Tag Archives: sector

DRDO should be more nimble on innovation: Nirmala Sitharaman

By Shaurya Karanbir Gurung, ET Bureau|Nov 27, 2018

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman at the launch of the ‘Mission Raksha Gyan Shakti’, which aims to promote Intellectual Property Rights in the defence sector.

NEW DELHI: The Defence Research and Defence Organisation (DRDO) should introspect to make themselves more “nimble” towards innovation, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said here today, while stressing on having an Intellectual Property cell in the defence ministry for sharing innovative ideas with manufacturers.

Sitharaman made the remarks at the launch of the ‘Mission Raksha Gyan Shakti’, which aims to promote Intellectual Property Rights in the defence sector. During her address at the event which was held at the DRDO Bhawan, she said, “DRDO like structures have to be on their toes for R&D. DRDO should introspect to make themselves more nimble towards innovation.”

She also stressed on the importance of an Intellectual Property cell to facilitate match making and sharing innovative ideas with the manufacturer from the user point of view. “I am telling Dr Ajay Kumar (Secretary Defence Production) and the DGQA that it is important for the ministry to have this cell to exchange ideas and do matchmaking,” she said.

Sitharaman explained that the defence sector is seen as an area where technical requirements are not easily shared, which leads to people who want to innovate not approaching the defence ministry. “They would go to any other ministry rather than approach defence, because it is difficult to break in and have a dialogue,” she said.

“It is that kind of barrier which we have to break and benefit from young minds. So that kind of benefit which you will derive is available for you. The ministry will have to do more for people who want to innovate,” she added.

The minister also said that the users, in this case the armed forces, should provide ideas about what they want. “You should be giving ideas to someone else to create it. The users can identify the situations in which you can conceive of something,” she said.

DefExpo 2018: Policy paralysis during Congress rule had affected defence preparedness, PM Modi says

B Sivakumar | TNN | Updated: Apr 12, 2018, 13:21 IST

HIGHLIGHTS

  • The Prime Minister was speaking at the defence expo in Chennai.
  • Modi said policy paralysis would not happen anymore.
  • The PM launched IDEX , a portal for startups to deal with the defence production department.

 CHENNAI: India is set to move faster in all fields as the NDA government has brought the country out of policy paralysis caused by the previous Congress government, said Prime Minister Narendra Modi while formally inaugurating the 10th edition of the defence expo – DefExpo 2018 – at Thiruvidandai near Chennai on Thursday.
“There was a time when, like many other aspects of governance, the critical issue of defence preparedness was also hampered by policy paralysis. We have seen how laziness, incompetence and perhaps some hidden motives can cause damage to the nation,” said the Prime Minister.
He said such paralysis would not happen anymore. “Issues that should have been long addressed by previous governments are being resolved now. You would have seen how the requirement of providing bullet proof jackets to Indian Army soldiers was kept hanging for years,” said Modi.
“You would also recall the long-drawn process of procurement of fighter aircraft that never reached any conclusion. We have not only taken bold action to meet our immediate critical requirements, but have also initiated a new process to procure 110 fighter aircraft. We do not want to spend 10 years in discussions without any tangible outcomes,” he said.
Promising honesty and transparency in all the dealings, the Prime Minister said, “We will work with you with a sense of mission to keep our defence forces equipped with state-of-the-art systems, and to create the necessary domestic manufacturing ecosystem to achieve this.”
Earlier, the Prime Minister launched IDEX (Innovations for Defence Excellence), a portal for startups to deal with the defence production department. “Today, we launched the ‘Innovation for Defence Excellence’ scheme. It will set up defence innovation hubs throughout the country to provide necessary incubation and infrastructure support to the startups in defence area,” said Modi.
He said the government would encourage private venture capital into the defence sector, especially for startups.
“New and emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and robotics are perhaps the most important determinants/of defensive and offensive capabilities for any defence force in the future. India, with its leadership in information technology domain, would strive to use this technology tilt to its advantage,” he said.
Quoting former President APJ Abdul Kalam, the Prime Minister said, Kalam asked us to dream, dream and dream. Our dream is to develop the ecosystem to foster an environment of new and creative entrepreneurship in defence manufacturing sector.
Modi said in the coming weeks the government would undertake extensive consultations with all stakeholders, including both Indian and foreign companies, about our defence production and defence procurement policy space. “I call upon all of you to actively participate in this exercise. Our aim is not just to discuss, but to draw the right lessons. Our intention is not to lecture, but to listen. Our goal is not merely to tinker, but to transform,” Modi said.
The Prime Minister witnessed live demonstration of the three services.

DRDO has much to answer for its poor performance

India has been unable to increase its self-reliance capability despite taking several steps.

By Dinesh Kumar | Chandigarh | 21 January, 2018 – Sunday Gaurdian
On paper the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) comes across as formidable. It is currently engaged in about 70 projects that include making almost every major conventional weapon system and platform that major military powers are already manufacturing. From rifles and machine guns to tanks, fighter aircraft, airborne warning and control system, aircraft carrier and a wide array of missiles—surface-to-air, surface-to-surface and sub surface. In reality, the DRDO has much to answer for its performance.

The DRDO, entrusted with developing weapon systems for India’s defence requirement, is critical for ensuring a high degree of self-reliance. Its huge establishment comprises a partnership with over 40 academic institutions, 15 national science and technology agencies, 50 public sector undertakings including the nine defence public sector units, the 40 ordnance factories and the over 250 private sector industries. By 2008, an estimated 1,500 small and medium enterprises were engaged in supplying about 20% to 25% of defence components to defence firms.

Notwithstanding, however, India’s self-reliance continues to hover at 30% to 35% despite a series of measures taken by the government that has resulted in India continuing to remain overly import dependent for its defence requirements. India has been unable to increase its self-reliance capability from the current 30% to 35% despite a series of measures it has taken in the last two-and-a-half decades in particular. Much of even the existing self-reliance capability is based on licence manufacture and transfer of technology by foreign state-owned or private companies. What is more, the government itself has expressed doubts about the country’s capability to even develop core technologies in reports prepared by the parliamentary standing committee on defence.

The harsh reality is that India’s state-owned defence industry has been unable to even develop a rifle, let alone a tank or an aircraft engine. The DRDO has consistently been shifting the timeline for all projects, ranging from rifles to aircraft. Furthermore, the DRDO has been unable to successfully complete a single major project except for a few missile systems and the nuclear powered submarine, although the latter has several shortcomings in capability. The procurement process continues to be time consuming and the private industry remains mired in bureaucratic processes. Most of the private industry’s involvement currently is low scale and focused on making sub systems. It is yet to graduate to making complete weapon systems or highly sophisticated technologies as is the case with major defence companies in the US and Europe.

India’s mission to increase self-dependency for defence equipment to 70% remains a dream. In 1992, following the breakup of the Soviet Union, which had been India’s main source of weapons supply, catering to 70% of the country’s defence requirements, a defence ministry “Self Reliance Review Committee” conceived “a ten-year plan for Self-Reliance in Defence Systems”, which, starting from 1995, was aimed at increasing India’s self-reliance index to 70% by 2005. The defence ministry has now shifted its deadline to attain about 70% self-reliance by over two decades to 2027. But as of now, this seems unlikely in the next ten years.

Efforts of successive governments have failed despite two unprecedented decisions that were specifically aimed at facilitating the self-reliance process—(a) opening of the military-industrial complex to Indian private sector participation up to hundred per cent, and (b) opening up to foreign direct investment (FDI) permissible up to 26%, which was subsequently increased to 49% in 2014 and 100% in 2016.

The present government’s latest emphasis on “Make in India” is undoubtedly noble, but seemingly idealistic. It remains to be seen whether “Make in India” will translate into “Made in India” or remain “Assemble in India”, without intellectual property rights and design control. Perhaps there is wisdom in the advice of David Gross, a Nobel Laureate in Physics, who during a visit to India in January 2016 advised that in order to “Make in India”, the country should focus on first “Discover in India”, followed immediately by “Invent in India”, before it embarks on “Make in India”. But this seems unlikely, considering India’s inflexible, irrational and outdated bureaucracy and the fact that India overall has been spending a paltry 0.9% of its GDP on research and development, compared to 2.1% by China, 2.7% by the United States and 4.4% by South Korea.

India’s record of producing and exporting weapon systems is extremely modest. For example, India’s defence exports averaged a meagre US$88 million a year between 2006-07 and 2008-09, which marginally rose to $174 million in 2013-14 and $330 million in 2016. At a cursory level, the list of countries that have been importing Indian defence equipment is impressive, as it also includes the United States, United Kingdom and Russia. But a study of the equipment reveals that it is very rudimentary—flight control panels, forging equipment and electronic assemblies to the US, transmitting tubes to the UK and, to Russia, some spares and services for the Russian origin MiG-29 and Sukhoi-30 fighter aircraft. None of these are critical technologies or anywhere close to a complete weapon system or a weapon platform.

In contrast, even while China is a major importer of defence hardware, it is at the same time also self-sufficient in certain key military technologies along with being a major weapons exporter. It was the fifth largest exporter of defence equipment to developing countries between 2000 and 2007, the third largest global supplier between 2010 and 2014 following an arms export increase by 143% and ranked fourth between 2008 and 2015 in arms transfer agreements with developing nations. China’s defence exports to developing countries averaged over $3 billion annually between 2011 and 2014, more specifically $2.5 billion in 2007, $2.2 billion in 2008, $3 billion in 2009, $1.9 billion in 2010, $3.2 billion in 2011, $3.4 billion in 2012, $4.2 billion in 2013 and $3.2 billion in 2014 and $ 6 billion in 2015.

India’s state-owned military industrial complex is characterised by flaws at several levels. Internal criticism against the military-industrial complex range from the way the DRDO is conceptualised and structured, its tendency to over reach, technological limitations and incapability; coordination problems with, and changing specifications by, the users, the myriad responsibilities of the head of the DRDO, the continuing limited involvement of the private sector and the predominant role of generalist bureaucrats with no expertise in defence. Moreover, the bureaucratisation of Indian science has created a scientific-work environment with features comprising caution, rules, reviews, screenings, scrutinies, committees, controls, centralisation, delays, doubts, indecision, inaction, suspicion, friction, and less communication.

Until India increases its self-dependence for its defence requirements, India’s import bill is only expected to rise, making it a foreign-made Indian armed force. But such overdependence has come at a high price for the country and the armed forces, which for the last two-and-a-half decades has been battling depleting force levels and antiquity of weapon systems.

The author is a defence analyst

‘Army Takes a Day to Reach where PLA Can Rush In’

By Express News Service Published: 28th April 2015 06:00 AM
NEW DELHI: Commenting on poor border roads connectivity, a Parliamentary panel has said that in the event of a war, the Army will take more than 24 hours to reach a border area where the Chinese PLA can arrive at in two or three hours. The Standing Committee on Defence, expressing serious concerns over connectivity to Arunachal Pradesh’s Tawang area, hit out at the Border Roads Organisation and asked it to construct good roads, especially on the eastern front facing China, on a priority basis.

The report said the delay in the procurement process had affected the armed forces’ operational preparedness.

The Committee observed that the naval budget had declined from 18.14 percent in 2006-07 to 16.51 percent in 2015-16.

Raising the issue of repeated naval accidents, the panel said the promulgation of the standard operating procedure to check the spurt in accidents was “ineffective”. The panel observed that allocation for the IAF is approximately 70 percent of the projection.

The report also slammed the ministry over the gap between the sanctioned strength of active fighter aircraft squadrons and their actual number.

The report said that the position of expenditure up to the end of February 2015 for the Army, Navy and the IAF is Rs 14,843,37 crore, Rs 18,438.02 crore and Rs 29,682 crore against their revised estimates of Rs 21,933.54 crore, 18,507.07 core and Rs 33,710.68 crore respectively.

Revamp DRDO

The Parliament Panel on Defence has called for a “complete revamp” and reorientation of the Defence Research Development Organistaion DRDO) to allow active participation of the private sector. It stressed on the need for a “complete revamp and reorientation of how the DRDO functions” with a major suggestion being to encourage the active involvement of the private sector, universities, the IITs and IIS. They could play a major role in the resurgence of the DRDO, it added.

DRDO’s Good days are coming

DRDO’s  Good days are coming – Dadagiri of DRDO scientists who are looking administration & HR of DRDO and passage of time they piled up hundreds of court cases and created lot of grievances and frustration among honest devoted officials. The incompetency of handling administrative, HR, recruitment and promotion matters one of the major reason of unproductiveness of DRDO.

The following answer given by Sh Manohar Parrikar in Rajya Sabha giving us some hope of Good are coming

 

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF  DEFENCE

RAJYA SABHA

QUESTION NO 2119 ANSWERED ON  17.03.2015

Overhauling of the DRDO and DPSUs

2119    Shri Rajeev Chandrasekhar

Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to satate :-

(a) whether Government plans to overhaul the functioning of the DRDO and the Defence PSUs in order to realise Make in India programme targets for the defence sector; and

(b) if so, the detailed plan and roadmap for the same?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF DEFENCE

(SHRI MANOHAR PARRIKAR)

(a) & (b): The functioning of Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) was reviewed by a Committee headed by Prof. P. Rama Rao. DRDO has accepted several recommendations which inter-alia include creation of Seven Technology Domain based Clusters headed by Director’s General; Restructuring of DRDO HQrs; Creation of Directorate of Quality, Reliability and Safety (QR&S); increase in budget for Extramural Research; creation of empowered Defence Technology Commission (DTC); creation of a Commercial Arm of DRDO; creation of 5 Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) posts along with 162 other posts for full scale implementation of Integrated Financial Advisor (IFA) Scheme etc.

Recently, a review of all DRDO Projects along with the three Services, OFB and Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) has been carried out so as to realign the focus towards the “Make in India” Programme. Also, more than 1000 small, medium and large Indian industries have been involved in the development and productionisation of products for the delivery to the Services.

With the objective of achieving self-reliance in defence production, the DPSUs have been continuously modernizing and upgrading their capabilities and widening their product range. Some of the DPSUs have also collaborated with DRDO and other R&D institutions in this regard. There is also increasing emphasis on partnerships of DPSUs with the private sector for sourcing various components so that DPSUs can play the role of system integrators and become more competitive.

Why do people want to go private organizations? Is it because they do good work and they are rewarded? Do you have any method of incentives for good work done by scientists? Please elaborate – (CC R&D HR)

As per the reply in Parliament ( LOK SABHA) against UNSTARRED QUESTION NO 596, ANSWERED ON 09.12.2013, the total 487 scientists left from DRDO from 2008 to 30th November 2013. Scientist B- 289, Scientist C- 152, Scientist D – 26, Scientist E-  13, Scientist F – 7.

Why they left – Financial reasons – very few, most young scientists join this great premier scientific organization with great enthusiasm that they will contribute their best to serve the nation, but unfortunately they encounter incompetent, greedy, bosses who got these higher posts on the basis of flattering/corruption /nepotism.

Examples are numerous but this is one real reason I grew up in a small town called ———— and my father works for ——. All my childhood I spent in scientific community and I dreamt of becoming a scientist one day. I did that and I ignored offers from private sector and Joined DRDO.

The establishment that I joined promised me excellent work in my field of analysis and designing. At 21, I joined and things of course were very indifferent to what I dreamt of.

We had bureaucracy and people were not happy. The organization was something like a hierarchy controlled rather than intellectual oriented. I had an excellent team and my STA’s are one of the best. People never cared to harness their potential. Have no idea why.

Most of the works that we were supposed to do were outsourced; this is one thing that I fought with everybody. I did not want to work for my salary; I wanted to work for pleasure.

Finally, my team was able to deliver some engineering marvels that my superiors said it was impossible to do. My growing frustration with outsourcing was a big issue for me. A single step ahead in the project is like fighting with in.

After 5 years of service, I came to US to pursue my further studies.”

The absolute power to Lab Directors is also a big reason to derail the organizations.

The training of young scientist started with collecting quotations, making specifications, filing indents of not required instruments & items on direction of their bosses to get good APAR and promotions. If the scientist not compromise with his integrity for helping out the corruption of his bosses and Director, then immediately his harassment started by all means including transfers.

One scientist from GTRE, Bangalore genuinely approached the Director for his transfer but the egoist Director after receiving transfer order from DRDO Hqrs told him “ I will see who is going to relieve you if you pressurized me. Your dead body only can only be relieved” It is not a joke and this is the real scenario of DRDO.

The individual  ask transfer without having GOD father in DRDO always get same treatment, his carrier start spoiling by Lab Directors, if Lab Directors is annoyed with any individual of lab means he will going to face social boycott by  whole lab because one try to help him means he will also come under threat zone. Targeted individual start facing each and every step of his day to day work like NO TD, No support for project work, no recommendation for good work, APAR/ACR dropped to average and many more obstacles are common.

If Lab Director sniff that the individual is watching corruption or raising voice for that, it means that that individual is now going to get a kick without following the rules to remotest area with instruction that make sure that this man does not get peace at all.

DRDO has an unwritten thumb rule that when any Lab Director is not happy with any individual it means that he must be transferred to other destination without justifying the reason and the best part of this is that entire DRDO HQRS backsthat egoist corrupt director. This has resulted in the DRDO we know today.

All 25 questions raised by the Cabinet/PMO / Parliament Committee are really the honest approach to make DRDO a productive organization. DRDO is wasting more than two lakh crores worth of infrastructure without any mentionable output. DRDO should accept Genral Mallik’s comment after KARGIL WARcasualties in the conflict could have been reduced had the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) not come in the way.

Unfortunately, DRDO still does not understand the importance of the country’s needs. It still wastes money on SDR type of technologies, which already exist, and DRDO is ready to give second extension for PDC, like Sh R C Agarwal, who got a second extension without output.

It is requested DRDO Hqrs now Modi Ji giving full opportunity to save and grow DRDO in real means, अब तो जागो औरभ्रष्टाचार, भाई भतीजावाद, अयोग्य लोगो को आगे बढ़ाने का कार्य बंद करो।  देश के विकास की और देखो।  जय हिन्द 

DR Gausal Khan’s, DIPAS representation also throws light of DRDO culture please go through the following pages.

Page - 1
Page – 1
Page - 2
Page – 2
Page -3
Page -3

Ten key DRDO projects delayed: Arun Jaitley

PTI | Jul 18, 2014, 02.44 PM IST

NEW DELHI: Ten major projects of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), including the LCA Tejas aircraft and several key missile programmes, have been delayed due to various reasons, Lok Sabha was informed on Friday.

Giving details of DRDO’s delayed projects, defence minister Arun Jaitley said during Question Hour that “corrective/ remedial” measures are being taken to address the issue of delays.

Besides Light Combat Aircraft, other delayed projects include Naval Light Combat Aircraft, Aero Engine Kaveri, Airborne Early Warning and Control Aircraft and Long Range Surface-to-Air Missile.

The Air-to-Air Missile Astra, Advanced Light Weight Torpedo, Dual Colour Missile Approach Warning System for Fighter Aircraft, among others, have also been delayed, the minister said.

On remedial measures to complete the projects, Jaitley said that consortium approach is being used for design, development and fabrication of critical components.

According to him, synergy and better co-ordination were being promoted among user services, DRDO and production agencies through cluster meetings.

Jaitley also said the general impression that DRDO is lagging behind and that government is not providing enough support “may not be very accurate”.

“It is not fair to say that activities of DRDO have been curtailed by paucity of funds,” he said.

On proposal to allow 49 per cent foreign direct investment in the defence sector, Jaitley said the objective is to bring in best technologies into the country.

The government has decided that now it would be “Indian majority controlled” and it will bring the best technologies in the defence sector, the minister said.

The country has to come out of the situation where India is the largest buyer of defence equipment and ensure that “we have domestic capacity within India”, he noted.

“Government is making all efforts to grant Performance Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS) to DRDO scientists on par with scientists of Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO),” Jaitley added.

Campus Recruitment by PS Banks Now Unconstitutional – What About Illegality Already Committed ?

campus selection letterby – Danendra Jain <dkjain49709@gmail.com>AllBankingSolutions.com

This refers to Mumbai High court judgement pronounced in a case related to Central Bank of India . The Bombay high court has held that its ( bank’s ) recruitment policy, which allows campus recruitment/interview method for appointment of officers against permanent vacancies on regular basis, was illegal and unconstitutional.

Bank management of almost all public sector banks has resorted to campus hiring, not only in scale I but in scale II and scale III too. During last ten years top ranked officers of almost all banks have functioned in an arbitrary manner, recruited persons of their choice, giving favours to kith and kins of high profile persons and denying the talented unemployed youth. Recruitment of persons for some personal gain or to give favour to sons and daughters of known dignitaries has damaged work culture in banks and adversely affected the asset quality of almost all banks.

Top management in public sector banks picked up persons from campus of their choice and in the name of merit they raped those who have been working in the bank for years and decades. Not only in recruitment have they harmed the future of those existing employees who were waiting for promotion to higher cadre and higher scale. There are instances where bank management recruited officer directly in scale III whereas hundreds and thousands of officers eligible for promotion to scale III are denied their rights.

Further due to their arbitrary and unjustified recruitment of officers from campus in scale III or scale II management of bank had to pay double salary or more for the same work which could be and which hitherto has been performed by junior officers and clerks.

Is there anyone who can punish such top ranked officers whose faulty action caused huge loss to the bank??

Why these responsible and top ranked officers should not be personally punished and taken to task so that in near future no one dares violating the rights of existing employees and denying the opportunity to really talented youths.

I am unable to understand why the courts have simply warned the bank to desist from campus hiring in future and why not court thought it necessary to impose penalty of erring top officials.

In response to court verdict against Central bank and its clear warning to bank not to repeat such campus hiring, Government of India should order CBI inquiry into all recruitment which took place during last ten years in public sector banks through campus hiring and whether those officers are really better than already working officers in banks and whether there was any corrupt dealing in such type of recruitment.

Desi defence showpieces powered by videshi parts

Rajat Pandit, TNN Jan 13, 2014, 01.39AM IST

NEW DELHI: The Tejas light combat aircraft, 30 years in the making, is just 60% indigenous as of now. The story of the indigenous Arjun main battle tank is even worse. First sanctioned in May 1974, 55% of the tank is still made of imported parts. This is the recurring theme across India’s fledgling defence industrial base (DIB), with the government failing to whip DRDO and its sprawling empire of over 50 laboratories as well as the five defence PSUs, four shipyards and 50 ordnance factories into shape.
The defence ministry, with its constant flip-flops, has also failed to spur the domestic private sector into entering the defence production sector in a big way. Neither has it managed to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), notching up a measly $5 million in the last 14 years.toi1

AK Antony may often tom-tom “indigenisation” as one of his guiding mantras, which he feels can curb corruption, but the ground reality has hardly changed in the over seven years he has been at the helm in MoD. India continues to wallow as the world’s largest arms importer, with the armed forces still getting around 65% of their military hardware and software from abroad.
In sharp contrast, China has emerged as the fastest growing arms exporter around the globe after assiduously building a strong DIB. It’s now hawking fighter jets, warships, missiles and smaller arms to countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bolivia and Zambia.

But a “proper ecosystem” has simply not been erected in India. As if the “high import content” in the so-called indigenous projects was not enough, insiders say even the much-touted transfer of technology (ToT) provision build into large defence contracts with foreign manufacturers is a bit of a sham.

“Indian PSUs focus more on just assembling knocked-down kits from foreign vendors instead of properly absorbing technologies,” said a senior official, pointing to the ongoing “licensed production” of the Russian-origin Sukhoi-30MKI fighters by Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL).

India has inducted almost 200 of the 272 Sukhois contracted for well over $12 billion from Russia, with HAL producing most of the fighters. “As per plans, HAL should have begun making Sukhois completely from raw material two-three years ago. But there has been a big delay,” he said.

“Moreover, the cost of each HAL-manufactured Sukhoi is almost Rs 100 crore more than if the same fighter was directly imported from Russia (the last 42 Sukhois ordered cost over Rs 450 crore each),” he added.

DRDO does have a point that funds allocated for defence R&D are not adequate. “We just get slightly over 5% of the total defence budget. The US defence R&D budget is around 12%, while China has 20%,” said a scientist.

But not many are impressed, pointing to huge time and cost overruns in almost all DRDO projects. While the indigenous development of Tejas, Arjun and other weapon systems is certainly to be cheered, the high import content in them remains another source of worry.

Take Tejas, which finally achieved its initial operational clearance last month. It has an American engine, British ejection seat, Canadian canopy sheath and Israeli radar. “A major chunk of its avionics and weapons are also imported. The series production of the Tejas Mark-II version, which is what IAF actually wants, is unlikely to begin before 2022,” said an officer.
The Army, in turn, has inducted 124 Arjun Mark-I tanks, while trials are currently in progress for the Mark-II version with 89 “upgrades or improvements”. The tank is just about 45% indigenous as of now, with its main laser guided missile being the Israeli LAHAT. “Arjun’s missile firing control system, laser target designator, engine transmission, suspension unit and running gear (track) are all foreign,” said an Army officer.

India has fared relatively better on the naval front, with all the 45 warships currently on order being constructed in Indian shipyards. Officials say India has achieved 80-90% indigenisation in the “float” (warship’s structure, hull etc), 50-60% on the “move” (propulsion) and 30% on the “fight” (weapons and sensors) components.

Zero for DRDO

Bharat Karnad | 26th Apr 2013 – Deccan Chronicle

The Indian Air Force has been clever over the years in a petty sort of way. Short-range or medium-range combat aircraft and so on are uniquely IAF nomenclature; no other Air Force has such categories. In the age of aerial tankers, describing warplanes by their radii of action is a distraction.

Forty years ago the IAF invented another category of warplanes — “deep penetration and strike aircraft”, which permitted the purchase of Jaguar. The IAF sees this sort of thing as a harmless ruse to serve its interest.

The multiplicity of combat aircraft thus procured allows, the service belie­ves, in a crisis to at least have some squadrons in its fleet not subject to sanctions or the spares-and-servicing tourniquet, which supplier countries in greater or lesser measure always apply, depending on their foreign policy goals and national interests of the moment, and which tool of manipulation is now legitimated by the recent Arms Trade Treaty.

This policy of buying aircraft from diverse sources was first articulated in a 2006 note from Air Headquarters (AHQ) to the ministry of defence (MoD), which stated that the requirement for a sub-30-ton fully loaded combat aircraft was being deliberately proposed to escape the Russian stranglehold, and avoid going in for more Sukhoi-30 MKIs or the upgraded variant the “Super” Sukhois. Thus, Rafale passed the spurious test, clocking in at 27 tons. Of course, the IAF-invented range-dictated categories serve another purpose. They confuse generalist civil servants in the MoD and convincing clueless politicians that there are big gaps in combat aircraft numbers which need filling.

In this game of “fool you, fool me”, where the IAF is being jerked around by supplier countries, the threat to national security stays unaddressed. IAF is principally to blame, of course. But the inability of the Aeronautical Dev­e­lo­p­ment Agency (ADA) and other Defence Res­earch and Development Organisation (DRDO) units tasked with aircraft and on-board systems designs, and the sheer incompetence of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) are equally responsible.

So criminally negligent has HAL been that in all the years it assembled a variety of MiG-21s, MiG-27s, MiG-29s, and the Jaguar, and the power plants for each of these aircraft at its Koraput factory, it failed to maintain a dat­abase. In other words, for all the licence manufacturing it has done over the years, by failing to compile how every component in the aircraft and in the engines does what and how, it has learnt nothing.

Had HAL maintained a database of all the items it has put together, the country by now would have had the built-up capability to manufacture the Tejas Mk-I and Mk-II on the run. But this defence pu­blic sector unit has red­uced its­elf to an adjunct of supplier companies. That top HAL leadership has not been brought to acc­ount on this score and that the Indian taxpayer continues funding such profligacy only reflects the state of things.

DRDO, on its part, has prospered by creating illusion. Other than in certain areas, such as in writing sophisticated software and devising complex algorithms to drive military systems, DRDO projects are mostly scams. Behind every project that’s touted for realising “self-sufficiency” lies imported technology in some guise. In fact, it has been so grossly inept in not insisting on total transfer of technology from its partners that foreign defence firms happily strike deals in which Indian monies fund the development of state-of-the-art technology in other countries but get nothing out of it except finished high-cost products.

It is not the fault of the supplier firms that DRDO has proved so inattentive, gullible, and plain reckless with public monies. Take for example the advanced medium-range and long-range missile systems supposedly being collaboratively developed with Israel. Except in striking a contract for `15,000 crore, DRDO settled for only a work-share arra­ngement and that too to fabricate the low-value backend of these missile systems, with the Israeli company retaining the intell­ectual property rights on all the technology so developed.

A similar deal for a short-range missile system with Dassault Aviation has just been signed and another `30,000 crore is consequently going down the drain. Because in this business suckers are not given an even chance, the foreign companies can hardly be blamed for exploiting DRDO’s unwillingness to leverage India’s financial subsidy to obtain full proprietary and production rights for all technologies generated in such projects. So what is the department of defence finance doing other than sleeping on the job?

If DRDO brass were to be hauled up, it would be like pulling out a foundational stone that could bring the whole fraudulent public sector defence industrial edifice that, notwithstanding its claims, has produced no original technology after the Marut HF-24 in the 1970s, tumbling down. It is the reason why the Naresh Chandra Committee’s recommendation that the offices of scientific adviser to defence minister, head of DRDO, and secretary defence R&D be separated, may never get implemented. There are too many vested interests in the armed services, DRDO, and DPSUs who have it good to want this situation to change.

Coming back to Rafale, had Reliance Aerospace gone about it the right way it could have emulated Larsen & Tubro (L&T), which has indigenously developed the engineering, tooling, and manufacturing capability to locally produce everything from nuclear-powered and conventional submarines of any design to artillery systems. This proactive attitude to build up its all-round capability means it is in a position to benefit from “transfer of technology” portions of deals for high-value weapons platforms India has signed in the past two decades, and very quickly to absorb foreign technologies India pays for but which, owing to the complete inability and incompetence of defence public sector units, has to-date not capitalised on. We are talking cumulatively of waste now reaching the thousand billion dollar-level.

If the L&T business model is too onerous, Reliance Aerospace, instead of turning itself into a mere cog in the Dassault Aviation machine by channelling payoffs to the right quarters in the ruling party to lubricate the Rafale deal, could have tried to buy off large chunks of the Rafale-maker, Dassault Aviation itself, as the Tatas have done by purchasing the South African company Denel’s entire 155mm/52 calibre Howitzer line. That might have been the second-best strategy to become a commercially viable defence production entity in double-quick time and do right by the country as well.

The writer is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

Comments

by Air Cmde Raghub… (not verified) on Fri, 2013-04-26 22:43
Zero sum Game.Only history will tell whether DRDO has been zero or hero. Import of even obsolescent BMD would have cost us fortune which DRDO has been able to save. Calling Names.. If IAF has managed to get its magnificent flying machines from diverse sources instead of all from Russia without love-it has been smart move by them for which they need to be lauded? Jaguars & Mirages have served us well as Canberra’s & Hunters did? HAL & ADA. The two are incomparable and class apart. While HAL has hardly picked up any worthwhile aviation technology during its half a century of assembling MiG’s & missiles in its sprawling MiG complexes- ADA has developed fourth generation plus Tejas. Flight testing & overcoming problems during development takes time but rewarding eventually. Successes as Scams? It is much easier to call a success a scam than calling a spade a spade. If DRDO has made use of some imported technology where is the problem? Most of the defence technologies are copied all over the world sans any qualms or copyright compulsions.155×52 or Desi Bofors will be copy work of some technologies. Russian K-13A air to air missile was true copy of the the US Sidewinder-without being a scam. Missiles. The learned author can rest assured that no short, medium or long range missiles can take India for a ride in any missile deal till Dr VK Saraswat is around. A scientist who has successfully lead us to the ICBM regime must have seen some technology benefit in these collaborations.

by MVP (not verified) on Sat, 2013-04-27 17:57
The so called DRDO Scientists are busy playing Golf in the DRDO Phase-II Township Golf Course, Bangalore. Unlike the soldiers, risking their lives in difficult terrains, a majority of these scientists enjoy their entire life (doing very little official work) in splendid townships, utilising CSD facilities, many festival holidays, discussing (obviously during office hours) and buying /investing in plots of land, flats etc. without concern to build good quality weapons at the shortest possible time. They do research(at tax payers expense) without any urgency to complete the tasks with an end result in mind. They should be made accountable for each and every pie of tax payers money. In case of not meeting the deadline, the scientists should be asked to reimburse back to the Govt. of India 50% of the salary drawn.