Tag Archives: sector

Drdo

The secret world of DRDO – The New Indian Express

1 Comment

By Yatish Yadav and Nardeep Singh Dahiya 02nd September 2012 12:00 AM

India is at war. Tejas fighters wheel over a smoke dark battleground, taking down enemy aircraft with their superior radar and missile capabilities. Lower still, Indian-designed helicopters are giving hell to enemy armour and troop formations with missiles and machine-gun fire. On the ground, mighty Arjun tanks lumber slowly across dunes, sure of their inpenetrable Kanchan armour even as they spew death through their 120 mm guns. Jawans crouch and advance with the tanks, firing three-round bursts from their INSAS rifles and lobbing bhut jholokia grenades at their foes. They are tireless, having imbibed performance-enhancing pills, and well-fed, having had spoil-proof parathas and self-heated packaged meals before battle.

This is what a DRDO dream looks like. However, a nightmare was revealed recently when Defence Minister A K Antony ordered the Comptroller General of Defence Audit (CGDA) to do a secret audit of India’s equivalent of the futuristic workshop of James Bond’s ‘Q’ — the Defence Research and Development Organisation that goes by the handle DRDO.

The highlights of the report are frightening. Here are some of them:

* DRDO has been developing equipment which is either sub-standard or have extended deadlines and additional budgets;

* Many of the projects have been sanctioned without the requisite government approval. Only 10 per cent of projects have come to the ministry for clearance;

* Corruption and nepotism exists in the upper echelons;

* There is an exodus of qualified scientists;

DRDO has challenged the findings but the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has taken cognisance of them. It will be ordering a review of the agency’s approval processes as well as that of the recent proposal to enhance the financial powers for DRDO chief V K Saraswat.

Waste products

Crores of rupees are spent on research that mostly flops

The CGDA audit findings raise serious questions on the capability of this defence outfit, which has an annual budget of Rs 10,500 crore. Established in 1958, it has a network of 52 laboratories nationwide, employing 5,000 scientists with about 25,000 support staff. But only 29 per cent of the products developed during the last 17 years are being used by the Armed Forces. The audit notes that in several cases, DRDO bought equipment from other companies after spending crores on R&D. For instance, the CGDA found that after spending two years and Rs 29.96 crore to develop satellite signal monitoring, DRDO ultimately bought the same from a public sector undertaking on a single tender basis for Rs 24.50 crore in April 2011. “If such technologies are indeed commercially available, where was the need of a development project by DRDO?” the audit asked. DRDO also spent Rs 6.85 crore to develop explosive detectors, which were offered to the army for Rs 30 lakh each. Foreign versions of these are available off the shelf for Rs 9.8 lakh per piece, a price that also includes repair and maintenance.

The CGDA report criticised the ‘joint development’ technology initiative of DRDO, calling it “import of older, foreign technology under the disguise of joint development.” The CGDA accused DRDO of promoting Israeli company M/S SCD without the mandatory formal transfer of technology agreement. Commenting on a DRDO deal to develop a higher format uncooled detector, the CGDA said: “DRDO shall be financing the development expenditure of `19.90 crore by releasing it direct to M/S SCD Israel. Basically, instead of doing development itself, DRDO is funding a foreign agency’s development effort, that too, without any explicit arrangements being finalised about ownership of intellectual property generated from such financing,” noted the CGDA. “Neither the production agency nor the users — mechanised forces of army — have been kept in the loop,” the CGDA report says.

With a chaotic record of arms experiments and eccentric choices of spending money on pickles and automated idli and dosa makers for aircraft carriers, the very reason for DRDO’s existence seems dubious. Says V K Mittal, a former senior scientist with the agency, “DRDO technology is almost two decades old. Two projects, namely Samyukta and Sangraha electronic warfare equipment, were partially inducted in the armed forces, but users felt these were outdated and more expensive than the latest technology available.” Meanwhile, the agency has developed many products that is meant for the soldier at the front: DRDO pickles made of semi-ripe berries and spices such as red chilli powder, cinnamon, cumin, cardamom, black pepper powder, and clovers, spicy potato parathas, instant kadhi mixes, cashewnut barfi, mutton vegetable korma, instant halwa mix, egg biscuits and instant upma mix are among its culinary achievements. The agency also successfully bred a region-specific hybrid goat using technology that mixed the genes of adaptive and meat traits through cross-breeding breeds such as Changthangi and Gaddi and Sirohi and Black Bengal goats. DRDO has also developed ‘Lukoskin’, a herbal care product for leucoderma and the performance enhancing drug Perfomax which is meant to “improve physical and mental performance in high altitude and hypoxic conditions.” In true 007 style, it has also developed a car coolant that will not freeze in extreme temperatures. The crores of rupees wasted in innumerable half-baked projects add up to quite a sum. In a separate report by CAG in 2011-12, the DRDO is criticised for spending crores on random research projects. In 2011, out of 55 high priority projects based on user-requirements, only thirteen went into production. A modular bridge, being developed for the army was shelved in 2010, after eight years of experiments and spending Rs 21.46 crore. Six months later, Rs 13.25 crore was sanctioned for another modular bridge project. The initiative to produce next generation laser weapons was closed down within a month after equipment was procured.

“We are dangerously behind our adversaries. China is far ahead in indigenous technology in both tanks and missiles sector. DRDO’s claim of modern technology is too old when it is delivered to armed forces. It is a big disappointment”, observes security analyst Major General (Retd) Afsir Karim.

Flop wonders

Institutions without qualifications are promoted

Defence minister Antony had asked the CGDA to investigate after receiving complaints on suspected manipulation in DRDO contracts, undue favor to some external vendors, and irregular appointments in the agency which runs a vast network across the country. Its annual budget has no audit verified document to show what value has been generated so far through its technologies. Under a very personal cloud is DRDO chief V K Saraswat. The CGDA has questioned why he granted Rs 2.88 crore to a mathematics institute to develop a futuristic radar when its scientists are not even remotely connected with research relating to the project. Incidentally, Saraswat is the president of the institute’s governing body. The audit also stated that the institute lacked expert manpower, and started recruitment only after getting DRDO funds that were released without due diligence. A Dehradun scientific lab was granted Rs 14 crore to develop a communication link, while the institute headed by Saraswat was also sanctioned Rs 2.98 crore to develop the same technology — it doesn’t have even basic facilities like computers for individual researchers. “It shows that the radar development project is being split in different parts to avoid going to the ministry and users with a proper full scope development programme,” the CGDA said. The DRDO understandably refutes the findings. “These are only observations. The laid down procedure of audit was not followed, and it was issued without authorisation. It is a one-sided report. We will give a point by point reply of audit findings. DRDO has achieved several milestones and that nobody is talking about, ” retorted Dr Ravi Gupta, DRDO’s official spokesperson. However, the CGDA report says that DRDO has tried to camouflage its failures in the name of secrecy and national security.

Says Commodore (Retd) Uday Bhaskar, former head of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), “The Government is not willing to discuss the Rama Rao committee report that talks about reforming DRDO. It shows that they are not serious about the decaying of a government institution, which in the last 30 to 40 years has completely disappointed the users. Money is being spent without any effect on indigenous programmes. I will appeal to Indian Parliament to take this matter and discuss the issue.”

Project black hole

DRDO has been spending fresh money on its own failed projects

The CGDA accuses the DRDO of functioning in a non-transparent manner. “There is no comprehensive database to find out the details of projects sanctioned for execution by the DRDO and how many has been declared as successful,” it said. Antony was also informed that DRDO has been operating as an authority unto itself, bypassing the MoD where many crucial expenses are involved: the agency comes under the ministry and its main objective is to develop a modern technology base and equip the defence forces with internationally competitive systems and weapons. During 2009-2010, DRDO sanctioned 702 projects costing above `50 lakh but only 102 research projects were referred to the ministry. The audit body also questioned the grounds on which DRDO authorities sanctioned new projects in the name of completing failed projects with questionable changes in scope to avoid ministry’s nod. For example, DRDO took up a project for development of counter mine flail (CMF) for T-72 tanks at a cost of `8 crore in December 2002. CMF is a device that creates a safe passage through a minefield by deliberately detonating land mines in front of the vehicle that it is mounted on. Army HQ revised the requirement in 2004, but DRDO continued with the old parameters and in 2008, the product failed tests. In spite of this, it was not closed and in February 2011, another new project costing Rs 49.85 crore was sanctioned for the same CMF project.

Armaments apart, the DRDO has been splurging 10 per cent of its annual budget on construction of offices and auditoriums. CGDA also indicted DRDO for unauthorised sanction of Rs 49.15 crore to develop a vehicle testing facility in Pune — mainly for civilian use — disregarding approval rules.

“There is a lack of transparency and accountability in the name of defence research. For decades, DRDO has been promising a lot to the armed forces but have failed to deliver. The top brass should be made accountable. Unless this happens, money will be squandered away on technologically outdated projects and the armed forces will be cheated,” says Mittal.

Meanwhile, there has been a huge exodus of scientists from the agency. Last year, 86 scientists took VRS. Says Gen Karim, “The functioning of DRDO is improper. In the next five years, the difference between our adversaries and us would be glaring. The MoD is not serious about reforming DRDO. A national blueprint is required for this.”

The swadeshi trap

Unplanned indigenisation leads to losses and aborted projects

In this situation, how efficacious are the agency’s multimillion-dollar projects? India purchases arms worth $6.9 billion from the US, making it America’s second largest defence client after the Saudis. The Congressional Research Service’s annual survey of global arms sales written by Richard Grimmett and Paul Kerr says India is fast upgrading its equipment from its Soviet-era arsenal. In late 1993, a committee headed by then Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister and DRDO chief APJ Abdul Kalam had set the goal of 70 per cent of indigenisation in weapons production by 2005; DRDO has not moved beyond the 30 per cent it had reached in 1995. The passion for swadeshi is the principle behind the money being spent by the Indian government on DRDO. But most of DRDO equipment malfunctions or the projects themselves are yet to take off or are delayed, sucking in more and more money.

Rifle recoil: The mass produced INSAS rifle, meant to be the main rifle for the Indian Army has been known to malfunction in extreme conditions. The first known debacle was on August 7, 2005. As the evening shadows grew longer at the Royal Nepal Army’s Pili camp in western Kalikot district, about 550 km northwest of capital Kathmandu, Maoist fighters massed silently outside. The roads connecting the camp that housed about 200 soldiers — mostly employed in the construction of a new highway — had been mined. A little before 6 pm, over 1,000 Maoists attacked the camp. Armed with INSAS rifles, the Nepalese soldiers fought back, but in vain. By 4 pm, the Maoists had captured 100 soldiers, and executed 40 of them. Nepal blamed INSAS malfunctions for the disaster: “The rifles are okay if you fight for an hour or two, but are not appropriate for long battles. If we had better weapons, our casualties would have been much less,” said a Nepal government spokesman. In November 2011, the Ministry of Defence issued a tender for 66,000 assault rifles to replace the INSAS. The MoD wanted the new rifles to be able to switch calibres between the small, high-velocity 5.56 mm rounds the INSAS fires and the devastatingly powerful 7.62 mm rounds of the older FAL rifles.

The story of this short-lived rifle epitomises the drift in the way the DRDO works, and also between it and the armed forces. The DRDO took a decade to design the INSAS. A few years later, it was supplied to the Army throughout the later half of the 1990s. But the Army did not put all its eggs in the desi basket; it bought 100,000 AK-47s from Bulgaria in 1995 for its frontline units in Kashmir. The INSAS began rolling off the lines soon after, at a cost several times that of the Kalashnikov. When war broke out in Kargil in 1999, INSASs jammed; the transparent polymer magazines cracked. Its ammunition-conserving three-round burst went virally fully automatic. An oil spray glitch was detected. By 2002, the Army had ordered the Israeli Tavor 21 rifle for its special forces and the Galil for its snipers. This year, the Special Forces will induct US-made M-4 rifles, the Vietnam-era M-16’s newer version that US soldiers now use in Afghanistan. “DRDO products are half imported and half prepared here, which is dangerous. Defence is too serious business to be left to one party. It is the user — our armed forces — who will decide which product is useful. DRDO cannot claim success of a product sitting in the workshop,” says Gen Karim.

Air disaster: In the early 1980s, the Indian Air Force was over-reliant on Soviet-made MiG-21s, which would be phased out, beginning in the mid-90s. In 1984, the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), a national consortium of over 100 defence laboratories, industrial organisations, and academic institutions with HAL being the principal contractor, was created specifically to manage the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programme. The DRDO was to develop the plane’s flight control system, hi-tech radar, and engine. DRDO delivered on the flight control system. However, the radar was the one that was to be developed by Ericsson and Ferranti Defence Systems Integration for the Gripen, a topline Swedish fighter plane. DRDO decided to develop the radar at home, and started in 1997. In 10 years, cost escalations, delays and other serious problems grounded the project, which is now being developed with help from the Elta group, an Israel Aerospace Industries subsidiary. Kaveri, the engine of the LCA — christened Tejas by former PM Atal Behari Vajpayee — was to be developed by the Gas Turbine Research Establishment, Bangalore using prototypes made by General Electrics, USA. By 2003, it had to be abandoned for an upgraded version of the GE engine used in the prototypes selected to power the first pre-production Tejas. The Kaveri had, in the meantime, failed high-altitude tests carried out in Russia, and by 2008, was officially declared unsuitable. GE was selected to provide 99 engines that were even better than the ones used in the first LCAs. Mysteriously, 15 actuators of the aircraft that were part of the LCA’s integrated flight control system went missing in December 2008 from Heathrow, London. The Tejas has flown, and well, but with an Israeli radar and American engine. The Kaveri programme alone cost the nation about Rs 2,800 crore over 23 years; the cost overrun of the entire LCA programme is estimated at about 3,000 per cent.

Tanked hopes: It took 35 years to make India’s main battle tank Arjun. In 1974, DRDO’s Combat Vehicles Research and Development Establishment at Chennai started designing the tank expected to be ready for war in 10 years. The Arjun was to weigh 40 tonnes with a 105 mm main gun. By the time it was finished in 2000, the tank had grown in size to 58.5 tonnes with a 120 mm gun that can fire rockets. In terms of cost overrun, the Arjun is the champion of delay and drift: it has cost 20 times the initial estimate to make an Indian tank with a German engine. It is so big that ordinary Indian rail wagons, the ones that have been transporting our older Soviet- and British-origin tanks had to be redesigned to accommodate its bulk. Military planners say bridges will collapse under Arjun’s weight. The Army and DRDO have been at loggerheads over the Arjun. Field tests have varied wildly: some have given the Arjun a junk rating, and others say it’s the best thing to have happened to the Armoured Corps. The tank is a ‘jugaad’ queen. South African howitzers have been mated to its chassis to make a self-propelled field gun that DRDO calls Bhima. The army will, at last, add to its ranks about 250-odd Arjuns, and 1,000 T-90s. The next Indian tank, the Futuristic MBT, may well come from a joint initiative with Russia.

As the MoD prepares to review DRDO’s financial procedures, the news is not all bad on the achievement front. Last week, the 350-km range surface-to-surface Prithvi II missile was successfully flight tested at the Integrated Test Range, Chandipur in Odissa. Saraswat, a multitude of rings embedded with various stones flashing on his fingers celebrated by feeding laddoos to the army commander present. However, the question for him is, after the ministry’s review, what’s for just desserts.

Comments(1)
Sir, Compliments to the authors for a candid and ‘no-nonsense’ expose. Speaking from personal experience in the ‘Silent Service’, I would say that DRDO Projects that were headed by the ‘USER’ and had a multidisciplinary team under him – ACHIEVED SUCCESS. Examples : Sonar APSOH (1984) – and now the mainstay of the ASW fitment on surface combatants, and ‘AJANTA’ – an EW suite for surface ships. And, let me put it squarely – For the Navy, ‘indigenisation’ is an Article of Faith. Yet, the output of the three DRDO labs, attached with the Navy – NPOL (KOCHI), NSTL (VIZAG) & NCML (MUMBAI) have been MODEST, to say the least. Good show Sirs !! Regards
Posted by Capt.(retd) H.Balakrishnan, I.N. at 09/02/2012 09:35

Drdo

DRDO should focus on areas where it has capacity to deliver: Manmohan

Leave a comment

DRDO should focus on areas where it has capacity to deliver: Manmohan
TNN Aug 1, 2012, 02.00AM IST

NEW DELHI: With India still importing well over 60% of its military hardware and software, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday asked DRDO to concentrate on key strategic and military technology areas to ensure weapon systems are developed without huge time and cost overruns.

In the backdrop of crucial projects like the Tejas light combat aircraft running way behind schedule, the PM said, “The share of the indigenous content in defence procurement continues to be low. We need to take a hard look at the pipeline of our projects and focus our time and material resources on selected areas where we have demonstrated capacity to deliver projects within reasonable time and cost.”
Holding there was “a net deterioration in international strategic and security environment”, “political uncertainties in our neighbourhood”, turmoil in West Asia and ever-growing terrorism and cyber threats, the PM said the armed forces would be provided the “wherewithal” to secure “our frontiers”.

This will, in the long term, help India to build a robust domestic defence industrial base, in both the public and private sectors, to compete with global players in developing state-of-the-art technologies.

“We need to give the industry a boost and quicken the pace of development. The role of DRDO is this is truly critical, given that there are 800 enterprises supporting its projects and programmes,” he said.

Readers’ opinions (15)

sd (delhi) 27 days ago
first of all manmohan singh should look for indian industry which is shutting down day by day . indian industries keep on labeling chinese products due to low pricing in china & poor facilities given to industrialist like electricity etc. number of forms are there to fill at the time of dispatches, waste of time & paper. they should implement gst to get rid of various taxes

ADM (Bangalore)3 Followers 27 days ago Silver: 1463323
DRDO is a public sector failure and MMS is a public elect failure……

Baba (Delhi) 27 days ago
Bio-toilets of DRDO is only required for using in extreme cold areas where temperature is sub-zero and some what beneficial in trains…… but in plains in normal temperatures in villages it works just like any normal toilet with under ground septic tank… only difference is they use more costly metal septic tank …. and even they add some bacteria in to the tanks…. it is essential as faecal matter degradation occurs naturally…….. It is only helpful earning of crores of rupies for DRDO ToT holders and gain some media hype for DRDO people by fooling the rural development minister. with the cost of one so called Bio-toilet 4 toilets can me constructed in villages that too with using local available resources and emplying local unemplyed people. Using fasionable words”Bio-Toilets” they r fooling common man of the country… and the ministers as well…….

Pram (Mumbai) 28 days ago
In which area MMS has capacity to deliver?

Sopan Thengadi (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) 5 Followers 28 days ago Silver: 3566434
The ‘delivery capacity’ of DRDO and other PSUs are well known. Tejas, Mig 21, LCH projecet, MBT Arjun, Air India – the list of underperformers is unending !!!
sinha.asok (Patna) 57 Followers 28 days ago Gold: 5587432
In a country all limelight is hogged by the politicians and bureaucrats and scientists are not even recognised for their contributions, it is too much to expect much from them. MMS should, first of all, start delivering on the social and economic fronts to prepare a conducive environment to face deteriorating security situation on the international stage.

pk (delhi) 28 days ago
Manmohan singh better focus on some economic strategies for country, rather than blaming DRDO

pr (bengaluru) 28 days ago
Once upon a time a cat mewed and dozed off again when the entire country plunged into darkness

Sudhir (IND) 57 Followers 28 days ago Gold: 10.5K542
Manmohan Singh is the most corrupt PM, Hindustan as ever seen. He as given Secular Congress members licences to loot the public.

hihari (Canada) 21 Followers 28 days ago Silver: 4534432
Sach bola MMS. DRDO has been putting its foot everywhere to have budget worth billions of dollars, but has delivered not even 50% of major projects! MMS bolts sach hai par karta kuch nahi hai, kya Karen iska!

Kartun Mhd with bomb (Kangress hate camp) 28 days ago Gold: 5022441
Manmohan should relax, because he does not have capacity to focus anywhere, except on Sonia’s instructions.

Air Cmde Raghubir Singh(Retd) (Pune) 28 days ago
Yes of course ideally DRDO should be concentrating on key military technologies to deliver without time & cost over runs-but how? If we have lagged behind in Tejas, option is not to get out of the aircraft development & concentrate on say making guns –we have to catch up with aviation technology too. Developing appropriate technologies should be national mission. For example we have been manufacturing MiG’s in our Hindustan Aeronautics for the last 50 years or so. Has the joint program between Russia & India lead us to any worthwhile aviation technology which could have been useful in our LCA or was it merely CKD’s riveted and nut-bolted in our complexes here –the Tatra way all the time? MoD must take a hard look of technology content in such joint ventures & also cost of locally assembled aircraft being comparable to the fly away imports. Now that DRDO has achieved breakthrough and much needed successes in quick successions in missiles & other areas, it must continue the dream run by change of leadership in labs which have been lagging behind. It may even think of getting service officers on deputation to man critical programs

Suraj Vanch (Wlltn) 28 days ago
the poodle barks

Dom pereira (Florida) 28 days ago
until and unless India allows the private sector to take part in defense manufacture in a big way India will never be able to be self sufficient in defense production. Private companies have the capacity to follow strict time frame which is very crucial to bring the cost down. In the U.S private firms run most defense companies and the results are for all to see.

dasg (ny) 28 days ago
PM Singh also ask this question to himself, has he capacity to deliver on much needed economic reforms on coal, power, labour and much else. It is easy to point to failures by others. He has failed miserably and hapless public is paying a heavy price for his incompetence in building consensus and pushing through much need economic reforms

Drdo

Complaint against DRDO Employees ,Chandipur

2 Comments
Mail received by www.corruptionindrdo.com
TO,
The DRDO Head Quaters
New Delhi
Sub: Complaint against DRDO Employees ,chandipur
Sir,
  I would like to inform you about the ,DRDO Employees ,chandipur ,These are  job in central  govt. sector ,But they do not work properly are also job  in private sector likely ,some are insurance agent ,Travel agent ,you know also very well  and curruption is not limit in their.,some person who is involve and I want to give the name one is Mr. N.C.Mahapatra and another is Mr. Anjay Singh , both are DRDO Employees ,chandipur ,Balasore ,ODISHA (PXE),pls veryfication all these employees .
   Therefore ,I want to request to you take the necssary action of these employees.
                           Thanking You,
With Regards:
Suraj
Balasore,ODISHA
Drdo

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

2 Comments

Advice from ex-chief: Accountability absolute must

Amitav Ranjan
Posted: Sun Nov 19 2006, 00:00 hrs
New Delhi, November 18:

DRDO should definitely be held more accountable for its work and it should stop saying it can do everything under the sun.

Coming from Dr Vasudev K Aatre, who headed the organisation between 2000-04, this could be the luxury of hindsight but yet, a painfully candid admission to the need for reform.

Now a professor at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Aatre has responded to this newspaper’s investigative series on DRDO’s dismal record (for the previous seven parts, visit www.expressindia.com). “I have been honest about our delays, I could not hide our shortcomings. There is a need to break certain cycles as the series in The Indian Express has shown. It is crucial that DRDO is a dictator of its own destiny.”

For that to happen, Aatre prescribes a five-point programme fundamental to which is, what he calls, “the absolute must for accountability.” And, two, the brisk introduction of the private sector into the fold of defence R&D to take away the burden of prototype production.

Calling for the immediate implementation of the incentive list for scientists — from sharing royalty to increased travel allowances — Aatre says the “Damocles’ Sword of imports” should not be allowed to hang over scientists engaged in fundamental research. Finally, and probably most importantly, “DRDO should stop making exaggerated promises.”

The aspect of talent retention is severely underestimated. Even President A P J Abdul Kalam, who headed DRDO through the ‘90s and saw first-hand the initial exodus of scientists to the newly booming IT sector — over 1400 have left in the last decade — said on November 11 in Ahmedabad: “We should work for the creation of a science cadre, with a clear mission and goal, well-defined growth path, and attractive salaries.”

But better remuneration is just one side of an intricate polygon of reform that DRDO admitted in June to be working on. The other crucial aspect is DRDO’s involvement with the services. The Navy, the smallest of the three armed forces, has the best depth of relations with DRDO but the less said about the Army and IAF, the better.

Experience has shown that programmes in which the agenda is set by senior serving officers, as in Navy’s avionics and sonars, have always performed with the greatest prudence — delivering on time, and cutting away losses when viability was severely undermined.

In June, as a start, the Standing Committee on Defence directed the DRDO to draw up a list of unviable projects that could be terminated.

But there is a consensus that synergy with the services is one way out of the present mess. Says Gen Shankar Roy Choudhary, former Army chief and member of the Standing Committee on Defence: “Coordination and interaction need a great deal of improvement. DRDO should make sure that officers from the services are part of design teams, and not looked upon as outsiders. Even today, they are accepted very reluctantly. I tried to do my bit in my time as Chief, but somehow it did not work out. This should be an immediate area of reform.”

Choudhary’s recommendation is an echo of what was officially proposed by the Defence Ministry’s Task Force on the “Reorganization of Higher Defence Planning”: a three-star serving officer should head the steering committee of DRDO programmes and the Armed forces personnel embedded with these programmes be recognised as integral members of the DRDO design team. None of this has been implemented yet.

New Defence Minister A K Antony, who received a three-and-a-half hour presentation on the DRDO on October 29, five days into office, told The Sunday Express, “In the few weeks that I have been here, I have realized the need for big changes. We need comprehensive reforms in this area to keep with changing situations. Over the next few weeks, I will be looking at this aspect in great detail.”

Consider what one of emerging India’s pioneers in industrial R&D, Biocon chairperson Kiran Mazumdar Shaw has to say about DRDO: “Every research establishment in the country needs to be reformed. Defence is one area where we need a high level of innovation. Enough is not being done and the DRDO is no exception to this. There is no modern approach at all,” she told The Sunday Express. “They should be focusing on every emerging technology and the application of new technology. At present, there seems to be only imitative effort. A lot of the research is ineffective. We need reforms in defence research that capitalise on innovation. Good talent needs to be attracted to these organisations.”

In DRDO’s journey from its fetters, it cannot ignore the private sector. The total volume of work undertaken by the private sector since May 2001 amounts to Rs 6,976 crore out of total capital acquisitions worth Rs 95,145.28 crore. Private sector potential in defence R&D is therefore enormous and mostly untapped.

On September 19, members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee received a compilation of the capabilities of just two private companies. Their capabilities officially declared as everything from weapon-launch systems, sea mines, submarines, fire-control systems and special materials to deep water technology, tracking radars, even space applications.

Atul Kirloskar, chairman of the CII’s National Committee on Defence, which played an integral advisory role to the Vijay Kelkar Committee on reforming self-reliance and procurement, told The Sunday Express: “With DRDO, there is a large opportunity to work on technological issues. Raksha Udyog Ratnas, or private sector systems integrators will be certified next year and will be able to make quotes. The new procurement procedure also includes a Make category. There are opportunities waiting.”

In a sense, few would know this better than Lt Gen S S Mehta, formerly Western Army commander and now Director General of CII. He said, “With growing similarities between civilian and military R&D, it is essential that Defence R&D evolve a collaborative structure which adapts to the rapidly changing technology eco-system.”

The journey to a weapons development system like in the US or Europe is still, quite certainly, decades away. But with shifting paradigms, the blurring of technological boundaries and a whole new element to the meaning of self-reliance, the essence of DRDO’s revitalization will be in accepting that the past is just that. The past.

(With Johnson TA in Bangalore)

What lies unread: the recommendations

• Kelkar Committee: streamline linkages with private sector, open up R&D, audit essential

 

• Task Force on Higher Defence Planning: Get senior service officers to head steering committees, let services personnel be part of design teams

• Create a science cadre with mission, goal, good salaries: President Kalam

• New evaluation technology to avoid time and cost overruns: ex-DRDO chief Aatre

• Cut losses, terminate unviable programmes, use resources for new ones, fashion future programmes with foreign partners: Defence Standing Committee

• Focus on emerging technology, innovate, attract best talent: Kiran Mazumdar Shaw

Drdo

DRDO gets it right when it works unlike DRDO

Leave a comment

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

DRDO gets it right when it works unlike DRDO

Amitav Ranjan
Posted: Sat Nov 18 2006, 00:00 hrs
NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 17:


For all its defences against non-performance, the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), ironically, has only to look within for ready templates of distinction. Programmes that have met targets are an isolated few but they worked well because their ethic symbolizes a fundamental breakaway from the tedium of the larger organisation’s default approach. Self-reliance, a term battered by DRDO’s track-record on showpiece programmes, shines beneath the hood in the Navy’s sonars, avionics and electronic warfare systems on IAF fighter aircraft and missiles developed under corporate foreign joint ventures.
The first two were developed on time because of the labs linking up with the armed forces right from the initial stages and, significantly, leadership that keeps young scientists on their toes. The latter, because international partnerships mandate a more professional approach to programme completion.
One of the most successful DRDO laboratories is also one of the least known, tucked away silently in the Trikkakara suburb of Kochi, fomenting applied research and technology to give the Navy real self-reliance in critical sensor systems.

The Naval Physical and Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL), the only DRDO lab to win both the Silicon Trophy and Titanium Trophy for excellence, has, in the last two decades, given the Navy an impressive 87 per cent self-reliance in acoustic sensors for warships and submarines. All Navy warships, including foreign ones, as a result, are fitted with DRDO sonars like the APSOH, HUMVAD and HUMSA, and the Navy does not need to import. Now, it is putting its finishing touches to the USHUS sonar for the Navy’s Kilo-class submarines and the Mihir dunking sonar for HAL’s Advanced Light Helicopter, all well within their projected timeframes.

Vice Admiral Madanjit Singh, formerly the Navy’s Southern Commander at Kochi, said, “The NPOL’s success is from user involvement right from the word go. The steering panel is headed by a serving Naval commander who sets the agenda, efforts between the DRDO and Navy are joint.”

VK Aatre, former NPOL director who went on to become DRDO chief, agrees. “When I was there, we could not distinguish between designers, Navy personnel and production engineers,” he said. “We shared an excellent rapport. The difference here was that the user was part of the design team.”

The lab’s current director V Chander, an IIT-IISc alumnus, has espoused applied research like no other DRDO establishment, working not for idealistic invention, but delivering quality, fool-proof sonar systems to the Navy. How?

First, he’s rechristened the HR cell as People, Academics, Research & Training. He’s made sure young scientists get to spend time with the Navy for extended periods of time rather than labour away only in their laboratories. Third, he’s made sure that the level of involvement with warships and the Navy is so high that projects are either completed or prudently foreclosed before despondence and lassitude can set in.

Vice Admiral Singh, as DG Defence Planning in 2000, recommended to the Task Force on the Reorganization of Higher Defence Planning, that the country’s R&D labs be rationalized on the lines of NPOL. What ensued, another story entirely, was a turf war that saw the idea quietly dissipate. Another area where DRDO has shone despite itself is avionics and electronic warfare systems for IAF fighter aircraft.

The IAF’s most advanced fighter, the Sukhoi-30 MKI, flies with avionics developed by the Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE) in Bangalore, and has proved so good that the new British Hawk advanced jet trainers and the license-produced units of the upcoming contract for 126 foreign fighters, will be armed with DARE avionics and electronic warfare systems.

For now, in addition to the Sukhois, these arm IAF Jaguars and MiG-27s which, combined, have over 30 DARE electronic systems, including mission computers, electronic warfare suites, laser rangers and multifunction advanced cockpits.

A testimony to DARE’s work: in 2003, the Royal Malysian Air Force ordered radar computers worth Rs 21.15 crore (75 per cent of DRDO’s officially declared export value of Rs 27.93 crore) from DARE for its Sukhoi-30MM fighter fleet, and is interested in buying more.

Air Marshal JS Gujral, formerly IAF Central Air Commander and Deputy Chief in charge of acquisitions, feels DARE has done an excellent job in a world where such technology is simply too advanced to share. “DARE’s projects have succeeded also because of deep interfacing with the IAF. They have maintained a high mark in defence output and timeframes compared to DRDO’s other not-so-successful ventures. Across the board, the avionics and electronic warfare systems by DARE match up with the best in the world. The IAF has been very happy with what they have provided us,” Gujral said. DARE Director RP Ramalingam said, “DRDO has realized that if there is a WW III, the winner will be the side that can best control the electromagnetic spectrum, and has therefore placed India as a competent force in the world map of avionics.”

Foreign joint ventures, on the other hand, have compelled DRDO to put out more realistic predictions on time and cost. The BrahMos missile project, which began development in 1998 as a corporate joint venture with Russia and resulted in a world-class cruise missile that other countries now want to buy, was completed in just six years at a cost of Rs 667 crore – no time and cost overruns.

Similarly, the new generation Barak-II surface to air missile for the Navy, being developed by DRDO in a JV with Israel, is officially to cost Rs 2, 606.02 crore and be ready by May 2011, a far more realistic predictive frame than any other missile project under the indigenous IGMDP.

The defence sector does not have a policy for foreign direct investment, but DRDO open to joint ventures with foreign partners. No wonder then, that on June 7, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence said, “BrahMos model should be followed in other projects also. Private sector should be given more opportunities in defence production and user participation should be encouraged from R&D stage.”
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.