Having worked for a while in DRDO (LRDE actually) and now at one of the IITs, I have seen both academic and DRDO worlds. Mt two cents.
a) @Vinay, I think what folks here are demanding is a little *accountability*. No doubt, space and defense research is expensive and justified, the question is— Is the money being spent correctly ? When you pour in crores and crores of money, you expect some deliverables right? The biggest problem with DRDO is that there has been little product development commensurate with money it has received. Surely, anyone would question the futility of pouring money to these guzzlers which produce no results.
b) Contrary to what Khan might want us to believe, selection to DRDO labs and ISRO is not all 'merit based'. DRDO (and others) have not been able to attract top ranked students even from local engg colleges. Those who join are disillusioned after a couple of months..when the seniors tell them to chill out and relax, no work is assigned, and most of the time is spent on tea, lunch and more tea. Unless, the work culture changes I don't see DRDO producing anything that the defense can use.
c) No accountability. I remember that majors from army/navy/air force used to visit DRDO and the so called scientists (right from group leaders), used to shiver when these visits were scheduled. The majors would be so annoyed with non-progress in terms of product, field trials, support system, technology transfers. The few products developed are substandard, behind state of the art by 20 years and since army can't take chances in a war, we end up buying weapons from other countries (israel, russia, france and so on).
d) Once you enter DRDO you are taken care for lifetime. You get staff quarters, essential commodities at throw away prices, 8-5 working hours, no projects, and pension when you retire. It is very easy to go into the regular time pass mood and most scientists are in that mood. Those very few who work hard go away from DRDO after a few years. Overall, it is considered an 'easy life' for scientists who join DRDO.
e) DRDO scientists are now 'encouraged' to do PhD. IITs have separate quota for these scientists for the MTech and PhD courses. The pathetic level of knowledge these girls (and guys) have is a serious concern. Anyway they are least interested in gaining knowledge. They are here to get a course completion certificate which allows them to jump ahead in the career.
f) One big difference b/w US and Indian defense labs are that US defense labs (such as at Las Alamos, Argonne etc) are very very attractive for bright students. There are short term careers for those who join US labs. Once they come out, top institutions scramble to take them in. So, it is considered a great achievement to join one of the US defense labs. Can we say the same to DRDO labs ??
g) US invests heavily in the universities. Their defense comes from three sources–labs, universities, and private developers (who again are bright students from top ranking univs). India invests least in universities. A 'fast track' grant from DST takes 8-9 months to be approved and the money sanctioned is not more than 17 lakhs. This is hardly a good amount to even replicate the state of the art in the field. Also, unlike US, we have hundreds of different grant agencies (DBT, DIT, DST, CSIR,"¦) which all are plagued by the same bureaucracy problems. There is very little amount for research in IITs. Imagine the local univs and NITs.
h) hate to say this"¦ but the quality of engineers produced in India is very very poor. Those coming out of IITs, only 20% are really good. The others are only marginally better than the rest of India. And all engineers eye only s/w as profession (no fault of them though). There is hardly an ambition to take up challenges, explore new avenues and vistas, develop technology. Everyone wants a s/w job, get paid (get laid), go onsite, and procrastinate.
i) ISRO on the other hand does one job and they do it pretty good, i.e., launch spaceships/ rockets. The moon mission guzzled so much of money and used technologies from abroad as pay loads. The moon mineral mapper came from US. If ISRO shuts up its mouth, works hard on improving technology (stops taking the sons/daughters of employers as 'trainees'), and provides full details on money utilized there is no reason why space program cannot be continued. Until there is transparency, tax payers have every right to question the (f)utility of dumping money on these labs.
j) Does ISRO wants to give us data ?? Ask someone like me who approached ISRO for data on moonmapper and was told to get lost..unless I fill in hundreds of papers and write a formal proposal explaining why I need it. After 8-9 months, they would 'consider' it.
