DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

Now contrast that with just one project that figures for which are available - Tejas - Approx. 75 thousand crore INR that will be the cash outflow in the production of Tejas Mk-1 and Mk-2. It may actually grow. And that will merely seed an aviation industry in India which is almost non-existent so far (HAL should not count towards indigenous aviation since it only does screw driver ToT while Tejas will be different)

Does that justify DRDO for you.

And domestic aviation is the second industry DRDO is touching. First one was Missiles which nobody was willing to supply. But you can make as many as you care for now.

After this may come in exotic sensor. The more staid ones already having been done.

Oh I forgot the special steels for naval shipping which is now getting used from small corvettes to air craft carriers

http://www.saiindia.gov.in/english/...mpliance/2012_13/Defence/Report_16/Chap_7.pdf

Reasons for low success rate of Staff Projects


Our analysis of closed Staff Projects, where the deliverables were

unacceptable to the users, pointed to the following reasons for their failure to

meet the demands of the user:

> Taking up projects before finalisation of SQR.;

> Excessive time overrun often making the developed technology

obsolete.

> Failure of the laboratory to develop the desired deliverables



> Partial achievement of project requirement and

> Mismanagement in Post Development Activities

ersakthivel said:

http://idrw.org/36-rafale-is-final-number-to-be-purchased-parrikar/#more-64705

Obviously manohar Parrikar an IIT graduate also thinks that saving money by cutting rafale numbers to just 36 and using the saved money to buy hundreds of tejas is the right idea after spending enough time in office , after receiving all strategic inputs, eventhough he is satisfied only with ,"a certain extent " in tejas capabilities ,

And only delhites will decide what they did by voting AAP is right or wrong when the next election comes.So lets see it then.


Hope this post stays as I haven't made any personal attacks on any one!!!

Click to expand...

Proof of the pudding is in the eating.

There are definitely going to be more Rafale, if not, then Grippen. Adani has partnered with SAAB Grippen fyi.

And @sob sir has said a few things in private, I am waiting for him to come and personally make things clearer for you.

In short HAL doesn't yet have the go ahead from GoI.

ersakthivel said:

GOI should encourage private industries in all spheres including defence. there are no two opinions about it. Competition ensures the best quality .


no one denies the issues with PSUs anywhere in the world.but they do deliver many worthwhile stuff.

Most of IA and IAF weapons are from Russian PSUs as well.


Recent news is ISRO has chosen HAL as their vendor for the all too important cryogenic engines.

Click to expand...

Well i have seen quite a few of your posts and some times they are well refercensed. But I have to disagree on the assertion that PSU's succeeded under Russia as a point of argument. I say this as the PSU in soviet regime worked in the following manner.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj00/win00/kerber.htm

Something which can and should never happen in our country.

HAL production rates are good but no where as impressive. And off late they have been indulging in too much mud slinging. I presonally feel when you start saying that 'the customer is wrong' , your credibility will be put to question. Compared to other PSU's it is damn impressive. But is it really any good when compared to other aviation enterprises.

Adani or for that matter any other Private business house will be able to do it only after they get a helping hand from either HAL or some foreign player.

HAL itself has to first decide how many things it wants to do under one roof.

But then you can rest assured the one line HAL has will not be allowed to go out of work. And HAL already does pinch hitting for DRDO. All the initial research work is being supported by HAL.

Something Adani or any other will never be able to do or even be trusted with despite their foreign partners. Rather because of their foreign partnership they will be out of the research phase absolutely. They will only do final assembly from documents provided with processes they develop with their foreign partners.

Actually we may see DRDO getting into an even closer relationship with HAL in future for this very reason.

Some direct quotes and first person accounts.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...0-15-years/articleshow/47171102.cms?prtpage=1

Make in India: Navy wants DRDO to develop 100 advanced technologies in 10-15 years
By Rajat Pandit, TNN | 6 May, 2015, 10.36AM IST
Post a Comment

Admiral Robin Dhowan on Tuesday said "a long-term naval technology roadmap" is now in place after extensive consultations with the Defence Research and Development Organization and other stakeholders.

"We have put the 'Make in India' thrust on an overdrive. The focus in the roadmap is on weapons, sensors and cutting-edge technologies, with certain milestones and required timelines," said the Navy chief, talking exclusively to TOI.

As of now, India has achieved 90% indigenisation in the "float" (hull, superstructure) component of a warship through the development of high-grade steel by DRDO and SAIL, among other things. But the "move" (propulsion) and "fight" (weapons and sensors) components lag behind at 50-60% and 30%, respectively.

"The 'fight' component has been made a thrust area, with talks even being held with production agencies like defence PSUs as well as the private sector. Close to a hundred technologies have been identified, which range from guns and missiles to different kinds of radars and sonars," said the Navy chief.

DRDO will certainly have to deliver in the timeframes required to avoid situations like last year's commissioning of 6,800-tonne destroyer INS Kolkata, the largest-ever warship to be built in India, without the critical long-range surface-to-air missile system.

Click to expand...

http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...ical-drdo-system/article6558305.ece?css=print

Published: November 3, 2014 01:16 IST | Updated: November 3, 2014 19:52 IST Nantes (France), November 3, 2014

Indian-built Scorpene to carry critical DRDO system
S. ANANDAN

India’s defence establishment will be fully responsible for a DRDO-developed critical propulsion system that will go into the last two of the six Scorpene submarines being built under technology transfer at Mazagon Dock, Mumbai, say the original makers of the submarine.
<snip>
The French defence shipbuilding major DCNS has put its own second-generation hydrogen fuel cell AIP system on the block. It maintains that the DRDO will be “fully responsible for the process” of the AIP it is developing for fitment on the submarines.
<snip>
“Our scheme is limited to integrating safely the DRDO-developed AIP plug to the submarine. We are working on designing the hull section in detail for this,” Mr. Berger told Indian journalists at the DCNS facility, which houses the “fully tested operational-scale fuel cell AIP.”

(The correspondent visited France with other Indian journalists at the invite of DCNS)

Click to expand...

As manpower cost of regular establishment forms a significant portion of the expenditure of the Laboratory, exclusion of manpower cost of regular establishment results in highly understating the project cost. Further, it also results in understatement of cost overrun in cases of delayed projects. Manpower Cost As manpower cost of regular establishment forms a significant portion of the expenditure of the Laboratory, exclusion of manpower cost of regular establishment results in highly understating the project cost. Further, it also results in understatement of cost overrun in cases of delayed projects. Audit analysis in this regard revealed that during the period 2004-05 to 2008- 09 year-wise expenditure incurred on Pay & Allowances of regular establishment of ARDE ranged between 36 per cent and 54 per cent when compared to the overall expenditure of the ARDE as indicated below:





Ministry stated in February 2011 that the project manpower is merged with the Peace Establishment of the Lab/Establishment. Hence this objection is not valid. Ministry’s reply needs to be viewed in the context that the core functions of the Lab are the projects and the scientific and technical manpower are dedicated to the projects. Hence project costs should include the manpower cost, particularly because substantial portion of the expenditure of the laboratory comprises of manpower costs.

http://saiindia.gov.in/english/home.../2011_12/Defence_Services/report_24/Chap7.pdf

@Khagesh you talk of Navy, then here it is

Research and Development activities need to be dynamic in order to cope with the highly complex and technology intensive requirements of the Navy. The development of equipment, sonar systems, underwater weapons and materials for naval platforms such as ships, submarines and aircrafts require incorporation and integration of multi-disciplinary technologies. To achieve this, the Directorate of Naval Research & Development (DNRD) at DRDO HQ acts as the interface and facilitates effective interaction between Indian Navy and DRDO Labs. The Directorate deals with technologies in areas such as underwater Weapons, underwater Sensors, Naval Materials and Marine Biology, underwater Ranges, Oceanography, Ship Hydrodynamics and Structure, and Fuel Cell and Marine Stealth.

DRDO has a network of three naval laboratories, viz. Naval Material Research Laboratory (NMRL), Ambernath with competency in metallurgy, polymer science and technology; Naval Physical and Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL), Kochi engaged in the design and development of underwater surveillance systems and Naval Science and Technological Laboratory (NSTL), Visakhapatnam, dedicated to the design and development of
underwater weapons and associated systems for the Navy.

Like other DRDO laboratories, Naval Laboratories also take up Mission Mode (MM)/Staff projects, Technology Demonstration projects (TD)/Research and Development projects (R&D)/Science and Technology (S&T) and Infrastructure Facility (IF) projects.




http://www.saiindia.gov.in/english/...n_compliance/2014/Defence/Report_4/Chap_6.pdf

Singh said:

Proof of the pudding is in the eating.

There are definitely going to be more Rafale, if not, then Grippen. Adani has partnered with SAAB Grippen fyi.

And @sob sir has said a few things in private, I am waiting for him to come and personally make things clearer for you.

In short HAL doesn't yet have the go ahead from GoI.

Click to expand...

The pudding was not coked in not some far off foreign land.

All IAF test pilots who have tasted the pudding have nothing but praise for its taste!!!

By 2025 when france finishes rafale delivery HAL will be producing FGFA . SO no justification can ever be offered for further rafale orders.

The view of the present government with respect to rafale is "urgent buy to stop squadron depletion", not to fill up six IAF squadrons with 200 million dollar plus rafale.

Even this order has more to do with maintaining strategic relationship with France besides buying rafales.

No nation that can field close to 300 Su-30 MKIs need rafale in any purpose other than niche roles.

And that is not going to change in the near future.

You can wait till Modi makes his first Russian visit , to know the timetable for FGFA.

Already gripen E empty weight has crossed 8 tons. So there is every possibility that it will have a far lower thrust to weight ratio even compared to tejas mk1. It would be very hard for people who have criticized tejas for being "underpowered" to even contemplate gripen E buy!!!,

Even the "famed" Adani bhai can't bring IAF around to buying "such overweight single engine fighter"!!!The twin engine rafale weighs just 9 tons!!!

Gossips can be fried in cocktail circuits, with influential people close to ruling party and within the party pushing for gripen E.but it wont get implemented on ground

reason is gripen E has much more deeper eng redesign than simple add 0.5 meter fuselage length, that is going to be done for tejas mk2 .

gripen E was made to compete with rafale and typhoon in weapon weight and range category with much bigger drag inducing fairings for relocated wheels fairings and need to carry more fuel to go longer.

But the brief given by IAF for tejas mk2 is different- More agility with , higher thrust to weight ratio, in a single engine fighter , not high weapon carriage and longer range.And filling up the mig replacement option with economical cost, at a third of grpen E cost , if we take lifecycle and upgradation cost into account.


IAF has rafales and su-30 MKIs for the roles envisaged by gripen E. .

IAF wants cost effective high Thrust to weight ratio fighter that can dominate the border area. And tejas will fill it easily.

And most of the brochure figures quoted for rafale and gripen for range and weapon carriage are just PR.
Range of an fighter is simply proportional to the spec called fuel fraction(weight of fuel/empty weight of fighter)

All other claims like my fighter will fly 4000 Km at an optimum fixed hihg altitude with puny weapon load ,have no operational validity when they are expected to carry optimum weapon load in punishing high temp low altitude terrain napping low level penetration mode.

I have posted the same info many times in tejas thread, whenever people throw ubber specs of MNC fighters.

And it is a fact that can never be rebutted.

@ersakthivel : Any sites/references where technical concepts of aviation can be referred to by a nOOb like me ?

flyingarg said:

Well i have seen quite a few of your posts and some times they are well refercensed. But I have to disagree on the assertion that PSU's succeeded under Russia as a point of argument. I say this as the PSU in soviet regime worked in the following manner.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj00/win00/kerber.htm

Something which can and should never happen in our country.

HAL production rates are good but no where as impressive. And off late they have been indulging in too much mud slinging. I presonally feel when you start saying that 'the customer is wrong' , your credibility will be put to question. Compared to other PSU's it is damn impressive. But is it really any good when compared to other aviation enterprises.

Click to expand...

I dont want anybody from ADA meeting the same fate.

What I meant was till private sector gets its acts together there is no alternative to HAL.

The customer IAF has made many late demands that led to tejas delays is a fact that was recognized even by tech blind CAG.IA revised the GSQR for Arjun at least four times .

For ex if IAf asks Dassault to integrate su-30 MKI sized radar and brahmos capable rafale , when will Dassault deliver?

What is needed is a creation of a strategic entity that combines the tech savvy elements of IAF, HAL and ADA into a single unit that functions in a unified manner with out finger pointing and leveraging the realistic tech know how present in the county into practical weapon systems , that can atleast cut import by half and usher in weapons export era with eager participation form private players.

In Akash , brahmos, agni, prithvi,it is happening with IA, IAF DRDO , defence PSUs and private players working in harmony to deliver a practical weapon system saving billions in forex.

It will happen with astra also.

No private player will invest a rupee if the user keeps changing specs of a project under development without waiting for batch wise upgrades as F1, F2, F3 in rafale shows.

this should happen with Arjun , tejas and AMCA is my wish.


besides the above three items IA and IAF will buy foreign suff for their tank, fighter needs. So why slap a mach 1.5 super cruise requirement on AMCA, knowing fully well it is practically impossible with todays tech in india?They have FGFA fir that purpose.

IAF has been issuing and revising ASR for AMCA for the past decade. Army still can not put it on paper what it wants from FMBT till tody. It is this tech ignorance of the services which is going to hurt those projects as much as in efficiency of DRDO and DPSUs.

flyingarg said:

@ersakthivel : Any sites/references where technical concepts of aviation can be referred to by a nOOb like me ?

Click to expand...

I have given reference whenever possible in my posts.There is no unified reference sites as such.

Singh said:

Proof of the pudding is in the eating.

There are definitely going to be more Rafale, if not, then Grippen. Adani has partnered with SAAB Grippen fyi.

And @sob sir has said a few things in private, I am waiting for him to come and personally make things clearer for you.

In short HAL doesn't yet have the go ahead from GoI.

Click to expand...

@Singh, Gripen is not going to come in that is for sure. SAAB/Adani combo might offer an alternate AMCA that is a possibility and it is being discussed. This would be a new aircraft by the looks of it.

As I said earlier HAL is not preparing even today for significantly upping the production capacity of LCA. Many foreign vendors of critical equipment have not been given orders and mind you most of them have delivery periods of 6 to 9 months at an average.

So the 100s of Tejas is going be a long way in the pipeline.

We are seeing the issues with SU 30. They are going to crop up and for HAL and IAF getting these birds back in the sky is no.1 priority. Also the issues with the engine and the fly by wire need to sorted out.

LCA with it's specs looks to be a very potent little fighter. IAF will have to evolve their doctrines with the pluses and the limitations of this aircraft.

Hari Sud said:

Post #149. Power_Monger

Your question is key to this discussion and not the DRDO bashing. Forum readers, here is your chance to throw your constructive opinions. There must be a way to resurrect DRDO. Some components of DRDO are doing well. Others are up for reorg. This is what probably up in PM Modi's mind. That is why he fired the DRDO head, three months back. His officials are probably working on an alternative. They will definitely value Forum opinions.

Kunal, Ray, Bhadra offer your opinions not for cross purposes but on constructive purposes.

Click to expand...

if you know the contributions of Mr. Avinash chander,you will feel sorry for the way he was unceremoniously kicked out!!!!..

HAL is not going to see a penny of profit with meager IAF order numbers. SO how can they give advance orders for vendors, with just 40 tejas mk1 order from IAF ?

Unless DM makes IAF to order tejas mk1 in substantial numbers, no way HAL can give substantial orders to vendors.

DM closing the gate on rafale is a definite indication to IAF to look at tejas seriously in the short term , if it ever wants its fleet level maintained.

With FOC coming up next month as DM expects, lets see how things evolve.

Bhadra said:

The Research & Development Establishment (Engineers) [R&DE (E)]​

http://www.saiindia.gov.in/english/...mpliance/2012_13/Defence/Report_16/Chap_7.pdf

The Research & Development Establishment (Engineers) [R&DE (E)] Dighi is a laboratory set up at Pune in 1962 under Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) with the primary role of development of mobility and counter mobility equipments for the Corps of Engineers. Over the years, the establishment has also diversified into development of ground system engineering for missile and other weapon systems. Staff Projects taken up for delivery of products required by Defence Services during the last 15 years achieved minimal success. Out of 19
closed Staff Projects only 3 underwent production, 2 partly achieved the project requirement and remaining 14 could not achieve success in terms of acceptance by the users. Projects were initiated without firm Staff Qualitative Requirement (SQR). Excess time overrun, failure of the laboratory to develop the desired deliverables and mismanagement in post development activities contributed to projects' failure.

Click to expand...

What is a staff project?what is the difference between a staff project and projects going on users request?

40 is not a small number. Let me just say that even orders for 10 nos. have not been discussed with these guys.

venkat said:

if you know the contributions of Mr. Avinash chander,you will feel sorry for the way he was unceremoniously kicked out!!!!..

Click to expand...

when the senior scientist starts lobbying for extension, then it is time for him to be eased out and make way for the younger blood.

sob said:

@Singh, Gripen is not going to come in that is for sure. SAAB/Adani combo might offer an alternate AMCA that is a possibility and it is being discussed. This would be a new aircraft by the looks of it.

As I said earlier HAL is not preparing even today for significantly upping the production capacity of LCA. Many foreign vendors of critical equipment have not been given orders and mind you most of them have delivery periods of 6 to 9 months at an average.
So the 100s of Tejas is going be a long way in the pipeline.

We are seeing the issues with SU 30. They are going to crop up and for HAL and IAF getting these birds back in the sky is no.1 priority. Also the issues with the engine and the fly by wire need to sorted out.

LCA with it's specs looks to be a very potent little fighter. IAF will have to evolve their doctrines with the pluses and the limitations of this aircraft.

Click to expand...

So if I understand your point :

No Rafale.
No Grippen.
Tejas not going into serially mass production anytime soon.
AMCA also not in the horizon anytime soon.
Sukhoi beset with issues.
Reasonable to assume : FGFA/PAK-FA also doubtful for the future.

I think the only thing that fits is Grippen + Tejas to replace Mig 21+27. Not only is Grippen cheaper than Rafale but they have Adani onboard too.

So the rumour mill is perhaps right.