Tag Archives: Defence Standing Committee

Reflections of our time

After 1942 it become clear that India will become independent and the national leaders started carving various developmental plans and knowing fully well that the day British goes the kitty will be empty.

However, Tata, Birla and many financially sound business tycoons came forward to rebuild India. Tata institute of Sciences, BITS Pilani, Visvesvaraya Technological University, etc. were to execute the task in land.

In 1948, though it was minor war we used equipment/arm ammunitions left out by British and fortunately both the parties across the border used the same equipment and arms ammunitions.

In 1962 we were an infant but had to fight the Chinese war in which we imported some equipment and arms ammunitions.

Successively in 1965 & 1971 once again we depended upon imported Russian equipment and some equipment given to India on goodwill.

In 1999, Kargil we were 52 years old with scientific and technological achievements on papers with lot of rewards awards like Scientist of the year, young scientist, PATH BREAKING RESEARCH AND OUTSTANDING TECHNOLOGY, AGNI AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN SELF-RELIANCE, DEFENCE TECHNOLOGY SPIN-OFF AWARD, BEST INNOVATION/FUTURISTIC DEVELOPMENT AWARD, Silicon Trophy, TITANIUM TROPHY and the list is very long.

We fought the war with imported arms & equipment. The statement of former Army chief V P Malik, who led the army during the 1999 Kargil war, has said “casualties in the conflict could have been reduced had DRDO not come in the way” in the acquisition of weapon-locating radar. “Delivery delayed is delivery denied,” said Defence Minister A.K. Antony.

The best part is that in Kargil war both parties imported same communications equipment from same suppliers of same country and history was repeated. Because of the terrain condition across the border same problems were faced by both the armies and suppliers sent engineers to rectify the problem.

Interestingly, the scientific achievement after 52 years of independence was the same.

In the Government of India, almost all the ministries have spent thousands and thousands of crores and achieved frontline technology but compared to defence R&D is far behind.

Why?

When DRDO used to have one CC R&D it delivered some output. After special powers were granted to project directors the incompetency took the fore front with the blessing of the recruiters that “position makes a man.” With this principle incompetent over powered. The bluffers became achievers.

Congrats to Dr. W. Selvamurthy one such achiever of DRDO, for assuming charge as President of Amity University, Noida.

Dr W.Selvamurthy, as CC R&D, visited DEAL, DRDO, Dehradun in a function when all the past directors were invited for felicitation. Dr E Bhagirath Rao, Sh V P Sandlas, Sh Ashok Sen were present in the function. Ex CC R&D Sh V P Sandlas then was Director General at Amity University and Dr W.Selvamurthy in his address said “the so called Director General of Amity University Sh V P sandlas” with his crooked famous smile on his face.

Amity University is same and today same Dr W.Selvamurthy has joined Amity University without obtaining the mandatory NOC from government of India (copy of RTI reply from DRDO enclosed)

But I must congratulate him that so far he has distributed crores and crores of rupees to his beloved south bound private universities via Life science board of DRDO, as per DRDO culture now he will access his past office and be able to manage funds for Amity University.

So almost private institutions are having same practice to oblige those who had helped them to provide funds (poor tax payers’ money) in the name of projects and individuals are getting interests or kickbacks by mutual understanding.

Only GOD knows when the government of India, GOM, Defence Standing Committee will realize this out flow of precious money. Since there is no accountability, these senior scientists and technocrats are fooling the nation and helping and nurturing the incompetency in the field of science and technology. This growing incompetency is a major obstacle of our self-reliance.

rti replyselva1

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

Amitav Ranjan
Posted: Sun Nov 19 2006, 00:00 hrs
New Delhi, November 18:

DRDO should definitely be held more accountable for its work and it should stop saying it can do everything under the sun.

Coming from Dr Vasudev K Aatre, who headed the organisation between 2000-04, this could be the luxury of hindsight but yet, a painfully candid admission to the need for reform.

Now a professor at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Aatre has responded to this newspaper’s investigative series on DRDO’s dismal record (for the previous seven parts, visit www.expressindia.com). “I have been honest about our delays, I could not hide our shortcomings. There is a need to break certain cycles as the series in The Indian Express has shown. It is crucial that DRDO is a dictator of its own destiny.”

For that to happen, Aatre prescribes a five-point programme fundamental to which is, what he calls, “the absolute must for accountability.” And, two, the brisk introduction of the private sector into the fold of defence R&D to take away the burden of prototype production.

Calling for the immediate implementation of the incentive list for scientists — from sharing royalty to increased travel allowances — Aatre says the “Damocles’ Sword of imports” should not be allowed to hang over scientists engaged in fundamental research. Finally, and probably most importantly, “DRDO should stop making exaggerated promises.”

The aspect of talent retention is severely underestimated. Even President A P J Abdul Kalam, who headed DRDO through the ‘90s and saw first-hand the initial exodus of scientists to the newly booming IT sector — over 1400 have left in the last decade — said on November 11 in Ahmedabad: “We should work for the creation of a science cadre, with a clear mission and goal, well-defined growth path, and attractive salaries.”

But better remuneration is just one side of an intricate polygon of reform that DRDO admitted in June to be working on. The other crucial aspect is DRDO’s involvement with the services. The Navy, the smallest of the three armed forces, has the best depth of relations with DRDO but the less said about the Army and IAF, the better.

Experience has shown that programmes in which the agenda is set by senior serving officers, as in Navy’s avionics and sonars, have always performed with the greatest prudence — delivering on time, and cutting away losses when viability was severely undermined.

In June, as a start, the Standing Committee on Defence directed the DRDO to draw up a list of unviable projects that could be terminated.

But there is a consensus that synergy with the services is one way out of the present mess. Says Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary, former Army chief and member of the Standing Committee on Defence: “Coordination and interaction need a great deal of improvement. DRDO should make sure that officers from the services are part of design teams, and not looked upon as outsiders. Even today, they are accepted very reluctantly. I tried to do my bit in my time as Chief, but somehow it did not work out. This should be an immediate area of reform.”

Choudhary’s recommendation is an echo of what was officially proposed by the Defence Ministry’s Task Force on the “Reorganization of Higher Defence Planning”: a three-star serving officer should head the steering committee of DRDO programmes and the Armed forces personnel embedded with these programmes be recognised as integral members of the DRDO design team. None of this has been implemented yet.

New Defence Minister A K Antony, who received a three-and-a-half hour presentation on the DRDO on October 29, five days into office, told The Sunday Express, “In the few weeks that I have been here, I have realized the need for big changes. We need comprehensive reforms in this area to keep with changing situations. Over the next few weeks, I will be looking at this aspect in great detail.”

Consider what one of emerging India’s pioneers in industrial R&D, Biocon chairperson Kiran Mazumdar Shaw has to say about DRDO: “Every research establishment in the country needs to be reformed. Defence is one area where we need a high level of innovation. Enough is not being done and the DRDO is no exception to this. There is no modern approach at all,” she told The Sunday Express. “They should be focusing on every emerging technology and the application of new technology. At present, there seems to be only imitative effort. A lot of the research is ineffective. We need reforms in defence research that capitalise on innovation. Good talent needs to be attracted to these organisations.”

In DRDO’s journey from its fetters, it cannot ignore the private sector. The total volume of work undertaken by the private sector since May 2001 amounts to Rs 6,976 crore out of total capital acquisitions worth Rs 95,145.28 crore. Private sector potential in defence R&D is therefore enormous and mostly untapped.

On September 19, members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee received a compilation of the capabilities of just two private companies. Their capabilities officially declared as everything from weapon-launch systems, sea mines, submarines, fire-control systems and special materials to deep water technology, tracking radars, even space applications.

Atul Kirloskar, chairman of the CII’s National Committee on Defence, which played an integral advisory role to the Vijay Kelkar Committee on reforming self-reliance and procurement, told The Sunday Express: “With DRDO, there is a large opportunity to work on technological issues. Raksha Udyog Ratnas, or private sector systems integrators will be certified next year and will be able to make quotes. The new procurement procedure also includes a Make category. There are opportunities waiting.”

In a sense, few would know this better than Lt Gen S S Mehta, formerly Western Army commander and now Director General of CII. He said, “With growing similarities between civilian and military R&D, it is essential that Defence R&D evolve a collaborative structure which adapts to the rapidly changing technology eco-system.”

The journey to a weapons development system like in the US or Europe is still, quite certainly, decades away. But with shifting paradigms, the blurring of technological boundaries and a whole new element to the meaning of self-reliance, the essence of DRDO’s revitalization will be in accepting that the past is just that. The past.

(With Johnson TA in Bangalore)

What lies unread: the recommendations

• Kelkar Committee: streamline linkages with private sector, open up R&D, audit essential

 

• Task Force on Higher Defence Planning: Get senior service officers to head steering committees, let services personnel be part of design teams

• Create a science cadre with mission, goal, good salaries: President Kalam

• New evaluation technology to avoid time and cost overruns: ex-DRDO chief Aatre

• Cut losses, terminate unviable programmes, use resources for new ones, fashion future programmes with foreign partners: Defence Standing Committee

• Focus on emerging technology, innovate, attract best talent: Kiran Mazumdar Shaw