Tag Archives: products

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman pulls up DRDO, asks it to focus more on research and development

“I would like to see equal fervour among innovators, among startups, among those who want to do something for defence related activities,” Sitharaman said | Photo Credit: ANI

 Nov 27, 2018 | 21:26 IST | ANI =TIMESNOWNEWS.COM
Addressing the gathering on the occasion, Nirmala Sitharaman opined that there is keenness among a lot of young minds to come back to India from abroad owing to the growth of startups in the country.
New Delhi: Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Tuesday pulled up the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and asked it to focus more on Research and Development (R&D) and exploit the opportunity and support being extended by the central government. Speaking at the launch of the Mission Raksha Gyan Shakti, which aims at increasing intellectual property right (IPR) to reduce the transfer of technology and dependence on foreign companies, the defence minister said, “DRDO should focus, in fact, refocus on R&D and it should be on toes to make themselves nimble to innovations.”

She also called upon all stakeholders to step up, as more was “needed to be done to nurture innovation in Defence, which could be translated into a commercially viable solution.” Sitharaman further said that the present ministry hierarchy should break the traditional barriers to identify, motivate and support people who are “capable to innovate, fabricate and manufacture in-house.”

Addressing the gathering on the occasion, Sitharaman opined that there is keenness among a lot of young minds to come back to India from abroad owing to the growth of startups in the country. “I would like to see equal fervour among innovators, among startups, among those who want to do something for defence related activities,” she said. Crediting Secretary of Defence Production Dr Ajay Kumar for the mission Raksha Gyan Shakti, Sitharaman observed that this operation is giving the “impetus needed for moving towards innovating for defence.”

“Defence is always seen as a very difficult area to come in with a commercialised product in hand. Defence is seen as an area in which probably much transparency doesn’t prevail when you want to buy a thing when you want to procure it for the purpose of defence. We need technical requirement for defence, be it of quality, be it of certain standards for performance or be it a necessity for use,” she explained. Sitharaman also stressed on the hesitancy of innovators to approach the Defence Ministry for the commercialisation of their products.

“Anyone who wants to innovate or anyone who wants do anything towards commercialising some product, which is patented hesitates to approach defiance related sectors. They would rather go to food industry due to preconceived notion that it is very difficult to even break in and then have a dialogue and then see that there is a possibility of commercially producing something that the defence might need,” Sitharaman added.

“Each time an innovation is patented the innovator may not be interested in producing it. You need to find somebody to produce it on a commercial scale. We make sure to facilitate it, make finances available and find a market for it,” the defence minister said.

DRDO under Parliament scanner; dna accesses House committee documents rapping organisation for shoddy research

Monday, 22 December 2014 – 7:10am IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: dna
294833-tejasNew Delhi: India’s premier defence research organisation – Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) – is under Parliament scanner.

Shoddy research, inordinate delays, corruption and its fancy for reverse engineering have resulted in the Parliamentary standing committee on defence raising the red flag on DRDO budget for 2014-15.

According to documents accessed by dna, the committee has nailed DRDO on several occasions. It has asked DRDO to furnish details on how many new models, weapon systems and engines have been imported in the last 10 years in the name of study and modifications. “DRDO labs are more interested in importing systems, modifying them a little bit, re-labelling them and reselling them to forces,” the panel observed.

Of the 31-member committee, four members have defence background. “Where do you think DRDO stands in our military hardware preparedness vis-à-vis China today?” the committee said. It also asked DRDO to disclose those areas of technology where they are not competitive or behind the curve.

“There is a perception that DRDO is not really fulfilling its role; it is only doing normal non-commercial office work. DRDO should work out what is required by the services… futuristic and does not get outdated before it is introduced into services. People are expecting something extraordinary from DRDO, something out-of-the-box,” it said.dna began its investigations in August this year when Prime Minister Narendra Modi criticised DRDO during an address in Kargil. drdo delay story dna

“If a project was conceived in 1992, it should not be the case in 2014 we are still saying it will take some more time,” he had said. India, he said, has the potential to be a world leader in defence sector, but was being held back by a chalta hai attitude.

In the last 10 years, the DRDO budget has increased from Rs 3,443.18 crore to Rs 10,868.89 crore (around three times). However, it has completed/closed only 13 projects costing Rs 134.08 crore in 2013 14, while it got 52 new projects, costing Rs 1,651.59 crore from January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014.

“DRDO’s mandate is to develop products and technologies to modernise our armed forces. It has shown a list of products developed by them. Please also furnish a list of technologies developed,” the committee said.

DRDO’s annual report says that, as on March 31, 2014, it was handling 339 projects costing approximately Rs 45,554.73 crore. Out of these, 37 projects cost above Rs 100 crore, and, in total, account for Rs 38,613.89 crore. This is approximately 85% of active project costs.

DRDO scientists are among the best paid in India. They get incentives like two additional increments on promotion, up to six variable increments on promotions granted on fast track, professional update allowance, opportunity to acquire higher qualifications at reputed institutes and residential complexes.

The committee also asked DRDO about its research on a Gujarat-based Sadhu, Prahlad Jani, who has been living on air. He does not eat and drink. A research on him was carried out in 2003 and 2010 and the committee asked if the outcome can be used in warfare.

Talking to dna, a committee member said on condition of anonymity: “DRDO is doing shoddy research and some parliamentarians seem to be encouraging it by asking how outcomes could be used in warfare. Are you going to deprive Indian soldiers food and water in harsh conditions like extreme heat and cold? It’s disgusting.”

“This is not the only example. Recently, in Pune, they developed a hi-tech chariot to be donated to a temple. Is it what they are supposed to do?” he said.

“There are also a number of irregularities like an institute director buying a Honda CRV for personal use from the institute’s budget, although that car was not fit for that terrain.

“A building construction project worth crores was given to National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC) without proper tendering. There are also complaints of misbehaviour and harassment of officials and purchase of expensive tickets from Nagpur, home district of one DRDO institute director,” he said.

DRDO blames it on defence services, finance officers

DRDO has its own woes. They range from lack of testing facilities to infrastructure to shortage of funds to impractical demands of defence services. Another big reason is the rejection of DRDO technologies by defence services, terming them “inferior”, and their ‘preference’ for imported technologies.

A top DRDO official in Delhi said, “Top defence people visit international exhibitions and defence machinery manufacturers where they see the latest technologies. They collect brochures and after coming back, they shortlist good technologies from various options available, amalgamate them and ask DRDO to develop a product or technology. They don’t even bother to study the feasibility of their demands in context with the resources with us. That is one major reason for delay in aircraft and engines.”

“What they see in these exhibitions is imported technology where countries like the US, Russia and France have in-house raw materials building and manufacturing facilities. In India, we have to import even small components. This is one reason for the delay and increase in project costs,” he said.

In Between ISRO and DRDO- Where Lies the Difference?

Friday, September 26, 2014, 9:01 [IST]- Oneindia news

After the initial euphoria over the emphatic and the most incredible success of ISRO’s Mars Mission has settled down, it would be interesting to do some analysis as to why ISRO stands apart from other similar organizations when it comes to crossing one milestone after another and that too in a field where very few dare to venture.

Space research is not everyone’s cup of tea and even though most of the major economies of the world have their own independent space research programmes, only a handful have been successful in making a significant mark in this field.

The Milestone Machine named ISRO

Even before the envious milestone of reaching Mars in its very first attempt, ISRO has been known for having had more than 100 launches and with the ISRO workhorse namely the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) alone having been responsible for launching 65 satellites into the orbit out of which 30 are of Indian origin and 35 of foreign origin.

Earlier this year, ISRO also succeeded in taming the unruly horse namely the GSLV or the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle with the launch of GSAT-14 weighing 1982 Kg by GSLV-D5 rocket. Today ISRO is not just known for its flawless but frugal engineering and space research credentials but also for making the impossible achievements possible with a fraction of the budget that NASA has.

The Big Question- What Sets ISRO Apart and Where Does DRDO Falter?

So what sets ISRO apart? What makes ISRO so globally competitive and how is it possible that a nation which can on its own make a spacecraft and make it travel for more than 660 million Km, finds it difficult to make a quality combat aircraft?

Isn’t it strange that a nation which has outsmarted NASA in terms of frugal engineering and low cost Mars Mission finds it difficult to retain its own engineering talent? Is it not a reality that ISRO has succeeded where DRDO has faltered if not failed?

In fact one should remember what Prime Minister Modi had to say to the top brass of DRDO in the month of August this year. He had expressed his anguish at the ‘Chalta Hai’ attitude of DRDO for its inability to finish projects on time and made it clear to them that the world would not be waiting for them.

Modi had stated to the top brass of DRDO no unclear terms, ‘”The world will not wait for us. We have to run ahead of time. We should not say in 2014 that a project conceived in 1992 will take some more time,” (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/World-wont-wait-for-you-PM-Narendra-Modi-tells-laggard-DRDO/articleshow/40550218.cms).

Clearly Modi was referring to DRDO’s numerous long delayed projects including that of the Light Combat Aircraft as well as that of its failure with several others including the Kaveri Engine, the Advanced Light Towed Array Sonar (ALTAS) projector the agonizing delay in the Long Range Surface to Air Missile or LR-SAM, which it was doing in collaboration with Israeli Aerospace Industries.

One though cannot deny the success of DRDO for materializing the Agni and Prithvi range of missiles and making some reasonable progress with some others such as Akash, Prahaar, Shaurya, Brahmos and with the anti ballistic missile systems. Barring the missile projects, the success rate of DRDO has been extremely unsatisfactory.

The other key problem with DRDO is its inability to realize its areas of core competence and concentrate on them. Instead it tried to put its hand on everything and ended up failing in many. On the contrary ISRO is known for its core competence and sticking to it.

Not Just DRDO but all Defence PSU’s and Ministry of Defence should be Blamed as well

In fact the blame should not just be with DRDO but equally with all the Defence PSUs and the Ordnance Factory Boards (OFB) who all suffer from similar laid back attitude and producing flawless quality products has not their hallmark.

At a time when ISRO has exemplified how a Mars Mission can be made successful at with fund less than what was used for even some of the top line Hollywood flicks, DRDO and its brethren in defense production are masters in cost overrun, delays and snail pace.

A major part of the blame for the sheer difference in the performance of ISRO and DRDO has to taken by the Ministry of Defence as well. The Ministry of Defence has failed to evolve with time and is manned with bureaucrats devoid of any specialized knowledge of strategic and defence affairs.

Their idiosyncratic tendency to cancel tenders at the whiff of a gossip of a wrong doing, without taking the issues of national security and priority for weapons, their tendency to manage issues of technology with a bureaucratic mindset and sheer inability to harness the potential of the private sector has done much harm.

The Real Reason for ISRO’s Success- No Bureaucratic Red Tape and Meddling in its Affairs

The real reason for which ISRO has succeeded is because it always had the free hand to perform without the needless bureaucratic hurdles to throttle their work.ISRO works directly under the supervision of the Prime Minister as part of the Department of Space and is managed by specialized technocrats rather than generalist bureaucrats. The ISRO website states:

‘The Space Commission formulates the policies and oversees the implementation of the Indian space programme to promote the development and application of space science and technology for the socio-economic benefit of the country. DOS implements these programmes through, mainly Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), Physical Research Laboratory (PRL), National Atmospheric Research Laboratory (NARL), North Eastern-Space Applications Centre (NE-SAC) and Semi-Conductor Laboratory (SCL). The Antrix Corporation, established in 1992 as a government owned company, markets the space products and services.’

Contrast this with the ad-hoc manner in which Ministry of Defence operates and the arms length distance it keeps from the end users of defense products, i.e. the Indian Army, Air Force and Navy. The Ministry of Defence completely lacks a strategic intent and has failed to create a Defence Commission on the lines of Space Commission to formulate policies and oversee implementation.

Further, it has failed to create a dedicated cadre of personnel with impeccable understanding of defense issues and issues related to the importance of development of indigenous capabilities. Fact of the matter is that defence PSUs or the DRDO were never taken to task everyone was happy with the lackadaisical approach and the dependence on imports.

Put DRDO directly under Prime Minister’s Supervision, just like ISRO

One cannot deny the success of DRDO in terms of making India capable of making developing missiles but at the same time, one also cannot overlook its sheer failure in other areas of defence research. The best thing to do, to salvage the situation would be to directly bring DRDO under the supervision of Prime Minister’s office.

In fact the whole Department of Defence, much on the lines of Department of Space should be directly under the Prime Minister and should ideally be supervised by a Defence Commission manned by defence experts and technocrats. Only that can salvage India’s defence research and bring it at par with its space research feats. DRDO has immense potential and talent to make excellence a norm like ISRO. All that it would take is to put it right under the supervision of Prime Minister and release it from the clutches of bureaucratic meddling.isro org

 

Narendra Modi extremely unhappy with DRDO’s failure to meet deadlines in delivering products

BHAVNA VIJ AURORA,ET Bureau | Aug 23, 2014, 12.19 PM IST – The Times of India
NEW DELHI: When defence minister Arun Jaitley commissions Indian Naval Ship Kamorta on Saturday in Vizag, it will be bereft of the critical mediumrange surface-to-air missile (SAM) and advanced light towed array sonars (ALTAS) — both of which Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has failed to deliver.
This is not the first failure for DRDO, the only body in the country doing research in the field of defence systems. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had commissioned INS Kolkata on August 16 in Mumbai.

That too was without the crucial long-range SAM systems and ALTAS.drdo award 2014

Extremely unhappy about the state of affairs, Modi has put DRDO on notice. With the government approving 49% FDI in defence, the PM has asked the tardy organisation to shape-up in the face of competition from the private sector. Officials in the security setup of the country told ET that Modi has asked the defence minister to conduct a detailed review of the organisation, and if need be come out with a white paper on it.

Modi personally delivered a stern message to DRDO, asking the officers to give up their “chalta hai” (lackadaisical) attitude, during the annual award ceremony of the organisation on August 20. The PM had started the DRDO clean-up project even before he attended the award function. He ordered scrapping of a committee that was reviewing cases to grant extension of service to scientists, who had superannuated. The committee sent its recommendations to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet.

As many as 15 top scientists of DRDO, including Director General (DG) Avinash Chander, are on extension. Chander, in fact, is now on contract after two extensions. Incidentally, he holds three posts — Secretary (Defence) R&D, DG (DRDO) and Scientific Advisor to the defence minister. It was the previous ACC, under the UPA government, comprising Manmohan Singh, AK Antony and Sushil Kumar Shinde that had granted him extensions and finally appointed him on contract in November 2013. About six to eight people were believed to be getting extensions each year in DRDO.

“The PM was not happy about it. As per a department of personnel and training (DoPT) ruling, only the best scientists of international stature should be considered for extensions. He asked for all the details. He was told about the high attrition rate among the younger scientists,” disclosed a senior defence ministry official.

The review committee, scrapped by the government, comprised secretaries of Department of Atomic Energy, DRDO and ISRO as members. Modi is believed to have said that the secretaries of the same departments could not review extensions of their own personnel. He has now constituted the committee to include the Cabinet Secretary and secretaries of unrelated departments of science and technology and earth sciences.

“It is to weed out the dead wood that Modi made the announcement about employing only young scientists, not over the age of 35, in five of the 52 DRDO labs. It is a beginning and will send the message to everyone working in DRDO to deliver,” explained the defence ministry official.

DRDO spokesperson Ravi Gupta could not be contacted for a comment.

Chinks in the Armour – What ail DRDO, India’s Premier Defence Organigation?

Rediff.com – News-Special Part- V

‘Kalam has been promoting himself, not self-reliance’

George Iype

Avul Pakir Jainulabeen Abdul Kalam, who headed DRDO for years, is credited with drawing up the blueprint for India’s entry into the league of developed nations. He is the protagonist of the government’s grand plans to make indigenisation of defence products a reality.

If he could transform DRDO from a moribund, bureaucratic government organisation to an establishment that fights for self-reliance in defence production, will Kalam’s effort to build aircraft, war machines and missiles on the Indian soil bear fruit?

Many acknowledge that despite technology denials and control regimes enforced by the developed countries, Kalam imbibed a high-end research and development initiative in DRDO laboratories that the government, academic institutions and the industry now look at him in awe.

Thanks to Kalam, DRDO now has a leading role in generating technologies and secure systems in the field of information technology which could change the quality of life in defence forces. Under his stewardship, the organisation created the critical components and devices that will be the backbone of state-of-the-art electronic systems in defence.

Many claim Kalam’s discovery has been a turning point in India’s history and national security. But these days the boat owner’s son from Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu is setting sail on just one massive project — take India to self reliance in defence production at least 70 per cent by 2005.

It is because of Kalam that India can now boast of the ambitious indigenisation Plan 2005. Plan 2005 is not just about making weapons indigenously. It is the symbol of national pride.

Years after it professed the indigenisation mantra, the government sheepishly admitted last year that only 30 per cent of Indian weapons were of domestic origin. The realisation prompted it to turn to Kalam. It then immediately created a Self-Reliance Implementation Council headed by Kalam that will implement Plan 2005.

Is DRDO’s aim to achieve 70 per cent indigenisation in the defence system realistic in the wake of unaccomplished high profile projects like the Light Combat Aircraft, Arjun main battle tank, the missile and nuclear submarine programmes? But can Kalam deliver?

Not many believe that Kalam will accomplish 70 per cent self-reliance by 2005. The task us gigantic. More than one-third of the budget for the missile programme, the Arjun MBT and the LCA has gone into imports of critical components. More imports are to follow as DRDO’s indigenous engine programme, especially for the LCA, is on the verge of collapse.

“Indigenisation is a hoax. Kalam is spreading it boasting that he will attain self-reliance in defence equipment in five years time. Indigenisation should have been the DRDO motto when it was established in the 1950s, not in 2000,” says an army officer.

Many within the army, the air force and the navy, who have been waiting in vain for DRDO-developed defence equipment and electronic warfare systems, claim Kalam has been promoting himself, and not self-reliance.

“Both DRDO and Kalam have failed to win over the armed forces because many of their projects have become serious stumbling blocks for the forces’ modernisation,” the army officer adds.

The accusations against Kalam are three — that he did not create a good research and development culture in DRDO, that his relationship with the armed forces has been rocky and that he did not embark on any plan to stem the brain drain from DRDO.

Designing and developing defence weapons is perhaps the toughest engineering task. But experts claim DRDO suffers from a poor research and development culture thanks to Kalam.

“DRDO under Kalam has done more on public relations than on proper research and development. That is the reason why many of our projects like LCA are terribly lagging behind in schedules,” says Shankar Sen Chaudhury, an independent technical analyst based in Hyderabad.

“The structural environment in DRDO labs have to change if effective results in indigenisation is to take place,” he adds.

Another problem is the rocky relationship that Kalam has with the armed forces. He and his colleagues argue that the forces do not have any specialists who understand the design and development concepts of DRDO. “Therefore, the armed forces always interfere in our projects halfway through,” a DRDO scientist says.

Many say this messy relationship between DRDO, “the seller” and the three armed forces, “the buyers”, should be blamed on both sides. “Kalam was a marketing man. He wanted to hard-sell his half-baked DRDO products to us, like the Arjun tank,” says an army officer.

But DRDO asks: When the forces induct imported products without any trails, why can’t they rely on indigenous products? DRDO officials say the only reason for this is that the army does not have the experience to induct an indigenous weapon system.

DRDO has been mouthing the politically correct mantra of indigenisation because a number of disgruntled scientists in the organisation charge, “Dr Kalam is a politician.”

His critics say the problem is that India’s defence programmes is a one-man show. “Only Kalam is recognised and acknowledged. It is ridiculous that thousands of us are working there, and only one man is framed in a glass house. That is the precise reason for the high rate of brain drain from DRDO,” a disgruntled DRDO engineer said.

The rate at which scientists and engineers are leaving the laboratories is a cause for grave concern. According to a survey, more than 3 per cent of scientists and engineers leave the organisation every year in search of attractive salaries and perks.

“We have been demanding better salary packages and service conditions. But neither Kalam nor the government has listened,” says the engineer.

A section of DRDO scientists are now happy that the organisation is no longer under Kalam. Ever since the new chief, Dr Vasudev K Aatre, took over in December, things are looking up. One of the his first decisions was to initiate a university interactive programme for DRDO scientists. Now, professors of premier science institutes like the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore will spend time with DRDO scientists on specific research projects.

Dr Aatre is also taking a few radical decisions — he is on the verge of dropping some projects that the organisation has failed to execute in many years.

TOMORROW: ‘DRDO is like the Indian cricket team’
“They have been pampered with money and praise that they cannot just deliver,” remarks Major General (retd) Ashok Mehta.

Defence ministry report slams DRDO chief

Defence ministry report slams DRDO chief

14 Aug 2012Hindustan Times (Bhopal)

NEW DELHI: Defence Research and Development Organisation chief VK Saraswat sanctioned R2.8 crore to a mathematical society headed by him, an audit report has revealed. The report prepared by the defence ministry’s finance wing has also dealt with issues of transparency and shortcomings in projects developed by the organisation.

Defence ministry audit questions DRDO functioning

New Delhi: An internal audit report ordered by the defence ministry raised questions over the functioning of the DRDO and the grant of Rs 2.8 crore by its chief VK Saraswat to a society under him.

The report prepared by the finance wing of the defence ministry raised several issues in its review and the transparency of the research agency with a budget of over Rs 5,000 crore, defence sources said in New Delhi.

The report has questioned the grant of Rs 2.8 crore by Saraswat to a mathematical society.

The report has also pointed out that to avoid seeking approvals from the competent financial authorities, the DRDO was splitting the sanctions for its projects, they said.

It has also cited shortcomings in the products developed by the DRDO such as the Arjun tank, which has been found to be overweight by the Army for operations in certain areas along the border.

However, the DRDO said the issues raised in the report “are essentially in the nature of preliminary observations” and it was “vitiated by a faulty audit process”.

“Such preliminary observations are required to be formally issued and replies to the same should be sought prior to compilation of any report. Only if the replies are not satisfactory is the next step of making a preliminary report taken.

“In the extant case, the laid down procedure was not followed and to that extent, the process of audit stands vitiated. Thus, even before seeking replies of DRDO, presumption and baseless conclusions appear to have been arrived at,” DRDO spokesperson Ravi Gupta said.

PTI

DRDO ‘develops’ blatant financial irregularities

Published: Friday, Aug 17, 2012, 9:00 IST

By Pradip R Sagar | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

The ministry of defence’s special audit has found blatant irregularities in the Defence Research Development Organisation’s handling of finances.

The special audit report, accessed by the DNA, reveals that financial sanctions are being split so that they do not require approval of higher authorities.

The audit carried out by Comptroller General of Defence Audit on the direction of defence minister AK Antony has found that key projects costing over Rs300 crore were tweaked by the DRDO to get them sanctioned without approaching the concerned financial authorities.

“DRDO authorities have sometimes used delegated powers to sanction supposedly new projects to complete the work taken up under ongoing projects, instead of going to the concerned financial authority for revision of cost of the old projects,” the audit report claims.

For instance, programme for development of main battle tank Arjun was sanctioned at Rs69.99 crore in November 2010. But the DRDO authorities changed the entire programme and split it into smaller sub-heads and several procurements were sanctioned under ‘build-up’ so that higher authorities within the system could be avoided. This shows that a coordinated attempt to avoid going to higher financial authorities, which is contrary to financial regulations,” the auditors observed.

Similarly, despite having a comprehensive five-year programme sanctioned for human performance enhancement in May 2009 at a cost of Rs34.56 crore, the director of Defence Institute of Physiology & Allied Sciences (DIPAS-DRDO), has managed to get approval for additional projects over the already sanctioned project. Such practice defeats the very purpose of making projects/programmes,” the report added.

Another project called ‘Product support and product improvement of NAG weapon system’ was sanctioned at a cost of Rs28.35 crore by VK Saraswat, director general of DRDO, despite the fact that the Cabinet Committee on Security approved similar programme was still in the pipeline.

Audit report also pointed out an unjustified cost reduction by DG, DRDO for a project for design and development of electro-optical sensors for air-borne platforms (UAV and Aerostat) at a cost of Rs49.82 crore.

“Director General, DRDO has reduced the cost from Rs70 crore as proposed to Rs49.82 crore so as to bring it just under Rs50 crore, which is his sanctioning power,” the special audit report claims.

Under scrutiny of accounts, the audit also found anomalies in facility for elctro-optical system testing (FACET). “FACET was sanctioned at a cost of Rs35 crore by DG, DRDO to create a facility, which is essentially required to meet the objectives of an already sanctioned project,” the report added.

The audit report also observed several split sanctions were issued for renovation of DRDO Bhawan in New Delhi while an unauthorised sanction of Rs49.15 crore to develop vehicle testing facility in Pune from public accounts mainly for civilian use was granted by the DRDO authorities

The Missile that Cannot Fire – Long delays, cost escalation damage DRDO’s reputation

Amarnath K, Menon and  Gaurav C. Sawant – April 13, 2012 – India Today 

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was set up in 1958 with a vision to “provide our defence services a decisive edge by equipping them with internationally competitive systems and solutions”. The DRDO has clearly failed in its mission.

There is no bigger indictment of India‘s premier organisation for research and development in military hardware than the fact that 54 years after its establishment, India still imports 70 per cent of its equipment requirements. In 1997, India best known defence bureaucrat and the then scientific adviser to defence minister, APJ Abdul Kalam, had said that India should bring the hare of imports in defence equipment purchases down to 30 per cent by 2005. No progress has been made. The percentage is still 70-30 in favour of imports.

DRDO`s list of successes is short-primarily the Agni and Prithvi missiles. Its list of failures is much longer.The Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) project, which was commissioned in 2001, is running late by four years. The costs have gone up from an original estimate of around Rs 3,300 crore to over Rs 5,780 crore. The Kaveri Engine for LCA is running late by 16 years and the cost has escalated by around 800 per cent.
In 2011, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) put a serious question mark on drdo’s capabilities. “The organisation, which has a history of its projects suffering endemic time and cost overruns, needs to sanction projects and decide on a probable date of completion on the basis of a conservative assessment of technology available and a realistic costing system,” its report stated.

The CAG report also revealed that not all technologies developed by DRDO were suitable for use by the armed forces. The three services have rejected 70 per cent of the products developed at the Armament Research and Development Establishment (ARDE), Pune, in the last 15 years costing Rs 320 crore because the products did not meet their standard and requirement, The CAG report stated that in order to form a fair and balanced view of the success of the projects undertaken by drdo, 46 completed and nine ongoing projects worth Rs 387.35 crore were scrutinised in February 2011. Of the 46 completed and closed projects, only 13 closed projects, wrapped up at a cost of Rs 68 crore, underwent production. “Without close synergy between the users and the technology development agency, much of the development efforts would go in vain, as the success rate of projects in ARDE amply demonstrates,” the report said.

The army is not impressed by DRDO`s performance either. Says Major-General S.V. Thapliyal, a former deputy director-general for perspective planning at army headquarters in Delhi, “DRDO promises to manufacture. It nixes our plans to acquire from abroad; It does not meet the deadline. Worse, it does not maintain quality either. The soldier, the end user, is the worst sufferer.”

General V.P. Malik, who was chief of army staff during the Kargil War, has an interesting incident to narrate in his book Kargil From Surprise to Victory. In 1997, the army finalized plans to acquire the AN/TPQ-37 Fire finder radars from the US. Prices were negotiated and just before purchase, drdo offered to manufacture them at half the price and within two years. The government shot down the army’s plans to buy these radars. In 1999, during the Kargil War, the radars were desperately needed. Neither had DRDO manufactured them nor could they be procured from the US (post-1998 Pokhran tests there was an arms embargo). Several lives were lost in Pakistani shelling. Wlien Indo-US relations improved, India did buy these radars in 2003, but at almost twice the initial price. “The problem with drdo is that it is big on promise and small on delivery. There is no accountability in the system,” says Malik.

DRDO continues to mislead. On April 4, it claimed it had achieved a major milestone on an “indigenous” programme to develop a sophisticated radar to monitor the Indian airspace. The aircraft on which the radar is mounted—a modified Embraer EMB 1451-is imported from Brazil. drdo had to resort to the Embraer aircraft because its own efforts at producing an indigenous carrier had ended in disaster. Project Guardian Airawat was stalled in 1999 when its HS-748 turboprop aircraft crashed, killing eight crew members-engineers, scientists and Indian Air Force (IAF) officers-on board.
Under a Rs 1,050 crore agreement, Brazil’s Embraer will now act as the pverall systems integrator for the “indigenous” project, supplying the three jets, mounting the radar and electronics onto the plane’s fuselage and ensuring that the altered jets retain acceptable flight performance.

According to its original 2004 timeline, this project was to be completed by 2011. Now the delivery of the remaining two modified Embraer aircraft is only expected by mid-2013. The project will not be complete until 2014. Even then there are serious flaws in the project. IAF has pointed out that the Embraer EMB 1451 cannot fly above 4 0,000 ft and therefore is only of limited use in surveillance. “DRDO has a history of claiming foreign designs as its own, like the Arjun tank which is a derivative of the German Leopard,” says a source in the agency. ~
The technology development agency is also largely responsible for the fact highlighted by General V.K. Singh that 97 per cent of the army’s air defence is obsolete. The CAG report lists seven requirements of the army for air defence guns and the project status report. CAG notes the end result: “Even though three R&D projects and one staff project were undertaken, the air defence gun system could not be developed by DRDO to satisfy the frequently revised requirement of the user.”

Army air defence sources say DRDO is tinkering with World War II equipment instead of working on cutting-edge technology. “The chief downplayed the state of affairs. It is in dire straits,” says a top-ranking air defence officer.

“The air defence is in a very-sorry condition,” says Air Marshal A.K. Singh, former air officer commanding-in-chief, Western Air Command. “DRDO is not able to service the equipment. Even if systems are acquired from abroad and DRDO or Hindustan Aeronautics Limited is meant to service it, it fails.This leaves critical gaps in national defence,” he says.

The Government had constituted a committee for the first-ever external review of the agency in February 2007. The committee chaired by P. Rama Rao, ex‘secreta1y, Department of Science and Technology and former director, Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory, Hyderabad, suggested that DRDO be restructured to make it a leaner organisation. It also recommended the setting up of a commercial arm of the organisation to make it a profitable entity, besides cutting back on delays in completing projects. “Delivery delayed is delivery denied,” said
Defence Minister A.K. Antony on delays in DRDO projects. But little progress has been made in the last five years on implementing the committee’s suggestions.

DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat is eager to put his house in order. He has called for the setting up of a Defence Technology DRDO chief V.K. Saraswat is eager to put his house in order. He has called for the setting up of a Defence Technology Commission as well as a bigger role for DRDO in picking production partners for products developed by the agency. Instead of the current practice of the Ministry of Defence arbitrarily nominating a defence public sector undertaking or an ordnance factory to build the product, usually when development is almost complete, DRDO would be able to select a capable partner company from the outset, from the private sector if necessary.

The defence organisation, which has an annual budget of over Rs 10,000 crore, now has no choice but to reinvent itself. The agency‘s research has drifted away from its core competence in recent times. It has been accused of “wasting time and precious resources” being engaged in research and development of technique for detection of pesticides in fruits, technology for dengue control, dental implants, foldable stretchers and berry juice.
The moribund agency is also suffering from employee attrition. Over the past five years, while the report of the Rama Rao Committee has languished, around 1,700 of its 7,900 engineers and scientists have left for better opportunities in private companies. The depletion of talent will be the last stage in what cynical insiders say is the process of converting DRDO into a dodo.

How missiles get their names

(Agni III missile launched from Bhubaneswar in May. (AFP Photo)

 

BANGALORE: How do you name a missile? Or a tank? Or an aircraft for that matter? If you thought Agni, Prithvi and Akash were random names scientists just came up with, you couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Developing missile technology is hard work, and for scientists, their baby. Research keeps them up long hours, away from family and friends and it is but natural that great deliberation takes place before christening these babies.

 

Sanskrit names are always given preference. Scientists believe such names are powerful. All names are, in one way or the other, connected to the function of the missile, aircraft or tank.

Take for instance Agni, the intermediate range ballistic missile. The fire or the energy needed for propulsion is what gave the missile its name.

Explaining the naming procedure, W Selvamurthy, chief controller of life sciences and human resources at Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) said missiles and other products developed by the labs are given names that have a “functional meaning and/or a scientific rationale”.

The director of each project, along with the team, proposes a few names that they think would be appropriate. The proposals go to the chief controller of the lab which is working on the project and the final name is decided keeping in mind the functions of the final product.

DRDO gets vote of confidence to meet defence needs

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.