Tag Archives: India

Drdo

AK Antony and the problem of corruption

Leave a comment

KP Nayar

Wednesday, 11 April 2012 09:47

“Will Minister Antony resign?” More than any other, this is the one question that I have been asked by Americans in recent weeks about the defence minister who has been in the news for the better part of this year. Most of the people asking this question have some connection with the military-industrial complex in the United States of America or the country’s defence and strategic community.

The reality, howsoever unpalatable, is that few defence ministers can survive after incurring the personal displeasure of an American defence secretary, unless they are defence ministers in Russia and China or in countries like Iran or North Korea, which are in various stages of confrontation with the US.

A.K. Antony attracted the wrath of the Obama administration last year by his determined refusal to receive the then defence secretary, Robert Gates, who tried to inject himself into a US delegation that was to travel to India for the second round of the “strategic dialogue” between New Delhi and Washington. Gates wanted to lobby with Antony on behalf of American companies, which were then in the running for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft being sought by the Indian air force, the biggest military aviation deal hitherto.

Antony made it clear to his cabinet colleagues, who were persuaded by the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, to plead the case of the Pentagon’s civilian head, that if Gates arrived with Clinton he would go to the remotest location in Kerala where even his mobile phone had no signal for the duration of the American’s stay in New Delhi. Kerala was then in the middle of its state assembly election campaign, which gave Antony enough of an excuse to be in his home state.

The defence secretary did not give up. Gates used the ruse that he was demitting office in July and that he wanted to make a farewell call on Antony: at that point, April was being considered for the strategic dialogue, which eventually had to be postponed because of the defence minister’s insistence that he will not meet Gates as long as the aircraft contract was at a sensitive stage in the acquisition process.

Pentagon officials have told reporters on background that “the defence secretary was informed that it would be suicidal” for Antony to meet Gates and that this message was conveyed by Indian diplomats in Washington, who were negotiating the strategic dialogue arrangements with the Obama administration at that time.

At the end of April 2011, American companies were eliminated from the race for the multi-role combat planes, the US ambassador, Timothy Roemer, resigned the next day, and Gates lost any further interest in making his farewell call on Antony. The strategic dialogue eventually took place in July last year without a top-level defence participation.

After an unstated policy of having no ministerial exchanges in defence for 50 years — except on a solitary occasion, that too botched — US defence secretaries have lately taken exceptional interest in their Indian counterparts and senior Indian ministers in the last decade. The most famous of such exchanges was when Donald Rumsfeld, who was predecessor to Gates, called on the deputy prime minister, L.K. Advani, at his hotel on a Sunday in a well publicized effort to highlight a new chemistry in their ties.

Rumsfeld felt somewhat proprietary about the new defence relationship that the administration of George W. Bush considerably advanced with India, but luckily for New Delhi, he did not stay at the Pentagon long enough to see Washington’s hope of bagging the much-sought-after combat aircraft deal crumble into dust. There is no saying how the mercurial Rumsfeld would have reacted to such a disappointment. Gates, a man of great dignity, took the setback in his stride, at least in public.

The Pentagon is not alone in being disgruntled by Antony’s ways. He has consistently refused to visit Israel, which interchangeably shares the first or second spots with Russia among the sources of arms imports for India.

As if to add injury to insult, last month the defence ministry blacklisted Israel Military Industries for 10 years for allegedly paying bribes to secure contracts in India. IMI is not just another arms-seller. It is owned by the government in Tel Aviv, a leading weapons manufacturer for Israel’s defence forces.

It was not expected that Tel Aviv will take the ban lying down. Additionally, the ban by Antony’s ministry has cast a shadow over plans by the Netanyahu government to privatize IMI. There are now question marks about the timing of the privatization: if the world’s number one arms buyer — India — has found IMI unsuitable to do business with, it could have ramifications for investors seeking to buy into the company.

Those familiar with New Delhi’s lay of the land in such matters were not, therefore, surprised when grumblings of discontent, which began as whispers after Antony rebuffed Gates, grew louder following the rejection of American bids for the multi-role combat aircraft. It was not entirely unexpected that after the decision against the Israelis, Antony would be put in a spot by a steady flow of news stories and purportedly thoughtful op-ed articles.

The Americans and the Israelis are not alone in being at the receiving end of Antony’s efforts in full throttle to do what he can to curb corruption in defence purchases and create a level playing field. Singapore is a country with which India enjoys a relationship that is totally free of trouble. That has not, however, prevented Antony from banning Singapore Technologies Kinetics from future contracts for a decade.

This land systems and specialty vehicles company has launched an all out bid to clear its name, including recourse to the Supreme Court. It has also threatened to seek international arbitration, creating an irritant in bilateral relations.

Russian defence suppliers who have had a free run of New Delhi’s procurement process for many decades have similarly been slapped with punitive sanctions as part of Antony’s anti-graft drive. The defence minister has further angered Swiss, South African and many more arms manufacturers, lining up a formidable array of forces, all of which would be glad to see him move out of his present job.

Typically, nobody is criticizing Antony for cracking down on corruption. Instead, the strategy of those who want him out of the way is to attack Antony for slowing down the modernization of the armed forces by creating bottlenecks in arms purchases, and for creating a trust deficit between the civilian and uniformed segments of the defence establishment. All in all, the effort is to show up the defence minister as a man incapable of running an enterprise as vast and complex as the one for which he is tasked with providing leadership.

The age controversy about General V.K. Singh, the army chief, was the best thing that Antony’s detractors could have hoped for. Unfortunately for the defence minister, both propriety and constitutionality demand that he cannot truthfully tell his side of the story.

For instance, Antony personally believes that the army chief is not lying about his age and that General Singh was born in 1951. Similarly, the General has been a steadfast ally of Antony in what the latter is trying to do about corruption in the defence establishment. It may be a hard idea to sell, especially after a sensational story about troop movements, but the personal warmth and respect for each other between Antony and Singh are nothing short of total. Which is why there has been no move to dismiss the army chief or get him to resign. Even though Antony believes that General Singh made a mistake about his date of birth, an episode from his own past prevents Antony from doing anything about it except to follow the letter of the law. Antony was chief minister of Kerala when a similar controversy dogged the state government.

Raman Srivastava, an Indian Police Service officer of the Kerala cadre who became director-general of the state police and later headed the Border Security Force, was at the centre of this controversy. A mere five months separate him and his brother, Vikram Srivastava, an IPS officer of the Uttar Pradesh cadre, who became director-general of the Central Reserve Police Force: a biological impossibility since both the brothers were born of the same mother.

As chief minister, Antony did not allow the Kerala cadre officer to change his date of birth. There is no way he would have acted any differently with General Singh. What is more, it is Antony’s estimate that there are at least 3,000 such cases of incorrect birthdays in government service records. That is a Pandora’s Box, which is best left shut.

-The Telegraph, Calcutta

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

The Lab Optimists

Leave a comment

Open Magazine – feature

BY Madhavankutty Pillai 31st March 2012

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Drdo

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

DRDO contradicts Army chief, says Tatra trucks ‘outstanding’

2 Comments

PTI | Mar 31, 2012, 08.18PM IST

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Readers’ opinions (274)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

raja (india) replies to Vijay Veer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Uncategorized

Serious lapses in NTRO equipment buying: CAG

1 Comment

Serious lapses in NTRO equipment buying: CAG

by Danish Raza Mar 12, 2012 First Post

New Delhi: While the Comptroller and Auditor General’s  (CAG) special audit report of National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO)remains a top secret, the auditing authority has officially admitted it found serious lapses in recruitment of regular employees and procurement of equipment by NTRO.

“We have noticed cases of appointment of ineligible candidates and lack of transparency in recruitment of regular employees in NTRO,” the office of the Directorate General of Audit (central expenditure), an arm of CAG, said in response to RTI application filed by V.K. Mittal

The findings of NTRO audit have not been made public.The report has not been placed before the Parliament. The agency is a highly specialised technical intelligence gathering agency.

Responding to a query on the types of irregularities which were detected in procurement of systems/ equipment, the auditing body said, “We have noticed lack of transparency and non- compliance of rules in procurement of systems/ equipment and deficient procurement management resulting in cases of excess payment/ wasteful expenditure to exchequer.”

According to the RTI reply dated February 29, 2012, a copy of which is with Firstpost, CAG has also noticed instances of misuse of official position. CAG has also informed Mittal that neither NTRO nor the National Security Advisor (NSA) has filed any action taken report based on special audit report- a first for any intelligence agency in India.

In other words, NSA received the audit report but took no action based on its findings.

“The fact that the CAG has detected bungling in NTRO but nothing was to curb it, calls for greater accountability in NTRO and other similar bodies,” said Mittal.

The NTRO, created in 2004, is a technical intelligence wing of the government of India. It reports directly to the NSA.

Mittal, a former scientist with NTRO and one of the founding members of the organization, exposed a series of irregularities in the purchase of defence equipment in NTRO. He wrote to the NSA and the Prime Minister’s Office about lack of transparency in procuring of equipment, including unmanned aerial vehicles, by the NTRO.

Last year, Mittal filed a petition in Delhi High Court on the issue. The High Court refused to interfere in the matter directing the CAG to proceed in accordance with law.

Mittal then moved Supreme Court which, in August last year, issued notices to the PMO, Central Vigilance Commission, NTRO and CAG.

In the next hearing on March 19, the government has to submit the auditor’s report in the Supreme Court before the bench of justice H L Dattu and C K Prasad.

Uncategorized

DNA Exclusive: CAG nails NTRO; NSA sits on report

Leave a comment

DNA Exclusive: CAG nails NTRO; NSA sits on report

Published: Monday, Mar 5, 2012, 9:15 IST
By Saikat Datta | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

An aggressive audit of the country’s premier technical spying agency, the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO), by the CAG — the first time an intelligence agency has been audited — has revealed large-scale irregularities, corruption and several instances of official position/s being misused.

The report is unlikely to be made public or even placed before Parliament, but is bound to raise questions on National Security Adviser (NSA) Shiv Shankar Menon’s role as he has not taken any action on the report for months. The NTRO does not come under any ministry and it reports directly to the NSA.

India is one of the few democracies where Parliament has no supervisory control over intelligence agencies. The report comes at a time when there is tremendous churning within the intelligence community with calls for greater accountability and transparency.

The CAG summarised its findings while replying to former NTRO joint secretary VK Mittal’s query under RTI seeking details of the audit. It says the CAG has “noticed cases of appointment of ineligible candidates” confirming fears that the agency has been flouting rules while recruiting senior people.

A source told DNA that this has resulted in people being recruited based on their “connections” rather than merit. In fact, IPS officer Jaijeet Singh (Maharashtra cadre) who joined the NTRO last year is probing such cases. So far, five people — either of the rank of joint secretary or director — are under the scanner. The “illegal recruits” include Commander Manoj Modi from the navy, LtCol Sachin Burman, part of the cyber-espionage team, Pramod Prasad, Ruchichandra Srivastava and HS Dhillon.

The CAG found that contractual appointments of senior officers were not transparent. Financial rules were flouted while recruiting Brigadier Anil Malhotra on contract. Malhotra dealt with counter-intelligence and internal security.

The report also talks of several senior officers “misusing” their positions. Chief among them is MS Vijaraghavan, currently the second-in-command in the NTRO.

The fact that he used a prime property in New Delhi’s posh Hauz Khas enclave as his personal residence — rent bills ran into lakhs — left the organisation embarrassed. The CAG recorded several instances of “misuse of official power”, many being committed by Vijayraghavan. Despite all this, he still holds a sensitive post because the government has chosen to ignore the charges against him.

PV Kumar, the present NTRO chairman, too investigated the mess and sent his report to the NSA, Menon. But he has been sitting on both reports for months. And the picture is unlikely to change because neither report would be tabled in Parliament. The reason: the reports are confidential.

The CAG said in an earlier reply, November 28, 2011, under RTI that neither the NTRO nor the NSA has sent any “action-taken” report. DNA has learnt that the CAG has found at least 143 instances of illegal recruitments. It has also found “non-compliance of rules” in procurement of systems and equipment. This means kickbacks could have been part of the several purchases made by NTRO.

The NTRO was set up after the Kargil war to coordinate all technical intelligence efforts. But the organisation has failed to take off because of nepotism and corruption. Even Union home minister P Chidamabaram refused to include the agency in his daily intelligence briefings. The home ministry recently denied it the status of a notified agency that could legally intercept phones and emails of the people of the country.

Drdo

Scientist Leaving DRDO — Why call Attrition?

Leave a comment

Dear friends while surfing I found the very sensible analysis of DRDO problems/solutions by Sh R C Chakraborty, Ex Director, DTRL, DRDO.

Prabhu Dandriyal

Scientist Leaving DRDO — Why call Attrition?

June 23, 2007, posted by rnyreaders http://myreaders.wordpress.com/,

R C Chakraborty,-rcchak@gmail.com

http://www.myreaders.info/02_Scientist__leaving__DRDO.pdf

The DRDO Directors’ Conference held on February, 21, 2007 was effective in a sense that media started reminding about DRDO functioning more frequently. For example, the dissatisfaction expressed by the Parliament’s standing committee on defence, the Minister A.K. Antony asking DRDO to answer for the huge delays in high profile projects, the concern expressed by Defence Services on DRDO projects and deliverables, the criticism of the individuals and an appreciation for the Government action in short listing private firms for granting the status of Rakshya Udyog Ratna. DRDO of course tried to read in between the lines, expressing — “High attrition rate of young scientists … The DRDO’s representation to the Pay Commission . . . proposals to increase salaries of its scientists to arrest the exodus ? . . . and so on “. Extracts from few such reporting are reproduced below for quick reference.

• Address at the DRDO Directors’ Conference, dated 21/02/2007, by the President Dr.A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, The Hindu, dated 22/02/2007, “Set goal for self-reliance in defence systems”: Kalam , by Special Correspondent. President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and Defence Minister A.K. Antony on Wednesday asked defence scientists to bring about a change in their functioning to deliver on India’s requirements of futuristic weapon platforms. “When an organization functions; for over five decades …..A change in the organizational culture is required based on present-day technology and infrastructure . . . . Advising that the DRDO be reorganized after every five years based on the dynamics of organizational missions. Mr. Antony … asked them to be prepared to answer for the huge delays in some of the high profile projects……..

• Indian_Express_dated 14/06/2007: DRDO Scientists are leaving to the greener avenues available in the Private Sector. More than 300 Scientists and Technical staff have left DRDO in the year 2006.

• Tribune_Chandigarh dated 28/04.2007 : “During 2002-2006, . . . 1,007 scientists left DRDO due to increased opportunities available in the private sector,” DRDO is seeking a four-fold increase in salaries . . . from the Sixth Pay Commission.

• Citizen Journalism, citizenxpress.com dated 15/0612007 Because of better career prospects nearly 33% of people who loin DRDQ quit (attrition rate as BPO), nearly 20% use DRDQ as stepping stone, nearly 13% are having due to lack of professional challenge and 8% leave DRDO looking for advancement and additional qualifications.

• The Hindu dated 23/12/2007 Defence Minister, A K Antony said “concerns had been expressed in various quarters over the functioning or the DRDO. The time has come to look ‘toward and see whether the organization is tuning itself adequately, to the changing time.

• Hindustan Times, dated 17/06/2007: 1,007 DRDO scientists quit in five years.

  • DRDO criticized for huge time and cost overruns its multifarious projects, saw  1007 scientist quitting in the last five years, Parliament was informed Thursday
  • Earlier this week, Antony had served notice on DRDO to quickly rectify the defects in the Arjun Main Battle Tank (MBT) it has been developing since 1970s or the government would be wind up the project.
  • Indian Army refused to induct the tank citing 14 major technical defects.
  • A parliamentary panel, last month rapped the DRDO for failing to meet its import substitution targets by as much as 50 per cent, saying hue overruns in its big ticket projects -warranted a “thorough review” of its functioning.
  • Parliaments standing committee report on the DRDO: During the 10th Plan (2002- 07), targeted 70% indigenization, only 30-35% could be achieved. Even after 48 years of its formation has not achieved its targeted mission of self reliance. Urgent need for a thorough review’ of its functioning and organizational structure “to increase its efficiency”. Pointing delays in the MBT, LCA and its Kaveri engine, and integrated guided missile development programme (IGMDP). Noting “No scientific audit at any point of time of DRDO and its projects”, recommended that the organizations projects “must be audited by external and independent groups of experts approved by the government.

• Bharat Rakshak, Consortium of Indian Defence Website, dated 11/06/2007, India’s R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector, Times of India, 19/06/2007: Godrej has big plans for military hardware. The $1.7 billion Godrej Group plans to give a major push to its military equipment supply, creating private Sector in manufacturing defence hardware. Already in nuclear and space technology and now plan to vigorously pursue in defence. Group Chairman Adi Godrej said. . . supplier of airframe sections for the Brahrmos missile, supply o equipments for satellite launch, nuclear sector, and refineries. Government short listed 1,3 private firms for granting the status of Rakshya Udyog Retna. The list was handed over to Defence Minister A K Antony by Probir Sengupta, the chairman of the government-appointed selection committee, on June 6.

•The Indian Express dated 23/06/2007, “Just DRDO won’t do’, why India has MNCs in IT, pharma, telecom but not in defence research. by Milind Deora, 2 1/11/2006.

  • In 1958, the DARPA was set up by USA, Dept of Defense and same year India established the RDO. While DARPA has been a huge success DRDO still hasn’t been able to achieve its vision — everything that really matters in the Indian military is stilt imported.
  • A special CAG review in 2000 of found: almost 50 per cent of the DRDO’s budget was spent on salaries; present ratio of scientists to other support personals is 1:5 in DRDO compared 1: 0.7 to DARPA.
  • World -class scientists are acquired from private sector and universities, Supporting personals are temporary, hired from other agencies so that DARPA doesn’t have to support them on a permanent basis.
  • US defence budget is almost 25 times larger than that of India, but then DARPA’s annual budget is only twice that of DRDO’s, because DARPA is focused on high-end technologies, leaving other- systems to industry. This has enabled it to stay lean.
  • For Arjun MBT and Akash missile, DRDO needs to follow better management practices to deliver indigenous technologies to the military. The production of juices and insect repellants are other instance where the DRDO urgently needs to rethink is focus.
  • DROD labs should avoid any kind of overlap and duplication. The organization must, draw up a list of future technologies based on certain criteria and go after them aggressively.

— First strategic  technology that no  country may sell to India— e.g., nuclear weapons, surveillance and communications  satellites and long range cruise missiles.

–       Second, technologies which are heading towards a global monopoly like conventional submarines  presently being sold at very, high price.

–     Third, future technologies on drawing boards all over the world — like unmanned  combat  aerial vehicles (UCAV5), unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) and robot soldiers.

  • If our other scientific and research organizations can make the world’s most competitive satellite launch vehicles, we can surely do the same for defence technologies.

• intent Blog, http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2OO6/12/how India .can s.hgj, dated 14/12/2006, How India Can Stop Subsidizing Russia And Israel by Milind Deora, India can build strong indigenous capabilities while creating competitive benchmarks for DRDO through the active participation of the private sector. . . If India has built world- class multinationals in sectors such as information technology and pharmaceuticals, both of which are knowledge-driven industries, we could easily create a handful of defence multinationals in less than a decade. . . A small nation like Israel accounts for a 10th of world defence sales and approximately a 5th of its exports are defence- related. While India had an annual import bill of around $5 billion last year, we exported a paltry $47 million worth of arms. Pakistan, which lacks industrial base, exported nearly twice as much. . . In addition to reforming the DRDO, the viability of select DPSUs, especially those not dealing with core areas like the production of missiles and warheads, should also be re-examined and certain products like food products should ether he scrapped or outsourced to lower-cost vendors.

Expressing such dissatisfaction, criticism or concern about DRDO accomplishment is not new. After the Kargil war (1999) DRDO activities were subjected to some scrutiny and a few reforms were suggested, but Not much was done on those recommendations (The Indian Express, 23/06/2007). Also, commenting on the DRDO in isolation, without looking at the higher defence management framework within which it is placed, would perhaps lead to incomplete or even flawed deductions,

Assuming that what all is said is correct, then DRDO must be 1ooking for alternatives to its failures, which means DRDO is preparing to take few “hard decisions”.

Some hard decisions I have in my mind which I would like to share are.

1. GET RID OF THE STUFF DRDO SHOULD GO WITHOUT.

2. All System Development projects and programs should be taken out of DRDC, because of very little R&D opportunity. The R&D element is just 10% while 90% is engineering design, fabrication, testing, integration, field trials, acceptance and management. Each of these better done elsewhere and not by R&D mind. The implementation responsibility would also he oti those who do these 90c/o work and finally on a Board. DRDO contribution, claim, responsibility, budget allocation, manpower, infrastructure, and management should relate to that 10% only.

3. Further, the Most Technology Demonstration projects should also be take ii out of DRDD. The reason is same said above. The R&D elements in these TD projects are just 40% or less. Indian industries, particularly the private sectors, offer better compensation and therefore have better human resources. They would better absorb this 40% R&D elements along with rest 60% activity.

4. Lastly, a few Technology Demonstration projects where R&D elements are 40% or more and all the S&T projects where R&D elements are 100%, there DRDO has it primary role that is : “Convert scientific know- how into usable technologies. Here also DRDO need to evolve partnership with the academic institutions, funded by government or privately managed. All such projects are identified as (a) Basic Research that produces new knowledge in scientific or technology areas of interest to the military and (b) Applied Research that supports the exploratory development of new technologies for specific military applications or further development of existing technology for new military applications. The procedures followed by DARPA can be adopted to ensue transparence, equal opportunity, accountability, quality and most importantly revealing what followed next.

My best regards to friends in DRDO, a great organization that helped me to grow over a period of 30 years

Drdo

Missile Crisis

Leave a comment

Shantanu Guha Ray January 22, 2011 /India Today / India / Story

India’s defence ministry is stalling the export of the indigenously manufactured BrahMos supersonic cruise missile to Indonesia. This first defence deal between the two countries was being pushed by the external affairs ministry as part of its Look East policy. The defence ministry shelved the proposal, citing security implications. Ironically, Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is to be the chief guest at the 61st Republic Day celebrations in Delhi

 

Drdo

SC asks for a copy of CAG report on NTRO scam

Leave a comment

SC asks for a copy of CAG report on NTRO scam

TNN | Jan 17, 2012, 12.47AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked for a copy of the Comptroller and Auditor General’s report pointing out alleged irregularities in the purchase of intelligence equipment byNational Technical Research Organisation(NTRO), which was set up in 2004 to provide critical data relating to threats to the nation.

Solicitor general R F Nariman assured a bench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad that the government had already initiated action against erring officials on the basis of the CAG report but petitioner V K Mittal’s counsel Jayant Bhushan wondered why the Centre was shy of bringing the alleged irregularities into the open by placing the report in Parliament.

The bench asked Nariman to produce the CAG report on NTRO scam in a sealed cover by March 19. This is the second time within a year that the apex court has asked for a CAG report, the first being on the irregularities in the allotment of 2G spectrum and licences during A Raja’s tenure as telecom minister.

Nariman was belligerent in trashing Mittal’s PIL, not only accusing the latter of attempting to serve a personal interest but also alleging that his correspondence with the authorities revealing top secret projects with their location could help countries inimical to India.

Bhushan countered Nariman by alleging that the government was deliberately keeping the matter under wraps in the name of security to shield the culprits. But the bench said, “It is not a case where the government has put the issue in cold storage but promised that it was being looked into. We will not pass an order but request the SG to produce the CAG report in a sealed cover on March 19.”

Mittal had alleged that a major portion of the Rs 450 crore NTRO scam pertained to purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) from an Israeli firm allegedly at a very high price without the mandatory approval of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

NTRO, which functions under the Prime Minister’s Office, has been entrusted with the task of missile monitoring, satellite and airborne imagery, cyber patrolling and security, cyber offensive operations and communication support systems including cryptology.

It was on the complaint of Mittal, a former joint director in the government of India who had also served in NTRO, that the PMO had ordered a probe into the scam and later, CAG was asked to look into the organisation’s accounts. Nariman alleged that Mittal wanted to head the NTRO and filed the PIL when he did not succeed.

During the last hearing, Bhushan had alleged that Delhi High Court had dismissed Mittal’s writ petition on April 6, 2011 after the Centre filed a probe status report in sealed cover assuring prompt action against the guilty officials. However, no action was taken till date, he claimed.

Mittal’s petition stated that the independent body answerable only to the national security adviser was allotted approximately Rs 8,000 crore since 2005, but there was no accounting of the spending.