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.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 27 Dec 2013 10:57

RoyG wrote:Honestly, I can't believe that limits like 40-50% are being proposed. What the hell are people on BRF so afraid of?


The reasons are many, do the reading across opinions from different stakeholders and understand why the concerns exist.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 27 Dec 2013 11:04

Victor wrote:
Karan M wrote:...some indian pvt firms are unscrupulous enough...

Well so are Indian defense PSUs like BEML of Tatra fame. But this is more a reflection of the rot that has been allowed to set in over the past couple of decades. Nobody should seriously expect the Indian govt to lounge around watching the proceedings without any oversight if there ever were a major disinvestment. A whip needs to be cracked and hopefully it will if we get a semi-clean nationalistic govt in the center that is genuinely panicked about the status quo and doesn't give more urgency to clean lungis than to guns, ships and aircraft.

There needs to be outrage at a GTRE that has sucked up resources for over half a century and has yet to provide us with a single Indian engine, forget something as cutting edge as the Kaveri. No need to mention the other DPSU's "achievements". Nope, barring a miracle, our best hope right now is a very large dose of private ownership making sure that the baby is not thrown out with the bathwater. This will remain the situation until the critical defense PSUs become as (or ideally more) attractive to work in as an L&T or Tata.


BEML did what GOI asked it to do. But at the end of the day, the point is to not replace a public Tatra case with a private one wherein our track record or leverage in dealing with them is far worse. Every year eqpt is procured from shady vendors who disappear and are merely blacklisted. Ergo, if the pvt sector is truly to be a panacea, strict checks and balances have to be put in place plus public transparency to show that we are not creating yet another Frankenstein's monster, able to both coerce public officials and act under the claim of private efficiency, while charging obscene markups. A couple of firms have this record already. To enable this, we need a proper MOD linkage and services etc involvement to keep everyone honest. Otherwise we'll see a replica of the story in some other sectors where a few big name pvt vendors rule the roost with GOI backing. So at the of the day it's all about intentions and one can only hope the next GOI is effective.

Coming to GTRE, read Maityas posts to understand their work and then see whether the outrage is warranted.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 27 Dec 2013 11:12

RoyG wrote:Honestly, I can't believe that limits like 40-50% are being proposed. What the hell are people on BRF so afraid of?


Saar,
foreign investment(direct or indirect) can be pretty tricky specially in critical sectors like defence or agriculture or media. What happened to dheshi media? The foreign investment need not be direct. As Karan M saar pointed out, it can be carried out through local proxy. Then from there, the foreign players set the agenda and it works against the interests of dhesh. So, there is need to be very careful.

Even in amirkhan, there are frequent allegations that the military-industry complex has its own agenda that can run contrary to the interests of the country. They may provoke wars for their own interests. And they can buy and influence politicians due to their deep pockets. Essentially, instead of corporations working for interests of country, country will be working to produce profits for corporations.

And in a democracy, it is very easy for corporations to influence politicians or parties to frame policies that will be beneficial to themselves even if it harms the interests of the country. Once such a system is in place, it becomes difficult for people to end it. A dictator or a king with absolute powers can face such challenges from corporations more effectively because they can easily cut down the corporations to size. But, in a democracy where all the politicians are only relatively powerful(with no one having complete power), corporations(that control agriculture, defence, energy or media) become very powerful. They can easily topple the govts or prop up govts.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4005
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 27 Dec 2013 11:33

johneeji,

Frankly I see military-industry complex as a first world problem. India faces great threats and we should do everything possible to make progress in defence r&d. I would rather have military-industry complex problem than the problem of insecurity.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Dec 2013 12:05

johneeG wrote:
RoyG wrote:Honestly, I can't believe that limits like 40-50% are being proposed. What the hell are people on BRF so afraid of?


Saar,
foreign investment(direct or indirect) can be pretty tricky specially in critical sectors like defence or agriculture or media. What happened to dheshi media? The foreign investment need not be direct. As Karan M saar pointed out, it can be carried out through local proxy. Then from there, the foreign players set the agenda and it works against the interests of dhesh. So, there is need to be very careful.

Even in amirkhan, there are frequent allegations that the military-industry complex has its own agenda that can run contrary to the interests of the country. They may provoke wars for their own interests. And they can buy and influence politicians due to their deep pockets. Essentially, instead of corporations working for interests of country, country will be working to produce profits for corporations.

And in a democracy, it is very easy for corporations to influence politicians or parties to frame policies that will be beneficial to themselves even if it harms the interests of the country. Once such a system is in place, it becomes difficult for people to end it. A dictator or a king with absolute powers can face such challenges from corporations more effectively because they can easily cut down the corporations to size. But, in a democracy where all the politicians are only relatively powerful(with no one having complete power), corporations(that control agriculture, defence, energy or media) become very powerful. They can easily topple the govts or prop up govts.


Seriously? Open your eyes man, corporations are neck high in corruption along with Congress. Does that mean we nationalize all of them? We need proper regulatory bodies to minimize this sort of thing. Don't penalize competition at the cost of these types of fears.

Wah wah, privates can't do sh*t...unbelievable that after 60 god damn years we still can't produce basic world class equipment for our troops and the few world class products that our PSUs manage to come up with don't even get inducted on time or get thrown out because it isn't profitable to our procurement guys. Yeah yeah, stick with this sh*t PSU setup that we have. Only in India...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 27 Dec 2013 12:48

RoyG, seriously, why are you tilting at windmills?

Can you point ONE person who says this? That privates cant do xyz and that they need to be kept out?

Wah wah, privates can't do sh*t...unbelievable that after 60 god damn years we still can't produce basic world class equipment for our troops and the few world class products that our PSUs manage to come up with don't even get inducted on time or get thrown out because it isn't profitable to our procurement guys. Yeah yeah, stick with this sh*t PSU setup that we have. Only in India...


And lay off the expletives. If you seriously think that after 60 years, our PSUs can only come with "few" world class equipment etc, then you need to spend more time looking deeper into the items procured versus venting.


Seriously? Open your eyes man, corporations are neck high in corruption along with Congress. Does that mean we nationalize all of them? We need proper regulatory bodies to minimize this sort of thing. Don't penalize competition at the cost of these types of fears.


Which is nothing different from what I said, or what JohneeG himself alluded to. The parts that are not in bold are your unecessary extrapolations from something that hasn't been said.

First, you responded to a valid point about overdoing the FDI input with rhetoric about people on BRF etc.
When this was responded to, now you are bringing in more over the top rhetoric.

All that has been said and which remains valid is not to trade one setup for another if the second has issues too without proper enforcement and regulation. SMEs and many pvt firms themselves are concerned about the relaxation of FDI norms beyond 40-49% as they anticipate being pushed out by con job subsidiaries rebranded as local firms.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 27 Dec 2013 13:11

As matter of fact, since BRF debate quality seems firmly headed for a nosedive (selective venting, etc, researched posts are seen only from a handful), here is what MSMEs and even the large pvt players with significant capability are concerned about.

a) 26% FDI was setup to ensure that pvt and public firms would both see tech transfers to lobby for large deals.
b)30-50% offset was setup to ensure deals for both private firms and public firms to tide over slow order placement by MOD due to protracted trials by services etc. A SME could use offset deals to keep its work flowing even as domestic orders ebbed or rose.

The former is now considered too low for many WW OEMs, raising it to say 49% is being considered. However, various groups have been lobbying it to be removed altogether. In which case, many WW OEM would not contemplate tieing up with any Indian firm. They would merely set up a shell office in India doing low value added work, whereas the true technology that we seek remains outside. This was the concern clearly articulated by many pvt firms who have so far received the bulk of the offset deals and are still hoping for large defence deals to come their way, and gradual production shifts from WW OEM to Indian market.

Another issue to consider is ITAR. It and other such national legislations forbid tech transfers of sensitive items on export control lists. For instance 3G NVDs exported to Israel, a tier 1 ally so to speak fo the US, are still subject to periodic checks to make sure they are being stored/used per original agreement. CAG has already put up concerns about INS Jalashawa.

The problem with 100% FDI or even >50% is that while on paper these allow us access to technology, national laws like the above ringfence physical control of the aforesaid technology.

At the end of the day, its instructive to see what PRC has done. They did not bend down before any concerns etc and firmly implemented their aerospace plans and offset requirements. Boeing and Airbus both transferred subsystem tech across a cluster of Chinese state owned firms, and today source billions of $ worth of kit from China.

The point then is to see what India's state requirements are and to stick firmly to them. Not go merely by what economic projections deem are expedient.
A fully owned subsidiary of a firm HQ in a nation which imposes sanctions on India, is still subject to the laws of its HQ. By the time law vs law issues are decided, the damage is done.

The entire purpose of TOT in Indian firms, PSUs was not merely to acquire technology which seems the fixation of many folks here, but to allow local sustainment. This was borne out of the lessons of the 1971 war, after which GOI started expanding the DPSU complex.

All said and done, today, most of the systems of a Jaguar airframe are made in India, a minority are imported. This is the same logic which had us work on getting high TOT for a Su-30, Dornier 228 etc to whatever limit possible.

This allows us to bypass the local laws vs HQ law issue which is mentioned above. However, by allowing 100% subsidiaries or even majority controlled ones, and assembly there, a) there is no way the Indian Govt can ensure required TOT (on paper) remains in Indian control - design drawings can always be removed, eqpt deemed out of Indian ownership b) No guarantee that long term sustainment or even spinoffs can go to other Indian programs.

Its no surprise then, that the huge lobbying for raised FDI limits (beyond 49%) comes out of some serious reasons which too can have consequences for India. And that TOT programs in which PSUs are involved see a lot of delay or outright broken deals (T-90 ones come to mind)
A prominent acquisition program for instance was to see missile seekers made at BEL controlled facility. The firm in question has been delaying and the basis is straightforward, BEL happens to be DRDOs biggest partner.

The kind of capability built up in our PSUs (D or otherwise) is very easy to sneer at, but with proper management and control, they can and have produced world class stuff. The pvt sector should be brought in on equal terms as well. To, however, in the name of privatization, break one system and put in another with no clear record of working - is to court disaster, the same as the USSR tried to overnight privatize its MIC and almost destroyed it in the process.

Net, there are many concerns about how the entire process should be done, and it is Indian interests which should be first and foremost.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

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

Postby vic » 27 Dec 2013 18:16

Any Criticism is valid if we had allotted adequate resources to R&D. For instance, France allotted around USD 2 Billion for R&D of M88 engine in eighties even though they had the whole infrastructure of engine R&D already in place. We allotted USD 100Million, no wonder we failed. If we have to start an equivalent programme then in today's currency value we have to allot USD 4 to 5 Billion + cost for setting up base infrastructure. As for example China is said to have allotted USD 20 Billion to develop Gas turbine technologies across the board. We do lot of blah blah but never put the money in R&D.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 27 Dec 2013 18:44

Who'll allocate resources to R&D when after all, the gravy train from imports means so much to so many. Forget conspiracy theories, the man who "Allegedly" was one of the prime beneficiaries of one of our biggest sports sca...err irregularities was also the same gent who tried to cancel the LCA when a parliamentary panel was sitting in judgement. It speaks volumes. I did an analysis sometime back of HAL IIRC financials. Found out that excess money was clearly not being used for capex but was being sent back to GOI as wasted dividend. And then for validation, a few weeks later media reports that PC is running around "soaking" every bit of money from PSUs to run the wasteful schemes of the NREGA type. With these sort of things that our system does, its a miracle what DRDO, ISRO etc have achieved. One only hopes that things change and a proper Govt comes to power.
But on the plus side, despite such pressures, PSUs are changing. BELs R&D allocation (as industry std % of sales) is double that of some 4-5 years back at ~8% and around 468 crores. HAL has also moved R&D to around 8%. While R&D spend alone is not the single metric to judge success by and a lot depends on internal processes, accountability and hence outcomes, these are still positive steps. Hope they continue.
But the lack of investment in critical areas in manufacturing - high tech industry (foundries), in industrial heavy engineering (machinery/automation as versus merely importing mfg kits) is still a big issue.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

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

Postby vic » 27 Dec 2013 23:12

I regret to say lot of these is bogus R&D expenditure to take tax benefit and hide higher production costs.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 27 Dec 2013 23:32

Before we tackle things like R&D allotments and FDI levels, we need to figure out the most basic issue without which nothing will matter: How to get the best people available in India to work on our most critical strategic needs--engines, aeroplanes, guns, bombs. No matter what anyone says, this is NOT HAPPENING right now and we need to acknowledge and address it first.

Our best people today prefer pay for performance over guaranteed job security and government perks which are actually the worst possible incentives in these areas. There was a time in the 50s-70s when we did have our best people working on these areas because there was nowhere else for them to go but this has changed drastically. I am willing to bet that even today, many people in our PSUs are sick of the overpowering corruption and bureaucracy and will actually welcome and embrace answerability, meritocracy and a perform-or-perish environment. It is doing India and these folks a huge disservice to deny this basic problem and to defensively trot out limited breakthroughs in random areas instead. There is no justification to continue with failed models, period. I'd be happy to be corrected but AFAIK we still don't have an Indian smart bomb in service when we should have them in the hundreds by now. All we have are endless "projects" and grand plans. If this is not criminal, I don't know what is.

In short: our most important development goals demand that we make them the most attractive options for our most talented people. Whether this needs wholesale re-jiggering of our deeply flawed PSU model or disinvestment is what should be tackled asap. No need to be shy about hiring foreigners either because in the short term, we will need them for sure in areas like engines. If they don't contribute, they get the boot like anyone else.

Also, disinvestment and privatization don't automatically need to get associated with FDI. We don't need blanket FDI or even any FDI in most areas of defense manufacturing if the roadblocks are removed for Indian companies. They will figure out what they need and how to get it within the constraints of Indian security imperatives. The problem is that in addition to their corruption-first game plan, our leaders are trying to mask their general ineptitude, cluelessness and lethargy in such matters by bringing up bogus bogeys and so far their model has been unchallenged.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4005
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 30 Dec 2013 04:39

From Indian Army thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6377&p=1567103#p1564693

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/frien ... f/1211486/

Former chief of the army staff Gen Ved Prakash Malik:

"We are still following very antiquated system which is not allowing flawless decision-making process…our policies are fractured, segmented," he said.

Talking about lessons learnt from the Kargil conflict, Malik said, "There are no friends during a conflict as everybody wants to make money. We are importing 70 per cent defence equipment. How can we be a regional power? After so many years, we are yet to get our industry moving as there are mindset problems in our defence ministry…problem is import of technology. We require foreign collaboration. We are stuck at 26 per cent FDI. Our private sector has the money and capability."

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1114
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

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

Postby Hiten » 30 Dec 2013 10:00

was the August test of the CLGM, that was delayed citing rains, carried out?

ARDE running a tendering process to manufacturing its Guidance system. Only Indian responders
The Pune-based DRDO lab, Armament Research & Development Establishment [ARDE] has initiated a tendering process to award a contract for supplying the Guidance system used in its Cannon-launched Laser Guided Missile [CLGM], presently under development. The Indian company eventually chosen would have to provide 30 units of the system, that it would need to build in conformance with the design drawings, manufacturing process & quality standards provided to it by the concerned DRDO lab.


http://www.aame.in/2013/12/drdo-clgm-de ... pears.html

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

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

Postby Vipul » 30 Dec 2013 19:22

HAL inducts 260 management/ design trainees.

Defence public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has inducted 260 management trainees.

The company inducted management trainees and design trainees (MTs & DTs) in various streams for its divisions/offices located across the country for capacity augmentation.

For the current year, trainees were inducted in technical, HR, IMM, Legal, Marketing, Civil and Architecture. For the first time, MTs in Marketing, Civil and Architecture have been taken on board.

“HAL is poised to meet the challenges of its various current and future projects and the recruitment process has been put on the fast-track for the benefit of both the company and applicants,” said Dr R.K. Tyagi, Chairman, HAL.

“The need of the hour is speed and transparency in selection process and HAL’s current induction of MTs is an indicator of this,” said V.M. Chamola, Director (HR).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 30 Dec 2013 19:55

Victor wrote:Before we tackle things like R&D allotments and FDI levels, we need to figure out the most basic issue without which nothing will matter: How to get the best people available in India to work on our most critical strategic needs--engines, aeroplanes, guns, bombs. No matter what anyone says, this is NOT HAPPENING right now and we need to acknowledge and address it first.


When you say "no matter what anyone says" - its a classic case, of details and facts be darned, I have a fixed opinion & it must & should be right.

For instance..

Our best people today prefer pay for performance over guaranteed job security and government perks which are actually the worst possible incentives in these areas. There was a time in the 50s-70s when we did have our best people working on these areas because there was nowhere else for them to go but this has changed drastically.


The public sector is actually pretty competitive for regular engineers. Its the IT sector which is a heavy paymaster which is addressed by contracting out software development to several private firms for specific programs.

I am willing to bet that even today, many people in our PSUs are sick of the overpowering corruption and bureaucracy and will actually welcome and embrace answerability, meritocracy and a perform-or-perish environment. It is doing India and these folks a huge disservice to deny this basic problem and to defensively trot out limited breakthroughs in random areas instead. There is no justification to continue with failed models, period.


What you define as limited breakthroughs in random areas only shows that your understanding of the issue is limited in that it completely ignores the number of successes achieved consistently in specific areas. In short there is a clear vision and the knowledge base acquired over serious effort to make these efforts a reality:

Strategic Missiles - Agni family, Prithvi family, K series, BMD Program - Phase 1 done
Rocket Arty - Pinaka
SAMs - Akash
EW - Samyukta, Sangraha, Sujav, Ajanta, Ellora, Varuna, Multiple IAF pgms
Radars - Rajendra & variants, 3D CAR & variants, Aslesha, Bharani
Sonars - USHUS, Panchendriya, HUMSA & HUMSA-NG
.. & so forth

There is a good reason we crossed Rs 100,000 Crore in production value with local systems - excluding the strategic missiles - in 2011 itself.
As of Aug 2013:

Systems Inducted (` in Cr) Under Induction (`in Cr)
Missiles 4667.79 60605.69
Electronics and Radar Systems 7606.19 21513.75
Advanced Materials and Composites 3504.96 138.84
Armament Systems 8304.33 4339.75
Aeronautical Systems 3049.37 23699.69
Combat Vehicles & Engineering Systems 12686.43 8236.89
Life Sciences Systems 246.91 286.29
Naval Systems 873.39 329.93

Total 40939.37 119150.82

Grand Total (Inducted + Under Induction) = `160090.19 Cr
Note: Strategic Systems are not included.


Net there have been many breakthroughs & they deserve their due & also replication. If a business model has to be analyzed and changed, it deserves seeing what has worked and what needs to be changed.

For instance, seeing the above, clearly, design & development is something where India has had success in. Mass manufacture can definitely do with involvement of the pvt sector even as the latter builds up R&D capabilities.

I'd be happy to be corrected but AFAIK we still don't have an Indian smart bomb in service when we should have them in the hundreds by now. All we have are endless "projects" and grand plans. If this is not criminal, I don't know what is.


This is a typical case of bringing up a random grouse, whilst completely ignoring the context.

How could India develop a smart bomb when its larger programs were ranked higher in priority- such as its strategic missiles & other programs in the IGMDP.

Now that they are complete, and the Indian economy supports the effort, multiple PGM programs are underway & similar to the IGMDP will be driven to completion. Its merely a question of when, not if.

In short: our most important development goals demand that we make them the most attractive options for our most talented people. Whether this needs wholesale re-jiggering of our deeply flawed PSU model or disinvestment is what should be tackled asap. No need to be shy about hiring foreigners either because in the short term, we will need them for sure in areas like engines. If they don't contribute, they get the boot like anyone else.


India has been seeking foreign assistance & hiring consultants for a long time & the experience has been anything but overwhelmingly positive.

As matter of fact - engine programs with foreign consultants (Run at DPSUs) have been hit or miss, with several experts from EEurope & elswhere not having the full knowledge to drive programs. Other agencies dont collaborate because we can be potential rivals.

In short, this is an expensive time consuming effort and no shortcuts are available.

Also, disinvestment and privatization don't automatically need to get associated with FDI. We don't need blanket FDI or even any FDI in most areas of defense manufacturing if the roadblocks are removed for Indian companies. They will figure out what they need and how to get it within the constraints of Indian security imperatives. The problem is that in addition to their corruption-first game plan, our leaders are trying to mask their general ineptitude, cluelessness and lethargy in such matters by bringing up bogus bogeys and so far their model has been unchallenged.


Sure, because you say so. As versus an AVM involved in the Avro privatization effort actually praising the involved stakeholders for their efforts.

FDI is BTW asked for since private firms are risk averse and choose not to invest in capex intensive industries with long gestation and phased trials before production clearance, which is invariably the case for any defence program. Assured orders are not a given for even GOI programs and services will insist on trials.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 30 Dec 2013 20:48

Lok Sabha
ANSWERED ON 26.08.2013

Question: Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to state :-

(a) whether the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed a kit to instantly identify explosive typically used in bomb blasts and plans to sell the explosive detector in USA;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether the kit has been made available to all security agencies in India to help them to check growing number of terrorist attacks in India; and

(d) if so, the other measures likely to be taken to upgrade information technology in security agencies to enable them to function efficiently?

Answer: Minister of Defence (Shri A.K. Antony)

(a) & (b) Yes, Madam. Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed Explosive Detection Kit (EDK) capable of detecting and identifying explosives commonly used for destructive purposes. The kit was launched by a US Company, Crowe & Co. On 2nd August, 2013. DRDO has granted a license on non-exclusive basis to sell EDK in countries other than India and on exclusive basis for manufacture & sales in US.

(c) The Explosive Detection Kit is currently in use by Police Forces (Maharashtra, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Tamil Nadu), Paramilitary Forces (Border Security Force), Bomb Detection and Disposal Squads (BDDS) and Army.

(d) In view of the growth of Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) in the country, security agencies are taking all possible steps to upgrade information technology to enable them to deal with such situations, like detection and diffusion of explosive devices.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 30 Dec 2013 20:49

Which missiles?
---
Lok Sabha
ANSWERED ON 26.08.2013

Question: Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to satate :-

(a) whether the Government has decided to set up of new Missile manufacturing unit by Bharat Dynamics Limited at Nandgaon Pet in Amaravati district of Maharashtra during the year 2011-12;

(b) if so, the details thereof and the present status of the project; and

(c) the time by which it is likely to be made operational?

Answer: Minister of Defence (Shri A.K. Antony)

(a) Yes, Madam.

(b) Bharat Dynamics Limited has obtained approval of the Board to acquire 535 acres of land on lease basis at Nandgaon Pet in Amravati district, Maharashtra for manufacturing missiles. Company is in the process of finalising the lease deed with Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation.

(c) It may not be feasible to give any time frame at this stage.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 30 Dec 2013 20:55

Q. No. 2516 Increase on R and D at HAL
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email More Sharing Services

Category:
Defence Acquisition
Type:
Parliament Questions and Answers
March 20, 2013
Rajya Sabha
ANSWERED ON 20.03.2013

Question: Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to satate :-

(a) whether it is a fact that the Government is considering to increase the expenditure on research and development at Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) by 15 per cent which is double than the present spending on R&D;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether it is also a fact that HAL is now ready to undertake more crucial aircraft projects; and

(d) if so, the details thereof?

Answer: Minister of Defence (Shri A.K. Antony)

(a)&(b):In the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) being finalized with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), it has been proposed to spend 15 per cent of Profit After Tax (PAT) on Research and Development (R&D) in the year 2013-14.

(c)&(d):Yes, Sir. The major development projects currently under progress are:

- Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA).

- Multi-role Transport Aircraft (MTA).
- Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).
- Intermediate Jet Trainer (IJT).
- Basic Trainer Aircraft (HTT-40).
- Advanced Light Helicopter Weapon System Integration (ALH-WSI).
- Light Combat Helicopter (LCH).
- Light Utility Helicopter (LUH).

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 30 Dec 2013 20:56

Q. No. 327 Resignation of scientists from DRDO

Category:
Defence Acquisition
Type:
Parliament Questions and Answers
March 20, 2013
Rajya Sabha
ANSWERED ON 20.03.2013

Question: Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to satate :-

(a) whether a significant number of scientists have resigned from their posts in the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) during the last five years;

(b) if so, the year-wise and post-wise details thereof;

(c) whether low emoluments in DRDO are the reasons for their resignation; and

(d) if so, what corrective steps are taken / proposed to be taken by Government to persuade the scientists not to resign?

Answer: Minister of Defence (Shri A.K. Antony)

STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF PARTS (a) TO (d) OF RAJYA SABHA STARRED Q. No.. 327 FOR 20.3.2013 REGARDING RESIGNATION OF SCIENTISTS FROM DRDO.

A total of 443 scientists have resiged from Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) during the last five years i.e. 2008 – 2012.

The year-wise and post-wise details of resignations are given below:-

Post Year Total
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Scientist ‘B’
83 41 38 58 46 266
Scientist ‘C’
64 18 18 21 16 137
Scientist ‘D’
9 2 2 5 4 22
Scientist ‘E’
5 3 1 1 1 11
Scientist ‘F’
1 3 2 1 7

Total
162 65 63 86 67 443

Scientists who had resigned have indicated their personal / domestic grounds as the reasons for leaving DRDO. However, it is assumed that increased opportunities / incentives available elsewhere is the likely reason of such resignations.

The following incentives have been granted as corrective measures:

Two additional increments on promotion to each Grade.
Up to six variable increments on promotions granted on fast track.
Professional Update Allowance to all scientists.
Opportunity to acquire higher qualifications at reputed institutes viz. IIT’s / IISc, etc. as DRDO sponsored candidates.
Young Scientists, Scientist of the Year and other DRDO Awards in recognition of their contributions, etc.
Excellent infrastructure facilities have been created at work places and also at residential complexes.

Government is also making all efforts to grant Performance Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS) to DRDO scientists at par with scientists of Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

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

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

Postby Vipul » 31 Dec 2013 23:07

Moschip bags defence contract.

Moschip Semiconductor Technology Ltd has bagged a contract from Advanced Numerical Research & Analysis Group, Hyderabad, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, for design and fabrication of a very complex system on chip (SOC) using advanced CMOS 40 nanometre (nm) low power process technology.
CMOS refers to complementary metal-oxide semiconductor.

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 630
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

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

Postby rajsunder » 01 Jan 2014 05:38

Not sure if this is the right place to post, but given below is the link to the video play list for the conference conducted by i-maritime
with primary focus on

-->What do we need to do to increase our share in the global shipbuilding market?

-->What can we learn from the shipbuilding industries of Japan, Korea and China?
How can we take advantage of our low labour costs and IT capabilities to improve -- delivery schedules, price competitiveness and product quality -- and build a brand name for Indian-build ships?

-->What are the chief areas of intervention?

-->How is that our labour force is able perform so well outside India?

-->Can we leverage technology and our IT capabilities to improve productivity -- without waiting until our labour costs go up?

-->Instead of labour versus technology, can we think of labour and technology?

-->How can our domestic shipping help?
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4144179CC186DDD0

Note: The videos in the playlist are in reverse.

my understandings from the video: In Indian ship yards, 560+ manhours/tone in millitary ship building and around 180+ manhours in commercial ship building.

For commercial ship building, the japaneese figures are 18/tone and in china around 29/tone and around the same figure for korean ship yards.

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1114
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

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

Postby Hiten » 01 Jan 2014 14:06

HAL has issued an RFI for RTA's engine
India's maiden attempt to develop its very own 70-100 capacity civil transport aircraft would soon get a boost#. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited [HAL], one of the participants in this National project, has issued a Request For Information [RFI] to select a suitable propulsion system for the twin-engine aircraft. Suppliers would have to provide 10 engines in the prototype phase of the programme, along with the necessary accessories, mountings & housing. Its stated 2017 as the time when the engines are required for integration on to the 1st prototype [estimating 3-4 prototypes, with the remaining engines for ground functions]. Commercial production is targeted for commencement from 2019, where it foresees a domestic requirement of 500 of these aircrafts [1000 engines], & then there could be export orders. The 80 kN thrust generating Engine, would have to be equipped with thrust reversers, a first for an indigenous aircraft project1, thereby allowing it to land on shorter runways, as may be the case in many Indian cities.


via http://www.aame.in/2014/01/scoping-mark ... power.html

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 01 Jan 2014 17:22

Hiten wrote:was the August test of the CLGM, that was delayed citing rains, carried out?

ARDE running a tendering process to manufacturing its Guidance system. Only Indian responders
The Pune-based DRDO lab, Armament Research & Development Establishment [ARDE] has initiated a tendering process to award a contract for supplying the Guidance system used in its Cannon-launched Laser Guided Missile [CLGM], presently under development. The Indian company eventually chosen would have to provide 30 units of the system, that it would need to build in conformance with the design drawings, manufacturing process & quality standards provided to it by the concerned DRDO lab.


http://www.aame.in/2013/12/drdo-clgm-de ... pears.html


Hiten, on your website, the statement about the CLGM having a thermal /heat seeking capability is incorrect, the journo you link to misunderstood how a laser seeker works.

Great site btw.

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

Postby Sagar G » 01 Jan 2014 19:08

Hiten wrote:HAL has issued an RFI for RTA's engine


If only we would have funded the passenger aircraft variant of Kaveri then instead of purchasing we might have not even needed one or could have been in a position to enter in a JV. Each and every technological purchase we make is the price we pay for not investing on our own people.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 01 Jan 2014 21:19

Hiten wrote:HAL has issued an RFI for RTA's engine

via http://www.aame.in/2014/01/scoping-mark ... power.html

Something doesn't add up in the article. The ceiling asked for is 40,000 ft which means only jets qualify, yet RFI mentions jet or turboprop. This report says the govt had asked for jet (turbofan) only and NAL was supposed to carry out a study and come out with a report by 2011. I guess that didn't happen since now HAL is leading the project, not NAL. The Flightglobal report also says that NAL thought the RTA could potentially replace the An-32 as well so this has obviously been considered because it makes so much sense. If so, what the hell is the MTA all about and why are we spending money on it? And what about the Avro replacement? It should be thrown into the mix too since it is similar to the An-32. Too many cooks IMO and high chance of muckup ending in familiar way.

Since this is going to be a co-development with a foreign partner, the low risk way to proceed is to go with an existing aircraft and redesign or reconfigure it for our needs, including composites with civil and military versions. Ideally, the chosen design will be available in several capacities from 40-70+ passengers. That way, our people get some experience, exports will be far easier and the more airplanes we make the cheaper they get. But most importantly, the chances of the project seeing daylight in reasonable time and cost will be much higher.

It will probably be a jet because that will be cheaper over the long haul, even for shorter hops, and lifecycle costs is the new mantra. Also, with our private ownership of small aircraft growing fast, the airspace upto 20,000-27,000 (best for turboprops) will be getting dangerously crowded. Jets are optimized for 30,000-40,000 ft. US has already moved to regional jets and Europe is going that way too.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 02 Jan 2014 17:09

courtesy "twinblade"..

http://i.imgur.com/ixbGSnW.jpg

Indigenous Suit to protect against Chemical and Biological attacks
Sanjay Bohare, Gwalior


DRDO Gawlior has developed an indigenous suit for protection against nuclear, biological and chemical attacks. The army has cleared this suit for production recently after trials at Delhi. Currently such suits are being imported from Germany. Indigenous suit costs a quarter of the imported ones.


According to official DRDO sources, the development of Mark V version has been completed. This suit was tested on 5 soldiers in Delhi. The short comings observed during trials were rectified. The indigenous suit weighs 2.15 Kgs compared to the German suit which weighs 2.27 Kgs.


The older Mark IV suits made in India used to weigh around 4 Kgs. Wearing that suit caused soldiers to fatigue earlier and affected their efficiency. The mark IV suits were discontinued and the Army imported lighter suits. The imported suits const around Rs 32,000 while the indigenous suit costs Rs 8,000.


The suit has activated carbon particles between various layers. A novel technique has been used to install the layer of activated carbon in the suit. This suit is made entirely from a single sheet and is one piece. The suit will protect soldiers for up to 90 hours in adverse conditions. The suit is reusable for up to 6 times. Washing will not affect the suit's properties.

The activated carbon spheres used in the suit have been developed by DMSRDE, Gwalior in a fluidised bed reactor. The suit is unaffected by water or oil and also has fire retardant properties.

A Sharma
BRFite
Posts: 1152
Joined: 20 May 2003 11:31

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

Postby A Sharma » 02 Jan 2014 18:19

DRDO Tech Focus Dec 2013

Focus on Underwater weapons

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2535
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 08 Jan 2014 10:12

Awesome video of 16 tonne HDS (heavy drop system) from IL-76 - developed by Aerial Delivery Research and Development Establishment (ADRDE)


Varoon Shekhar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2001
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 23:26

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

Postby Varoon Shekhar » 08 Jan 2014 18:45

Pretty nice article about DRDO in the latest Frontline mag. Unfortunately, no write-up about the GSLV, probably too early. Look out for next issue in 2 weeks.

http://www.frontline.in/the-nation/our- ... epage=true

Interview with Avinash Chander, DRDO Director General. By T.S. SUBRAMANIAN

THE Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) develops everything from battle tanks, missiles and the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) to massive bridge-laying machines, anti-corrosion paint and hundreds of other products. It excels in developing cutting-edge technology. Avinash Chander, the Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, is DRDO Director General. Besides, he is Secretary, Department of Defence R&D.

He has a degree in electrical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and an M.S. (by research) in spatial information technology from Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. He began his career in the DRDO, in August 1972, pioneering the design and development of inertial navigation systems for aerospace applications. He is the chief architect of India’s long-range Agni III, IV and V missiles and...

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54682
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 09 Jan 2014 06:06

Very good interview. Has lots of updates on many aspects of DRDO work.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4699
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 09 Jan 2014 06:57

Varoon Shekhar wrote:Pretty nice article about DRDO in the latest Frontline mag. Unfortunately, no write-up about the GSLV, probably too early. Look out for next issue in 2 weeks.

http://www.frontline.in/the-nation/our- ... epage=true

Interview with Avinash Chander, DRDO Director General. By T.S. SUBRAMANIAN

...


Lots of good details in there.

Highlights:
  • R&D synergy between laboratories -> Seven independent clusters of laboratories
  • R&D synergy between clusters (and beyond) -> Systems Analysis Centre (SAC)
  • R&D synergy w/ academic institutions -> Directed basic research, creating a new knowledge-base and new manpower skills modelled after DARPA [Defence Advanced Research Projects’ Agency]
  • R&D synergy w/ Armed Services -> Defence Technology Commission (DTC) - it would seem the IN indigenisation success is due to its direct interactions with the clusters even before this new setup.

...
DIRECTED BASIC RESEARCH


The DRDO’s implementation of the Rama Rao Committee’s recommendations seems to be cosmetic: Chief Controllers have been redesignated as Directors General of clusters of laboratories. When will you empower the clusters of laboratories with greater decision-making powers and allow management decentralisation, migration of scientists/engineers from one laboratory to another within the same cluster, and so on? Have you appointed financial advisers for each cluster?

Implementing the recommendations was the first [thing] on my agenda, and I am really happy that within three months of taking over, I could implement its prime recommendations. First, we have created seven independent clusters of laboratories. Second, [we have] set up a Systems Analysis Centre (SAC) in New Delhi, which will interact with various DRDO laboratories and beyond the laboratories to look at the potential scenarios for our capability development. This is something where scientific methodology has been lacking. Our aim is to create a scientific process to assess the present war-fighting capability, the type of weapons needed, their utilisation, strengthening their safety features, network-centric potential, simulating the processes with mathematical modelling and looking at their potential. The third part, in fact, went beyond the committee report: that the DRDO needs to invest in future technology growth.

If we have to sustain ourselves and transform into a dynamic organisation prepared for cutting-edge technology leadership, the DRDO has to invest in a big way in directed basic research. This is a favourite topic of R. Chidambaram [Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India] also. Today, India is lacking in directed basic research where you do fundamental research, but with a goal in mind. That is what we have started. The SAC will tap the best potential and create centres of technology in academic institutions to carry out this type of directed research, creating a new knowledge-base and new manpower skills. It is a novel concept and in a way what I call the DRDO’s preparation for the DARPA [Defence Advanced Research Projects’ Agency] model.

You said the DRDO has implemented the Rama Rao Committee’s recommendations only in a cosmetic manner. I do not know from where you got that impression. Today, the Director General of each cluster is empowered financially to sanction projects up to Rs.25 crore. The Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister is empowered to sanction projects up to Rs.60 crore. All mission mode programmes have to, in any case, go to the Cabinet Committee on Security. Ultimately, each cluster will have its own independent financial adviser instead of a single IFA [in New Delhi]. We have IFAs in Hyderabad, Bangalore and Pune. We need to have two more IFAs in Hyderabad and Pune.

All Directors General are fully empowered to move any scientist anywhere within the cluster.


Why is there a delay in setting up the Defence Technology Commission (DTC) as recommended by the Rama Rao Committee? Are the three Services chiefs, who will be its members, resisting it because the decisions taken by it will be binding on them?

The process for setting up the DTC is going on. We are going to put it up for the financial approval of the Defence Minister and then it will go to the Finance Ministry. The in-principle agreement is already there [to set up the DTC]. I don’t think there is any issue in setting up the DTC.

As far as the Services are concerned, they are fully represented at the highest level. Any decision taken by the DTC will automatically be a debated, conscious decision, and the whole idea of setting it up is that there should be a new synergy among the various wings, the planner, the designer, the production system and the user, and that is how the country’s defence programme will achieve the requisite self-reliance. We have already started our close interaction with the Services. The Navy directly interacts with the clusters. We have started a very close interaction with the production department so that the production gears up accordingly. We are interacting closely with the OFB and industry to tap their potential to the maximum and build the strength of the OFB further in terms of quality. They have a huge infrastructure that needs to be [utilised] properly.

I am happy that I have had positive interaction with all these groups. Many of our products are jointly coming out from various groups. Take the LCA, for example. The Chief of the Air Staff personally takes a review every two or three months. We have a full team of users sitting and working in the Astra [air-to-air missile] programme. They are doing a part of its design.
...

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 09 Jan 2014 08:11

One blooper there. TSS should have checked to confirm..AWACS radar is indeed an AESA. But this is very interesting and backs up all the bits and pieces of info that have been appearing about comms.

Our aim is to produce state-of-the-art communication equipment: satellite terminals, from field to command-and-control centre and network-centric systems. A software-defined radio for the Navy is now a reality…. We have met all the electronic warfare requirements of the Navy and the IAF, primarily from Indian systems. You know how successful our development of sonars has been. The T-72 and T-90 battle tanks will be refitted with Indian reactive armour. So it is not just missiles that the DRDO has developed but a plethora of systems. About 95 per cent of the requirements of the anti-nuclear, biological and chemical warfare systems are met by the DRDO-developed systems.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19658
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

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

Postby Karan M » 09 Jan 2014 08:47

Why is there a delay in setting up the Defence Technology Commission (DTC) as recommended by the Rama Rao Committee? Are the three Services chiefs, who will be its members, resisting it because the decisions taken by it will be binding on them?

The process for setting up the DTC is going on. We are going to put it up for the financial approval of the Defence Minister and then it will go to the Finance Ministry. The in-principle agreement is already there [to set up the DTC]. I don’t think there is any issue in setting up the DTC.

As far as the Services are concerned, they are fully represented at the highest level. Any decision taken by the DTC will automatically be a debated, conscious decision, and the whole idea of setting it up is that there should be a new synergy among the various wings, the planner, the designer, the production system and the user, and that is how the country’s defence programme will achieve the requisite self-reliance. We have already started our close interaction with the Services. The Navy directly interacts with the clusters. We have started a very close interaction with the production department so that the production gears up accordingly. We are interacting closely with the OFB and industry to tap their potential to the maximum and build the strength of the OFB further in terms of quality. They have a huge infrastructure that needs to be [utilised] properly.

I am happy that I have had positive interaction with all these groups. Many of our products are jointly coming out from various groups. Take the LCA, for example. The Chief of the Air Staff personally takes a review every two or three months. We have a full team of users sitting and working in the Astra [air-to-air missile] programme. They are doing a part of its design.

............................................

Practically all [of India’s] naval ships, including aircraft carriers and submarines, are now being built in India. So if you look at the platforms, major steps have been taken to attain self-reliance in land, air, water, underwater, and manned and unmanned systems.

Coming to the weapons, advanced trials are under way on Pinaca-MkII, the multi-barrel rocket launcher system. We have enhanced its range to 60 kilometres. Smart bombs from aerial delivery systems are undergoing trials. With regard to precision-guided munitions, we are working on aerial delivery weapons, which can have long ranges. We have taken up a major project, on a public-private partnership, to develop an advanced, next-generation artillery gun. It will be much better than the existing 155 mm howitzer. We have torpedoes. Varunastra will soon undergo trials. We are confident of completing the trials by February/March 2014 making it ready for induction into the Navy.

We have taken up the futuristic requirements of high-energy weapons, both in the laser and in the microwave domains. Future weapons can be unmanned combat air vehicles —drones and loitering systems.


Ammunition is a critical area. We are working closely with industry and universities in this area. We have developed a bi-modular charge system which fires the shell for 155 mm or 105 mm guns. It is going in for user evaluation. It is a good example of cooperation between the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB) and the DRDO.

We are also working on thermobaric munitions; air-delivered bombs; ammunition for tank guns; Fin Stabilised Armour Piercing Discarding Sabot (FSAPDS), that is, high-penetration weapons; shells; grenades; and so on.

We are working with the OFB and industry because this is an area where the DRDO has done the R&D, the ordnance factories have to do the production, and industry has to come up with subsystems, components and parts. This is a major joint activity.

Regarding the enabling systems, they are really the force-multipliers: the radars, the communication systems, the Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) System, and so on.The AEW&C System is undergoing evaluation. Communications have been established and radars are being tested.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4005
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 09 Jan 2014 10:06

I am reading Kelkar committee report on defence reforms. I have been noting down what according to me are interesting and relevant points to this thread. I have completed 30% of the report. If no one objects, I plan to dump the notes (just selected points from the report without any comments) in phases. If anyone thinks it's not necessary, let me know.

Here is the report - http://164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/Defe ... ID-PPP.pdf

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7732
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

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

Postby rohitvats » 09 Jan 2014 10:09

partha wrote:I am reading Kelkar committee report on defence reforms. I have been noting down what according to me are interesting and relevant points to this thread. I have completed 30% of the report. If no one objects, I plan to dump the notes (just selected points from the report without any comments) in phases. If anyone thinks it's not necessary, let me know.

Here is the report - http://164.100.47.134/lsscommittee/Defe ... ID-PPP.pdf


Please do the needful. Such points need to be discussed in detail.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4005
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 09 Jan 2014 10:23

Thanks Rohitji. Feel free to reduce the font size if necessary.

Kelkar committee report reading notes - 1


1.
The Committee have also pointed out that the demand for state-of-the-art
weapon systems is poised to take a quantum leap in future and any let-up at this
stage in the implementation of Government’s policy of achieving self-reliance
through national efforts would only result in heavy dependence on foreign
sources. They have, therefore, expressed the hope that concrete and positive
action will be taken by the Ministry of Defence on the recommendations made in
this Report with a view to optimally exploiting the industrial capabilities and the
competence available within the country.

2.
In reply to a question on Indigenisation of Defence Production, the Defence
Secretary informed the Committee during evidence as under:
“The other point is, indigenisation is slightly complex issue. For example, if you take
the light combat aircraft or the advanced light helicopter, these are heavily depending
on foreign components. I understand that the foreign component is 55 per cent of it.
Systems, materials, engines are imported. Even then you can describe it as an
indigenous effort and capability but we should not lose sight of the fact that
throughout the world, there is heavy interdependence on other countries and
companies. To be fully indigenous, independent and self-sufficient in the manner
that you suggest may not be feasible in many years.”

3.
Whenever we acquire an advanced new weapon system, then the
indigenisation level is low and then we progressively indigenise. To give you an
example, we have now absolved the technology for MiG. If we are making, MiG
they are nearly 85 per cent indigenous. But if we go in for a fifth generation
fighter aircraft today, because that is what may be required by the Forces, then
the indigenisation level will be low and then progressively we will indigenise. So,
when we talk of indigenisation we should see it in terms of the weapons systems
where we have acquired indigenisation capability because in a low-level
technology we can achieve 100 per cent indigenisation. But if you move to the
next level of technology which is a higher technology then we have to start again.
This is a submission that I had made last time also and I had made a
presentation that in some areas we have been able to do very good
indigenisation like in small arms. Now, T-72 etc. are 95 per cent indigenised.
The small arms ammunition is indigenised. But when we go into new areas, it is
different”.

4.
On a specific query about the benefit of FDI and its effect, if level of FDI is
increased, the Ministry of Defence in their written note submitted the following
information:
“The benefits of FDI will be:
(i) There will be an increased flow of funds from foreign source under
FDI.
(ii) Employment will be generated for the local population.
(iii) Taxes and other revenues will flow back to the local economy.
FDI levels of more than 50 per cent would imply that the management control
would be with foreign investors. Therefore due to the strategic nature of the
Defence Industry, there is an apprehension that such ventures would fail at
critical times since there would be possibilities of withdrawal on the basis of
embargoes/sanction/pressures imposed by foreign governments or international
agencies.”

5.
Elaborating on the present policy of the Government on FDI, the
representative of FICCI stated during evidence as under:
“The original FDI was at 26 per cent. When the country is buying directly
from the foreign suppliers, and they can produce and sell goods and services
from abroad directly then there is no incentive of creating 26 per cent owned
company in this country. It is because they can supply everything from
abroad. With 26 per cent the intellectual capital transfer will have to happen
much more. That is one issue which we need to think very carefully and see
what is good for this country. It is there in the recommendations that for the
‘buy’, and ‘buy and make’ procedures also, an Indian company must be
nominated as the maintenance partner at the RFP stage. That will allow real
technology transfers to happen. The ‘Make’ policy today allows that all
upgrades will have to happen by the Indian Companies only, but it needs to
be strongly implemented.
If we are deciding to put a ban on the imports then 51 per cent, 49
per cent will automatically start to happen. At 51:49, a lot of investment
will come in. If we decide that foreign company will not go on ‘buy’, and
‘buy and make’, but we will go with the make route and ask Indian
companies too, and then partner the foreigners to bring in the technology
gaps, foreigners having a 49 per cent stake will have to happen. At 26 per
cent they will not come, but at 49 per cent they will start to roll in indoors.
Not just by saying that you are now allowed to do 49 per cent, what is
important is that we say that it has to be an indigenous company under the
‘make’ procedure to qualify for these programmes"

6.
On the issue of increasing FDI in Defence Sector, the representative of
ASSOCHAM made the following submissions:-
“Any sensitive technology cannot be given with 26% equity in a joint
venture with any company sitting here. If any foreigner says you want
100% of a technology to build a particular thing. This 26% is not enough
for me. How do I control it? How am I responsible? This 26% limit in
Defence is a problem. I think it must be 51% or, at least, 49% will be
worthwhile. You will immediately see a change. India has the capability
to absorb technology. The success of Japan, which was the miracle of the
last century, their technology imports were their biggest foreign exchange
exports. How did they got control over the automobile industry. They got
the technology quickly and they overcame and optimized and became the
leaders. ”


7.
On being asked by the Committee regarding the status of implementation
of Kelkar Committee’s recommendations, the Ministry submitted the following
information:
“Out of total 40 recommendations in part I of Kelkar Committee report, 26
recommendations were accepted for implementation out of which 18 have
been implemented so far. 8 recommendations were accepted for
implementation with certain modifications out of which 6 have been
implemented so far. Out of remaining 6 which were to be deliberated upon
further 2 have been implemented and 1 has been dropped after due
deliberations.”


8.
Explaining the rationale behind his recommendations about Defence
Public Sector Undertakings (DPSUs), Dr. Vijay Kelkar during his oral evidence
informed the Committee as under:
“Here, I should tell you that we met the Ordnance Factories and Defence
Undertakings, labour unions. They have thought a lot on this subject and
I would suggest the Committee to invite and meet them. Many of them
have thought a lot on this subject. You may or may not agree with their
views but you may get a viewpoint. Ordnance Factories do not have their
own R&D and they cannot decide on their vendors, hence, they are not
efficient. They shall have more autonomy. Give them more powers and
make them autonomous. Like any modern organization, let them choose
their own supplier and technology. Each with Rs. 10,000 crore of annual
output they do not have R&D. Even small Indian firms have their own
R&D. There is a genuine demand of ordnance factories to have more
powers. Once you corporatise them, I think, you should give them
adequate powers. The total strength of the ordnance factories is two
lakhs. A private sector is producing ten times more than what they are
producing today. This is the kind of possible gains we can get in that case.
They are not allowed to produce for civilian market and they do not know
their strength. Unless you give them more powers, more autonomy, I
think, situation will not be improving. I think in Ordnance Factories, there
is very great technological power in India which is not exploited fully. The
figure of Rs. 30,000 crores is almost one per cent of the GDP. That kind
of capabilities are there. And we are losing that. We are saying to
corporatise them. BSNL is a good model. We should corporatise them
without any employee losing their job or pension rights. Put all the
pension rights there which is done by BSNL. Protect all their rights, give
them more powers and accountability. That is what we have
recommended for the ordnance factories.”


9.
The report first takes into account the historical development. Why
did we make defence production a monopoly of the public sector? The
very simple reason is that when the country became independent there
was not much private industry. The only industry that was there was in the
Government hands. So, it was naturally thought that defence should be in
the public sector. In 1991 when the major liberalization took place, it
coincided with global changes in the defence industry.
Globally, the defence industry has undergone a revolutionary
change. There is an enormous amount of globalization in defence
production. These two things were happening in the rest of the world. One
is globalizing defence production and other is that it also has become an
extremely R&D intensive industry. Small companies cannot survive. In the
United States there were 22 or more large defence corporations but they
got reduced to only five to seven. The same tendency is there in Europe.
Even in Russia, the same process is seen. The number of Defence
equipment producing systems and platforms has became smaller and
smaller because of enormous amount of R&D.


10.
There is one more interesting point which an Air Marshal, one of the great Indian
thinkers said. What is secret is not production but deployment of
equipment. I am afraid, production is not secret. Therefore, in this
country we can say that production is not secret. Where you deploy is
secret but what the defence industry produce in this country is not.
We must record Mr. Chairman that enormous strides made by the Ministry in
this area. I think, they have now very detailed kind of procedure backed
acquisitions. There is a silent revolution taking place. We must help them
to make progress further.”


11.
Apprising the Committee about the different public-private participation
models of development in the country, Dr. Vijay Kelkar stated during evidence as
under:-
“... We studied the experience of ISRO; ISRO is the most successful
example of how Indian industry participates in hi-tech area; just like Army,
they also wanted that; so, ISRO participated in that and created
infrastructure where large amount of requirement of space industry is
done by our own companies. So, let us follow the ISRO model. What is
ISRO model? First they made available their own in-house technology to
Indian industry. Second, they gave long-term commitments to Indian
industry. Third, throughout the whole process, they hold the hands and
guide them to what they want. So, there is holding of hands between the
buyer and the producer. So, they work as a team. Consequently, we have
this now in space industry.

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

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

Postby merlin » 09 Jan 2014 12:07

MIRV/MaRV design ready, research into DEW on going and HSTDV research on going are the most critical confirmations for the future from the interview. That's good to know.


Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1114
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

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

Postby Hiten » 11 Jan 2014 07:20

Karan M wrote:Hiten, on your website, the statement about the CLGM having a thermal /heat seeking capability is incorrect, the journo you link to misunderstood how a laser seeker works.

Great site btw.


Thank you. Learning every moment. Will re-visit the post later today. Been swamped offline. Couldn't touch the blog.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2379
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

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

Postby VinodTK » 13 Jan 2014 06:19

Desi defence showpieces powered by videshi parts
NEW DELHI: The Tejas light combat aircraft, 30 years in the making, is just 60% indigenous as of now. The story of the indigenous Arjun main battle tank is even worse. First sanctioned in May 1974, 55% of the tank is still made of imported parts. This is the recurring theme across India's fledgling defence industrial base (DIB), with the government failing to whip DRDO and its sprawling empire of over 50 laboratories as well as the five defence PSUs, four shipyards and 50 ordnance factories into shape.
:
:
"Moreover, the cost of each HAL-manufactured Sukhoi is almost Rs 100 crore more than if the same fighter was directly imported from Russia (the last 42 Sukhois ordered cost over Rs 450 crore each)," he added.
:
:
:


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yagnasri and 42 guests