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

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chackojoseph »

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

chackojoseph wrote:
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!
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.

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.
ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1536
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by ASPuar »

^^

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?
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

negi wrote:
chetak wrote: They immediately begin to lobby for a permanent secondment to DRDO. Compromising both loyalty and integrity.
So lobbying for DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity?
negi ji

You misunderstand.

lobbying for their personal secondment to DRDO == compromising on loyalty/integrity!!
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

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?
For our national safety, both sectors have to exist side by side.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chackojoseph »

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.
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.
tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3263
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by tsarkar »

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.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

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.
ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1536
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by ASPuar »

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.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chackojoseph »

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.
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.

I am just very worried about the resistance from the army.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

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.
Very many young scientists in DRDO are disgusted with the current state of affairs. Politics has taken a very heavy toll.

They are leaving in droves to join the private sector.

After expensive DRDO training, I might add.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

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.
Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".
ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1536
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by ASPuar »

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?
The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.

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.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Rahul M »

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.............
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 ?

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

ASPuar wrote:
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?
The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.

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.
And the Navy has also been equally supportive of the DRDO by carefully keeping them out of most of their projects. :)
ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1536
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by ASPuar »

Vivek K wrote: Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".
Would you care to elaborate...?
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chackojoseph »

chetak wrote:
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.
Very many young scientists in DRDO are disgusted with the current state of affairs. Politics has taken a very heavy toll.

They are leaving in droves to join the private sector.

After expensive DRDO training, I might add.
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.
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

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! :)
And then developed tactics around that weakness. Thank you for proving my point.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Kanson »

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!!
:) 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 ?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Vivek K »

ASPuar wrote:
Vivek K wrote: Amusing how "Ulta Chor Kotwal ko daant raha hai".
Would you care to elaborate...?
Saari Ramayan khatam ho gayee aur aap pooch rahe ho .......

In the case under discussion, it is the IA and the DGMF bossing over the DRDO and not other wise.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

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

Post by Kanson »

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)..
sarkar ji, I'm not able to get your point. What stopped Navy from using Paulraj and making him as Rickover ?
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.
hmm, do you know how many projects universities and private indus help was sorted...?
Hint: even for Brahmos which is joint collob with russia, many univ put their effort in...
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

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 ?
Kanson ji,

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.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Rahul M »

ASPuar wrote:
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?
The Arjun is ONE project. Keep things in perspective.

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 ! :lol: 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.}
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by Kanson »

chetak wrote:
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 ?
Kanson ji,

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.
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 ?
Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2931
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

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

Post by Vivek K »

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.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

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

Post by Kanson »

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."
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Armoured Vehicles Discussion Thread

Post by chetak »

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. :wink:
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

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."
Kanson ji,

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.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

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

Post by Kanson »

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.
Chetak ji, You still havent answered my question directly.

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.
Kanson
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3065
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 21:00

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

Post by Kanson »

chetak wrote:
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."
Kanson ji,

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.
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..

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..
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Post by Rahul M »

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
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

Kanson wrote: Pls answer this directly, does Navy thinks asking secondment to drdo by Naval officers as disloyalty ?
Kanson ji,

Yes.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

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 ?
Rahul M ji,

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

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.
Kanson ji,

After all the DRDO shenanigans, Paulraj was probably disillusioned. He moved abroad to better his prospects like any other IIT graduate.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Post by Rahul M »

and nothing beyond that level, which is the reason he left. what rank did rickover end up with ? was he left as Cmdr ?
After all the DRDO shenanigans, Paulraj was probably disillusioned. He moved abroad to better his prospects like any other IIT graduate.
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.

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

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.
Rahul M ji,

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.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17167
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

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

Post by Rahul M »

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35018
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

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

Post by chetak »

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.
Rahul M ji,

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.
Craig Alpert
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

Post by Craig Alpert »

BSF Buys Thermal Detectors
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.
$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??)
Craig Alpert
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

Post by Craig Alpert »

Pvt Sector Has Big Role in Defence Equipment: Antony

ALL TALK AND NO ACTION on his part!!!
Post Reply