initio defective” but later, the Navy used the “excuse” of urgency to reverse the decision and sent it to the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) for approval to consider WASS “as a resultant single vendor”.
Alleging wrongdoings in the process that dates back to 2007 and 2008, the MP claimed that to ensure the RFP was not cancelled, the Navy had “deliberately cleared” another bidder ATLAS Elektronik of Germany at the TEC (Technical Evaluation Committee) stage and rejected it after trials.
“Creating a single vendor scenario through manipulation to overcome the DPP, which has happened in this case, and selecting an inferior product, could lead to the security of the nation being compromised for pecuniary financial gains,” he warned in the letter to Antony.
On getting no response from Antony, the MP shot off a letter to CVC Pradeep Kumar along with the one written to the Defence Minister in January this year. “This has vigilance angle,” he wrote, requesting probe into the matter “seriously” and take necessary steps to stop any possibility of corruption in the deal.
Earlier, ATLAS Elektronik had also cried foul play and sent letters of complaint to the Defence Ministry.
Meanwhile, reacting to the allegations levelled by Nishad, Navy spokesperson Commander P V S Satish said, “For the moment all I can say is that all acquisitions undertaken by the Indian Navy are done with due care and adherence to laid down procedures”.
“Trials were conducted as per the procedures approved by the DAC and were acceptable to both the vendors (in the contract),” he added. The Navy has plans of procuring around 100 torpedoes for the fleet of its six Scorpene submarines, which are being constructed by the Mazagon Dockyarads Limited (MDL) in partnership with French DCNS.

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

New details emerge on Tatra truck deal

Leave a comment

THE HINDU

NEW DELHI, April 2, 2012

PRAVEEN SWAMI,VINAY KUMAR

CBI questions London millionaire again

Even as Central Bureau of Investigation detectives have begun questioning Ravi Rishi, the London-based millionaire businessman at the heart of the showdown between the Defence Ministry and Chief of the Army Staff V.K. Singh, fresh details have begun to emerge of the truck deal that precipitated the crisis.

Rajan Mukherjee, the general manager of West Bengal-based Ural India, has told The Hindu that General Singh — then General Officer-Commanding of the Eastern Command — had requested the firm to provide trucks for testing in 2008, after Tatra trucks sold by Mr. Rishi’s firm “miserably failed 17 Mountain for performing Quick Reaction Team and reconnaissance duties in [the] super-high altitude areas of northern Sikkim.”

“Defects”

“During the trials,” Mr. Mukherjee said in an e-mail to The Hindu, “the Tatra vehicle developed defects in engine assembly, whereas Ural’s engine performance was satisfactory even after running about 600 km at high altitude.”

Mr. Rishi owns Vectra, a conglomerate which has a controlling stake in Czech and Slovak-based specialist truck firm Tatra, which has supplied the Indian Army since 1986.

Rashi Verma, a Joint Secretary at the Defence Ministry, had said last week that the government had “never received any complaint from the armed forces” — a statement which suggests the Eastern Command either chose not to pass on its problems with the Tatra to the army headquarters in New Delhi, or that its reports were suppressed by higher authorities.

In an exclusive interview to The Hindu published on March 26, General Singh had said he was offered a Rs. 14-crore bribe, which, it emerged, was linked to an officer allegedly representing Tatra to clear a consignment of 600 trucks.

There is no information available so far if Ural India’s trucks were the sole platform tested by the Eastern Command in Northern Sikkim and if so, why. Ural is co-owned by Kolkata-based magnate J.K. Saraf, who knew Gen. Singh during his tenure as Eastern Army Commander. There is no allegation, however, of the relationship having caused improper influence to be exercised.

Mr. Mukherjee’s claims, however, stand in stark contrast to earlier statements by VRS Natarajan, the head of public-sector giant BEML, which co-manufactures Tatra trucks in India. Mr. Natarajan claimed that Ural India’s trucks had been knocked out of competition in the ongoing trials, a claim Mr. Mukherjee has denied in his e-mail to The Hindu, adding that his firm is considering “appropriate action.”

The BEML chief, however, has since been backed by Defence Research and Development Organisation chief V.K. Saraswat, who said Tatra trucks were “outstanding.” Both BEML and Tatra have said they are considering legal action against General Singh, but provided no details of their course of action.

Army sources said the problem encountered in Sikkim could have been related to the Tatra truck’s engine, which is designed for rugged battlefield use, compromising high-altitude performance in return for lower risks of breakdown.

CBI officials refused comment on the issues they had discussed with Mr. Rishi, but the businessman has been barred from leaving India until further notice.

He was earlier questioned by the agency officials last week, soon after the CBI registered an FIR in the case. CBI officials were also poring over and analysing a number of documents seized during raids in Delhi, Noida and Bangalore.

Apart from Mr. Rishi, the FIR refers to unknown officials of BEML, Vectra and the Army. The case was registered under provisions of the Indian Penal Code relating to criminal conspiracy to cheat and under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The investigators are tasked with looking into all purchases of Tatra trucks made from 1997, when Vectra took control of Tatra. Since 1986, the Army has purchased some 7,000 Tatra trucks to transport troops and artillery.

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

Govt orders review, revamp of DRDO, forms expert panel

Leave a comment

Govt orders review, revamp of DRDO, forms expert panel

Shiv Aroor

Posted: Fri Jan 19 2007, 00:00 hrs

NEW DELHI, JANUARY 18:

Rejecting the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO)’s assertion that its internal workings are adequately monitored, the Government has set up an independent and external committee of experts to conduct a comprehensive review of the DRDO and produce a report by the end of this year to suggest how the organisation be made more efficient and professional.

The dismal track record of the DRDO, highlighted by The Indian Express through a series of investigative reports in November last year, had found an echo in Parliament with Defence Minister A K Antony promising a new system of accountability to keep delays and cost over-runs in check.

The eight-member committee has been asked to conduct a thorough review of DRDO’s administrative, financial and personnel procedures and audits of scientific research work undertaken by the organisation’s laboratories. It will keep tabs on whether the interests of armed forces are being served, monitor time and cost overruns of weapons programmes, draw a roadmap for synergy with private industry and foreign consultants, and recommend strategies on utilising offsets that will now be part of all foreign weapons contracts.

Committee chairperson, Professor P Rama Rao, a former Secretary at the Department of Science & Technology and currently Dr Brahm Prakash distinguished professor at the ISRO, told The Indian Express from Hyderabad: “I will begin applying my mind on the task as soon as the government letter reaches me.”

 

The other committee members are former financial advisor at the Defence Ministry A K Ghosh, former HAL chairman Dr Krishnadas Nair, Samtel Group chairman Satish Kaura and Professor T P Ghoshal from Jadavpur University. The three representatives from the armed forces, all retired, are former DG Artillery Lt Gen C S Cheema, former IAF vice-chief Air Marshal Ajit Bhavnani and Vice-Admiral Pravesh Jaitly, formerly the Navy’s chief of materials.

With the creation of this committee, the Defence Ministry has finally acted upon a crucial recommendation made by the Vijay Kelkar committee almost two years ago, that DRDO’s functioning as a research body needed to be under the purview of a panel of independent experts.

The committee’s mandate is significant considering that the DRDO, last year told the Parliamentary Standing Committee on

Drdo

Need to revamp, give us roadmap in a fortnight: Govt tells DRDO —-Manu Pubby Posted: Sun Apr 27 2008, 00:36 hrs New Delhi, April 26:

Leave a comment

Need to revamp, give us roadmap in a fortnight: Govt tells DRDO

Manu Pubby  Posted: Sun Apr 27 2008, 00:36 hrs New Delhi, April 26:

Barely a month after receiving the first ever external review report on the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO), the government has decided to revamp the research body to fix accountability and clear the way for more private sector participation and foreign collaborations.

In fact, the Defence Ministry has decided to move a Cabinet note for the overall restructuring of DRDO as early as next month to ensure that the reorganization starts off by the end of this year. To facilitate this, DRDO has been asked to submit a detailed revamp roadmap to South Block within a fortnight.

The roadmap, which will be examined by the Defence Ministry to make sure that it “reflects the spirit” of the P Rama Rao Committee report, would lay emphasis on the need for using all means possible to incorporate globally available technologies for indigenous development projects.

As first reported in a series in The Indian Express, the 50-year-old organization came under flak for repeated delays and failures by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence in 2006. The government decided to set up a high-powered committee led by P Rama Rao, former secretary, Department of Science & Technology to “examine the effectiveness of R&D support provided vis-à-vis in-house research facilities with DRDO and to ensure effective participation of the private sector in Defence Research”. The committee submitted its report on March 5, exactly one year after it had been commissioned.

The major points recommended by the Rama Rao Committee that are to be incorporated into the road map:

• The 52 DRDO laboratories are to be realigned into five “lab clusters,” each will be headed by a Director General and have its own specialization. The broad clusters: Electronics, Armaments, Avionics, Missile Systems and a dedicated research cluster. Each cluster will have a certain degree of autonomy and will be accountable for failures and delays. The Chief Controllers, who will be re-designated as Director Generals, will move out of New Delhi to take charge of these clusters

• Setting up a tri-services cell within the framework of the organization to overlook all development projects from the conception stage itself. The cell will be headed by a three-star officer — this position will be held by all three forces on a rotational basis. The cell will have three Major General-rank officers who will oversee development projects of their respective services.

To speed up development and meet deadlines, promote joint ventures with global players, involve private sector and foreign collaborations to inculcate globally available technologies into the organization.

• Entire restructuring to be monitored by a special implementation cell that will be headed by a DRDO Chief Controller. The cell will also have a representative from the Rama Rao Committee and will report directly to the Defence Ministry.

DRDO, which has come under increasing flak for repeated delays and failures, will be made more accountable and has been told to put emphasis on private sector partnerships and foreign joint collaborations to ensure time-bound projects. The revamp will also address the long-standing demand of the armed forces for deeper involvement in defence-development projects and will push for a younger age profile of scientists.