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.
member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23694 » 28 Aug 2014 21:08

Saurav Jha: Dr Chander, what about small arms?

Avinash Chander: We have developed a joint venture protective carbine, which we have offered to the Army for evaluation trials. We have also developed a corner-shot rifle, which is also available for trials. Beyond that we aren't taking up that many small arms projects. OFB of course is doing some other things. But today I feel this is an area where domestic industry can play a major role, because industry has the full capability to do this class of systems. We should see how we can involve industry in this area.

Saurav Jha: Indeed, in the United States there is a veritable cottage industry based around AR-15 derivatives...

Avinash Chander: Exactly, there's nothing in these systems which cannot be done by any good engineering industry. So I think we need a policy relook which gets private industry into small arms. They can use their own technologies, some joint ventures, some DRDO based products and then they will prove themselves over time. I think we have done good products in this sphere but have not been able to market it effectively. And if people here don't want it, we can always give it to a private player who can look for export avenues.


Nice to hear this and hopefully apart from small arms, industry is considered competent for a lot of other projects too.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 28 Aug 2014 21:14

Unlike some on BRF, even the head of DRDO is now coming out and saying that private industry is now competent enough. He knows that PSU culture is on its way out. It's only a matter of time before they are reduced to a DARPA type agency. OFB will be finished all together.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 28 Aug 2014 21:50

indranilroy wrote:
Zynda wrote:Who designed this? Satyam? Or GippsAero has an office in India?

Mostly CSIR-NAL. Designers from Mahindra Aerospace Private Limited (MAPL) helped as well.


Apologies. You are right.

It says it right there on their web site and I read right past it!!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35893
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 29 Aug 2014 02:29

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NEWS/news ... wsid=21234 There are ICs that you will be buying anyway, but what you make with those ICs is ultimately your system, your design.

AC saab is right, however your design is still under the control how those ICs can be put to use.. they have restrictions and hack points perhaps depending on what is integrated into those chips.[especially sourced from massa].

I think the question should have been answered to Aero Engines.. we are lagging like crazy! in that department.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 29 Aug 2014 08:58

prasannasimha wrote:Actually as far as fuel efficency goes truboprops are considered more efficient for short and medium distances and there is an argument for the returm of turboprops in this era of low profit margins .

The repair and maintenance of turboprops are higher than jets for a variety of reasons and is why most short/medium haul routes are changing to jets. Noise pollution is another biggie and it is possible now for a small jet to land in city-center airports because of noise-reduction tech on jets. On short haul routes (like Mumbai-Pune) where there is not enough time to climb to 20k+ ft, props may have an edge efficiency-wise but then door-to-door times and costs may soon become much more attractive with ground transport at those distances (a/c buses on improved multi-lane roads, fast trains etc).

Point is the thinking that resulted in Saras concept is decades old and practically useless today. Saras most likely can be competitive in the short-distance market only as a premium door-to-door business aircraft flying people to rough mine and factory airfields for example, but Mahindra is miles ahead in this space already. As a jet however, it has a chance of competing both in India and abroad as a corporate aircraft. Unless another company jumps in before NAL can move as is very likely.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3549
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

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

Postby Neela » 29 Aug 2014 09:44

The arguments against Turboprops seem to not changed for a long time. The glamour of high-bypass , slick sounding jet engines cannot be matched by TPs. But I am willing to bet that TPs will be there and still running 2-3 decades from now. Wait a little more before writing obituaries.

Image
Last edited by Neela on 29 Aug 2014 09:50, edited 2 times in total.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3549
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

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

Postby Neela » 29 Aug 2014 09:50

Splitting posts keep it focusssed on select topics.

Above graph shows trends in the market. Now, looking at inventory from here ( from 2013):
Image

That looks very healthy

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3549
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

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

Postby Neela » 29 Aug 2014 09:53

From the link in the post above:
We expect both manufacturers to get even busier, as Pratt & Whitney Canada is expected to introduce a new engine, currently called the Next Generation Regional Turboprop to replace its current PW100 series. That engine will include a new compressor, a scaled-version of PW’s Talon burner, and an 8 bladed propeller to provide a 20% improvement in fuel burn. That magnitude of an improvement is enough of a difference for customers to mandate adoption of the new technology engines on existing or new development programs – much like the GTF forced re-engining programs for A320 (neo) and Embraer EJets (E2). Re-engined models should appear in the 2018 time frame, given typical lead times.


It will be a little naieve to assume that next generation TPs will not try to reduce noise . From this post here

There is a perception that TPs do not have the same level of technology as jets. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today’s TP-powered airliners have the same accoutrements - radar, GPS, HUDs. And they even have noise cancellation making them about as quiet as jets even though they have huge props spinning a few feet away from the cabin. They are also nearly as fast, too. The “killer app” for a TP is that it burns much less fuel per passenger – so for short missions (typically 350nm or ~60 minutes) a TP has better economics. On a typical short route of 300nm the fuel consumption of an ATR 72 is roughly half that of a regional jet.

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23694 » 29 Aug 2014 18:11

http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/ch ... 57765.aspx

Dire need to speed up DRDO’s output

Those in the ministry of defence (MoD), who exercise control over DRDO, are blissfully ignorant of what defence equipment is all about. In weapons, they can’t tell a gun from a howitzer, and in engines, a cam shaft from a crank shaft. :)

There is little understanding and mutual confidence between the DRDO and the defence services

The DRDO never spells out its technological status in relation to the equipment to be developed. With the result, GSQRs are prepared without proper interaction with the DRDO, but keeping in mind what is already in the market.

The DRDO never seeks the scaling down of the GSQRs to a level at which it can handle projects, in the full knowledge and belief that the project can be dragged on endlessly and that no one will be called upon to account. Once a project is taken on, complete secrecy prevails and service officers posted with these establishments are kept out of the loop.

When the USSR broke up, some governments of east European countries offered to shift state-of-the-art defence industries to other countries. India spurned these offers, while China took two thousand scientists and some of the defence industrial units. In India, there is a politico-bureaucratic nexus which has successfully thwarted such moves, for obvious reasons.

Close down those establishments of DRDO which are busy re-inventing the wheel, and those whose tasks can best be done in the private sector. Get it out of the control of the MoD. Equally do away with most of the defence ordnance factories. Pass on production of such equipment to the private sector.

It is DRDO component grouped with the navy that has performed well. This has essentially been due to direct control that the navy has exercised over this component. Of the three establishments, one is always commanded by a naval officer and the other two have a number of naval officers on their establishment. Thus a series of projects have been successfully completed: some on their own and some others as part of collaboration with certain foreign companies.

Restructure the MoD as an integrated organisation, consisting of bureaucrats, defence services staff, scientists and financial experts. It would ensure better coordination, cutting out duplication and triplication of work, improved efficiency and speedy decision-making. Integrated defence planning and defence technology development have become an inescapable necessity.

Pending adoption of the CDS system, DRDO’s various establishments need to be grouped with the army and IAF on same lines as for the navy.


RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 29 Aug 2014 19:09

Our "immature" indian industry is now being entrusted with producing helicopters after the scrapping of light utility helicopter deal. :lol:

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 29 Aug 2014 20:10

Neela wrote: I am willing to bet that TPs will be there and still running 2-3 decades from now. Wait a little more before writing obituaries.

Nobody is writing obituaries for turboprops. As tactical military aircraft and short-medium range passenger aircraft flying at low-medium altitudes they will remain competitive but as a 14-seater, Saras can only be viable as a niche aircraft where Mahindra has pulled ahead in the turboprop space. As a fuel-sipping jet above 20k ft, it has a chance to break through and become relevant. This is just a reflection of NAL's thinking where IMO it has failed to make a case for Saras in its current configuration and has slipped further into irrelevance in the space as others overtake it.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6882
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 30 Aug 2014 00:00

There is no way that we will be able to settle the debate on whether a turboprop is better than a turbofan in a 14-seater segment. There are large sales on both sides. And that is why I am suggesting both. But, Saras can certainly gain from is going down from a crew of 3 to 2. Who has a flight engineer in a 14-seater plane?

By the way, we missed this.
Saras ready to take off again
August 19, 2014: India's first indigenous civilian aircraft, the 14-seater push-prop SARAS could get back into the air any day now. After a five-year grounding following a devastating March 2009 crash that killed its there-man IAF test crew, the National Aerospace Laboratory, in coordination with the IAF's Aircraft & Systems Testing Establishment (ASTE) are undersood to be confident of a first flight before Diwali this year. As reported earlier by SP's, the ASTE had begun ground trials of the modified PT1N platform around December last year, and has undergone a rigorous routine of ground handling, turning and taxi trials, including static systems trials. Former NAL chief and aerospace guru Prof. Roddam Narasimha recently spoke out about the various programmes, and said that the proposed the Regional Transport Aircraft (RTA) could spearhead a much needed new wave in Indian capabilities alongside the Saras. "It should be a turbo-prop aircraft, executed in a public-Private Partnership (PPP) mode, preferably as part of a global consortium, and should be viewed as a common “civil-military” platform that would also address the transport aircraft needs of the Indian Air Force in terms of the Avro and AN-32 replacements, thus generating the numbers and associated economic viability needed to make it successful," he said.

Image
Image
Image
Image


P.S. Please disregard those pictures. They are from HSTT in 2004.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

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

Postby srin » 30 Aug 2014 00:00

dhiraj wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/chandigarh/dire-need-to-speed-up-drdo-s-output/article1-1257765.aspx

Dire need to speed up DRDO’s output



My eyes glazed over when I saw it was completely one-sided and I had to go to the main source to confirm that the author is an ex-general of army. The relationship between DRDO, DPSUs and services (mainly other than Navy) is really rotten. And this street fight seen in multiple fora (I remember an AeroIndia 2013 seminar, and the roundtable on MMRCA) is getting pretty ugly and won't benefit anyone.

I honestly don't know why DRDO projects always drag on. But my two guesses (I don't know which one is right)
a) If DRDO doesn't commit to a specific time, then it fears it won't get the project to do it in-house, or won't get the budget.

b) It really is difficult to know ahead of time how long something will take. You need everything from basic science to metallurgy to engineering for any project to be successful and it becomes hard to estimate if you aren't even in there. And as you master the domain, it becomes progressively easier. For instance, it took a long while to mature in the missile development, but the advances there are pretty amazing.


I don't know why Navy and DRDO have the least of issues - maybe it is because they are more engineering oriented ?

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5038
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

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

Postby Surya » 30 Aug 2014 01:44

If any proof of this lavish expenditure is required, one need go no further than have a look at the DRDO office complex at the rear of South Block and then of course see Sena Bhavan as well.


seems like all ex faujis discuss this in the club and spout the same line :) :mrgreen:

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 30 Aug 2014 03:07

srin wrote:I don't know why Navy and DRDO have the least of issues - maybe it is because they are more engineering oriented ?

The general has answered this question:
It is DRDO component grouped with the navy that has performed well. This has essentially been due to direct control that the navy has exercised over this component. Of the three establishments, one is always commanded by a naval officer and the other two have a number of naval officers on their establishment.

IAF wanted to do the same thing with HAL but was rebuffed by the babus. Can't imagine them handing over control of OFB to the Army either. As the general says, DRDO/HAL/OFB need to be broken up/overhauled/closed/pensioned off or things will never change. I only hope that the new govt will understand this soon and act with urgency, otherwise we are finished.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

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

Postby Sagar G » 30 Aug 2014 03:48

There is a level lame and then there are "researched" articles written by Ex defence personnels. Each and every time such "ground breaking" articles comes out of places where the sun doesn't shine it provides an opportunity to have a few laughs in an otherwise serious thread (trolls also achieve the same effect). Here we have Lt Gen Harwant Singh (retd) claiming

It is DRDO component grouped with the navy that has performed well. This has essentially been due to direct control that the navy has exercised over this component. :rotfl: Of the three establishments, one is always commanded by a naval officer and the other two have a number of naval officers on their establishment. Thus a series of projects have been successfully completed: some on their own and some others as part of collaboration with certain foreign companies. Nuclear submarine is one such example.


This and the rest of the part about Naval control over DRDO labs is total and absolute bunkum/lie being peddled by him. First of all the Navy has a tilt towards indigenization which is unmatched by IAF/IA. It is in their culture to seek out for indigenization no matter what the cost even to the level where warships gets delayed because of the Navy's will to have indigenous components. Full marks to Navy for that. To add to that they don't display the contempt for our scientific/engineering community (except a few) which is otherwise prevalent in IA/IAF as can be seen by multiple articles written by ex IA/IAF personnels. Coming to the three labs that he talks about let me post the info for the same

Naval Materials Research Laboratory

Director's Profile

Dr. R.S.HASTAK is a post-graduate in Chemical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay in the year 1978 and Ph.D in the year 2012 from Defence Institute of Advanced Technology(Deemed University), Pune. He joined Defence Research & Development Orgnisation in the year 1980. His experience includes rocket propulsion, power sources for aerospace applications, Carbon-Carbon Composites, field mobile ground support systems. He worked in DRDO labs located in Hyderabad for three decades.

Dr. R.S.HASTAK was appointed as the Director, Naval Materials Research Laboratory (NMRL) in Dec 2009. In his present capacity, he is spearheading research, technology & product development activities in the area of materials for marine applications. He is actively involved in the technology development for the fuel cells & supercapacitors.

In the area of marine materials, Dr. R. S. Hastak is working on high strength, high stiffness metallic materials, polymeric & ceramic materials. He is leading a team engaged in the development & productionisation of corrosion resistant paints & coatings for marine applications and antifouling coatings for marine vessels.


Naval Physical and Oceanographic Laboratory

Director's Profile

Shri S Anantha Narayanan Outstanding Scientist and Director, Naval Physical and Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL), Kochi has been promoted to the grade of Distinguished Scientist.

Shri Anantha Narayanan obtained BTech in Electronics Engineering from IIT-Madras in 1975 and MTech in Electronics from Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, in 1985 with Gold Medal. He is an alumnus of the National Defence College, New Delhi, where he underwent training on National Security and Strategy in 2003.

Shri Anantha Narayanan joined DRDO in 1975 as Junior Scientific Officer at Defence Research and Development Laboratory, Hyderabad. Subsequently he was transferred to NPOL, Kochi, in 1978. He was appointed Director, NPOL, on 1 January 2007 and was promoted as Outstanding Scientist in July 2009.

Shri Anantha Narayanan has made seminal contributions to the development of sonar systems for the Indian Navy. He was part of the development team of the first frigate sonar project. He was the Team Leader for the project APSIM established in ASW School, Naval Base in 1985. During 1993-98, Shri Anantha Narayanan was the Project Director for India’s first indigenously developed submarine sonar project, which paved the way for self-reliance in this field. As Director (Systems) he was instrumental in streamlining the production andinduction of several Sonar Systems during 2000-2006. As Director, NPOL, he was instrumental in realising a new generation surface ship sonar in a very short span of time. He has guided the development work on towed array and airborne sonar systems in NPOL. Shri Anantha Narayanan is a recipient of the DRDO Scientist of the Year Award in 1995 for his outstanding contributions in development of Naval Systems.

He is a fellow of IETE and a member of Ultrasonic Society of India and Acoustical Society of India.


Naval Science & Technological Laboratory

Director's Profile

Shri CD Malleswar Sc G, has assumed the charge of Director, Naval Science and Technological Laboratory (NSTL),Visakhapatnam,wef 1 October 2013.

Shri Chengalvala DurgaMalleswar, obtained his MSc (Tech)electronics degree with Radar Engineering as specialisation from the Andhra University in 1977 and MS in Electronics and Communications form IIT-M, Chennai, in 1980. He is a graduate of the 45th course of the National Defence College, New Delhi. He also holds an MPhil in Defence and Strategic Studies, from the University of Madras. Since 1980, he is with DRDO in various capacities as Group Leader, System Designer, Officer In-charge System Integration, Project Director and Head of the Technology Directorates of Weapon Fire Control Systems and Countermeasures. His significant contributions include: First Solid-state Weapon Data Recorder for Torpedoes, first Indigenous Tactical Weapon Control System 'Panchendriya' for submarines, Helicopter Fire Control System, Integrated Anti-Submarine Warfare Complex, IAC Mod '0' and Mod 'C' for Naval Frigates and ASW Corvettes, and Anti-Torpedo Decoy Launch Control Systems. Apartfrom these, he has also contributed for successful completion of Wire Guided Torpedo Project as Officer In-charge System Integration and to several Torpedo Induction support products like Air/Ship-borne Presetters, Torpedo Simulators and Drill and Practice Torpedo, etc. All these systems are being produced by defence production agencies and inducted into the services. He is the recipient or DRDO Technology Group Award- 2004, and the DRDO Scientist of the Year Award-2007 conferred by hon'ble Prime Minister of India.

Shri Malleswar is a member of IEEE and life fellow of IETE. He has successfully conducted two national conferences ACCT-2012 and ARCNET-2013. He is presently the Chairman of IETE, Visakhapatnam.


Tell me where does anyone see the name of any Naval officer commanding any one of the institutes. There is no control of any DRDO lab by IN neither there is any hidden control by IN over the director of any of these labs. The thing here is that IN closely works with DRDO in doing all the basic R&D which is required before going on to make any worthwhile product. But accepting this will put IA/IAF into a bad place because then people will ask why aren't you doing the same ??? Which will lead to massive chaddi uttaroing exercise in full public view hence create a bogey of DRDO naval labs being under the command of Navy.

The actual agenda of this article is not wishing indigenization but

The DRDO needs to be placed under the CDS, which will result in mutual confidence and better interaction with the services and bring in efficiency and good performance.


Get the dirty civilians under Army control !!!!!

Now without creating a bogey of IN having control of DRDO labs how will you peddle your pet agenda ??? People with such mentality are very dangerous and it's good that they don't have any decision making power. Such farticles are the best they can do so read and laugh.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22539 » 30 Aug 2014 07:41

^To think that such people were in command of our valiant soldiers, truly a case of lambs leading lions.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

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

Postby srai » 30 Aug 2014 08:16

srin wrote:
dhiraj wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/chandigarh/dire-need-to-speed-up-drdo-s-output/article1-1257765.aspx

Dire need to speed up DRDO’s output



My eyes glazed over when I saw it was completely one-sided and I had to go to the main source to confirm that the author is an ex-general of army. The relationship between DRDO, DPSUs and services (mainly other than Navy) is really rotten. And this street fight seen in multiple fora (I remember an AeroIndia 2013 seminar, and the roundtable on MMRCA) is getting pretty ugly and won't benefit anyone.

I honestly don't know why DRDO projects always drag on. But my two guesses (I don't know which one is right)
a) If DRDO doesn't commit to a specific time, then it fears it won't get the project to do it in-house, or won't get the budget.

b) It really is difficult to know ahead of time how long something will take. You need everything from basic science to metallurgy to engineering for any project to be successful and it becomes hard to estimate if you aren't even in there. And as you master the domain, it becomes progressively easier. For instance, it took a long while to mature in the missile development, but the advances there are pretty amazing.


I don't know why Navy and DRDO have the least of issues - maybe it is because they are more engineering oriented ?


Looking from past dealings, the IA tends to draft its requirements from foreign brochures and wants all of those best features in indigenous products. If what has developed doesn't meet its stringent requirements then it won't accept the product. It would rather get them from foreign vendors. There seems to be a lack of an iterative methodology to induct products and then continuously improve them over time to help develop indigenous capability.

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

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

Postby srin » 30 Aug 2014 10:31

Victor wrote:
srin wrote:I don't know why Navy and DRDO have the least of issues - maybe it is because they are more engineering oriented ?

The general has answered this question:
It is DRDO component grouped with the navy that has performed well. This has essentially been due to direct control that the navy has exercised over this component. Of the three establishments, one is always commanded by a naval officer and the other two have a number of naval officers on their establishment.

IAF wanted to do the same thing with HAL but was rebuffed by the babus. Can't imagine them handing over control of OFB to the Army either. As the general says, DRDO/HAL/OFB need to be broken up/overhauled/closed/pensioned off or things will never change. I only hope that the new govt will understand this soon and act with urgency, otherwise we are finished.


He has provided his perspective which we don't have to accept as face value.
Running R&D houses where scientists value their autonomy and independence is way different from commanding officers & jawans who are required to obey you. Does Army have the ability to deal with the DRDO scientists and engineers at a technical level to earn their respect ? Does he really believe that we can get instant knowledge of barrel metallurgy (for artillery) or FPA or MMW seeker (for ATGM) the moment Army takes over ?
It does seem he has no idea how to run an R&D establishment.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 30 Aug 2014 20:07

srin wrote:It does seem he has no idea how to run an R&D establishment.

True, and neither should he because that's not his job. You see, the scientists exist only to give the generals what they need, nothing else. Should an Indira Nooyi know how to make a micro-actuator or UV curing machine in her Pepsi plants? If Von Braun were left to his devices, he would be busy designing a rocket to Pluto. It was only the general's boot on his ass that resulted in the V2 which was needed immediately and merely to reach London.

All of this is moot. We can keep arguing about this till the cows come home but I'm fairly certain that the DPSUs as we know them are finished.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 30 Aug 2014 20:21

Sagar G wrote:People with such mentality are very dangerous and it's good that they don't have any decision making power. Such farticles are the best they can do so read and laugh.

You know, I think the pakis/ISI would tend to agree with you. Only the Navy is getting stuff done--kind of--and it would be dangerous if the IAF and IA replicated the model by taking more control of what the DPSUs dabble in. After all the status quo has resulted in pshssss....pfffttttt which is exactly what the pakis/ISI want.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 30 Aug 2014 21:27

srin wrote:
b) It really is difficult to know ahead of time how long something will take. You need everything from basic science to metallurgy to engineering for any project to be successful and it becomes hard to estimate if you aren't even in there. And as you master the domain, it becomes progressively easier. For instance, it took a long while to mature in the missile development, but the advances there are pretty amazing.

This is exactly what the general is saying. If the Army had a real understanding of the DPSU's capabilities not based on empty boasting like "we can make the best engine/phyter/phazer", maybe they wouldn't ask for those things because their lives depend on it, not merely their careers. As things stand, what alternative do they have to taking the DPSU's words at face value?

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1717
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

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

Postby Picklu » 30 Aug 2014 22:23

Victor wrote:As things stand, what alternative do they have to taking the DPSU's words at face value?


Yep, the services other than Navy are babes in the woods, we get it, yessir.

Just wondering, which Satan made Navy eat the fruit though.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 30 Aug 2014 23:26

Picklu wrote:
Just wondering, which Satan made Navy eat the fruit though.

The same that refused to let IAF and Army take responsibility? It's not like they haven't asked.

member_23461
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23461 » 30 Aug 2014 23:28

Yep, the services other than Navy are babes in the woods, we get it, yessir.

Just wondering, which Satan made Navy eat the fruit though.


The same satan that gave you the gas to assume, that you are the last word on the subject. Your armchair offers you the comforting warmth that makes you feel a little...whats the word...balooneey

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

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

Postby Sagar G » 31 Aug 2014 00:06

Picklu wrote:Just wondering, which Satan made Navy eat the fruit though.


Well it's called VISION something which the IA/IAF HQ lacks. Not to worry the present GoI seems to be well placed to enforce that vision into them.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

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

Postby Sagar G » 31 Aug 2014 00:13

Indian scientists find a 'wonder herb' in the high Himalayas

In the high hostile peaks of the Himalayas where sustaining life is a challenge in itself, Indian scientists say they have found a "wonder herb" which can regulate the immune system, help adapt to the mountain environment and, above all, protect from radioactivity.

Rhodiola, a herb found in the cold and highland climate, has led India's leading scientists to wonder if it is the end to the quest for "Sanjeevani", the mythical herb that gave renewed life to Ram's brother Lakshman in the epic Ramayana.

Locally called 'Solo' in Ladakh, the qualities of Rhodiola were largely unknown so far. The leafy parts of the plant were used as vegetable by locals. However, research by the Leh-based Defence Institute of High Altitude Research (DIHAR) is exploring the therapeutic values of the herb that shows it can do wonders for the troops posted in difficult high altitude areas like the 5,400-metres-high Siachen glacier.

"Rhodiola is a wonder plant that has immunomodulatory (enhancing immune), adaptogenic (adapting to difficult climatic condition) and radio-protecting abilities due to presence of secondary metabolites and phytoactive compounds unique to the plant," R.B. Srivastava, Director, DIHAR, told IANS.

Srivastava said the herb can mitigate the effects of gamma radiation used in bombs in biochemical warfare.


"A concerted effort involving conservation, propagation and sustainable utilisation of this unique medicinal herb will surely result in rediscovery of Sanjeevani for the troops deployed in extreme climatic condition along Himalayan frontiers," said the director.

The Leh-based lab of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), the world's highest agro-animal research laboratory, has been researching on this wonder plant for more than a decade.

"While its adaptogenic qualities can help the soldiers in adjusting to the low pressure-low oxygen environment, the plant has also been found to have anti-depressant and appetizer properties," said Srivastava.

In the barren glacier of Siachen where white is the only colour visible for miles, depression is a problem troops face. The high altitude and harsh climate also make them lose appetite.

DIHAR has already developed Herbal Adaptogenic Appetizer, and Herbal Adaptogenic Performance Enhancer that improves performance in extreme high altitude conditions, and has been highly appreciated by the Army.

Rhodiola is also found in other parts of the world with other countries like the US and China engaging in research on the wonder herb.

The plant has been used in traditional Chinese medicine to combat high-altitude sickness, while in Mongolia physicians prescribed it for tuberculosis and cancer.

Researchers in Russia studied its impact on athletes and later on cosmonauts.

Some other qualities the plant is found to be containing in studies across the world include fast recovery after heavy workout, memory enhancement, and cardiac stress reduction.

"Our research reveals its potential for anti-aging, tissue regeneration, protecting neurons during lack of oxygen, and cognitive improvement," said Sunil Hota, who is working on investigating medicinal properties of the plant at DIHAR.

O.P. Chaurasia, ethnobotanist with DIHAR for nearly two decades, told IANS that they have successfully established a field gene bank and Rhodiola plantation of nearly two acres in the premise of the laboratory.

"We are trying in-vitro propagation of the plant to increase its population," added Chaurasia.

Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2645
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

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

Postby Victor » 31 Aug 2014 02:30

DRDO's bio-toilets can help Swachh Bharat mission: Venkaiah Naidu
The NDA government was pushing the initiative in a bigger way than the previous government, he said. "This time we want to go in a big way :mrgreen: .

Seriously, bio-toilets are desperately needed in the remote places where the Indian Army is stationed but I wish GoI had given the RFP "Design & Manufacture of Bio Toilet" to the private sector. Need to create a vast army on non-union workers is what we need to do.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6882
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

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

Postby Indranil » 31 Aug 2014 06:01

Victor wrote:DRDO's bio-toilets can help Swachh Bharat mission: Venkaiah Naidu
The NDA government was pushing the initiative in a bigger way than the previous government, he said. "This time we want to go in a big way :mrgreen: .


Seriously, bio-toilets are desperately needed in the remote places where the Indian Army is stationed but I wish GoI had given the RFP "Design & Create Bio Toilet" to the private sector. Need to create a vast army on non-union workers is what we need to do.

I am pretty sure that you also consider looking down on and demeaning the work of people even without looking at the product is down right wrong. But, your bias blinds your judgement.

anyways, the bio toilets has been accepted everywhere. By the Army, by the Indian Railways, by NGOs, and even healthcare organizations like WockHardt etc.

And by the way, you would be happy to know that by the middle of 2012, DRDO had already sold licenses to 49 private companies for the manufacture of these toilets.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2596
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

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

Postby Sagar G » 31 Aug 2014 12:29

^^^ That's nothing HAL compound doesn't even have toilets !!!! They do it in open like millions of Indian's even visiting foreign dignitaries are encouraged to join in, some of them have been overheard to find the experience "liberating".

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17518
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 31 Aug 2014 12:43

srin wrote:
dhiraj wrote:http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/chandigarh/dire-need-to-speed-up-drdo-s-output/article1-1257765.aspx

Dire need to speed up DRDO’s output





I don't know why Navy and DRDO have the least of issues - maybe it is because they are more engineering oriented ?


The Navy maintains dominant control both at the DRDO level and the DPSU level.

A vast majority of the Navy oriented DPSUs are Navy controlled via the top and mid level management staff either on deputation or permanently absorbed. Thus a engineering cultural fit and concept of "farm to fork", so to say, is ensured along with a no nonsense work culture that others are forced to follow.

Deadlines are Navy mandated and largely achieved. A majority of the meetings are Navy chaired and agenda is always Navy driven. Almost all project managers are uniformed Navy personnel answering only to Naval authorities.

Effective project management has always remained under very strong Navy control.

Eg, the Kaveri Gas turbine offshoot had a number of uniformed foreign trained (by the Navy) Naval officers with tailored PhDs, working hands on, to modify and deliver the marine version.

The Navy also quickly modified it's existing test facilities to accommodate the new engine instead of looking for a "foreign" partner to deliver the same at enormous cost.


And finally, the IN does not overly depend on DRDO controlled external inspection agencies which is another way the DRDO slyly maintains control. These external inspection agencies, having been successfully bypassed on a number of occasions, went crying to the MOD for arbitration and were over ruled every time. Now the very same agencies have fallen in line and are cooperating effectively instead of raising stupid objections aimed at maximizing personal benefits to their staff including sanctioning of numerous foreign trips at the Navy's cost to "study the technology and inspect manufacturing facilities and quality control" Somewhat like NaMo's mantra "cooperate gracefully and helpfully or be marginalized permanently"

This is how it was. It had somewhat unraveled during the cancerous rule of saint anthony, when DRDO big guns pulled wool over his saintly beady eyes and got themselves unjustified extensions of tenure :)

srin
BRFite
Posts: 1566
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

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

Postby srin » 31 Aug 2014 18:37

Chetak-ji, so, another way of interpreting is that Navy too is having problems, but because it is involved, it really doesn't complain.

So, Scorpene is delayed for a long time, but MDL being run by ex-Navy rear admiral, it really won't complain. Or CSL doesn't have money for completion of INS Vikrant, but it isn't CSL issue but an MoD issue. And CSL chairman is an ex-commodore. Despite NPOL, we still need to import sonars, but don't hear too much noise about it.

So - my takeaway from this is that, giving services the operation control of DPSUs or having ex-officers run the shipyards really doesn't solve the core problem of delays. It only stops the gripes.

I'm not trying to be provocative here. There is a huge blame game on, and we don't hear the DRDO / DPSU perspectives in open source media and hence, tough questions need to be pondered over to understand what is really going on.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 31 Aug 2014 18:50

What is going on is that there has hardly been any competition and no grand vision for defense industry from the top. This is changing now. Have an efficient biding process, strict rules, IB security clearance, relaxed labor laws, university research program reform based on competitive grant system, etc. and you'll see how quickly DRDO is going to turn DODO. Same goes for HAL, OFB, and other PSU's.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

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

Postby NRao » 31 Aug 2014 19:06

from the top


Is there a "top"?

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17518
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Postby chetak » 31 Aug 2014 19:12

srin wrote:Chetak-ji, so, another way of interpreting is that Navy too is having problems, but because it is involved, it really doesn't complain.

So, Scorpene is delayed for a long time, but MDL being run by ex-Navy rear admiral, it really won't complain. Or CSL doesn't have money for completion of INS Vikrant, but it isn't CSL issue but an MoD issue. And CSL chairman is an ex-commodore. Despite NPOL, we still need to import sonars, but don't hear too much noise about it.

So - my takeaway from this is that, giving services the operation control of DPSUs or having ex-officers run the shipyards really doesn't solve the core problem of delays. It only stops the gripes.

I'm not trying to be provocative here. There is a huge blame game on, and we don't hear the DRDO / DPSU perspectives in open source media and hence, tough questions need to be pondered over to understand what is really going on.


Your point is well taken.

No shortage of gripers in the Navy, sirjee. or even out of it. The harshest critics are all in white uniform or retired from the IN. In no other service would the Chief have ever quit for any reason.

Scorpene issue is a political issue not an engineering one. Properly funded and kicked off it should bloom. saint anthony delayed funding for the carrier among many other projects because termite queen wanted money for her elect rahul baba schemes err welfare schemes. The blasted dynasty even compromised national security and the minions willingly complied so that they could all continue to ride the gravy train.

So, as the fine ladies in hong kong say , "no money, no jig jig" :wink:

NPOL, IMVHO, seems to have reached the zenith of it's capabilities. It's first successful projects were spearheaded by Commader Paulraj. They coasted along for a very long while after he left. Imports should provide new "inspiration" for all

Once approved and funded, the IN generally brings the project home and that's the point that I was trying to make. The in house talent is encouraged, motivated and nurtured and the IN is way way far ahead on the indigenisation programs.

The IN is small, tightly knit and very highly technologically oriented, so much so, that due to the complexity of systems, the new intake of all officers henceforth is to comprise only of engineers from what one is hearing, well maybe not all, we still need doctors, of course.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 31 Aug 2014 20:19

NRao wrote:
from the top


Is there a "top"?


government.

Hobbes
BRFite
Posts: 219
Joined: 14 Mar 2011 02:59

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

Postby Hobbes » 01 Sep 2014 08:17

chetak wrote:
srin wrote:Chetak-ji, so, another way of interpreting is that Navy too is having problems, but because it is involved, it really doesn't complain.

So, Scorpene is delayed for a long time, but MDL being run by ex-Navy rear admiral, it really won't complain. Or CSL doesn't have money for completion of INS Vikrant, but it isn't CSL issue but an MoD issue. And CSL chairman is an ex-commodore. Despite NPOL, we still need to import sonars, but don't hear too much noise about it.

So - my takeaway from this is that, giving services the operation control of DPSUs or having ex-officers run the shipyards really doesn't solve the core problem of delays. It only stops the gripes.

I'm not trying to be provocative here. There is a huge blame game on, and we don't hear the DRDO / DPSU perspectives in open source media and hence, tough questions need to be pondered over to understand what is really going on.


Your point is well taken.

No shortage of gripers in the Navy, sirjee. or even out of it. The harshest critics are all in white uniform or retired from the IN. In no other service would the Chief have ever quit for any reason.

Scorpene issue is a political issue not an engineering one. Properly funded and kicked off it should bloom. saint anthony delayed funding for the carrier among many other projects because termite queen wanted money for her elect rahul baba schemes err welfare schemes. The blasted dynasty even compromised national security and the minions willingly complied so that they could all continue to ride the gravy train.

So, as the fine ladies in hong kong say , "no money, no jig jig" :wink:

Once approved and funded, the IN generally brings the project home and that's the point that I was trying to make. The in house talent is encouraged, motivated and nurtured and the IN is way way far ahead on the indigenisation programs.

The IN is small, tightly knit and very highly technologically oriented, so much so, that due to the complexity of systems, the new intake of all officers henceforth is to comprise only of engineers from what one is hearing, well maybe not all, we still need doctors, of course.


Good post. However, it does not explain the giant time overruns on the surface warship projects, with Indian built vessels taking up to twice the time or more foreign yards/ navies take to build and commission warships. An area where the Navy has not stepped up to take ownership is conventional submarines, where we're still reliant on foreign technology. In the overall perspective of the Navy's otherwise successful adoption of the builder's role, this sticks out like a sore thumb. And lastly, let us not forget the Vikramaditya, a telling example of their failure in surveying, estimation and project management.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1534
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

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

Postby Sid » 01 Sep 2014 09:47

Hobbes wrote:Good post. However, it does not explain the giant time overruns on the surface warship projects, with Indian built vessels taking up to twice the time or more foreign yards/ navies take to build and commission warships. An area where the Navy has not stepped up to take ownership is conventional submarines, where we're still reliant on foreign technology. In the overall perspective of the Navy's otherwise successful adoption of the builder's role, this sticks out like a sore thumb. And lastly, let us not forget the Vikramaditya, a telling example of their failure in surveying, estimation and project management.


Most of the IN surface ships are launched in time, but their outfitting and integration of systems imported from different sources takes bulf of the time. Their rust in the shipyard for next 4 to 8 years waiting for all subsystems to arrive.

INS Kolkata D 63
Laid down - 27 September 2003
Launched - 30 March 2006
Commissioning - 16 August 2014

Similarly, P 28 ( INS Kamorta)
Laid down - 20 November 2006
Launched - 19 April 2010
Commissioning - 12 July 2014

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21922
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

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

Postby Austin » 01 Sep 2014 10:05

Launching the ship is the most easiest thing to do what comes after words is where the complexity comes , PSU SY are quite good at the former after that its mostly time and cost overruns. The project itself has to be revised with CCS giving multiple cost revisions.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22539 » 01 Sep 2014 10:08

^I once read that these delays are often caused by delays in the ordering of components or subsystems, due to either a phased approach in procurement (with all the components not ordered up front at the start of the project) as well as delays in sanctioning funding for the same. Any truth to this? Are the DPSUs forced to delay purchase of components?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, Sagrawal and 21 guests