What's new

DRDO under Parliament lens

CONNAN

SENIOR MEMBER
Feb 23, 2009
3,381
0
2,923
Country
India
Location
United States
Acid test for research organisation, caught on wrong foot on several occasions
  • 294819-parliament.jpg
India's premier defence research organisation – Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) – is under Parliament scanner.

Shoddy research, inordinate delays, corruption and its fancy for reverse engineering have resulted in the Parliamentary standing committee on defence raising the red flag on DRDO budget for 2014-15.

According to documents accessed by dna, the committee has nailed DRDO on several occasions. It has asked DRDO to furnish details on how many new models, weapon systems and engines have been imported in the last 10 years in the name of study and modifications. "DRDO labs are more interested in importing systems, modifying them a little bit, re-labelling them and reselling them to forces," the panel observed.

Of the 31-member committee, four members have defence background.

"Where do you think DRDO stands in our military hardware preparedness vis-à-vis China today?" the committee said. It also asked DRDO to disclose those areas of technology where they are not competitive or behind the curve.

"There is a perception that DRDO is not really fulfilling its role; it is only doing normal non-commercial office work. DRDO should work out what is required by the services... futuristic and does not get outdated before it is introduced into services. People are expecting something extraordinary from DRDO, something out-of-the-box," it said.

dna began its investigations in August this year when Prime Minister Narendra Modi criticised DRDO during an address in Kargil.

"If a project was conceived in 1992, it should not be the case in 2014 we are still saying it will take some more time," he had said. India, he said, has the potential to be a world leader in the defence sector, but was being held back by a chalta hai attitude.

In the last 10 years, the DRDO budget has increased from Rs 3,443.18 crore to Rs 10,868.89 crore (around three times). However, it has completed/closed only 13 projects costing Rs 134.08 crore in 2013-14, while it got 52 new projects, costing Rs 1,651.59 crore from January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014.

"DRDO's mandate is to develop products and technologies to modernise our armed forces. It has shown a list of products developed by them. Please also furnish a list of technologies developed," the committee said.

DRDO's annual report says that, as on March 31, 2014, it was handling 339 projects costing approximately Rs 45,554.73 crore. Out of these, 37 projects cost above Rs 100 crore, and, in total, account for Rs 38,613.89 crore. This is approximately 85% of the total cost of active projects.

DRDO scientists are one of the best paid in India. They get incentives like two additional increments on promotion, up to six variable increments on promotions granted on fast track, professional update allowance, opportunity to acquire higher qualifications at reputed institutes and residential complexes.

The committee also asked DRDO about its research on a Gujarat-based Sadhu, Prahlad Jani, who has been living on air. He does not eat and drink. A research on him was carried out in 2003 and 2010 and the committee asked if the outcome can be used in warfare.

Talking to dna, a committee member said on condition of anonymity: "DRDO is doing shoddy research and some parliamentarians seem to be encouraging it by asking how outcomes could be used in warfare. Are you going to deprive Indian soldiers food and water in harsh conditions like extreme heat and cold? It's disgusting."

"This is not the only example. Recently, in Pune, they developed a hi-tech chariot to be donated to a temple. Is it what they are supposed to do?" he said.

"There are also a number of irregularities like an institute director buying a Honda CRV for personal use from the institute's budget, although that car was not fit for that terrain. A building construction project worth crores was given to National Buildings Construction Corp (NBCC) without proper tendering. There are also complaints of misbehaviour and harassment of officials and purchase of expensive tickets from Nagpur, home district of one DRDO institute director," he said.

DRDO blames it on defence services, finance officers

DRDO has its own woes. They range from lack of testing facilities to infrastructure to shortage of funds to impractical demands of defence services. Another big reason is the rejection of DRDO technologies by defence services, terming them "inferior", and their 'preference' for imported technologies.

A top DRDO official in Delhi said, "Top defence people visit international exhibitions and defence machinery manufacturers where they see the latest technologies. They collect brochures and after coming back, they shortlist good technologies from various options available, amalgamate them and ask DRDO to develop a product or technology. They don't even bother to study the feasibility of their demands in context with the resources with us. That is one major reason for delay in aircraft and engines."

"What they see in these exhibitions is imported technology where countries like the US, Russia and France have in-house raw materials building and manufacturing facilities. In India, we have to import even small components. This is one reason for the delay and increase in project costs," he said.

DRDO | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
 
Both parties accusing each other and the net result is Zero for the country. Recently I visited IITF Delhi and met some DRDO Officials. They were so upset with me when I asked them about the status of some of their programs. They just dont want to take any criticism. Their major woe is that they have been given way too much projects than they can handle.
 
This the problem with India's model. We tried to skip the small steps and go straight to the end product. Now we can see how we are suffering. Not being able to build the small components has hit us hard. Food for thought for all those who were defending this type of action.


Another thing to note is DRDO reseaching and building some incredible CRAP. Temple chariots? Researching Yogis who never eat food? Are you f-ing serious? You really need to separate studies to see if this guy is lying? If this is the case, we have some serious problems. Let's not forget what a committe member mentioned about the parliamentarian's stupidity.
 
@sancho you havent commented yet mate ? :lol:

Sorry, am I late to the party?

"If a project was conceived in 1992, it should not be the case in 2014 we are still saying it will take some more time," he had said. India, he said, has the potential to be a world leader in the defence sector, but was being held back by a chalta hai attitude.

In the last 10 years, the DRDO budget has increased from Rs 3,443.18 crore to Rs 10,868.89 crore (around three times). However, it has completed/closed only 13 projects costing Rs 134.08 crore in 2013-14, while it got 52 new projects, costing Rs 1,651.59 crore from January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014.
Just as I always say, they don't finish projects and just jump on the next one if things are delayed or getting in trouble.
 
The question is not about just looking at DRDO by parliamentarians. It should have been rather monitoring critical projects periodically and updating the house about it. The house should ask question why the delay, if the project is relevant today, does it need additional features, funding, time etc etc. in other words, a proper review and analysis/discussion. thats what parliament was meant to be. If parliament does such a thing, i am sure every def PSU would start performing better including DRDO

Sadly, indian parliament functions less adjourns more. We are a country where politicians rushes to the chairperson more and slogan shout and get house adjourned rather than discuss threadbare such things.
 
Stop pumping money and resources into those DRDO a**es if they do not deliver and spend the money on private players.

DRDO needs competition and better management.
 
Recently I met a guest lecturer .He got his B tech from Kerala University and Mtech from NIT(k).
When I met him he said to that his ambition is a good job in ISRO. He tried for ISRO exams for 10 times and only succeeded in 10 th time.Still he dont have expectation about that post in ISRO.
From this I realised the attraction of ISRO from young talents in our nation.There is a reason for the success of ISRO and failure of DRDO.
Time arrives for tough disciplinary action against DRDO.
 
Recently I met a guest lecturer .He got his B tech from Kerala University and Mtech from NIT(k).
When I met him he said to that his ambition is a good job in ISRO. He tried for ISRO exams for 10 times and only succeeded in 10 th time.Still he dont have expectation about that post in ISRO.
From this I realised the attraction of ISRO from young talents in our nation.There is a reason for the success of ISRO and failure of DRDO.
Time arrives for tough disciplinary action against DRDO.

Truly when i did my Engg i had only 3 options for apprenticeship/training- 1.ISRO 2.Institute for Plasma Research and 3. Oil &Nat gas PSU . Indeed the cutting edge at my time was the coming of VLSI tech and only ISRO and IPR were doing top notch work. No where in my time i or my friends even distant seems to had ever any fascination for DRDO. We all felt its more of "chai peeyo aish karo" organisation. Mind you i am talking almost 2 decades back. Times changed a lot now i feel. may not radically but still a little bit perhaps.
 
A little late I guess, considering its Christmas time, we can forgive you ;). But on topic I just dont know when are they going to dismantle DRDO, may be very soon.

And happy X-Mas to you too! :D

It's not DRDO as such, it's the way they work, the way they see themselfs that is the problem. We criticize HAL and the monopoly, but DRDO has misused their position far more and has caused more problems for India. I truly believe, that if the LCA project would had been managed by HAL, it would had been done in a better way, since HAL does use their access to foreign partners to their advantage and has experience with the Dhruv project. DRDO is a developer and their scientists and engineers should focus on the developments of techs and systems, but should leave the project management to the company that actually produce the product, be it HAL for LCA or TATA for the Kestrel.
 
DRDO is a developer and their scientists and engineers should focus on the developments of techs and systems, but should leave the project management to the company that actually produce the product, be it HAL for LCA or TATA for the Kestrel.

Thats what happened in the case of HAL and ADA, didnt it? I know ADA never actually got the customer expectation right at the first place. I guess it would be very ideal if IAF is given the project management and monitoring (Not a usual corporate scenario where customers dont manage projects) and both R&D and Developer is answerable to IAF.
There is another issue, IAF needs to be the sponsor too, who releases the funds but in our case its not the case. Both work on separate budgets making no-one keeping a tab of the money spent.
 
Thats what happened in the case of HAL and ADA, didnt it? I know ADA never actually got the customer expectation right at the first place. I guess it would be very ideal if IAF is given the project management and monitoring (Not a usual corporate scenario where customers dont manage projects) and both R&D and Developer is answerable to IAF.
There is another issue, IAF needs to be the sponsor too, who releases the funds but in our case its not the case. Both work on separate budgets making no-one keeping a tab of the money spent.

I guess @sandy_3126 can tell you some things wrt to ADA and HAL's design team and how things are done, but I agree that the involvement of the forces in these kind of projects needs to be far higher too. Not sure if I would go so far to give the control over the whole project, since they usually don't have the know how of managing either, but the way DRDO does it today, surely is wrong. The IAF must provide more than just the basic ASR and then wait and see what comes out, but must be far more committed too. Wrt the budgets, when there is no accountability, why care about budgets or timelines anyway?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Back
Top Bottom