Tag Archives: defence

Drdo

6,000 cr wasted, 10-yr delay & they want 150,000 cr more

Leave a comment

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

 6,000 cr wasted, 10-yr delay & they want 150,000 cr more

Amitav Ranjan

Posted: Sun Nov 12 2006, 00:00 hrs

New Delhi, November 11:

Make India prosperous by establishing a world-class science and technology base…provide our Defence Services the decisive edge by equipping them with internationally competitive systems and solutions… design, develop and lead to production state-of-the-art weapons systems…

That’s the “vision” and the “mission” the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has proudly spelt out for itself.

An investigation by The Sunday Express into official records that include detailed testimonies by the Ministry of Defence to a Parliamentary Standing Committee — its report is yet to be tabled in Parliament — shows that if there’s one thing this behemoth of 50 laboratories with a staff of about 33,000 has developed to almost perfection, it’s this: wrapping itself around the flag to hide a record of delay and non-delivery in virtually all major weapons programmes.

At a time when China is rapidly modernising its armed forces through international collaboration and acquiring advanced technology from abroad, the DRDO has become a prisoner of its own misleading slogan on self-reliance. In preventing the armed forces from buying urgently needed weapons with brave talk, “we can make it here”, and failing to deliver, the DRDO has introduced uncertainty into the government’s defence planning.

According to latest official records, obtained by this newspaper, in 12 of its showpiece projects, none of which is anywhere near completion, the DRDO has overshot sanctioned estimates by Rs 6,013.43 crore in just the last 10 years. The projects include the crucial guided missile programme, the Arjun tank, the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA Tejas), the Samyukta communication system and Kaveri jet engine.

To put this in perspective, this cost overrun is larger than DRDO’s budget of Rs 5,356 crore for the current year. And this is reflective of just 12 projects. It speaks nothing of 427 others, all in varying states of drift. And yet DRDO claims, “Global level R&D and any world-class defence product can be brought out in competitive time and cost.”

These were the words used in a September 22 presentation to the Standing Committee especially in the year of the organisation’s biggest symbolic failure, the Agni-III strategic missile.

But if cost overruns were not enough, consider this: Records show that for all major projects, DRDO’s average time overrun is 10.11 years (see chart). For example, a 16-year delay for the Arjun tank and 12 years for just Phase I of the LCA Tejas.

Responding to a written questionnaire from The Sunday Express, DRDO chief M Natarajan, who has also been involved with one of DRDO’s biggest failures, the Arjun tank, says: “This is a complaint which I hear very often. But one should understand these are all R&D projects. All advanced countries face similar situations. If you say that we are always late, then it would not be fair to us. We generally deliver the goods on time.”

If that were true, Natarajan must have had a trying time explaining that on October 29 at the very first DRDO presentation to new Defence Minister A K Antony. Drawing comparisons with the China-Russia relationship, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutt reportedly wanted to know why there were such “massive delays” in DRDO projects and persistent technological gaps.

Former IAF chief Air Chief Marshal S Krishnaswamy was more direct. Called in a year after he retired to give testimony, he told the Parliamentary panel: “For improvement in DRDO’s working, it is essential to make fundamental changes in organization and structure with accountability to the user and to do work in time.”

Krishnaswamy couldn’t have been more spot on. For, although DRDO defended its performance by blaming the three services — they change their requirements while development is in progress, they spend too much time on trials — here’s just how bad the current situation is: In the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th Plans, with DRDO’s failures a compelling factor, according to the Defence Ministry, the country has spent an average of 24.25% of the Defence budget on imported systems to fill in holes caused by DRDO’s non-delivery. That translates into roughly Rs 42,376 crore since 1991-92.

Even the “self-reliance” index, the one plank the entire DRDO justifies itself on, has remained static for the last 15 years. Ironically, in 1991, it was President A P J Abdul Kalam, then DRDO chief, who charted out a plan to push self-reliance up to 70% by 2005. Today’s self-reliance index, according to the Ministry’s own estimate: 30 per cent.

 

Kalam, in fact, started the Self-Reliance Implementation Council (SRIC) in 1992 and monitored it to check for slippages and gaps. But that was more an academic exercise than anything else. For five years now, the council hasn’t met once.

Papers are only “activated” when Parliamentary questions are asked. In what has the armed forces on tenterhooks now, on October 29, the DRDO recommended to Antony that a “certain percentage of defence acquisitions be earmarked exclusively for DRDO and indigenously developed products.”

The total cost of 439 projects currently in progress with DRDO adds up to Rs 16,925 crore, with just 17 of those adding up to Rs 13,560 crore, most of them on time and cost extensions. In September, DRDO asked, in its testimony to the

Parliamentary committee, for an assured allocation of Rs 1,50,000 crore at the rate of Rs 10,000 crore per year for the next 15 years starting 2010.

It’s time Antony asked the DRDO a few questions, beginning with the Integrated Guided Missile Development programme. There is no indigenous weapons project as prestigious as this, neither is there one that matches its record of repeated and expensive failures.

Every project has to fructify within a given timeframe, otherwise it will just begin to drift and lose focus

Air Chief Marshal S Krishnaswamy

DRDO needs greater accountability. We have not been able to get the maximum out of DRDO, even though self-reliance should be our core

Gen V P Malik

 

Drdo

DRDO opposes it but House panel underlines: you need outside audit

Leave a comment

 DRDO opposes it but House panel underlines: you need outside audit

Amitav Ranjan , Shiv Aroor

Posted: Thu Dec 28 2006, 00:00 hrs

NEW DELHI, DECEMBER 27:

The Defence Ministry strongly resisted it. The Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister discarded it as unnecessary. But the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence has now categorically rejected both views and recommended that the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) be brought under the audit scrutiny of an “independent and external” panel of experts to make sure that expensive and delayed defence projects don’t remain indefinitely adrift.

The report is scheduled to be tabled in the Budget session of Parliament.

In the report, compiled after detailed testimonies from the military top brass and independent experts over several months, the Standing Committee, chaired by Balasahib Vikhe Patil, has observed, “There is no scientific audit of DRDO projects as such. However, the DRDO has mechanism of feasibility study, design and technology evaluation, project peer review. The Committee observe that inspite of that, a large number of projects are showing inordinate delay and escalation of huge cost. The Committee therefore recommends that in addition to existing audit system, DRDO’s projects must also be audited by external and independent audit group of experts duly approved by the Government of India.”

It goes on to add, “The Committee is of the view that this will facilitate the government to check on the growing cost and time overrun of the DRDO projects and also to ascertain the accountability for the delay in execution of projects.”

In just 12 of the DRDO’s most critical projects — involving systems that the armed forces need more than any other, like missiles, fighters and theatre artillery — the organisation has exceeded sanctioned estimates by Rs 6, 013.43 crore in just the last 10 years, a figure greater than its current annual budget.

This recommendation comes after the Committee conducted a thorough review recently of the country’s most crucial defence programmes, including the integrated guided missile development programme (IGMDP), the Light Combat Aircraft, the Arjun main battle tank, the Kaveri jet engine and concurrent engineering.

On November 16, as part of an investigative series on the DRDO’s delay and mismanagement, The Indian Express had reported on how the Defence Ministry had failed to act on a crucial point raised by the Vijay Kelkar committee, recommending that DRDO’s functioning as a research body needed to be under the purview of a panel of independent experts.

In fact, on the day before the report was published, Comptroller & Auditor General (C&AG) VN Kaul said at a defence economics seminar, “Defence R&D is an area where accountability often takes shelter under the policy of self reliance, and indigenization becomes a reason for delay… accountability of domestic R&D organizations needs to be re-emphasized to enable better assessment of return from investment. Sensitizing of the defence services to the role of public audit is essential.”

This is precisely what the Committee has now called for, virtually thrusting aside DRDO’s own contention that “accountability cannot be fixed for loss of time in projects”.

The Committee has observed, “Keeping in view the disappointing performance of DRDO, the Committee strongly recommends to the government the complete review of the functioning and structure of DRDO… by appointing an independent committee of experts/professionals, on the lines of AEC and ISRO” and said that DRDO “cannot absolve itself” from the responsibility for inordinate delay.

“The delays cause suspicion on the capability of DRDO in the eyes of the users and other nations of the world,” it says in its report.

Following The Indian Express series, Kelkar was called in by the Standing Committee last week to expand on the observation he had made 21 months ago as part of his overall recommendations on reforming defence procurement. For the Committee, this was absolutely against what DRDO itself had said in testimony on January 2: “DRDO has enough audit and reviews of the projects at various stages. It is not considered necessary to introduce additional audit and reviews.”

Drdo

Antony asks DRDO to build credible missile defence system

Leave a comment

Antony asks DRDO to build credible missile defence system

Agencies – Indian Express

Posted: Fri Jun 03 2011, 15:01 hrs

New Delhi:

Defence Minister A K Antony today asked the DRDO to prioritise the development of 5,000-km range ballistic missile while building a credible missile defence system for the country.

He also congratulated the Defence Research Development Organisation for developing the interceptor missile allowing India to join an elite club of nations possessing such advance technology.

“DRDO must demonstrate the capability to develop missiles of the range of 5000 km at the earliest. This is a challenge for the DRDO and I hope they will successfully meet this challenge at the earliest,” he said here.

Antony was addressing a gathering of defence scientists who received the DRDO’s annual award for excelling in their respective areas.

“The interceptor missile defence program has taken India into the elite club of nations that possess the capability to demonstrate this technology. DRDO should now concentrate on developing a credible ballistic missile defence for the country,” he added.

He also asked DRDO scientists to focus on the development of Mark II version of the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun for the Indian Army and Kaveri Engine.

“The development of MBT Arjun and Kaveri Engine has been hit by delays. Development of MBT Arjun is a major milestone. But Mark II is another area of challenge. That challenge you have to meet,” he told the gathering.

Antony also asked DRDO and Indian Air Force (IAF) to ensure on schedule the induction of the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas into the force.

“After getting the Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) for the LCA Tejas, we are moving towards its Final Operational Clearance (FOC). I am sure DRDO and IAF will work together to deliver Tejas on schedule,” he said.

He added that the delays in the development of indigenous engine for the fighter jets had given more time for the induction of the LCA and the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) for the IAF.

Drdo

DRDO muddles through 439 projects

Leave a comment

DRDO muddles through 439 projects

Rajat Pandit, TNN Aug 16, 2006, 03.01am IST

NEW DELHI: From missiles, radars and electronic warfare programmes to even juices, mosquito repellents and titanium dental implants, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) does it all. And, by and large, flounders in them all, with technical glitches, time and cost overruns.

Amid growing demand by armed forces and experts that DRDO “concentrate” only on “a few core and critical areas” to bolster the country’s defence preparedness, latest statistics show the organisation has as many as 439 ongoing projects at a total cost of a whopping Rs 16,925 crore. “DRDO, with around 29,000 personnel in 50 laboratories and establishments under its umbrella, certainly needs to get its act together. Not even 10% of its total budget (DRDO got Rs 5,454 crore in 2006-07) is spent on fundamental research,” says a senior defence official.

Adds an Army officer, “What is the use of having such a huge defence R&D set-up if it cannot even come up with basics like good bullet-proof jackets, webbing and light-weight ballistic helmets. Even the systems they manage to deliver to us suffer from operational problems.”

The long-standing aim to take the country towards self-reliance in military capabilities, of course, remains a mere pipedream. If in 1991-92, 25% of India’s total defence expenditure was spent on imports, the case remains the same even now.

DRDO, of course, has to contend with inadequate funds, with its allocation hovering just around 6% of the total defence budget. Moreover, it’s not able to attract top scientific talent in the absence of good career prospects and other incentives.

But even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently told DRDO he was “concerned by the problems of cost and time-overruns, which have plagued our defence industry for decades now”.

Consequently, it’s no wonder that the armed forces prefer the import route because of DRDO’s long track-record of delivering too-little, too-late. Of the 439 projects, for instance, the really big ones number around 20. But the progress in them, more or less, has been shoddy.

The Arjun main-battle tank project, for one, was sanctioned way back in 1974. After spending a huge amount of money, the first five Arjun tanks are still being tested for battle-worthiness, with the Army not too keen to induct them.

Similar is the story with Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, sanctioned in 1983 to replace the country’s ageing MiG fleet. Though its prototypes have completed over 530 flights, IAF is not fully convinced yet whether it will induct them by even 2012. This when government has already sanctioned Rs 5489.78 crore for Tejas till now.

The country’s integrated guided missile development programme, which kicked off in 1983, has only now shown some progress, with a few Prithvi and Agni missile variants being inducted into the armed forces.

Drdo

Antony tells defence PSUs to get their act together

Leave a comment

Antony tells defence PSUs to get their act together

TNN Feb 15, 2007, 01.36am IST

NEW DELHI: Perform or perish. defence minister A K Antony used the platform of an awards function on Wednesday to deliver this blunt message to defence PSUs, ordnance factories and, of course, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

In fact, the minister virtually asked DRDO — which is into making juices and mosquito repellents as well as tanks and missiles, as earlier reported by TOI — to concentrate only on “high-technology” areas of “strategic importance”.

“I am not satisfied with the work of some PSUs, ordnance factories and others. They must change. Otherwise, it will become difficult for them to survive in this era of competition,”said Antony, addressing an audience of chiefs and chairpersons of defence PSUs, shipyards and DRDO.

After handing over “awards for excellence”to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Bharat Electronics Ltd, which are being conferred with the “navratna” status, Antony said defence organisations “must adapt and transform to the changing environment of the defence industry brought about by globalisation”.

Drdo

DRDO lets loose ‘missiles’ at armed forces

2 Comments

DRDO lets loose ‘missiles’ at armed forces

TNN May 27, 2010, 04.40am IST

NEW DELHI: After public bickering among Cabinet ministers, here comes the sharp divide in the defence establishment.

With PM Manmohan Singh, defence minister A K Antony and others watching, the faultlines that underlie the embittered DRDO-armed forces relationship erupted into plain view on Wednesday.

Defence Research and Development Organisation chief V K Saraswat, speaking at the National Technology Day awards function, tore into the armed forces for failing to overcome their “temptation” to induct the latest weapon systems from abroad.

This did not go down well with the forces, represented as they were by Air Chief Marshal P V Naik, Admiral Nirmal Verma and General V K Singh as well as other officers in the audience. Some officers told TOI that DRDO “promises too much” but delivers “too little, too late” and the forces are “forced” to push for import of weapon systems to maintain operational readiness.

“Some awards given today, for instance, are for Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, Nag anti-tank guided missile and Astra air-to-air missile. These are still not operational despite years, if not decades, of trials,” said an officer.

The spat comes just two days after the Navy chief held “a long meeting” with Antony to stress that it was high time DRDO got its act together, said sources.

Wednesday’s award ceremony began normally enough, with Saraswat listing out achievements ranging from launch of India’s first nuclear submarine INS Arihant to the planned test of the 5,000-km range Agni-V ballistic missile in 2011. But then, Saraswat let loose a couple of heat-seeking missiles. It’s grossly unfair to hold only DRDO responsible for the poor level of self-reliance in defence systems, he said.

“The responsibility should be shared by all stake-holders of defence ministry and cannot be placed on DRDO alone, which neither has the power to impose its products on its customer (forces), nor the mandate or capacity to produce

the developed systems all by themselves,” he said.

“Services also must understand that while the temptation may be overwhelming to field proven, state-of-the-art imported systems, they too have a role to play in the country’s economic and industrial growth. No foreign system can be customised to completely address our long-term requirements,” he added.

There is, of course, a lot in what Saraswat said. The armed forces certainly need to fully support DRDO to ensure self-reliance in critical weapon systems, the supply of which from abroad can easily be choked in times of crisis.

But it’s equally true DRDO projects cannot continue to be bedevilled with huge time and cost overruns.

The PM, on his part, said, “We should be able to acknowledge and learn from our setbacks. It’s a fact some projects have been delayed and others have faced difficulties during operational induction.”

 

Readers’ opinions

a.ravi. (chennai)

20 Jul, 2010 02:56 PM

defence ministry and the govt should wake up from sleep. all the defence projects should be with foreign tie ups. regards .a.ravi.

John (India)

27 May, 2010 08:59 PM

Its very essential to develop weapons indigenous. But instead of spending money and valuable time on conventional weapons which was already in use by other countries, our DRDO has to research on new kind of weapons which will give us upper hand in a war. Or our weapons should be next generation. All our weapons should be fully automated, computer controlled and should have some kind of artificial intelligence. We should prove ourselves and show to the world that we have capabilities in destroying enemy satellites and have the capability to protect our own satellite in case of a war which may give a upper hand in a war. We should have Predator UAV’s which should be more capable than other countries.

N.Shekar (Bangalore)

27 May, 2010 08:38 PM

DRDO is a white elephant eating away the Tax payer’s money. DRDO should be used only for research and Development and not for bulk manufacture as they simply cannot do it. For most of the employees of DRDO, it is just a past time job and none except a few work seriously. There is no team work and the employees and the management is just busy playing politics. There has been no headway made in the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), Nag anti-tank guided missile and Astra air-to-air missile. These are still not operational despite having spent countless amount of money. Every time the Defence minister visits the DRDO offices he sanctions crores of rupees and there is no accountability. Until and unless the so called DRDO is made accountable, nothing will be achieved and there is no use in cribbing that the armed forces are encouraging foreign Arms and ammunition.

raju (surat)

27 May, 2010 06:46 PM

Best thing is to privatise DRDO, we all know how government offices work. Most of the time goes in chatting, sipping tea, smoking, preparing tambacu etc. How will they produce cutting edge tech and time bound deliveries. With the best brains in the world we should put them to use in the right way and Private sector can only do that.

Narendra (Hyderabad)

27 May, 2010 06:36 PM

Ok wise guys,

harpreet (chandigrah) replies to a.ravi.

13 Aug, 2010 02:52 PM

there are many Indian companies which have better research and development capabilities, and they can produce much better arms and ammunition.ex-mhaindras and the tatas, all they need is a chance and we need to give them a fair chance. pinika multi barrel rockets are good example of this.

Milan Dutta (Kolkata)
27 May, 2010 06:12 PM

Armed forces must accept that this missile was right on target

A.P.MISRA. (Hyderabad)
27 May, 2010 05:47 PM

Blaming is very easy.No doubt DRDO moves at snails speed because they dont have a time bound programme to delver the goods.There are also lot of personnel politics involved in assigning the projects.There are very good scientists in the organisation who are dedicated to their work.The output of DRDO has to be translated by the Defence Production Units who owe equal responsibility for it.Corruption is one of the major factors which some how creeps in and ensures that the quality desired dosnt come out.vested interest of beneficiaries cannot be ruled out. 

Hussain (Hyderabad)
27 May, 2010 04:57 PM

DRDO is a Burden on our country. we pay thousands of crores of Rs for our scientist who has promised this country that they will stop all weapons import.I must admit Mr.Gopal has rightly said DRDO is an elephant. DRDO is nothing but a same old Govt office where files are fed to termites and buried.

Keviv (Bangalore)
27 May, 2010 04:47 PM

Right name of DRDO should be Delayed Research and Defective Organization. To top that they act high and might like there developing something very great. To see that a person need to come to Bangalore and see wastage of Tax Payers Money.

Drdo

Sanctioned in ’83, LCA Tejas is yet to take off

1 Comment

Sanctioned in ’83, LCA Tejas is yet to take off

Rajat Pandit, TNN Feb 12, 2008, 01.55am IST

NEW DELHI: When defence minister A K Antony witnesses a flight demonstration of the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) in Bangalore on Tuesday, he should take a close look at the fighter which typifies all that is wrong with defence projects in India.

The LCA project was sanctioned way back in 1983 at a cost of Rs 560 crore to replace the rapidly aging MiG fighters.

A quarter of a century later, with project costs already pegged at Rs 5,489.78 crore, the LCA is still at least four years away from becoming fully operational.

And when IAF finally inducts an LCA squadron, around 2012 or so, it will fly with American GE-404 engines and radars developed with Israel’s help, apart from several other ‘foreign’ parts in what is touted to be an ‘indigenous’ project.

Yes, developing a supersonic fly-by-wire fighter jet from scratch, with international sanctions in place for several years, is an extremely complex task. “But taking almost three decades is criminal,” said a senior official.

“All the agencies involved in it like the Aeronautical Development Agency, Defence Research and Development Organization, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and even the IAF, which has frequently changed requirements of weapons and electronic warfare midway, have to share the blame,” he added.

For the record, the two LCA technology demonstrators and three prototype vehicles have clocked over 800 flights till now, accumulating 425 hours and covering a flight envelope of 1.4 Mach and 15-km altitude.

Last year, the LCA even test-fired its first air-to-air missile, prompting the defence ministry to proclaim it as “a historic event” marking the beginning of the “weaponization” of Tejas. But the fact remains that the deadlines for the IOC (initial operational clearance) and FOC (final operational clearance) of Tejas have been revised time and again. As things stand now, IOC is projected by 2010 and FOC by 2012.

IAF, on its part, has ordered only 20 LCAs so far, despite pressure from the defence R&D establishment, unsure as it is of the delivery date and whether the LCA will be a top-notch fighter once it is ready. Incidentally, IAF and Navy had earlier projected a requirement of as many as 220 LCAs.

The less said about the indigenous Kaveri engine, which was meant to power the LCA, the better. The repeated failures of Kaveri – its development cost has jumped to Rs 2,839 crore from the initial Rs 382 crore – has meant the first 40 LCAs will have the American GE-404 engines.

With no solution in sight, DRDO has invited proposals for foreign collaboration for the co-development of Kaveri now. Keeping all this in mind, the overall development cost of LCA will zoom well over Rs 12,000 crore before it becomes a reality.

 

Readers’ opinions (33)

Sort by:Newest|Oldest

vivian fernandes (bombay)
12 Feb, 2008 09:21 AM
I have recently started working for the aviation industry and i have come to learn that although building a plane sounds easy there are so many parts that have to fit together that it is a mind boggling process.. However like many of the readers have mentioned,it should not take us 24 years to make a plane fly .. I do agree that the indian scientists are underpaid and i think it is high time we start bringing in private contractors like most of the western countries do.. so i think the only solution to this problem is to bring in people who know what they are doing and not leave projects in the hands of un educated,3rd rate politicians who might as well sold the parts for the plane on the black market to line their pockets..

Kotresh Tambrallimath (Bangalore)
12 Feb, 2008 09:00 AM
Indian Scientist salary is 5 to 10 times less than normal software Engineer salary. Because of this transition rates are high, so project is getting delay. Regarding cost of project, all are talking about 5000 cr. but how many billions of dollars US has invested to come to this position ??? Developing our own technology and building LCA is far far far better than Buying Black box(F16). I am very much thankful to all our scientists who are working in ADA and DRDO for there effort and dedication.

Krishna (Pennsylvania, PA)
12 Feb, 2008 08:31 AM
Well…I have worked on the LCA’s cockpit software programs in the early 90s. I know very well that we tried imitating F16’s fly by wire technology. We even followed USA DoD standard for software documentation. But I don’t understand why there is so much delay in taking off. I think we could not even copy something properly.

Prasad (Atlanta, USA)
12 Feb, 2008 08:24 AM
Even if we consider 12K Crore to develop an aircaraft from scratch (and belive, me there are many more things to an aircraft apart from the engine), I think it is not a bad price. Considering India has 12 lakh crores in its coffers as foreigh exchange and its income has multiplied manifold in past few years, 12 K crores for this project is not at all astronomical. We have to be cognizent of the fact that the project was executed by a government agency in complete isolation until recently without any private participation. India has learned a good lesson from it and is now encouraging privte participation in these kind of projects. I think we need to look at it much more positively. Every project is a learning curve and we have learned our share from this one too. I find such reports a bit too harsh towards all the good work which has gone into it. As a responsible mouthpiece of Indian media your esteemed publication should refrain from publishing such articles, which show our research establishments in bad light.

Rishi (Bangalore)
12 Feb, 2008 08:21 AM
Its time for the government to come out of the politics and took hard decision and recruiting from top premier colleges by offering them competetive pay.India have enough talent to build anything the only thing is that there should be strong will power behind it.

Drdo

Panel wants overhaul in DRDO’s set-up

Leave a comment

Panel wants overhaul in DRDO’s set-up

Rajat Pandit, TNN Mar 19, 2007, 12.13am IST

NEW DELHI: Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has taken yet another hit.

After being slammed for huge time and cost overruns in virtually all its projects, a parliamentary committee has now called for DRDO’s drastic overhaul if it’s to supply cutting-edge weapon systems to the armed forces in time.

 

And the “fundamental changes” must start at the very top. In its latest report tabled in Parliament on Friday, apart from recording Defence Research and Development Organisation’s “disappointing performance”, the Standing Committee on defence expressed its “displeasure”at the scientific advisor (SA) to the defence minister wearing so many hats.

In addition to being the SA, he is also director-general of DRDO, secretary (R&D) and director-general of Aeronautical Development Agency.

This must change, as also DRDO’s penchant for taking too many things on its plate. Venturing as it does even into making juices, mosquito repellents, titanium dental implants and the like, the committee said DRDO must concentrate only on “fundamental and crucial” defence research.

Urging the government to encourage the private sector to come into defence R&D and production in a major way, the committee said DRDO must be made more accountable and open to independent auditing.

A comprehensive national policy should also be formulated to recruit and retain “talented and experienced”scientists in Defence Research and Development Organisation, which has a shortage of around 1,400 scientists, as also promote its closer cooperation with IITs and universities.

Calls for a revamp of Defence Research and Development Organisation, of course, are not new. This newspaper, in several reports, has highlighted that it continues to flounder in developing desperately-needed military capabilities for the country.

Whether it’s the much-touted Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), sanctioned in 1983 but still at least four-five years away from becoming fully-operational, or the bulky Arjun main-battle tank, which the Army is being forced to swallow, the story has remained grim.

With the mind-boggling delays, the costs of most of Defence Research and Development Organisation projects have simply zoomed up. Take the LCA programme. Its initial projected cost was Rs 560 crore.

But now, it stands at Rs 5,490 crore, with another Rs 2,893 crore for its Kaveri engine. By the time the LCA becomes operational, if it does, over Rs 10,000 crore would have been sunk into it.

So, it’s no wonder that India has become the largest importer of military hardware and software in the developing world, notching up arms deals worth $11 billion in just 2004 and 2005.

It will spend another $30 billion over the next five years in armament imports. In view of all this, the parliamentary report expressed the “urgent need” for “a thorough review” of the functioning and organisational set-up of Defence Research and Development Organisation, which has 50 establishments and over 33,000 personnel under its umbrella.

Expressing dismay that DRDO had managed to achieve only 30% indigenisation target as against the 70% target set for the 10th Plan (2002-2007), the panel said the organisation has not been able to achieve its mission of self-reliance in defence production even 48 years after it was established.

Readers’ opinions (3)

asamanja ghose (paris)
19 Mar, 2007 02:16 PM
Dear Editor, Once again, the Parliamentary Committee should have gone much farther in its recommendations. We must institute a thorough judicial inquiry (independent of any and all administrative and political influence) as to why the LCA project and all other important Defence Projects have not yet been completed to date and resulted in such delays and heavy cost over-runs, while forcing the country to spend its meagre Foreign Exchange reserves to import military hardware. For instance, we are being forced to buy 126 Fighter Aircraft. If the LCA had been on time, this would not have been necessary, would it? In my opinion, military hardware-exporting countries and our corrupt politicians, corrupt political parties, and certainly some corrupt scientists in the DRDO are responsible for this state of affairs. They take bribes to design ways and means to delay our projects so as to continue exporting their outdated and “junk” products to India. How is it that no IT raids have ever been carried out on any of the above-mentioned categories of people, but only minor officials have been targeted, just for the form. Why have not the account books of the congress party not been seized and audited thoroughly after allegations that “thales”, the french manufacturer 0f the six diesel-electric submarines from whom india has ordered these, has paid sonia khan (sorry gandhi) a “bakshsish”‘ of 400 crores after the signing of this agreement. it is obvious that rajiv khan (sorry gandhi) did not have as big a stomach to digest the 64 crores that he had taken for the bofors deal and that he did share it with the congress party. Of course, the biggest “boffun” that the Bofors deal exposed was no one to do any thing with the congress, but the self-styled raja v.p. singh, who shouted himself hoarse before being elected prime minister saying that he will unveil the names of all the culprits of this international scandal, but once elected just forgot about it did nothing of the sort. Others like vajpaye and advani did not do much better. are we, as a nation, so cowardly that we are afraid of owning up to and take responsibility for our faults? if we aspire to be a superpower, should we behave like a bunch of sheep or tigers? Should we not start preparing for the day when we will have to tell the USA to get the hell out of the Indian Ocean, as that is our territory, and that they have nothing to do with that any more? Think over all this, dear reader. if these concepts seem too advanced for you, do contact me, i will explain. rest assured, it will be India that will the usa a bloody nose and make them eschew their haughtiness and misplaced sense of superiority. just ask yourself, what is that impostor, cheat and a plain highway robber be without his Indian software developers? What would the USA be without us Indians today? A. GHOSE

viswanath c (mumbai)
19 Mar, 2007 10:08 AM
Many organisations like DRDO are not at all performing well. The entire hierarchy needs to be revamped so that persons who can show results only can remain and exist there. In many cases, such Institutions does not allow youngsters to come forward and in desperation they leve the country. No need to make any hue and cry about depletion or loss of intellectual and technical personnel, let us do some homework to correct ourself!

balasubba raman guruswamy (bangalore)
19 Mar, 2007 08:18 AM
Internal nepotism is the bane of DRDO Labs. The best of brains are demotivated lot. It would be interesting if the ‘heads of the Labs’ are thoroughly investigated on the impact of their personal lives on the working of DRDO, over last 10 to 15 years.

Drdo

‘DRDO must avoid delays in defence projects’

Leave a comment

TNN Apr 12, 2008, 03.09am IST

NEW DELHI: Indicating that the Defence Research and Development Organization was in for a major revamp, defence minister A K Antony on Friday said cost and time overruns would no longer do in crucial defence projects.

“We are in the process of introducing several innovations to streamline and make more effective the entire defence product development and procurement process,” said Antony, while addressing the 32nd DRDO conference here.

“On the anvil are amendments to our procurement procedures, developing a healthy interface with the public and private industry through offsets and bringing about organizational improvements in DRDO,” he added.

This assumes significance in the backdrop of the recent report by the P Rama Rao committee, which has called for a drastic overhaul of DRDO to ensure it can supply cutting-edge weapon systems to armed forces without the prevailing huge time and cost overruns, as reported by TOI earlier.

Drdo

DRDO gets vote of confidence to meet defence needs

Leave a comment

TNN Jun 4, 2008, 02.05am IST

NEW DELHI: In view of some Western countries unwilling to part with strategic defence technologies, the government on Tuesday said it would further strengthen the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) for providing strategic defence with suitable delivery systems.

Amid concerns expressed by members of a Parliamentary consultative committee on defence on project delays and poor quality of some products developed by DRDO, defence minister A K Antony told MPs that the research organisation has put India in an elite club with the development of interceptor ballistic missile system.