Tag Archives: New Delhi

Drdo

Arjun, Main Battle Tanked

Leave a comment

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

Arjun, Main Battle Tanked

Amitav Ranjan                                                                                                                  Posted: Tue Nov 14 2006, 00:00 hrs                                                                                New Delhi, November 13:

The Arjun tank has no future. It still cannot fire straight. The T-90, a far superior tank, can kill the Arjun. We would not cross any border with these tanks.

Strong words, from Brigadier D K Babbar, the Army’s pointsman for the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun project at the Mechanised Forces directorate until he retired last year from the 94th Armoured Brigade. Babbar, who spoke to The Indian Express, has reason to be disillusioned. So has Army chief General J J Singh who was more diplomatic last month: “We will see where we can use it to get optimum use.”

It’s not going to be easy.

Over 30 years after Project Arjun was sanctioned by Indira Gandhi’s Cabinet to make a home-grown battle tank that would address the armoured deficit identified during the 1971 war, the Army is now faced with a troubling prospect: inducting a lumbering, misfiring, vintage design tank like the Arjun, and that, too, in large numbers.

This, after DRDO over-shot Arjun’s project deadline by 16 years — from 1984 to 1995, finally closing the project only in 2000 — and the cost over-run is almost 20 times the original estimate. This is the highest percentage over-run for any DRDO project.

With five pre-production tanks forced upon the Army’s 43rd Armoured Regiment in 2004 and 23 tanks to be handed over shortly, MBT Arjun is about to be pushed into full-rate production outside Chennai, with the Army bound by its commitment to buy 124 for two regiments, all of which are to be delivered by 2008.

Still having 58 per cent of its content imported – including its engine, the integrated gunner’s main sight and tracks— the Arjun tank was put through confirmatory trials in the Mahajan ranges in July but the Army wasn’t holding its breath.

 

Consider these: At a mammoth 58.5 tons, Arjun is a full weight class over the Russian T-90 and nowhere near as agile.

• In May, the Defence Ministry publicized the Army chief’s inauguration of a product called Bogie Flat Arjun Tank (BFAT) built by Bharat Earth Movers in Bangalore. What it didn’t say: these were specially built rail wagons wide enough and reinforced to carry the massive 3.85-m-wide Arjun. For, the tank will crack the existing freight wagons.

• According to the Army’s latest trials, the decade-old problem of overheating persists. Two of the tank’s main subsystems, the fire control system (FCS) and integrated gunner’s main sight, which includes a thermal imager and laser range-finder, are rendered erratic and useless by the Arjun’s abnormally high peak internal temperature, which moves well beyond 55 degrees Celsius. This is in testimony to the Parliamentary committee.

• Following failed trials in summer 1997, which were criticized in a 1998 CAG report for a series of malfunctions, transmission failures and overheating, and an exodus of scientists from DRDO the same year, the tank’s production cost shot up steeply. Its unit price in 1997 was Rs 10.8 crore. It’s official unit price now: Rs 16.8 crore.

Former chief Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary had promised his service quick inductions, only to be faced with yet another extension by DRDO. In the same period, the Sino-Pak Al-Khalid tank was productionised and had begun inductions. When contacted, Roy Choudhary said: “I was a strong proponent of the Arjun tank but its performance was disappointing.”

• On October 12, Minister of State for Defence Production Rao Inderjit Singh told The Indian Express that it was decided — after the recent trials — that the production-series tanks will be stripped of their indigenous tracks and will have imported ones. So will the first few tanks that roll out of the Heavy Vehicles Factory outside Chennai. In other words, after three decades of research, Main Battle Tank Arjun cannot stand on its own “indigenous” feet.

• The project, according to testimony provided in January by the Defence Ministry to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, has produced virtually nothing. DRDO admitted to the same committee in June that it would be able to develop an indigenous engine, gunner’s main sight and tracks only if the Army places an order beyond 124 tanks. However, the Army has no such plans, making it uneconomical and non-feasible to reduce import content.

“License production of the above items may be feasible with enhanced order quantity for Arjun tanks and may result in reduction in import contents,” admits DRDO. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Army will progressively begin inducting between 800-1000 T-90 Bhishma tanks, which will be built under license from Russia, from 2008, making the letter ‘M’ in Arjun’s prefix not just superfluous but bogus. Why?

“It is important for the Army to maintain combat superiority over its adversaries. There have been delays and slippages in the MBT Arjun project,” Army Headquarters said in written replies to The Indian Express. Five months ago, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence said, “The Committee also desires that accountability for delay in production of the Arjun Tank may be fixed.” But the Arjun, which has cost the exchequer Rs 305.6 crore so far (representing one of the largest ever cost-overruns in percentage terms), has the influential DRDO high command unfalteringly behind it. DRDO chief Manthiram Natarajan, chief architect of the Arjun programme and a 2002 Padma Shri, has been associated with the programme since its birth in 1974 and became Programme Director in 1987. When contacted, he said, “Defence scientists are conscious that there have been time over-runs on some of the projects. But even today, it is much more cost efficient than tanks of same calibre being produced elsewhere.”

But DRDO is undeterred. With the Army’s armour perspective plan drawing out 60 regiments by 2020, DRDO told the Parliamentary panel that it’s now developing what it calls Tank-X, a hybrid consisting of an Arjun gun turret mounted on a T-72 chassis. Two tanks have been prepared, and DRDO has said it will shortly offer them to the Army for an evaluation. No guesses for why the Army isn’t terribly excited.

Drdo

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

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

Leave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Drdo

DRDO should plan to develop Scalar Weapon.

3 Comments

2nd November 2011

To
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

Honorable Sir,

Your attention is drawn to open secret, Russian were able to unify electromagnetic and gravitation theory. Just after world war –II the foundation of physics and electromagnetic discovery a weapon known today as “Scalar Weapon”

Even today the mighty Americans can never dare to see the soviet face to face. The giant transmitter releases 40 mega watts each and the transmitting pulses in advertently setup a standing wave around the earth. The first experiment conducted in 1950-52

The second experiment of 1 May1960  the defensive radars of soviet  uses their prototype scalar EM beam weapons downed U-2 reconnaissance plane flying over Soviet Union that time the surface to air missile had not born. 

April 10, 1963 Russians destroyed the U.S.S. Thresher with one of his new weapons. Scalar EM (electromagnetic-gravitational) beams, focused through the ocean to interfere on the Thresher under the surface, recreated spurious EM energy resulted the jamming of all electronics control system and the submarine sank under the sea.

April 11, 1963,   two deployed Soviet scalar EM weapons fired massive scalar EM pulses through the ocean. The two massive pulses met and interfered deep under the surface, 100 miles north of Puerto Rico. The resulting giant underwater EM explosion hurled a mushroom of water half a mile up into the air, and the anomalous explosion was observed  

In 1976 the power was further raised and 3-30MHz communication across the globe was interrupted. Multi beam light seen up to 200 miles and earthquake like situation was observed in China

In June 17, 1966 from the air near Teheran, Iran, several airline pilots sighted a brilliant sphere of light, “sitting on the horizon,” so to speak, deep within the Soviet Union. The intensely glowing sphere expanded to enormous size, dimming as it expanded, always remaining “sitting on the horizon.”  The pilots observed the phenomenon for 4 to 5 minutes

In 1977 from Alaska to Chile observed dense cloud.

In 1979 &1980 Soviet was able to test Scalar EM exothermic pulse, EMP flash appeared similarly to the nuclear explosion.

In March 26, 1987 the events related to the demolition of the Atlas-Centaur rocket which occurred on provides strong evidence of the use of Teslar-scalar weapons.

In June 1982 Japan Airline flight 404 & 421 pilots reported from 42 degrees N latitude and 153 degrees longitude sighting of a giant light over the about 700 miles east of Kushiro.

In 1984 gigantic mushroom cloud emerged above the ocean of the coast of Japan within 2 minutes the cloud grew to 60000 feets.

In 1985 an expert discovered the 54 powerful scalar beam with a separation of 12 KHz.

Soviets conducted full strategic exercise of their scalar EM weapons. After analysis was proved that the modern battle could be fought without movement of the personals across the border. The directed energy weapon or scalar weapon can turn the war scenario in favor of the country that is having these weapons.

DRDO with a huge infrastructure of nearly 1 Lakh corers and a strong scientific & technical manpower of 30000 in general & 6000  high qualified outstanding scientists receiving corers of rupees as rewards for importing the import substitute  can asked to development the technology of the scalar weapon

Scientific Adviser to RM is requested to find out the details of these dates and DRDO should plan to develop Scalar Weapon.

Thanking you

Regards
       
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com,  prabhu@dandriyal.com
Website –  www.corruptionindrdo.com
Drdo

Recovery of HRA – RTI Success Story -1

7 Comments

To                                                                                                       15th September2011
The Defence Minister
Room No -104, South Block
New Delhi – 110011

Reference: a)  Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2011 dated 21st March 2011
                       b)  Your letter No 1409-VIP/RM/2236 dated 20th May 2011

 Honorable Sir,

To expose the corrupt practices of DRDO top brasses I sought under RTI Act -2005 several informations and as I have already reported you few cases to you , where DRDO took the shelter under schedule-II exemption and did not gave the information. I approached the appellate authority but he also outright dismisses my requests which were asked in larger public interest.

Finally when I appealed to CIC (Chief Information commissioner) and CIC ordered DRDO authority to furnish the information to applicant.

Now DRDO compelled to issue a letter seeking recovery of HRA (House Rent Allowances) from those scientist/ officers who have stayed/staying in guest houses and also claimed/ claiming the HRA (House Rent Allowances)

The enclosed letter No DOP/03/3100/M/05 dated 17th August 2011 is meaningless until the HRA  (House Rent Allowances) recovered with interest from guilty scientist/ officers

DRDO top officers are enjoying this corrupt practice since early 1990.

In this connection an interesting case is that a senior top officer was posted to DRDO Hqrs was stayed in guest house and in the same time he was allotted Type IV/V Government accommodation, which he was rented to private person and collected approx Rs 30000 /month even after his retirement from DRDO. He was continued hold that house almost 5 years after retirement. This is the one of the famous case of DRDO and SA to RM knows it very well. It can happen in only in DRDO.

To stop this corrupt practice permanently from DRDO, Sir, you are requested to consider following and pass the appropriate order to Defence Secretary on this subject matter.

All those scientist/ officers who are staying/or stayed in guest house and claiming or claimed HRA (House Rent Allowances) should refund the amount with interest as per CCS (CCA) rules.

This deliberated attempt to fool the system and generate the illegal money should appropriately deal as per CCS (CCA) rules and to be reflected in their service book.

Thanking you

Regards
Prabhu Dayal Dandriyal
21-Sunderwala, Raipur, Dehradun-248008
Phone – 2787750, Mobile- 9411114879,
E-mail id prabhudoon@gmail.com,  prabhu@dandriyal.com 
Website – www.corruptionindrdo.com 

Enclosed

  1. Letter No DOP/03/3100/M/05 dated 17th August 2011

Copy to

  1. Defence Secretary, Room No 101, South Block, New Delhi -110011
  2. Scientific Adviser to RM, DRDO Bhawan, Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110105

    Recovery of HRA