Print Release
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRDO AWARDS for the year 2013 for outstanding contribution in various areas of technology will be given away by the Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, in the august presence of Hon'ble Defence Minister Shri Arun Jaitley and a galaxy of dignitaries on 20th August 2014 in a brief ceremony to be held at Kothari Auditorium, DRDO Bhawan.
The DRDO awards in 10 categories are being given to honour individual Scientists/Teams of DRDO, partners of DRDO from other sectors for their outstanding contributions in furthering DRDO's efforts in achieving self-reliance.
DRDO Life Time Achievement Award 2013 is being conferred on Dr. Dipankar Banerjee formerly Director, DMRL and Chief Controller R&D of DRDO for his distinguished contributions to the field of Metallurgy, Materials science & Combat Aircraft Program.
Technology Leadership Award: In recognition of outstanding contributions and leadership qualities, the Technology Leadership Award for the year 2013 is being awarded to Shri S Anantha Narayanan, Distinguished Scientist & Director Naval Physical & Oceanographic Laboratory (NPOL), Kochi towards development of underwater surveillance systems, new technologies in underwater transducers, onboard processors and deployment mechanisms and fostering industrial partnerships leading to proliferation of a large number of systems in the Indian Navy.
ACADEMY EXCELLENCE AWARDS are given to members from academia associated with DRDO for research in emerging areas. The two Academy Excellence Awards for the year 2013 are being conferred on Emeritus Prof. S Mohan, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru for his noteworthy contributions to several projects of DRDO. His innovative ideas and advice have helped DEBEL to successfully carry out technology demonstration of the concept of TDLAS Oxygen Sensor for Air Borne application, Ammonia Sensor, Micro needle Array for EEG and MEMS based pressure Sensor and Prof. V Kamakoti, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai for his outstanding contributions to the area of Computer Architecture, Reconfigurable System Design and Indigenous VLSI/EDA software, Secure Operating Systems, Indigenous IPs and to improve the performance of ANURAG developed ANUPAMA/ABACUS processors using higher level design abstraction.
Silicon Trophy for the Best Systems Laboratory of DRDO is being awarded to Defence Research & Development Laboratory (DRDL), Hyderabad for outstanding contributions towards development of tactical and underwater launched guided weapon systems.
TITANIUM TROPHY for the Best Science Laboratory of DRDO is being awarded to Defence Institute of Physiology & Allied Sciences (DIPAS), Delhi for outstanding contributions in improving performance and health of the soldiers deployed at high altitude and other operational environments.
DRDO awards for PATH BREAKING RESEARCH AND OUTSTANDING TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT for the year 2013 are being conferred upon:
· Dr. SC Sati,Director, Aerial Delivery Research & Development Establishment (ADRDE), Agra and his team for their outstanding contributions towards design, development, realisation and testing of P-16 Heavy Drop System comprising multi stage parachutes and platform.
· Dr. S Guruprasad, Scientist 'H', and Director, Research & Development Establishment (Engineers) (R&DE (E)), Pune and his team for their outstanding contributions towards development of a cost effective manufacturing technology for composites, Resin Film Infusion and materials for the same, leading to realisation of large size, light weight and multifunctional structural components for military applications.
· Shri RS Chandrasekhar, Scientist 'F', Research Centre Imarat (RCI), Hyderabad and his team have made outstanding contributions in developing innovative and robust Alignment methodologies for Inertial Navigation Systems for Air-to-Air tactical weapon and Ship-launched Strategic weapon.
DRDO AWARD FOR PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE are being conferred on Shri PS Subramanyam, Distinguished Scientist & Director, Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) Bengaluru and his team along with Dr. K Tamilmani, former Chief Executive, CEMILAC and his team towards accomplishing an unprecedented milestone in Defence Aviation through indigenous design, development and certification of a state-of-the-art fighter aircraft, Tejas for induction into services. Tejas has been granted Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) in Dec 2013. This rare feat of the team has catapulted India into the elite club of nations which possess the technological capabilities and infrastructure to build and roll out their own fighter aircraft with state-of-the-art technologies.
SPECIAL AWARD FOR STRATEGIC CONTRIBUTION 2013 is being conferred on:
· Smt. U Jeya Santhi, Scientist 'F' and her team for significant contributions towards successful design, development, erection and commissioning of Strategic Command and Control infrastructure comprising a secured, multi-layered, Strategic Communication Network and specialised Blast and EMP hardened structures.
· Shri K Ravi Sankar, Scientist 'F', Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (CAIR), Bengaluru and his team for outstanding contributions to the development of Security Solutions for Strategic Communication Networks (SCN) for securing sensitive data transmitted over PSTN links, high-speed point-to-point links which incorporate indigenous high grade encryption algorithms, automated and fast robust synchronization, user friendly end-to-end key management, innovative capture resiliency techniques with robust authentication mechanisms.
· Shri Rajeev Thaman, Scientist 'F', Scientific Analysis Group (SAG), Delhi and his team have made significant contributions in developing various indigenous information security SW Solutions for Cyber Defence, which have been deployed at various Defence Establishments, Strategic Programmes and other Intelligence Agencies providing high level of security assurance.
Defence Technology Absorption Award is given to DRDO's industrial partners for their support in transformation of technologies developed by DRDO into products/systems/processes for Armed forces. The award is being given to:-
· M/s Accord Software & Systems Ltd., Bengaluru, has immensely contributed towards indigenous design, development and production of advanced high dynamics GPS+GLONASS+GAGAN receivers with state-of-the-art technologies and features in multiple configurations to the specific requirements/ specifications of Indian Defence programmes in close coordination with DRDO laboratories.
· M/s Aerospace Engineers, Salem, Tamil Nadu, has displayed profound technical expertise in absorbing various technologies and has delivered high-precision and quality elastomeric products manufactured out of these technologies for use on various airborne systems developed by DRDO that include LCA, Lakshya, Nishant, Missiles, Life Saving Systems, aircrafts and helicopters.
· M/s Krishna Industries, Mumbai has displayed pioneering efforts towards indigenous production of "Bulb Bars" of various sections of DMR-249A grade steel, on industrial scale, in association with DRDO for construction of warships by devising ingenious roll design, rolling parameters and novel heat treatment technique. Their sustained efforts have culminated in producing high quality bulb bars for the first time in the country, thereby meeting the requirements of the Indian Navy in a timely and cost effective manner.
DEFENCE TECHNOLOGY SPIN-OFF AWARD 2013 is being awarded to Defence Food Research Laboratory (DFRL), Mysore for significant extension work in the rural sector for the benefit of tomato farmers & women entrepreneurs by means of commercialization of tomato-based value-added products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.stratpost.com/video-vayu-stratpost-air-power-roundtable-v
Following is what was said by AIr marshal matheswaran in "vayu(purrrr gas)" round table,
Is the concept relevant anymore? We need to look at that. I think we've outlived the relevance of the concept. That is one issue. But having said that, in the context of Indian capability development – Indian aeronautics development, there is nothing more important than a program which is taken up and moved in full earnest. This choice of the program – you see you started off with the HF-24 and countries if you see them, you need to follow just like what the Chinese are following -the block approach – is what we should have done. We should have continued with HF-24 in different blocks. That's how you build the national capability.
We closed shop there and then we jumped to a four and half generation aspiration on the LCA – much has been achieved, which is very creditable, but it will take thirty years if we jump like that. And the time frames that have been projected have all been absolutely unrealistic. And this is where the government needs to be brought in – what are they doing, how do they analyze – or they just take their words for it?
Cost and time frames are absolutely unrealistic. And example: the Kaveri engine. 89 you get the CCS approval – project is approved for 450 crores saying that a 4th generation engine – no such engine existed anywhere in the world – and mind you we haven't made a single aero-engine that flies before that nor even today. No engine has been made – designed and made. And you want to jump to a 4th generation engine though original proposal was for a five-stage engine which people said 'Come on, have some sense. Look into it again.' So they made it six-stage – even that was not existing anywhere in the world.
And what do they say? We will do the complete development by 7 years – by the 7th year the series production will be ready and it will be inducted into the air force in 1996. Even for established majors like General Electric or Pratt and Whitney to start an engine from scratch design is a 20-year program. Okay, so here professionalism is in question. These are the reasons why we've got into this kind of a problem.
With respect to LCA, it's time to close it. Close it in the sense – what you have achieved is what you will get. And my reports are there already in that. The first choice of the design was wrong and that design can give you only this capability, which, I've said, is something akin to the Bison's capability.
So we need to close it here and move on to the next block approaches to address the problems that are there and develop different models. –
Vice Admiral (retd.) Shekhar Sinha says
When you start coming on a new venture – new platform, we should not just write off the technology that you have imbibed. And it must be pursued. And while it is – Mk II, Mk III is all on the cards – we should get ahead with the next design and whatever you have made, use this as a trial platform or a trainer aircraft or lead-in fighter (trainer). Because if we don't get this technology right then we will continue to import and will remain from 70 import and 30 (indigenous) – we have not made any aircraft, actually, ourselves. So our capability may exist but we don't have the capacity to build those numbers and its going to keep increasing with time.
The second issue is that it's a badly managed program. Nothing wrong with the technicalities, there's nothing wrong with the – whatever decisions have been taken.
But if you have a project head and not leave it only to the LCA project team of the DRDO or somebody else to drive, this is exactly what will happen. I would very strongly recommend that we – we have spent a lot of money, there have been a lot of discussions with Matheshwaran in the IDS Headquarters even earlier – that LCA should have been better managed, it would have been flying you – you would have already stepped on to Mk II. So our thinking is that we should not allow this technology to be written off and take on from here and get on with Mk II, Mk III and use these aircraft for other purposes – for lead in fighter training or whatever. –
Air marshal Barbora says,
I happened to meet the designer of the Sukhoi-30 MKI. Seminov. I was in Russia then as an air attach̩. And he actually said to me Рhe said 'Very good you all are doing the LCA program. We wish all success.' He's the chief designer of this unique MKI. He said ' But first before you know how to make an aircraft please come and sit with us for fifteen years and maybe you'll learn how to make an aircraft.
Now Ajai (Shukla) rang me up from Bangalore, in respect of the LCA production line. He said there's no production line for the LCA as yet. How are we forming the squadron?
Four and half years back we took a decision about forming the first squadron. We pumped in our manpower there in Bangalore to produce the first squadron, based on, again, the very optimistic supply chain that the HAL would give us. Till date, like he said, serial production hasn't started. Now, enough is enough also, na.
Our air force problems started with the LCA prompted that this is going to replace your MiG-21s. Today the shit we are in – I'm sorry for the word – the Indian Air Force structure – force structure – is because of LCA.
And I can agree there – please let's not stop, block this program. Pick up the good points – there are very good things in the LCA. Managerial capability: Very poor. Every time we have gone to the government – when I was vice chief and the chiefs were there – Matsy (Air Marshal M Matheshwaran) was supposed to pack up his bags and go to Bangalore and take over. What happened?
I mentioned it to the defense minister the day before I was retiring, suggesting as to what coud be done in respect of HAL and whatever it is. Actually, he got angry at me. He says 'you don't have faith in HAL'. I said, you don't have to say it, I don't have faith.
Frankly, we must pick up the good and go ahead and try and develop more. But we can't do it alone. I'm sorry – we made an Ambassador car and we made rocket launchers going into space. We missed out on mid-level technology – discontinuous route. And to get into – that happened to China also, but China is very good at reverse engineering – they're doing it.
According to Tamil Mani the ADA DG, reverse engineering is much more difficult than original research based development!!!!
I dont know from where Barbora got the info that we can reverse engineer a complex project like tejas by copying every T,
If some one gives a BLISK with single crystal blades to barbora & co and asks them to deliver an exact copy, how long will it take?
Even after spending billions and decades chinese couldnot replicate the AL-31 SCB tech successfully and reliably on their WS-13 and still importing russian engines!!!!
Once again Air marshal matheswaran the great says,
As someone who's been involved closely with the program, and who's done two studies intimately, I'd like to put certain things at rest. One: the LCA and MMRCA cannot be compared.
So don't flog that fallacy that under the indigenous program the LCA can now take over the MMRCA's requirements and fill in those gaps – its not possible.
That is the foremost reason for vayu conference!!!!!
The most important thing is, in the LCA program, we suffer from a national culture which I call – it flows from our caste culture system. Why? Because nowhere in the world, when designers are given certain tasks to design an aircraft and develop it, the interface between the user – user's ability to convince and make him understand what he wants and what are the operational requirements so that the designer can choose the right design intent, is completely and interactive process.
Here, the scientific adviser will tell the air chief technology demonstration is my job – you've given me the ASR, now lay off – let me finish my technology demonstration program, then you come in – we will see thereafter. There's the problem. Because it's too late to come in and make changes. That's one.
Second. What Admiral Arun Prakash said is absolutely correct. The F-22 program was – after the basic technology demonstration program the user takes over the entire program management. The US Air Force appointed a program manager with significant powers – financial as well as executive decision-making with respect to the program.
Because you must take even a decision – even if you have to foreclose the program if its not viable and you must have that wherewithal for it, so you have to be trained and you have to be fully in that process. This man took over the F-22 program as a Lieutenant Colonel – he remained the program manager when the F-22 was operationally inducted 20 years later and he was Lieutenant General when he retired. There's a problem in our service culture and service mindset. We don't want to put people on professional competencies as experts on a program for any length of time. Our P-staff or personnel staff in the other two services will cry hoarse and say 'no, this guy cannot be in Bangalore for 20 years or three years or five years. So we keep breaking the expertise and it's like the monkey climbing up and coming down two feet down so we are always at the perpetual start point. These are the fundamental factors that impinge on this.
More importantly, I think DRDO and the public sector spend more time on publicity events – on non-events. I said, stop all that. You know you have a pre-IOC, you have an IOC, you have a huge celebration – you actually keep announcing things – 'we are the fourth country to achieve this', 'we are the fifth country to achieve this' or 'we are the third country to achieve this' – where is the final product? Where is it going to see the operational utility? How about questioning that? Where are the timelines? Where is the cost accountability?
This is what we need to question. We stop these public events, we stop these announcements for the rest of the world and if you think that we're fooling the rest of the world – we're fooling ourselves.
The rest of the world, who are experts in technologies in the aerospace domain – they know exactly what's wrong with your aircraft. They know exactly where your technologies remain.
So the person who said there's always been a conflict between HAL, DRDO and air force – there's never been a change of stance of air force. Constantly, there's an accusation that goalposts have been shifted by air force. The ASR was approved with everybody involved in 1985 and there were two concessions given in 1989 – no other change has ever been made. It is their inability to conform the ASR, for a variety of reasons. –
Well air marshal Matheswaran , matsy was giving his "expert advice in Vayu fart fest " against scuh public jamboorees !!!!
Well Modi govt is not listening and treating tejas team like door mate as matsy would have liked very much for not allowing him to take control of tejas
.
Well matsy's and the resident aerodynamic expert of Vayu, Mr. Pushpinder Singh's advice seems to be falling on deaf ears!!!!
First the Modi govt gave these guys and now they are giving them awards!!!!!
What a breach of national security????
Why should they be awarded for destroying IAF's force structure?
Why should they be awarded for running a failed program?
Why should they be awarded for producing "a fighter inferior to Mig-21 Bison", according to "intimate" reports received by matheswaran himself, who claims to have done two deep studies on Tejas program and given an "expert opinion" to Indian govt to wind up this program, pick up the good things and leave.
