India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Sagar G »

vic wrote:LR SAM is practically Israeli project with minimal DRDO involvement except observing & co- ordinating. How come DRDO is being blamed?
Hain, what does that even mean ??? DRDO is very much involved in "development" of the system (Google is a handy tool use it) but the delay is from the Israeli side cause they are putting their resources in their pet projects.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Sagar G »

Ewwww you just made me click that lifafa's article, please give a head's up the next time you choose to post articles from that lifafa.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Sagar G wrote:
Ewwww you just made me click that lifafa's article, please give a head's up the next time you choose to post articles from that lifafa.
Do you have any points for dismissing the article. Otherwise, thanks for trolling.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Sagar G »

indranilroy wrote:Do you have any points for dismissing the article.
Saw the blog and directly closed the tab, no point reading lifafa.
indranilroy wrote:Otherwise, thanks for trolling.
Mention not :mrgreen:
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Sanku »

I can see a number of people getting their hackles up. Mostly rent seeking PSU types.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/naren ... n/1099376/
While he said his party has decided to oppose foreign direct investment in multi-brand retail, Modi accepted there was a need for larger investment from abroad in defence production.

Without specifying if he supported an increase in the investment cap from the current 26 per cent, Modi said India could easily emerge as a leading global arms manufacturer. "Foreign investors would be keen to use the trained and abundant Indian labour" in this sector, he pointed out.
I think if NaMo was the PM, Dassault would easily be able to tie up with Reliance and Reliance would be the first Indian pvt weapon maker.

(yeah yeah I know evil evil corrupt Ambani's etc)
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Vipul »

DRDO fires on towards MIRV capability.

India's premier Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) is firing on in several directions with the work on hand involving MIRVs (multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicles) and improvements in missiles, aircraft, tanks and artillery.

DRDO director general and scientific adviser to the defence minister V.K. Saraswat told India Strategic (www.indiastrategic.in) magazine that in terms of missile range, Indian scientists had achieved whatever was assigned by the government (about 5000 km) but the effort was now to develop MIRV capability.

"The building blocks, from boosters to radars, seekers and sophisticated mission control centres are there," he added.Saraswat, who has just been awarded the country's third highest civilian award, the Padma Bhushan, said that DRDO had been able to develop key RF (radio frequency) seeker technologies for missiles in cooperation with Russia, and that in the last missile test, the seeker used was made in India. Digital processing in any case is based on DRDO's own software.

Without the seekers, a missile would be an aimless vehicle.The RF and IR (infra red) seekers are meant for proximity and precision engagement of targets, and both these technologies are required for the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) capability as well as all kinds of missiles. Saraswat did not give details but said that India also was working on seeker technologies with other countries. "Today, we are able to design and develop RF seekers, and in about a year or so, we will be independent in this key technology," Saraswat added.

As for an ABM shield, he said that DRDO had conducted four endo-atmospheric (within the atmosphere) and two exo-atmosphere (outside the atmosphere) missile interception tests and that all six had been successful. "We certainly need more tests but we can say we have been successful in developing this capability." The last one, designated Advanced Air Defence (AAD) interceptor missile, and fired on November 23, was in fact a hit-to-kill test.
So far, DRDO has mostly been working on proximity, near-miss or zero-miss acquisition of targets. With these systems, an ABM missile blows itself up some nine metres from its targets. From now on, the effort will be to develop the hit-to-kill capability by directly impacting hostile targets.

Saraswat, however, said that India was not working on an ASAT (Anti-Satellite) missile.ASAT technology has been developed by the US and China.

On radars, he disclosed that India had initially worked with the Israelis to acquire technology and skills, but now, DRDO had made-in-India long range radars that can discern between aircraft, missiles and other flying objects. The ABM shield being developed has overlapping radar coverage as one cannot "allow any corridors for a missile to slip in".

He said that DRDO is a technology developer and essentially, it is up to the industry - public and private - to build systems for the users, that is, the armed forces.

For instance, after supplying 119 Arjun Mark-I tanks - the order initially was for 124 - DRDO is now developing the Arjun Mark-II and nearly 80 percent of the improvements/changes sought by the Indian Army had already been incorporated. Work on the remaining features is underway and there would be trials this summer to satisfy the user requirements.The Arjun Mark-I has already outperformed the T-90, Saraswat said, adding that the Mark-II would have enhanced night fighting capabilities with advanced equipment for the gunner, driver and commander. There will be better rough terrain and amphibious (fording) mobility, better surveillance and firing capability, as well as increased protection.

An agreement is in place with the army for another lot of 118 - or two regiments - of Arjun Mark II tanks.The Mark-II has a better 120 mm gun, capable of firing anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs). DRDO was examining offers from Israel and Belarusfor the new ATGMs.

Saraswat said that DRDO was in talks with US aviation major Boeing for a transonic wind tunnel for testing models of supersonic aircraft. If the agreement comes through, it will help in easing the queuing problems in testing various systems.

The tunnel is being offered as part of offsets for Boeing aircraft that India is buying.India has only one wind tunnel, a trisonic one, at the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) in Bangalore. Set up by NAL's first director, P. Nilakantan, it was commissioned in 1967 and is among the most-used facility of its kind in the world.

Saraswat said that DRDO's emphasis is on meeting the immediate and foreseeable requirements of the Indian armed forces."We do though have a DRDO Vision 2050 document though," he added.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Vipul wrote:DRDO fires on towards MIRV capability.
"The building blocks, from boosters to radars, seekers and sophisticated mission control centres are there," he added.Saraswat, who has just been awarded the country's third highest civilian award, the Padma Bhushan, said that DRDO had been able to develop key RF (radio frequency) seeker technologies for missiles in cooperation with Russia, and that in the last missile test, the seeker used was made in India. Digital processing in any case is based on DRDO's own software.

Without the seekers, a missile would be an aimless vehicle.The RF and IR (infra red) seekers are meant for proximity and precision engagement of targets, and both these technologies are required for the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) capability as well as all kinds of missiles. Saraswat did not give details but said that India also was working on seeker technologies with other countries. "Today, we are able to design and develop RF seekers, and in about a year or so, we will be independent in this key technology," Saraswat added.
I am waiting for news of Indian RF seekers on A2A and S2A missiles. Hopefully, there will be no more requirement of Maitri/Barak-8/Spyder sagas after that.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Austin »

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited Corporate Video

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Prem Kumar »

A scathing criticism of Jugaad and our lack of engineering/design focus. A wake-up call, to say the least

http://www.ipfonline.com/IPFCONTENT/art ... ndia-1.php
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by shiv »

Prem Kumar wrote:A scathing criticism of Jugaad and our lack of engineering/design focus. A wake-up call, to say the least

http://www.ipfonline.com/IPFCONTENT/art ... ndia-1.php
Great article, deserves archival as a reminder
Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4218
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Prem Kumar »

I knew you would like it, given your constant reminder to everyone about being realistic on what HAL can deliver, given the overall state of design & manufacturing in our country

Puts the achievement of Tejas, LCH in new light

This article deserves a thread by itself IMO. Unfortunately, I will not do justice to it if I start one - given my lack of time
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Cross posting
shiv wrote:http://www.deccanherald.com/content/326 ... aking.html
Japan joins jet age by making its own plane
The Japanese government quickly became one of the largest financial backers of those projects, handing out billions of yen in subsidies to help Japanese suppliers develop technology and win lucrative contracts from Boeing. Though the government declines to reveal exact numbers, estimates by researchers at the State University of New York of how much Japan has handed out to 787 suppliers in subsidies and loans over the past decade are as high as $1.6 billion. Boeing, which is based in Chicago, outsources its parts manufacturing to pare its investment in research and development, design, manufacturing and also its workforce.

At the same time, the Japanese government was ready to give passenger plane manufacturing another try, as it looked in the early 2000 for ways to bolster Japanese exports and revitalise the country’s stagnant economy. In 2003, Japan announced bold plans to finance the development of compact, fuel-efficient aircraft. By the mid-2000, Mitsubishi executives were gearing up to develop a passenger jet.
In contrast:
1. The FICV project hangs in limbo for the last 3 years.
2. Production capability at L&T and Pipavav shipyards lay wasting while MDL etc. have their order books brimming for the next 15 years, while having a backlog on their present projects by atleast 5 years.
3. Tata mounted howitzer has not got access to a firing range for the past 1 year
4. Nobody knows what is happening to the National Civil Aviation program.
5. There are no takers for the 6-8T transport plane initiative.
member_20036
BRFite
Posts: 140
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by member_20036 »

BHEL corporate R&D unit to invest Rs.1,300 cr

http://m.thehindu.com/business/Industry ... 520r%2526d
The corporate research and development wing of Bharat HeavyElectricals Limited (BHEL) is planning to invest over Rs. 1,300 crore in developing new products during the current financial year.
The public sector power equipmentmaker invested Rs. 1,248 crore during the fiscal 2012-13. The products, developed in-house, con- tributed Rs. 9,643 crore, amountingto 19.3 per cent, to BHEL’s overall turnover during the previous year. “The R&D spend during 2012-13 went up by 4 per cent, and the investment is likely to witness the same growth this fiscal also,” BHEL Corporate R&D General Manager S. Sekar said.
Addressing a press conference here on Tuesday, he said the Ramachandrapuram unit of the company was likely to receive close to Rs. 300 crore of the total investment planned for developingnew products for emerging markets. “The investments we make will start fetching us returns in two to three years,” he said.
He said the solar tracker developed by the company was likely to be launched commercially in six to eight months. Replying to queries, he said the company was working out modalities to develop comprehensive solutions for tapping solar energy. BHEL’s R&D division filed 825 IPR applications, out of which 345 had been grantedpatents and were in force.
“The R&D advisory committee comprising experts is working out plans to identify future growth avenues and has charted out roadmaps for 1,500 plus projects sofar,” he said.
Will
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 11:27

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Will »



In contrast:
1. The FICV project hangs in limbo for the last 3 years.
2. Production capability at L&T and Pipavav shipyards lay wasting while MDL etc. have their order books brimming for the next 15 years, while having a backlog on their present projects by atleast 5 years.
3. Tata mounted howitzer has not got access to a firing range for the past 1 year
4. Nobody knows what is happening to the National Civil Aviation program.
5. There are no takers for the 6-8T transport plane initiative.

All this talk of giving private industry opportunities is just lip service. The most common excuse bandied about not giving private industry orders is the lack of experience. How are they going to gain experience if you don't give them orders. Anyway in the 10-15 years it takes an MDL to build a warship I think an L&T or a Pipavav would gain the experience and turn out a warship well before that time.

Private industry has the advantage of hiring the best brains with the relevant experience to make things happen. The Govt instead of pouring money down bottomless pits like PSU's should take a leaf out of the book of the Japanese govt and start giving incentives to private industry.

Having said that the arms lobby is too well entrenched and everyone from politicians to the armed forces have a finger in the pie, which they wouldn't want to give up easily.

So all we will have is lip service paid to private indigenous efforts while the powers that be will continue to enjoy the cream off imports :evil: The safety and security of the country be damned.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Austin »

DRDO chief wants 7% of defence budget for R&D

With Defence Minister AK Antony demanding that less weaponry be imported and a greater percentage of India’s military requirements be developed and built in the country, the Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) wants a significantly higher budget and has spelt out a three-fold roadmap for indigenization.

In an exclusive interview to Business Standard, DRDO chief Dr VK Saraswat, who is also Scientific Advisor to the Raksha Mantri, has said that DRDO’s funding must be raised from the current 5.2 per cent of defence expenditure to at least 7-8% of the defence budget.

“We need a minimum of 7-8% of the defence budget to successfully deliver the systems that the armed forces need. The current gap of 2% of defence budget will have a serious impact, forcing us to prioritize between our development projects,” says Saraswat.

The DRDO’s allocation of Rs 10,610 crore for 2013-14, would have been higher by Rs 3,650 crore if it had been allocated 7 per cent of the defence budget. The DRDO’s highest funding levels were in 2007, when it received 6.2 per cent of the defence budget.

Pointing out that China was spending some 20 per cent, and the US 16 per cent of their defence budgets on R&D, Saraswat said, “Developing world-class military technologies would require an R&D allocation of minimum 10% of the defence budget.”

Besides enhanced funding, Saraswat outlined three important steps that the defence ministry (MoD) and the military needed to implement. Firstly, the military must plan ahead in order to allow the DRDO enough time to develop the equipment that soldiers need.

“The military cannot raise a new requirement and say that it must be imported immediately unless the DRDO delivers it in 18-24 months. Most complex defence systems take 7-8 years to develop and we must be allowed that time. Besides, we have seen that the time needed for importing a defence system is between 4-6 years. So the army must plan ahead,” says Saraswat.

As Business Standard has reported (Apr 13, 2013, “Ministry’s initiative to push indigenous development”) the forthcoming Defence Procurement Procedure of 2013 is likely to address this demand. DPP-2013 will require the military to provide the DRDO and Indian defence companies with adequate time to develop the equipment that it requires.

The second major change that the DRDO chief wants is for the armed forces to accept the concepts of “spiral development” and “capability based deployment” of equipment being developed.

“Spiral development” rests on the fact that that military equipment capabilities gradually improve as design and development continues. Saraswat explains that if the military wants a radar system that can detect enemy fighter aircraft 500 kilometres away, and the DRDO develops one that can see 300 kilometres, the military should accept and deploy that radar. While soldiers develop expertise in operating the radar and provide valuable feedback, the scientists would enhance the capability to 500 kilometres. “Capability based deployment” means bringing into operational use a “Mark I” radar, while a “Mark II” version, with better performance is developed.

The DRDO chief’s third recommendation for boosting indigenization is an investment fund through which the MoD can fund selected technology projects by private sector companies, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

“The fact is that private sector defence R&D is close to non-existent. We need a venture capital investment system, which will fund and promote research and promote an R&D culture in these companies. We have to cover their risk,” says Saraswat.

There are several government models for funding private sector defence R&D, most notably in Israel, and the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) model in the US, in which the Pentagon chooses from amongst futuristic projects that private sector players propose, and funds them even when there is no certainty of success.

A similar thought process is evident in the Kelkar Committee, which has recommended setting up a Defence Technology Development Fund, with a corpus of Rs 100 crore. So far the MoD has not taken any concrete steps to implement this.

Finally, the DRDO chief would like the setting up of Defence Equipment Manufacturing Zones, on the lines of Special Economic Zones (SEZs), where defence industries benefit from quality infrastructure, funding and locational synergy. In Pune, a group of electronics companies have set up the Defence Electronics Manufacturers’ Association (DEMA).

“Defence electronics is an advanced field which requires special qualification and certification. DEMA is a successful experiment that has led to about 25-30 good defence industries coming up around Pune itself,” says Saraswat.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by k prasad »

This is precisely what we need!!!

VKS has hit the nail on the head when talking about the RFPs from the forces. It is impossible to understand the principles of a weapon, develop the technology from it, design a usable mil platform based on that technology, evaluate it and finally productionize it so that we create a usable, high quality and effective military system in a short time - Forget 6 years, it'll take us much more than that to understand what it takes, given that in many areas of work, we are starting from Level zero.

It is important for the defense forces (AND MoD) to help this process along, understand the risks and accept them, and not do anything to compromise this process mid-way (like changing GSQRs or Staff Reqts, or not giving enough user feedback and support to the development). This mindset (if it exists) needs to change - of treating DRDO as just another defense supplier, and expecting them to provide equally good platforms in the same timeframe as other defence majors. Its a shortsighted way to see things.

The other great point is about ameliorating and mitigating investment risks for Pvt companies looking to get into the defence industry -

1) In helping them with the initial investment into such facilities,
2) In guaranteeing support for their R&D activities (even if they don't lead to deployable platforms) - for eg, its pitiable that the Tata SED Howitzer is not able to get access to Army firing ranges for testing their equipment. There is no other way they can test their equipment otherwise.
3) Guaranteeing them support in terms of ordering enough numbers to help them break even on their production run, and to ensure that they don't make losses in having to shut down their production lines due to lack of orders.

... The electronics industry is relatively low cost to invest in, the design tools are the same for both civilian and military systems and there are no specific production lines which can only be made for milspec chips, which allows these companies to redeploy resources in case of low demand. The rise of Fabless semiconductors allows for chip design without large costs. This explains why we have a more active defence electronics and software industry than a defence manufacturing or materials industry. But this needs to change. And quickly.

One can only hope that Saraswat's suggestions are seriously considered and implemented.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by NRao »

They need to extend his contract (which they have declined to do I think).
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Sagar G »

A similar thought process is evident in the Kelkar Committee, which has recommended setting up a Defence Technology Development Fund, with a corpus of Rs 100 crore. So far the MoD has not taken any concrete steps to implement this.
Anthony talks big regarding indigenization but refuses to take steps regarding the same. Ajeeb aadmi hain !!!!
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by NRao »

Austin wrote:Failing to deliver
All I get:
This page is currently unavailable. Please try again later.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by NRao »

New procurement policy to boost India's self-reliance in arms
Ajai Shukla/New Delhi 20 Apr 13 | 11:03 PM
The Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), the apex decision-making body of the Ministry of Defence (MoD), has revised the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) that details the process for buying defence equipment for the military. MoD today announced that the new policy, DPP-2013, has the twin objectives of “infusing greater efficiency in the procurement process and strengthening the defence manufacturing base in the country".


DPP-2013 goes beyond the earlier DPPs of 2002, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2011 in explicitly backing indigenous defence industry. It stipulates that Indian defence companies will get access to the military’s long-term equipment road map, providing them with the time needed for developing the equipment that the military needs in the future; provides a level playing field between the defence public sector undertakings (DPSUs) and the private defence companies; simplifies the ‘buy & make (Indian)’ procedure to benefit Indian industry; and defines ambiguous terms in the DPP like ‘indigenous content’.

As Business Standard has reported (Apr 13: ‘Ministry’s initiative to push indigenous development’), DPP-2013 stipulates the ‘categorisation’ of each procurement case should favour indigenisation, with equipment being bought internationally only if developing and building in India proves impossible. ‘Categorisation’ is a key decision in each acquisition project, in which MoD decides whether the equipment should be developed and built in India (‘buy Indian’ and ‘make’ categories); or built in India by an indigenous consortium (‘buy & make Indian’); or built in India with transfer of technology (‘buy & make with ToT’); or bought over the counter from a foreign vendor (‘buy global’).


The MoD announcement says DPP-2013 “provides for a preferred order of categorisation, with global cases being a choice of last resort. The order of preference, in decreasing order, shall be: (1) ‘buy (Indian)’; (2) ‘buy & make (Indian)’; (3) ‘make’; (4) ‘buy & make with ToT’; and (5) ‘buy (global)’. Any proposal to select a particular category must now state reasons for excluding the higher preferred category/categories".


MoD has also granted a longstanding request by private defence companies for access to the military’s 15-year Long-Term Integrated Perspective Plan (LTIPP), so that they have the lead time needed to meet future equipment needs. Today, MoD said: “DAC has approved the release of a public version of its 15-year perspective document (LTIPP), outlining the “Technology Perspective and Capability Road map" (TPCR) against LTIPP 2012-2027. The TPCR will provide useful guidance to the Indian defence industry for boosting its infrastructural capabilities and directing its R&D and technology investments."


An advantage DPSUs and Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) have enjoyed over private firms has been MoD’s nomination of selected DPSUs as the recipients of Maintenance Transfer of Technology (MToT) from foreign vendors in major acquisitions. For example, in aircraft purchases (Jaguar, Sukhoi-30, Hawk, etc) Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has been nominated by MoD as the MToT partner, entitling it to receive the technology and infrastructure needed to maintain, service, overhaul and upgrade the aircraft through its service life. Now, levelling the playing field between DPSUs and private industry, MoD says: “MToT has been hitherto reserved largely for OFB and DPSUs through the nomination process. A DPP amendment has been approved that does away with nomination by the Department of Defence Production and facilitates selection of MToT partners by Indian bidders. This measure is expected to have a positive impact on private-sector participation in maintenance, repair & overhaul work.


Besides finalising DPP-2013, DAC today also clarified important issues relating to defence licensing. A ‘defence items list’ has been finalised and sent to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP, under the commerce ministry). An explicit list of defence items will clarify which items actually need a defence licence. MoD has also informed DIPP that dual-use items (with civil as well as military applications) will not require licences.


DAC has also allayed apprehensions among foreign vendors and governments that information, documents and technology transferred to the Indian defence industry may not be secure. DAC today finalised ‘draft security guidelines’ that will be circulated for consultations with stakeholders, including licensed defence industries. MoD says: “A complete security framework for Indian private industries participating in defence cases will be in place in the near future."


MoD also cleared a keenly anticipated mechanism for providing micro, small and medium scale enterprises (MSMEs) with funds for developing defence equipment. According to MoD, “Sidbi has decided to earmark an amount of Rs 500 crore for providing loans (to defence MSMEs), and further, a fund of Rs 50 crore for equity support out of ‘India Opportunities Fund’ managed by its subsidiary, namely, Sidbi Venture Capital Ltd." DPP-2013 goes a long way towards addressing longstanding demands of the Indian defence industry, particularly the private sector. Rahul Chaudhry, CEO (Strategic Electronics Division) of Tata Power and co-chair of Ficci’s defence committee, says: “The steps enumerated today will take India and Indian industry towards substitutive self-reliance. MoD has addressed several key industry recommendations. We welcome this and eagerly await the details in the fine print of DPP-2013."


Separately, in a bid to speed up financial sanctions for capital procurement, DAC has tripled the financial powers of the army, navy, air force and coast guard chiefs from the current Rs 50 crore to Rs 150 crore. Finally, after a succession of arms procurement scandals, most recently around the procurement of AgustaWestland VVIP helicopters, Defence Minister A K Antony has divested himself of discretionary powers to approve deviations from DPP. Henceforth, only DAC will have this power.


MAJOR CHANGES IN DPP-2013


Self-reliance: Indigenous development and manufacture to be favoured over foreign procurement Road map: Private industry to be given a Technology Perspective and Capability Road map Tech transfer: Maintenance ToT to be through bidding, not nomination Industry in loop: Military to consult industry well before procurement so that acquisition plans can be translated into “national defence R&D and production plans" Simplification: ‘Buy & make (Indian)’ procedure to be simplified to benefit private industry Pending cases: Indigenous cases worth Rs 1,20,000 crore to be pushed through Licensing: ‘Defence items list’ to be finalised to simplify licensing Security framework: Draft Security Guidelines finalised MSMEs: Sidbi to earmark Rs 500 crore for defence MSMEs; Financial powers of chiefs: Tripled from Rs 50 crore to Rs 150 crore
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by vic »

So we give Rs 150 crore to Indian Companies and Rs. 30,000 crore to FGFA, absolutely equal equal
KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 964
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by KrishnaK »

vic,
It's 500 crores.
srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by srin »

We also need to certify the list of indian firms (public or private) that they have the capability to perform.

For instance, to use the example from MMRCA thread, I don't think Reliance can build fourth generation fighters ... yet. Tata is doing something with Sikorsky so _might_ be able to build LUHs.
Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Neshant »

Pretty amazing how forward thinking Russian aerospace engineers were prior & during WWII.

Even in their dire circumstance, they were able to come up with revolutionary ideas.

All the more amazing considering how many of them Stalin executed for nothing.

We don't seem to have such creative thinkers in India. Either that or the people who do have creative ideas & the skills are not getting to positions where they can carry out their ideas.



German engineers too.

Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Vipul »

DRDO to step up development of unmanned aerial vehicles.

A month after India’s Defence research agency, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), was told to speed up its weapons and systems development programmes to ensure self reliance, the Government has announced that DRDO has stepped up development of certain UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles).

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) had slammed the DRDO last month for deficiencies in its projects, and had highlighted procedural lapses in obtaining sanction for its new projects.CAG had also noted that financial powers of the DRDO Director-General and Defence Research and Development Department Secretary were enhanced from Rs 25 crore to Rs 50 crore and Rs 60 crore to Rs 75 crore, respectively.

Defence Minister A.K. Antony had emphasised the need for self reliance in military equipment and asked for speeding up the DRDO projects.The DRDO has an estimated Rs 70,000 crore projects on hand.

After the development of Pilotless Target Aircraft Lakshya; Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Nishant; Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAV Rustom-I; and various mini and micro UAVs, Antony told Parliament that DRDO has stepped up development of the MALE UAV-Rustom-II.

With regards to Rustom-1, Antony said major objectives, like taxi, take-off and landing, endurance and altitude of the technology demonstrator were accomplished after conducting 26 flights.Further flights are planned to evaluate its payload capabilities, he added.

Regarding Rustom-2, he said the project was progressing as per schedule with active participation of the users.While preliminary design reviews and most of the critical design reviews have been completed, the first flight of Rustom-2 is scheduled in mid-2014.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by ShauryaT »

A scathing verdict.

Zero for DRDO
If DRDO brass were to be hauled up, it would be like pulling out a foundational stone that could bring the whole fraudulent edifice tumbling down
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Vipul »

Saras set to fly again.

After crash of its prototype in 2009, in which three IAF officers were killed, its need was questioned.After being in an indeterminate state for five years, India’s first multi-role light transport aircraft programme is once again on track as a new prototype of the Saras aircraft and is set to fly soon."

The Saras programme to develop a 14-seater aircraft overseen by the National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) suffered a major setback following the crash of an aircraft prototype in the outskirts of Bangalore, resulting in the death of three Indian Air Force (IAF) officers who were onboard the ill-fated aircraft. “We are going to have the first flight of the Saras (PT-N) soon and preparations are on for it,” said an NAL official. The maiden flight of the aircraft will be conducted by the IAF’s Aircraft Systems and Testing Establishment (ASTE).

NAL has so far developed two prototypes of the Saras aircraft—PT1 and PT2. It was the PT2 that crashed in 2009. Following the PT2 crash due to an incorrect relight procedure, the Saras programme was written off, with many questioning the need for India developing such an aircraft.However, the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR)—to which NAL is an affiliated laboratory—went ahead with the project and that apart the father of one of the IAF Officers who was killed in the crash had also asked the government not to give up the project, stating that completion of the project would be a fitting tribute to his son.

Meanwhile, NAL as part of Saras programme recovery plan has converted the Saras PT1 to Saras PT-N and this aircraft corresponds to the Saras PT2. This modified prototype is equipped with the Canadian Pratt & Whitney PT6-67A engine.That apart, it also has a new engine stub wing and nacelle, landing gear actuators, and some improvement have been made to the flight control and flap systems. Along with the PT-N, NAL is also currently developing the PT3 which is christened as the ‘production standard Saras aircraft’. This aircraft which will weigh 500 kg lesser than its predecessors and is expected to be flight tested by the end of the year.

The IAF has placed an order for 15 Saras aircraft, which will be manufactured by the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited. The postal department has also expressed interest in procuring the aircraft to deliver mails.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Very welcome news. But they have been saying "soon" for sometime. I hope this time they mean it literally.

Actually, it is an interesting space. There will be 3 planes in the 14-20 seater category from Indian stables. Do-228 and Saras, and GA-18 from Mahindra Aerospace.
Varoon Shekhar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2178
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Varoon Shekhar »

Austin wrote:Failing to deliver
An article that is totally at variance in spirit and content, with the very laudatory articles written last year in Frontline(like this oneFocus DRDO: Versatile, world class) , about the huge variety of products originating from DRDO, and their general success. Wonder what new information has come to light.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Austin »

Defence Research and Development Organization
An Independent Review Committee headed by Dr. P. Rama Rao was constituted by the Government for reviewing the functioning of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO).

The following recommendations of the Committee have been implemented:

(i) Nomination of nodal officers for structured interaction between DRDO and Services.
(ii) Integrated Financial Advice Scheme for financial decentralization.
(iii) Appointment of a dedicated Chief Controller for Human Resources (HR).
Cabinet Note has been initiated for:
(i) Creation of Defence Technology Commission (DTC).
(ii) Creation of a Commercial Arm of DRDO.
(iii) Renaming DG, DRDO as Chairman, DRDO.
The following recommendations are in various stages of implementation:
(i) Creation of technology domain based clusters and appointments of Director Generals (DGs).
(ii) Appointment of an HR Consultant and review of HR policies.
(iii) Increase of budget for Extramural Research to 5% of DRDO Budget in a period of 3 years.
(iv) Restructuring of DRDO Headquarters, Creation of System Analysis Centre (SAC), Directorate of Quality, Reliability and Safety (QR & S).

At present, there is no proposal to revamp the DPSUs to make them capable for developing advance weapons systems. However, DPSUs have been advised to substantially increase expenditure on R&D and modernization to upgrade their infrastructure and to be in tune with changing needs of technology/production.

Adequate resources have been made available by the Government for carrying out research and development works.

Government continuously monitors the capacity utilization of DPSUs and emphasis is given for augmentation and modernization of their capacities to meet the growing demand of the Armed Forces.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Baijayant Jay Panda and othersin Lok Sabha today.
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Vipul »

Defence public sector productivity less than one-third of private sector.

The defence ministry revealed in parliament on Monday that the worker productivity of its nine Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) ranges from Rs 17.16 lakh per employee per year, in Goa Shipyard Ltd (GSL), to Rs 58 lakh per employee per year, in Bharat Electronics Ltd.The average productivity of employees across the nine DPSUs is just Rs 38 lakh an employee per year.

This is a fraction of the productivity of some private sector companies that are jostling to enter defence production. In Bharat Forge's Pune facility, 4,000 employees generate a turnover of Rs 4,000 crore, giving employee productivity of Rs 1 crore per annum. Tata Power, an increasingly visible player in defence, generated a revenue of Rs 9,500 crore in 2011, with 4,627 employees, with each employee generating more than Rs 2 crore of revenue.

Despite the low productivity, the DPSUs pay out a significant amount as overtime. HAL had the largest overtime payout, with Rs 8,664 lakh paid to some 32,644 employees. Goa Shipyard, with the lowest employee productivity, paid Rs 1,167 lakh to 1,596 employees, adding up to over Rs 70,000 per employee per year.All these figures were presented in Parliament on Monday by the defence ministry in response to written queries from members.

In a belated recognition of the advantages of the private sector, the recently cleared Defence Procurement Policy of 2013 has modified procurement rules to harness the private sector in defence production. Private sector defence companies will now get access to the military's long-term equipment roadmap, providing them with a level playing field with the DPSUs. The "Buy & Make (Indian)" category of procurement has also been simplified in order to bring in more private sector companies.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by shiv »

Vipul wrote:Defence public sector productivity less than one-third of private sector.

The defence ministry revealed in parliament on Monday that the worker productivity of its nine Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) ranges from Rs 17.16 lakh per employee per year, in Goa Shipyard Ltd (GSL), to Rs 58 lakh per employee per year, in Bharat Electronics Ltd.The average productivity of employees across the nine DPSUs is just Rs 38 lakh an employee per year.
Please allow me a digression and a ramble. PSU low productivity is a carefully designed and maintained system designed to eat into national resources with the rot going right back into the system of government. If there is one reason why DPSUs need a major revamp amounting to a resounding kick it is this.

But the problem spills over into other sectors as well where the government pays salaiares.

In brief the history of this nonsense as I know it goe back to the pre-independence era when an education enabled the Indian to get a government job. A government job is for life and gets you a pension as ell. You can't be kicked out easily. The post independence socialist state of mid that set up BEL, HAL, ITI etc only compoundd this.

Today people pay good money in bribes to get government jobs. Sweepers, drivers, gardeners, watchmen, errand boys, chaprasis etc are all government employees. They all have jobs for life and a pension. Cutting them out leads to a PSU strike. The big sahib in a PSU gets a driver - another lifetime job. No such perk is available in the private sector for all and sundry.

Naturally the public sector is an attractive criminal enterprise where public money is spent to keep a lot of people employed for life. A government minister who has spent many crores in bribing a party just to be able to get a ticket to fight an election gets his votes by starting a public sector unit in a god forsaken place. An entire mini city has to be built there starting from power supply, public works, roads, electricity and water. the money that flows out of public coffers is huge and the unit remains an employer of people for many decades - surviving as a sick unit whose workers are a vote bank.

One such example would be "Hindustan Antibiotics Limited", a Public sector unit which produced medicines which were more effective if applied like holy ash on the forehead while praying than if consumed. The factory still exists - a sick unit like Hindustan Machine Tools. these factories in the 60s had fleets of buses ruling the roads of their respective cities - and never stopped being a drain on the exchequer. I am not saying the units were useless. They had their uses but were inefficient, and inefficiency means more money is put into the factory per unit return on investment. That "more money" is simply paid to keep government workers employed and unproductive for everything other than a vote every five years.

Let me finish with an example. One young candidate who is standing for election in the upcoming Karnataka elections has seen his personal assets grow from Rs 700 crores to 900 crores (US $ 180 million) since the last time he stood for election 5 years ago. Currently voters are bribed with Rs 1000 in cash (or equivalent). Rs 1 lakh will bribe 100 voters. Rs 1 crore will get you 10,000 voters. A piffling Rs 2 crores (US$ 400,000) out of assets of 900 crores (US $ 180 million) will buy 20,000 votes - enough to shift the balance in any constituency. This is across party lines. Not just one party. (another naive BRF myth)

Where is the incentive to close down sick units or clear slums? BRF people are naive to imagine that there is ny patriotism or desh bhakti involved as the ground level among politicians. It is about getting elected and making money for the next election. War and border are for the armed forces,

PS if you live in Karnataka - please go out and vote. Preferably, vote for the cleanest candidate who has no criminal record.
Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Nikhil T »

shiv wrote:
Vipul wrote:Defence public sector productivity less than one-third of private sector.

The defence ministry revealed in parliament on Monday that the worker productivity of its nine Defence Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs) ranges from Rs 17.16 lakh per employee per year, in Goa Shipyard Ltd (GSL), to Rs 58 lakh per employee per year, in Bharat Electronics Ltd.The average productivity of employees across the nine DPSUs is just Rs 38 lakh an employee per year.
Please allow me a digression and a ramble. PSU low productivity is a carefully designed and maintained system designed to eat into national resources with the rot going right back into the system of government. If there is one reason why DPSUs need a major revamp amounting to a resounding kick it is this.

But the problem spills over into other sectors as well where the government pays salaiares.

In brief the history of this nonsense as I know it goe back to the pre-independence era when an education enabled the Indian to get a government job. A government job is for life and gets you a pension as ell. You can't be kicked out easily. The post independence socialist state of mid that set up BEL, HAL, ITI etc only compoundd this.

Today people pay good money in bribes to get government jobs. Sweepers, drivers, gardeners, watchmen, errand boys, chaprasis etc are all government employees. They all have jobs for life and a pension. Cutting them out leads to a PSU strike. The big sahib in a PSU gets a driver - another lifetime job. No such perk is available in the private sector for all and sundry.

Naturally the public sector is an attractive criminal enterprise where public money is spent to keep a lot of people employed for life. A government minister who has spent many crores in bribing a party just to be able to get a ticket to fight an election gets his votes by starting a public sector unit in a god forsaken place. An entire mini city has to be built there starting from power supply, public works, roads, electricity and water. the money that flows out of public coffers is huge and the unit remains an employer of people for many decades - surviving as a sick unit whose workers are a vote bank.

One such example would be "Hindustan Antibiotics Limited", a Public sector unit which produced medicines which were more effective if applied like holy ash on the forehead while praying than if consumed. The factory still exists - a sick unit like Hindustan Machine Tools. these factories in the 60s had fleets of buses ruling the roads of their respective cities - and never stopped being a drain on the exchequer. I am not saying the units were useless. They had their uses but were inefficient, and inefficiency means more money is put into the factory per unit return on investment. That "more money" is simply paid to keep government workers employed and unproductive for everything other than a vote every five years.

Let me finish with an example. One young candidate who is standing for election in the upcoming Karnataka elections has seen his personal assets grow from Rs 700 crores to 900 crores (US $ 180 million) since the last time he stood for election 5 years ago. Currently voters are bribed with Rs 1000 in cash (or equivalent). Rs 1 lakh will bribe 100 voters. Rs 1 crore will get you 10,000 voters. A piffling Rs 2 crores (US$ 400,000) out of assets of 900 crores (US $ 180 million) will buy 20,000 votes - enough to shift the balance in any constituency. This is across party lines. Not just one party. (another naive BRF myth)

Where is the incentive to close down sick units or clear slums? BRF people are naive to imagine that there is ny patriotism or desh bhakti involved as the ground level among politicians. It is about getting elected and making money for the next election. War and border are for the armed forces,

PS if you live in Karnataka - please go out and vote. Preferably, vote for the cleanest candidate who has no criminal record.
Before we jump to conclusions consider two points

1) When comparing per employee productivity in DPSUs, compare it to Private sector for their defence business.
In Bharat Forge's Pune facility, 4,000 employees generate a turnover of Rs 4,000 crore, giving employee productivity of Rs 1 crore per annum. Tata Power, an increasingly visible player in defence, generated a revenue of Rs 9,500 crore in 2011, with 4,627 employees, with each employee generating more than Rs 2 crore of revenue.
Since when does BF have a defence turnover of Rs 4000 crore and Tata Power of Rs 9500 crore? Even comparing shipyards like MDL to electronics providers like BEL is ridiculous.

2) And for the anti-PSU tirade, this measure of turnover per employee falls flat on its head. IndianOil Corp has a turnover of Rs 410,000 crore for 36k employees (FY 2012). That gives a, hold your breath, Rs 11.5 crore turnover per employee.

And now let's see Reliance Industries, often the gold standard for all things private. Its 2012 turnover of Rs 339,000 crore from 50,000 employees gives us a productivity of Rs 6.5 crore - almost half of IOC (a company that is in the same business!).

This report in itself proves nothing. Let's not paint all PSUs or DPSUs and even Pvt companies with the same brush.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by shiv »

Nikhil T wrote:
This report in itself proves nothing. Let's not paint all PSUs or DPSUs and even Pvt companies with the same brush.
No the report proves nothing at all and will achieve nothing. But it will not help close down hundreds of sick public sector units either.

The non closure of sick units because of humanitarian grounds that prevents thousands of PSU employees from becoming jobless has a blowback effect in which profit making PSUs cannot be made efficient because of labor issues.

There is a definite problem with PSU inefficiency that has been hidden by complex calculations. However PSUs are the only concerns that can make high tech defence equipment so it's a mixed bag, and calling for reforms instantly leads to someone or the other squirming because someone's balls will inevitably get squeezed by PSU reform. It is easy for people like me outside PSUs to talk, but on the other hand people in PSUs will not talk that much. They know the rot but are willing to reap the benefits, just like I as a private citizen reap the benefits of subsidized diesel and cooking gas every day of my life. What goes of my father? The government will not exclude me (I can afford unsubsidized fuel) from subsidies because it will be seen as the thin end of the wedge in removing all subsidies and will lead to protests and loss of votes and inability to make 25 crores for the next election and the next 7 generations

In India the combination of sick PSUs and import and re-market private firms ensure that we do not produce lenses for any high tech optical equipment. Go to a hardware shop and ask for fine grade 320 sandpaper and you will find "made in USA" stamped on it.
Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Nikhil T »

shiv wrote:
No the report proves nothing at all and will achieve nothing. But it will not help close down hundreds of sick public sector units either.

The non closure of sick units because of humanitarian grounds that prevents thousands of PSU employees from becoming jobless has a blowback effect in which profit making PSUs cannot be made efficient because of labor issues.
Aren't we seeing the same humanitarian issues with the Western world as well? Why do we, as Indians, insist upon holding India to a higher standard? Is it not true that US Congress is artificially keeping alive tens of thousands of jobs of Boeing (a pvt company) at the cost of US taxpayer, even after USG has repeatedly told that there is no need for additional C-17s? These are humanitarian grounds as well!

The point is that losing a job is not a small deal for a PSU (or Pvt sector) employee and more often than not, it is the GoI that can rectify the business situation of a sick PSU since large executive decisions are always cleared by the GOI.
Shiv wrote: There is a definite problem with PSU inefficiency that has been hidden by complex calculations. However PSUs are the only concerns that can make high tech defence equipment so it's a mixed bag, and calling for reforms instantly leads to someone or the other squirming because someone's balls will inevitably get squeezed by PSU reform. It is easy for people like me outside PSUs to talk, but on the other hand people in PSUs will not talk that much.
I'm not sure what complex calculations you are pointing to. Please explain if you can.
My point is that PSU reform or not, the problem is GOI when it comes to defence productivity issues. The original article assumes "turnover/employee" = "employee productivity". But on the ground, this is absolutely meaningless!

Can Avadi have a high turnover/employee when the Army/GoI only orders 124 Arjun Mk-Is ? For the last 1.5 years the Avadi's Arjun Assembly unit is lying unutilized, because Army insists that the next tank to roll out should be Arjun Mk-II. This idling will continue for another 2.5-3 years because of the lead time that is needed after the order is placed.

Ten years from now, if the GoI's (or, God forbid, the Army's) gravy train from rusty Russian imported tanks is upset by a Tata or a Mahindra instead of DRDO - guess what? That private sector company will be sitting idle then. Similarly if the Navy decides to stop giving orders to Pipavav or cancels them midway, Pipavav's productivity will plummet too and it might decide to forever quit the defense sector.
The point is, there is no hope for higher productivity until the GOI and the Services first reform themselves and help in creating a dependable defence base in the country.
Shiv wrote: They know the rot but are willing to reap the benefits, just like I as a private citizen reap the benefits of subsidized diesel and cooking gas every day of my life. What goes of my father? The government will not exclude me (I can afford unsubsidized fuel) from subsidies because it will be seen as the thin end of the wedge in removing all subsidies and will lead to protests and loss of votes and inability to make 25 crores for the next election and the next 7 generations

In India the combination of sick PSUs and import and re-market private firms ensure that we do not produce lenses for any high tech optical equipment. Go to a hardware shop and ask for fine grade 320 sandpaper and you will find "made in USA" stamped on it.
Well why don't the Pvt sector firms go create the grade 320 sandpaper? Surely, the sick PSUs are not hampering their ingenuity! And as a counterpoint, you can go ask any IAF BRD employee about the lubricant he uses for IAF's vast array of imported planes and you'll hear a PSU name (more often than not, IOC). Not RIL, Cairn or Shell. :)
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by shiv »

Nikhil T wrote:I'm not sure what complex calculations you are pointing to. Please explain if you can.
Here you go. These are unrelated things that change the subject from PSUs to something else for which answers are demanded the minute PSUs start taking flak

Nikhil T wrote:Well why don't the Pvt sector firms go create the grade 320 sandpaper? Surely, the sick PSUs are not hampering their ingenuity!
Note that the inability of private sector to do something does not translate to credit to PSUs. PSUs are not making that sandpaper either, and the certainly don't make lenses for optics, but the employees need pension, perks DA/ ADA and paid leave. Private sector firms who are not doing something are not taking money from the government for not doing something. In my own defence I will say that I have been a staunch supporter of the fact that only PSUs can deliver any defence stuff in India. But that does not mean that efficiency cannot be improved.

Nikhil T. I understand that you may have a need to defend PSUs Please go ahead. I am not going to argue over the details that you ask simply because your argument does not change my view in any way, and it also does not change my intention to keep posting my view. If you feel different, by all means post your view and I will post mine. I will reply to you only if I think there is something useful I can say.

As far as I am concerned I think the message of public money bleeding PSUs being maintained by the government is a message that needs to get through. You can argue against it, but the message will be posted nevertheless.

PS In my view this is a ridiculous question and I post it only because it amuses me.
Nikhil T wrote:Aren't we seeing the same humanitarian issues with the Western world as well?
You may see a whole lot of things in the Western world, but PSUs being run by the Indian government is not on the list and so the question does not concern me.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8428
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Indranil »

Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector

Post by Nikhil T »

Post Reply