ASPuar wrote:But the record so far has been dismal.
Please specify.Granted there have been delays and challenges, and even the occasional failure, but these do not detract from the laundry list of successes in diverse fields such as missiles, electronics, and armaments. Most of these have been accomplished with India under heavy sanctions (hence the need to "reinvent the wheel") and with very little resource allocation. As things stand, practically every defence item India has had any success in, has a DRDO hand in it. Its something that even the biggest critics of the DRDO have started to admit given the huge orders the organization (or rather the companies who manufacture its designs) has won in just past few years.
Yes, I know, when-starting-from-ground-zero-we-need-to-make-allowances-blah-blah... but even when making allowances, one should be careful not to bankrupt onesself.
DRDO's investment in its projects stands at around Rs9000 Crore. Orders placed stand at Rs 100,000 Crore, with orders for far more in the pipeline & being allocated through the usual process. So please specify, how exactly is India bankrupting itself.
I am not one for outside purchases, and the Naval Design Bureau seems to be doing a much better job than anyone else for the Navy. In theory I support the DRDO. But It is not ridiculous to demand return on capital employed. And DRDO has NOT been doing a good job of delivering returns. And this is just the latest example of DRDOs lack of focus. Running off on non critical projects, when urgent needs lie unfulfilled for years.
This is rhetoric. Please specify as to the data regarding return on capital employed, DRDO "not doing a good job of delivering returns", "lack of focus", and "non critical projects". I fear your mail displays a lack of understanding about what is even critical and non critical, which cannot be wished away by using rhetoric. In particular, how is AIP non critical? Per the Navy it is a vital strategic ability that enables conventional submarines to be more effective. Only a handful of countries have a lock down on this technology & they are charging an arm and a leg for it. And as matter of fact, the options currently available are not exactly optimal either. They all have some defect or the other, from an operational standpoint.
When (if at all) this AIP contraption finally sees the light of day (in even a semi working condition), I will personally send you twenty dabbas of mithai (A la dormant comrade Rakesh, with his Akulas). But until then I am keeping my enthusiasm levels (very) low, and hoping that DRDO concentrates on at least completing work on all of the major projects it already has in hand, which are already terribly delayed, before rushing off to start new ones.
This line of thinking does not really make sense as the DRDO is not a monolithic organization which works sequentially on programs. There is no one group at DRDO which is working on everything. Different labs do different things, and in parallel. Some are more successful than the others. Again, this may depend on so many factors, including the technology, the challenge, service requirements, support from local industry, etc. In this specific project, on my reading, news reports note that it is the Navy which asked NMRL (a naval lab) to work on AIP. So this has very little to do with other major projects or the like or even those of other services.
I have great respect for our defence scientists, but modesty, focus, and a fair assessment of their own capabilities, are not amongst their many good qualities.
Let us turn this around. Is your mail "modest" - as in is it balanced? Does it have focus - as in details? Does it have a fair assessment of capabilities - as in the information? Given the lack of details in your mail, one would daresay, it is your view around civil military relations, and turning everything into a bloody civilians versus the effective military focus, which seems to be dominating your thoughts. I see little to no respect in your comments either.
BTW, Kolkata class have nary a thing to do with DRDO, and are successfully produced simply because DRDO involvement is kept to a minimum, and most of the work is done by the service itself.
This is one more indication (reference underlined portion) that your comments are more around your personal prejudice as versus facts. Reading Wiki, many of the critical systems are of DRDO-BEL design, manufactured by BEL and other PSU & private companies. Also, I know for a fact that as recently as a few years back, the Navy was handing more and more design work to DRDO to make its ships more effective in several criteria (they approached worldwide designers and the options for procuring technology off the shelf were either too expensive or not available, whereas India had built up competence).
even our chinese drones manage for meaningful flames.
highly regarded by the navy. They have this attitude that it will be made to work. Not only that they are extreamly happy with what the drdo does for them. 
