India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
1) DRDO existed when no one would give us Arms and we had "almost" single supply source.
2) DRDO has re positioned time after time. They have been moving with time. Even today, they have gone for JV's, partnered with Univ and private companies.
3) DRDO has navigated through its Hr issues and continues to do so.
4) As the technologies have matured, DRDO has provided a number of products that it cutting edge and which is not available.
Isn't it what every one asking for?
A pure private run over Defence affairs is undesirable. ireally don't want our jawans to call the toll free number, punch options and talk to telephone clerks who will tell them that they have to personally come to the nearest gallery and submit the papers.
2) DRDO has re positioned time after time. They have been moving with time. Even today, they have gone for JV's, partnered with Univ and private companies.
3) DRDO has navigated through its Hr issues and continues to do so.
4) As the technologies have matured, DRDO has provided a number of products that it cutting edge and which is not available.
Isn't it what every one asking for?
A pure private run over Defence affairs is undesirable. ireally don't want our jawans to call the toll free number, punch options and talk to telephone clerks who will tell them that they have to personally come to the nearest gallery and submit the papers.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
chackojoseph wrote:I am not going to argue on that. I still prefer govt banks when I keep my money. I still have a government phone connection (investing in more). My opinion about private is not very great. DRDO will do the kind of research that Private companies will not. Indian Airlines flies to non profitable sector. BSNL reaches most places. Etc Etc.chetak wrote: No.
Let private India company rise again which is the consuming fear of the DRDO. It's the old story of the emperor and his new clothes.
When employees can be hired, fired and "bonused" easily, that usually brings out the best in a human being.
Ambition and fear of failure should ride on the same horse!
Its my personal view.
chackojoseph ji,
Ditto for me saar. Banks, telephones, insurance, preferred airline and whatnot. All government owned.
But DRDO is a very different story. We cannot afford idiosyncrasies in research. They have to understand that they form the tail and not the teeth. Long years they have claimed that they are superior because they are "scientists". That coloured view is a fat load of BS.
It's the teeth that will always provide them their freedom to claim superiority. It should not be misused.
They have to meet the requirements of the Indian Armed Forces. It is the very and only reason they were created and exist today.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
^^
Odd. Nobody is asking for a wholly private defence sector. But at the moment, most big ticket items are off limits to private investors. Why cant both sectors exist side by side, instead of this statist model?
Odd. Nobody is asking for a wholly private defence sector. But at the moment, most big ticket items are off limits to private investors. Why cant both sectors exist side by side, instead of this statist model?
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
negi jinegi wrote:So lobbying for DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity?chetak wrote: They immediately begin to lobby for a permanent secondment to DRDO. Compromising both loyalty and integrity.
You misunderstand.
lobbying for their personal secondment to DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity!!
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
For our national safety, both sectors have to exist side by side.ASPuar wrote:^^
Odd. Nobody is asking for a wholly private defence sector. But at the moment, most big ticket items are off limits to private investors. Why cant both sectors exist side by side, instead of this statist model?
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
sir,chetak wrote: chackojoseph ji,
Ditto for me saar. Banks, telephones, insurance, preferred airline and whatnot. All government owned.
But DRDO is a very different story. We cannot afford idiosyncrasies in research. They have to understand that they form the tail and not the teeth. Long years they have claimed that they are superior because they are "scientists". That coloured view is a fat load of BS.
It's the teeth that will always provide them their freedom to claim superiority. It should not be misused.
They have to meet the requirements of the Indian Armed Forces. It is the very and only reason they were created and exist today.
Hired , fired? They will leave the company for an extra Rs 500/-.
The DRDO scientists I know are very competent and they are very much in demand by the Pvt sector. Scientists are like that. We need an agency to liaise between the user and scientists. I don't expect scientists to be commercial minded. A scientist is a scientist.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Negi, I was trying to explain why decision makers might have biases. There is history of mistrust.
I have served onboard Brahmaputra with no air defences except shoulder fired Igla borrowed from other services. Such experiences are hard to forget by decision makers. I have my own set of biases against DRDO, but to be fair, I am still willing to applaud their successes in Shourya, PAD/AAD, etc.
Chackojoseph, why cant we have a flexible model? Let every project evolve on its own. Let steering team be comprised of different stakeholders. That is the hallmark of all successful projects.
I have served onboard Brahmaputra with no air defences except shoulder fired Igla borrowed from other services. Such experiences are hard to forget by decision makers. I have my own set of biases against DRDO, but to be fair, I am still willing to applaud their successes in Shourya, PAD/AAD, etc.
Chackojoseph, why cant we have a flexible model? Let every project evolve on its own. Let steering team be comprised of different stakeholders. That is the hallmark of all successful projects.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
We need pvt players to step up. However, who will invest one paisa when the IA will not order 1,000 Arjuns? Not many pvt players would put up with the gruelling trials over 2 decades resulting in only a 124 tank order.
Last edited by Vivek K on 17 Mar 2010 22:47, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Amusing how the armed forces are relegated to the careless monicker of "user". In that we will produce whatever we want, and your role is simply to use the stuff we put out. DRDO, IDAS, Ordnance Board, MES, Defence Estates Service, AFHQCS seem to have all forgotten, that the reason for their creation was to support the armed forces. Not boss over them.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
We already have a flexible model. DRDO is already developing stuff with Israel, pvt co's PSU's, Univs etc. We still need to have a nodal agency, DRDO, guided by the defence policy guidlines. Like whith whom they can deal with and how much.tsarkar wrote:Chackojoseph, why cant we have a flexible model? Let every project evolve on its own. Let steering team be comprised of different stakeholders. That is the hallmark of all successful projects.
I am just very worried about the resistance from the army.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Very many young scientists in DRDO are disgusted with the current state of affairs. Politics has taken a very heavy toll.chackojoseph wrote: sir,
Hired , fired? They will leave the company for an extra Rs 500/-.
The DRDO scientists I know are very competent and they are very much in demand by the Pvt sector. Scientists are like that. We need an agency to liaise between the user and scientists. I don't expect scientists to be commercial minded. A scientist is a scientist.
They are leaving in droves to join the private sector.
After expensive DRDO training, I might add.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".ASPuar wrote:Amusing how the armed forces are relegated to the careless monicker of "user". In that we will produce whatever we want, and your role is simply to use the stuff we put out. DRDO, IDAS, Ordnance Board, MES, Defence Estates Service, AFHQCS seem to have all forgotten, that the reason for their creation was to support the armed forces. Not boss over them.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.Vivek K wrote:We need pvt players to step up. However, who will invest one paisa when the IA will not order 1,000 Arjuns?
As far as DRDO stuff is concerned, The IA has ordered regiments of Pinaka.
They have ordered regiments of Akash SAM.
They have ordered radars.
They have ordered hundreds of thousands of INSAS.
They have ordered hundreds of Prithvi SRBMs.
They have ordered hundreds of MPV's.
A million BPJs.
Tens of thousands of ground surveillance radars.
The list is endless. People who are interested in the defence production industry are slavering at the mouth to be allowed a piece of the (very profitable) pie. Do not let your judgement be coloured by a few weeks of contentious discussion on BR. The army is very supportive of DRDO where their stuff has proved its worth. As to the rest, their PROFESSIONAL judgement should generally have preference over our amateur rants.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
that's the problem ain't it ? you call superiority complexes by DRDO scientists a fat load of BS and then go on to claim superiority of services (they are the teeth and DRDO is tail etc, did DRDO ever argue they are the teeth ?) in the very next line ?chetak wrote: ...............But DRDO is a very different story. We cannot afford idiosyncrasies in research. They have to understand that they form the tail and not the teeth. Long years they have claimed that they are superior because they are "scientists". That coloured view is a fat load of BS.
It's the teeth that will always provide them their freedom to claim superiority. It should not be misused.............
why does it have to be a zero sum game like this ? can any govt arm really claim 'superiority' over another ?
__________________
@ all, this doesn't have anything to do with the thread topic and I'll move these posts.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
And the Navy has also been equally supportive of the DRDO by carefully keeping them out of most of their projects.ASPuar wrote:The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.Vivek K wrote:We need pvt players to step up. However, who will invest one paisa when the IA will not order 1,000 Arjuns?
As far as DRDO stuff is concerned, The IA has ordered regiments of Pinaka.
They have ordered regiments of Akash SAM.
They have ordered radars.
They have ordered hundreds of thousands of INSAS.
They have ordered hundreds of Prithvi SRBMs.
They have ordered hundreds of MPV's.
A million BPJs.
Tens of thousands of ground surveillance radars.
The list is endless. People who are interested in the defence production industry are slavering at the mouth to be allowed a piece of the (very profitable) pie. Do not let your judgement be coloured by a few weeks discussion on BR. The army is very supportive of DRDO where their stuff has proved its worth.

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Would you care to elaborate...?Vivek K wrote: Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4297
- Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
- Location: From Frontier India
- Contact:
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
If you would attempt searching my site, I had put up a DRDO Vs Private sector attrition report. You will find that very revealing. DRDO had better rates. Plus, DRDO had built up an attrition margin, so that even if they leave, they still have back up.chetak wrote:Very many young scientists in DRDO are disgusted with the current state of affairs. Politics has taken a very heavy toll.chackojoseph wrote: sir,
Hired , fired? They will leave the company for an extra Rs 500/-.
The DRDO scientists I know are very competent and they are very much in demand by the Pvt sector. Scientists are like that. We need an agency to liaise between the user and scientists. I don't expect scientists to be commercial minded. A scientist is a scientist.
They are leaving in droves to join the private sector.
After expensive DRDO training, I might add.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
And then developed tactics around that weakness. Thank you for proving my point.chetak wrote:Vivek K wrote:tsarkar, being pragmatic will lead you to our line of thinking - eventually. Self reliance has its own advantages.
Do you think that wars can only be won with the best available weapons? Tactics therefore have no role? The Japs had a superior fighter at the start of WWII then how did they lose?
Because the americans discovered the sad secret of this superior fighter!
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
chetak wrote: They immediately begin to lobby for a permanent secondment to DRDO. Compromising both loyalty and integrity.
negi wrote: So lobbying for DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity?
chetak wrote:
negi ji
You misunderstand.
lobbying for their personal secondment to DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity!!

What is good for goose is good for gaunder, na ?
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Saari Ramayan khatam ho gayee aur aap pooch rahe ho .......ASPuar wrote:Would you care to elaborate...?Vivek K wrote: Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".
In the case under discussion, it is the IA and the DGMF bossing over the DRDO and not other wise.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
sarkar ji, I'm not able to get your point. What stopped Navy from using Paulraj and making him as Rickover ?tsarkar wrote:Rahul, I fully agree with you. Imagine we could have been world leaders if Cdr Paulraj was allowed to continue on the lines of Admiral Rickover. My point was look at broader universal benefit rather than agenda of your team (Services or DRDO)..
hmm, do you know how many projects universities and private indus help was sorted...?1. Allow indigenization by any means – Universities, Private, Services, DRDO, PSU or even OFB. The present policy is more of an employment generation scheme for government services.
Hint: even for Brahmos which is joint collob with russia, many univ put their effort in...
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Kanson ji,Kanson wrote:
You are making the same argument as what from quotes quoted by Mr. Sarkar depicting Dr Arunachalam of doing. If secondment to DRDO is a compromise of loyalty/integrity to Navy or if the Navy thinks that way, why not drdo have the same attitude of deputing Navy officers in their project ?
What is good for goose is good for gaunder, na ?
You misunderstand.
If a fauji were to slyly and fraudulently finagle a secondment to the DRDO by kissing ass or what ever, that is a compromise of loyalty/integrity to the service he originates from.
Many excellent Service Officers have politely declined repeated offers of secondment to the DRDO and moved back to their parent organisations. And then again, others have accepted and stayed on. DRDO makes the first move because they see some technical benefit for themselves as well as the customer. This is the legitimate and honorable way.
By the way, the Navy always has hard hold of all its projects with the DRDO, Industry etc with Navy deputed on site project managers.
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
ASPuar wrote:The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.Vivek K wrote:We need pvt players to step up. However, who will invest one paisa when the IA will not order 1,000 Arjuns?
As far as DRDO stuff is concerned, The IA has ordered regiments of Pinaka.
{a pathetically small 80 of them ? not even enough to replace the BM-21 grads of which we have around 150 ?}
They have ordered regiments of Akash SAM.
{only after shifting goal posts n number of times, repeatedly dragging feet and after it became a case of gross embarrassment not to do so with the IAF going gung-ho on it. again, only a token amount.}
They have ordered radars.
They have ordered hundreds of thousands of INSAS.
{and within 10 years of frontline use already asking for replacements internationally ! not as much as a squeak of iteratively improving the system, in stead we will buy foreign all over again ! }
They have ordered hundreds of Prithvi SRBMs.
{was there a foreign alternative ?}
They have ordered hundreds of MPV's. A million BPJs.
Tens of thousands of ground surveillance radars.
The list is endless. People who are interested in the defence production industry are slavering at the mouth to be allowed a piece of the (very profitable) pie. { and that refers to the foreign suppliers only let's not forget. you are arguing against yourself !our HVF guys get paid whether they are producing anything or not, I don't see them lobbying hard to get a production deal that will force them to work, things like bribes don't even come into the picture.
just for comparison's sake, the DRDO does not even have a commercial interest in a system like arjun, for it is not even a manufacturer} Do not let your judgement be coloured by a few weeks of contentious discussion on BR. The army is very supportive of DRDO where their stuff has proved its worth.{not quite. there's a reason why a large number of people who follow these projects closely find a fault only with the IA(then again only certain areas) and not with IAF or IN.} As to the rest, their PROFESSIONAL judgement should generally have preference over our amateur rants.
{an appeal to authority is the worst kind of argument. by that token the govt knows what it is doing, the IAS knows what its doing and we should not question them at all ? after all it is their professional judgement right ? I'm sure you do see the problem with this kind of argument ? even granting that IA is far better as an overall organisation, merits of individual decisions can't be decided on reputation alone.
and lastly, it is not on ameteurish rants that this discussion rests but on information from professional sources including some from the army itself.}
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Thanks Chetak ji for the reply.chetak wrote:Kanson ji,Kanson wrote:
You are making the same argument as what from quotes quoted by Mr. Sarkar depicting Dr Arunachalam of doing. If secondment to DRDO is a compromise of loyalty/integrity to Navy or if the Navy thinks that way, why not drdo have the same attitude of deputing Navy officers in their project ?
What is good for goose is good for gaunder, na ?
You misunderstand.
If a fauji were to slyly and fraudulently finagle a secondment to the DRDO by kissing ass or what ever, that is a compromise of loyalty/integrity to the service he originates from.
Many excellent Service Officers have politely declined repeated offers of secondment to the DRDO and moved back to their parent organisations. And then again, others have accepted and stayed on. DRDO makes the first move because they see some technical benefit for themselves as well as the customer. This is the legitimate and honorable way.
By the way, the Navy always has hard hold of all its projects with the DRDO, Industry etc with Navy deputed on site project managers.
Let me ask this in different way. Lets leave finagle, fradulent, slyly etc. Is there any established views from Navy that says, asking secondment to DRDO by Naval officers is considered as disloyalty ?
As this topic was started wrt to Paulraj, may i ask, how do you know Paulraj was not asking secondment to DRDO ? Why DRDO chief in that case Arunachalam, asking him to go sabbatical ? why didnt he ask him to return to his parent service ?
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Thanks Rahul. It is tiring to stress these facts again and again and yet be asked to repeat them again. I appreciate your patience and service.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
As tsarkar ji laments that IN last a Rickover in the form Paulraj, i'm at loss to understand why Mr. Paulraj went to Stanford Univ, instead of joining his parent service, i.e. Indian Navy back once DRDO chief asked him to leave Sonar project.
If drdo is such a nasty place with full of politics etc... why then Mr. Paulraj used his own words to say,
"Dr Srinivasan for giving me near absolute freedom at NPOL to execute the project."
If drdo is such a nasty place with full of politics etc... why then Mr. Paulraj used his own words to say,
"Dr Srinivasan for giving me near absolute freedom at NPOL to execute the project."
Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread
Kanson wrote: Thanks Chetak ji for the reply.
Let me ask this in different way. Lets leave finagle, fradulent, slyly etc. Is there any established views from Navy that says, asking secondment to DRDO by Naval officers is considered as disloyalty ?
As this topic was started wrt to Paulraj, may i ask, how do you know Paulraj was not asking secondment to DRDO ? Why DRDO chief in that case Arunachalam, asking him to go sabbatical ? why didnt he ask him to return to his parent service ?
Kanson ji,
I was also in NPOL though not during Paulraj's time.
I know Paulraj and he is a very unassuming type of gentleman.
There was palpable fear at that time in senior DRDO circles about Paulraj's runaway success as also his stellar role in the project.
They wanted him out of the country, nothing less. He had had offers from US universities already by then.
The IN would never have dispensed with his services to the DRDO and neither did Paulraj ask for it. But he could perhaps have continued on deputation but DRDO did not want to risk any more success for Paulraj.
Paulraj is currently professor of Electrical Engineering at Stanford and was awarded the Padma Bhushan recently. Arunachalam has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

Due to the shortage of Officers, the IN as indeed other services, do not encourage secondment to DRDO.
Unless a fauji were to slyly and fraudulently finagle a secondment to the DRDO generally using political influence.

Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Kanson ji,Kanson wrote:
If drdo is such a nasty place with full of politics etc... why then Mr. Paulraj used his own words to say,
"Dr Srinivasan for giving me near absolute freedom at NPOL to execute the project."
Never again after that!!
There after every service officer has been watched carefully at NPOL.
And given the most mundane of jobs until the IN stepped in and threatened to withdraw all its deputed officers.
Now things are more or less normal. They desperately want more IN officers but are not willing to treat them right.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Chetak ji, You still havent answered my question directly.Kanson ji,
I was also in NPOL though not during Paulraj's time.
I know Paulraj and he is a very unassuming type of gentleman.
There was palpable fear at that time in senior DRDO circles about Paulraj's runaway success as also his stellar role in the project.
They wanted him out of the country, nothing less. He had had offers from US universities already by then.
The IN would never have dispensed with his services to the DRDO and neither did Paulraj ask for it. But he could perhaps have continued on deputation but DRDO did not want to risk any more success for Paulraj.
Paulraj is currently professor of Electrical Engineering at Stanford and was awarded the Padma Bhushan recently. Arunachalam has been consigned to the dustbin of history.
Due to the shortage of Officers, the IN as indeed other services, do not encourage secondment to DRDO.
Unless a fauji were to slyly and fraudulently finagle a secondment to the DRDO generally using political influence.
You were talking about loyalty and integrity and made a statement Paulraj was an exception.
Pls answer this directly, does Navy thinks asking secondment to drdo by Naval officers as disloyalty ?
If Paulraj is so wonderful and Navy would have not dispensed his service, why then he left Navy to join Stanford Univ? Why not continue there in Navy ?
Leaving drdo is acceptable as the drdo chief asked him to leave the country on sabbatical becoz as you say senior drdo circles doesnt like Paulraj's runaway success, but infact, he exactly did that as asked by drdo chief, right ? He went and joined Stanford Univ....why he has to do what drdo chief said, instead he could have stayed with Navy itself, na ? Pls answer the ques directly.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
As we are talking only abt Paulraj incident as it was provided as facts to putforth an arguments let keep the focus on that. Lets leave what happened after that and whats happening now..chetak wrote:Kanson ji,Kanson wrote:
If drdo is such a nasty place with full of politics etc... why then Mr. Paulraj used his own words to say,
"Dr Srinivasan for giving me near absolute freedom at NPOL to execute the project."
Never again after that!!
There after every service officer has been watched carefully at NPOL.
And given the most mundane of jobs until the IN stepped in and threatened to withdraw all its deputed officers.
Now things are more or less normal. They desperately want more IN officers but are not willing to treat them right.
At the least, during Paulraj's time, Paulraj felt that he was given near absolute freedom to do what he wanted, right ? So as per Paulraj, a drdo lab gave him absoulte freedom, why come facts are twisted to give a devilish picture..
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
just had a nudge from someone through the interwebs.
prof Paulraj left the navy prematurely to join the evil of evils BEL because of a major gripe with IN for the glass ceiling that exists for technical cadre in the navy ? so there was little chance of him becoming a rickover due to IN's own policies.
portrayals from one side alone can often end up looking one sided.
http://reflections-shivanand.blogspot.c ... l-raj.html
prof Paulraj left the navy prematurely to join the evil of evils BEL because of a major gripe with IN for the glass ceiling that exists for technical cadre in the navy ? so there was little chance of him becoming a rickover due to IN's own policies.
portrayals from one side alone can often end up looking one sided.
http://reflections-shivanand.blogspot.c ... l-raj.html
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Kanson ji,Kanson wrote: Pls answer this directly, does Navy thinks asking secondment to drdo by Naval officers as disloyalty ?
Yes.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Rahul M ji,Rahul M wrote:just had a nudge from someone through the interwebs.
prof Paulraj left the navy prematurely to join the evil of evils BEL because of a major gripe with IN for the glass ceiling that exists for technical cadre in the navy ?
During Paulraj's days I think that Electrical Officers in the IN had the fastest promotion to the rank of Commander. 12 Years flat.
Not duplicated in any other Service at that time.
There certainly was no glass ceiling for anyone technical, specially not for one of his sheer brilliance.
Added later
BTW, Just like MDL, GSL and GRSE etc, BEL was considered a "captive" Naval PSU.
Last edited by chetak on 18 Mar 2010 01:35, edited 4 times in total.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Kanson ji,Kanson wrote:
Leaving drdo is acceptable as the drdo chief asked him to leave the country on sabbatical becoz as you say senior drdo circles doesnt like Paulraj's runaway success, but infact, he exactly did that as asked by drdo chief, right ? He went and joined Stanford Univ....why he has to do what drdo chief said, instead he could have stayed with Navy itself, na ? Pls answer the ques directly.
After all the DRDO shenanigans, Paulraj was probably disillusioned. He moved abroad to better his prospects like any other IIT graduate.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
and nothing beyond that level, which is the reason he left. what rank did rickover end up with ? was he left as Cmdr ?
his disillusion was with navy itself, not with DRDO. he left because he had no hope of further advancement in the navy as an engineer/scientist.
we know the similar story of AM Rajkumar who was passed over for promotion because Air HQ felt "he was having a good time" leading the flight test team of a 3rd world country trying to develop a state-of-the-art fighter.
as for DRDO shenangians, other than the VSA bit I'm hearing completely different accounts, so pardon me if I don't take that comment at face value.
a disillusioned person left the navy to work in public sector BEL (which collaborates closely with DRDO) ? sounds odd doesn't it ?After all the DRDO shenanigans, Paulraj was probably disillusioned. He moved abroad to better his prospects like any other IIT graduate.
his disillusion was with navy itself, not with DRDO. he left because he had no hope of further advancement in the navy as an engineer/scientist.
we know the similar story of AM Rajkumar who was passed over for promotion because Air HQ felt "he was having a good time" leading the flight test team of a 3rd world country trying to develop a state-of-the-art fighter.
as for DRDO shenangians, other than the VSA bit I'm hearing completely different accounts, so pardon me if I don't take that comment at face value.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Rahul M ji,Rahul M wrote:a disillusioned person left the navy to work in public sector BEL (which collaborates closely with DRDO) ? sounds odd doesn't it ?
his disillusion was with navy itself, not with DRDO. he left because he had no hope of further advancement in the navy as an engineer/scientist.
In those days BEL was a Naval preserve. Many of the earlier BEL chairmen were ex Naval guys. The BEL job was probably used as a means to entice him, give him technical independence and hopefully keep him in India. In those days there was no great collaboration between BEL and DRDO because DRDO hardly had any projects going at that time.
The Navy had technical commodores and Admirals during Paulraj's days. I don't think that there was any glass ceiling for his promotion as such.
Maybe as you say, he was generally disillusioned with the Navy, with the DRDO, whatever and decided to cut for greener pastures. Academically, he was already a known figure in international circles.
And he was also very academically inclined. Maybe it was a CIA plot to entice him to the States and deprive India of further development in the field of sonar technology. Who knows?
Anyway, how does it make a difference? He had just successfully completed a major sonar project almost single handed and yet he had senior scientists gunning for him. Where one would have expected accolades, he received brickbats. Who in his right mind would not be disillusioned?
The country has lost out and we were deprived of his valuable services in a nascent and vital field of technology. I sincerely hope that all the other dramatis personae in this little drama are tolerant to very high temperatures because Paulraj is living it up in airconditioned comfort in Stanford.
Last edited by chetak on 18 Mar 2010 02:16, edited 1 time in total.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
I don't see quite how he received brickbats in stead of accolades, in fact he was disillusioned enough by the "shenangians of DRDO" and the "brickbats" he received from the senior scientists to leave the navy to start CAIR, a DRDO lab as its founding director. you can check their website if you don't believe me. the story goes that he wanted to continue in IN in an academic capacity but IN would have none of it.
as of now, the facts present a picture quite different to your story that he was disillusioned with DRDO, in fact the truth seems to be the opposite. and by his own admission he liked his time at NPOL.
btw, NPOL continues to do good work even after he left (and it's not only IN people who work there) so it's not as if the scientists working there were total incompetents.
as of now, the facts present a picture quite different to your story that he was disillusioned with DRDO, in fact the truth seems to be the opposite. and by his own admission he liked his time at NPOL.
btw, NPOL continues to do good work even after he left (and it's not only IN people who work there) so it's not as if the scientists working there were total incompetents.
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
Rahul M ji,Rahul M wrote: as of now, the facts present a picture quite different to your story that he was disillusioned with DRDO, in fact the truth seems to be the opposite. and by his own admission he liked his time at NPOL.
btw, NPOL continues to do good work even after he left (and it's not only IN people who work there) so it's not as if the scientists working there were total incompetents.
Paulraj did some of his best work at NPOL. If he didn't enjoy his work he would not have been able to produce such excellent results.
That NPOL continues to do good work in his absence is not disputed.
They continue to be the best DRDO lab IMHO. It was their initial success and the good foundation that was laid by Paulraj and others that made them into a center of excellence that they are today.
They lead the country in signal processing techniques and applications. They are also among the small handful of labs that have actually successfully delivered projects to the Forces.
However, the IN presence has diminished considerably primarily due to shortage of officers.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1438
- Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
- Location: Behind Enemy Lines
Re: India's R&D in Defence DRDO, PSUs and Private Sector
BSF Buys Thermal Detectors
$10 Million/340 EQUALS $29,411.change A POP!!!! The article claims it costs around $26k a pop.. Difference of ~3,411 which roughly equals $1.2million (kickbacks??)India’s Border Security Force (BSF) and Paramilitary Forces will soon be equipped with 340 hand-held cooled thermal detector sights, in order to curb illicit arms and ammunition trade that occurs in the sensitive border areas of India.
India has placed an order to the tune of $10 million with the Indo-Israeli joint venture Alpha-ITL Electro-Optics for the supply of these high-tech hand-held cooled thermal detector sights, called “Drushti”. These detectors will be used by various commanders of the BSF and other paramilitary organisations to track movements across the border areas.
“Drushti” is a compact and light-weight night vision binocular for long-range ground observation and can scan an area within the range of 2-8 kilometres. The development of “Drushti” by the Indo-Israeli joint venture was achieved with significant contribution and expertise from both the sides. While the Indian side provided the optics, printed circuit boards, power system, video cards, software, eye piece assembly and outer casing, the Israeli firm Semi-Conductor Devices has contributed with the crucial ‘Coolant Dewar Detector.’
As for the salient features of “Drushti”, it weighs less than 3 kilograms, has a more powerful detector (320X256 InSb FPA) than the present one used by the Indian forces and has a reasonable price tag of only $26000. As for the current monocular devices used by the Indian forces, they have weak detectors, weigh 5 kilograms and came with a price tag of $40000, besides straining the eyes. The “Drushti” thermal imager can perform versatile roles with modifications, like operating as a tank sight, or as an aerial sight for helicopters.
Since India needs these crucial devices to secure border areas, the Indian government will be floating another tender to acquire 750 more thermal imagers. As of now, the “Drushti” thermal imagers are being tested by the BSF soldiers at night to scan in the hilly border areas.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 1438
- Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
- Location: Behind Enemy Lines