The Indian Navy seems to have given up the idea of the P3’s and is looking for newer versions of the Atlantique among others.
———————————————————————————–
It said the P-3C aircraft, built by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) , would improve Pakistan’s ability to restrict the movement of militants along its southern border, in particular, and improve border security everywhere.
———————————————————————————–
That’s a joke.
What is the timeline for their completion and handover.
IAF expansion plan will have F-16 bid
IAF expansion plan will have F-16 bid
November 17, 2004 18:13 IST
The United States’ F-16 aircraft will be in the race for India’s plan to acquire 125 supersonic fighters, an Indian Air Force official said on Wednesday.
The IAF will insist on a technology transfer by aircraft manufacturers, including parting with the source code for avionics, Vice Chief of Air Staff Air Marshal S K Malik said in Bangalore on the sidelines of the 45th annual conference of the Indian Society of Aerospace Medicine.
More news reports
“We have not short-listed any aircraft nor discounted any,” Malik said.
“Perhaps F-16 will be there, (Swedish) Grippen, Mirage 2000 and MiG 29 will be there,” he said.
Malik said the qualifying requirements would be put in place shortly and presentations by the manufacturers invited.
This will be followed by the issue of request for proposals, he said.
“Product support should be guaranteed and uninterrupted, if for any reason there are sanctions on us, spares should be given,” he said.
He said the move to go in for multiple vendors was to get better flexibility and cited the difficulty the IAF faced during the acquisition of the British Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer from a single vendor.
He said the initial process of identifying the aircraft that the IAF wanted to buy to replace the ageing MiGs would take around two years.
India had invited aircraft manufacturers for the Aero India air show in February next year, he said, adding, “Those countries who will take part will have commercial interests.”
IAF teams will participate in combat exercises in France and the US next year, he said, adding the air force had gained significantly in the exercises in Alaska and South Africa this year.
IS star49 one of those guys who was banned from in here?
Atlantiques
5 F-27s
2 P-3C (8 on order/requested)
Fleet of submarines
All of the above will be looking for the carrier and have the ability pass on info…..
——————————————————–
Thought they had only one atlantique left.
The Akula – Type 971
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/akula/index.html
SSN AKULA CLASS (BARS TYPE 971) ATTACK SUBMARINE, RUSSIA
The Russian Navy has 14 Bars class Project 971 submarines known in the West as the Akula class nuclear powered submarines (SSN). A number of Russian Akula class submarines are deployed in the Pacific region. The submarines were built by the Amur Shipbuilding Plant Joint Stock Company at Komsomolsk-on-Amur and at the Severodvinsk shipbuilding yard. Seven Akula I submarines were commissioned between 1986 and 1992, and three Improved Akula between 1992 and 1995. Three Akula II submarines, with hull length extended by 4m and advanced machinery quietening technology, have been built. The first, Viper, was commissioned in 1995, the second, Nerpa, in December 2000 and the third, Gepard, in August 2001. The Akula II are 110 m long and displace up to 12,770 tons. They have a maximum speed of 35 knots submerged and a maximum diving depth of 600 m.
The Indian Navy has announced plans to lease two Akula Class submarines from the Russian Navy for five years, beginning in 2004.
DESIGN
The submarine has a double-hulled configuration with a distinctive high aft fin. The hull has seven compartments and the stand-off distance between the outer and inner hulls is considerable, reducing the possible inner hull damage. The very low acoustic signature has been achieved by incremental design improvements to minimise noise generation and transmission – for example, the installation of active noise cancellation techniques.
The retractable masts viewed from bow to stern are the periscopes, radar antennae, radio and satellite communications and navigation masts.
MISSILES
The Akula class carry up to twelve Granat submarine launched cruise missiles. The missiles are fired from the 533mm torpedo launch tubes. Granat (NATO designation: SS-N-21 Sampson) has a range of about 3,000km and delivers a 200kt warhead. The CEP (the circle of equal probability) is 150m. The CEP value is a measure of the accuracy of strike on the target and is the radius of the circle within which half the strikes will impact. The land attack Granat missile uses inertial and terrain following guidance.
The submarine’s anti-ship missiles are the Novator SS-N-15 Starfish and the Novator SS-N-16 Stallion. The Starfish, fired from the 533mm tubes, has a target range of 45km. The Stallion, fired from the 650mm tubes, has a longer range of up to 100km. The Stallion and the Starfish can be armed with a 200kt warhead or a Type 40 torpedo.
An air defence capability is provided by a Strela SA-N-5/8 portable missile launcher with 18 missiles.
TORPEDOES
The submarine has eight torpedo launch tubes, four 650mm and four 533mm tubes. The Improved Akula and Akula II have ten, with six 533mm tubes. The four 650mm tubes can be fitted with liners to provide additional 533mm weapon launch capacity. The torpedo tubes can be used to launch mines instead of torpedoes. The Akula can launch a range of anti-submarine and anti-surface vessel torpedoes.
SENSORS
The Akula’s surface search radar is the Snoop Pair or the Snoop Half. The surface search radar antennae are installed on the same mast as the Rim Hat radar intercept receiver.
The submarine is fitted with the MGK 540 sonar system which provides automatic target detection in broad and narrow band modes by active sonar. It gives the range, relative bearing and range rate. The sonar system can also be used in a passive, listening mode for detection of hostile sonars. The sonar signal processor can detect and automatically classify targets as well as reject spurious acoustic noise sources and compensate for variable acoustic conditions.
PROPULSION
The main machinery consists of a VM-5 pressure water reactor rated at 190MW with a GT3A turbine developing 35MW. Two auxiliary diesels rated at 750hp provide emergency power. The propulsion system drives a seven-bladed fixed-pitch propeller.
The propulsion system provides a maximum submerged speed of 33 knots and a surface speed of 10 knots. A reserve propeller system, powered by two motors rated at 370kW, provides a speed of 3 to 4 knots. The submarine is rated for a diving depth to 600m.
http://www.naval-technology.com/
U212 / U214 ATTACK SUBMARINES, GERMANY
The U212 submarine is capable of long-distance submerged passage to the area of operation. The German Navy has ordered four of the submarines. The Type 212 is being constructed by Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH (HDW) of Kiel and Thyssen Nordseewerke GmbH (TNSW) of Enden. HDW is responsible for the bow sections and TNSW for the stern section. HDW is assembling the first and third vessels, TNSW the second and fourth. U31, the first of class, began sea trials in April 2003 and it is scheduled to be commissioned by the end of 2004. The second, U32, was named in December 2003 and is planned to be handed over in May 2005.
Two U212 submarines are being built by Fincantieri for the Italian Navy. The first, S526 Salvatore Todaro, was launched in November 2003 and will commission in 2005. The second will commission in 2006.
COMMAND AND WEAPONS CONTROL SYSTEM
The Type 212 is equipped with a highly integrated Command & Weapons Control System which interfaces with sensors, weapons and navigation system. The system is based on a high-performance databus and a distributed computer system, the Basic Command & Weapons Control System (Basic CWCS) supplied by Konsberg Defence & Aerospace of Norway under the trade name MSI-90U.
TORPEDOES
There are six torpedo tubes in two groups of three. Type 212 is equipped with a water ram expulsion system for torpedo launch. The submarine is equipped with the DM2A4 heavyweight torpedo weapon system from STN Atlas Elektronik.
COUNTERMEASURES
EADS Systems & Defence Electronics and Thales Defence Ltd have been awarded a contract to develop the FL1800U electronic warfare system for the German and Italian navies’ U212 submarines. The 1800U is a submarine version of the FL1800 S-II which is in service on the Brandenburg and Bremen class frigates.
A consortium led by STN ATLAS Elektronik and Allied Signal ELAC is responsible for the development of the TAU 2000 torpedo countermeasures system. TAU 2000 has four launch containers, each with up to ten discharge tubes equipped with effectors. The effectors are small underwater vehicles, similar in appearance to a torpedo. The effectors are jammers and decoys with hydrophones and acoustic emitters. Multiple effectors are deployed in order to counter torpedoes in re-attack mode.
SENSORS
The submarine is equipped with an integrated DBQS sonar system which has: cylindrical array for passive medium-frequency detection; a TAS-3 low-frequency towed array sonar; FAS-3 flank array sonar for low/medium-frequency detection; passive ranging sonar; and hostile sonar intercept system. The active high-frequency mine detection sonar is the STN Atlas Elektronik MOA 3070.
The search periscope is the Zeiss Optronik SERO 14 with optical rangefinder, thermal imager and global positioning system. The Zeiss SERO 15 attack periscope is equipped with laser rangefinder.
PROPULSION
The propulsion system combines a conventional system consisting of a diesel generator with a lead acid battery, and an air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, used for silent slow cruising, with a fuel cell equipped with oxygen and hydrogen storage. The system consists of nine PEM (polymer electrolyte membrane) fuel cells, providing between 30 and 50kW each.
For higher speeds, connection is made to the high-performance lead acid battery. An MTU 16 V- 396 diesel engine powers the generator from Piller GmbH for charging the battery installed on the lower of the two decks at the forward section of the submarine. The diesel generator plant is mounted on a swinging deck platform with double elastic mounts for noise and vibration isolation. The propeller motor is directly coupled to the seven-bladed screwback propeller.
TYPE 214
HDW is developing the Type 214 submarine, which is a further improvement on the Type 212. The Greek Navy has ordered three Type 214 submarines. The first, Papanikolis (S120), was built at the HDW Kiel shipyard and was launched in April 2004; it is scheduled for delivery in 2005. Hellenic Shipyards will build the second (Pipinos S121) and third (Matrozos 122) vessels at Skaramanga, for commission in 2008-09. Hellenic Shipyards was acquired by HDW in May 2002. A fourth vessel was ordered by Greece in June 2002.
South Korea has also ordered three Type 214, to enter service in 2007, 2008 and 2009. These will be built by Hyundai Heavy Industries.
The Type 214 will have an increased diving depth of over 400m, due to improvements in the pressure hull materials. Hull length is 65m and displacement 1,700t. Four of the eight torpedo tubes will be capable of firing missiles.
Type 214 submarines for the Hellenic Navy will be armed with the WASS (Whitehead Alenia Sistemi Subaquei) Black Shark heavyweight torpedo. The Black Shark is a dual purpose, wire-guided torpedo which is fitted with Astra active / passive acoustic head and a multi-target guidance and control unit incorporating a counter-countermeasures system. It has an electrical propulsion system based on a silver oxide and aluminium battery.
Performance of the AIP system has been increased with two Siemens PEM fuel cells which produce 120kW per module and will give the submarine an underwater endurance of two weeks. A hull shape which has been further optimised for hydrodynamic and stealth characteristics and a low noise propeller combine to decrease the submarine’s acoustic signature.
The Integrated Sensor Underwater System ISUS 90, from STN ATLAS Elektronik integrates all sensors, command and control functions on board the submarine. BAE Systems provides the Link 11 tactical data link. The sensor suite of the U214 submarine consists of the sonar systems, an attack periscope and an optronic mast. The submarine’s electronic support measures system and Global Positioning System sensors are also installed on the optronic mast.
————————————————————————–
SSK SCORPENE ATTACK SUBMARINE
The Scorpene submarine has been jointly developed by DCN of France and Izar (formerly Bazan) of Spain. Two Scorpene submarines have been ordered by Chile. The vessels will replace two Oberon Class submarines which were retired in 1998 and 2003. The first, O’Higgins, built at DCN shipyard in Cherbourg, was launched in November 2003 and is scheduled for delivery by the end of 2004. The second, Carerra, is being built at Izar’s Cartagena shipyard in Spain and will be delivered in 2006.
The Royal Malaysian Navy placed a contract for two Scorpene submarines in June 2002. The vessels are to enter service in 2007 and 2008. As with the vessels for Chile, the first will be built in France by DCN, the second by Izar in Spain.
France and India are to sign an agreement to build six Scorpene submarines in India, subject to final approval by the Indian CCS (Cabinet Committee on Security). The submarines will be built at the state-owned Mazagon dockyard in Bombay, with technical assistance and equipment from French companies DCN and Thales. The submarines are to be delivered between 2010 and 2015. As part of the deal, the submarines would be armed with EADS SM-39 Exocet anti-ship missiles.
SCORPENE FOR THE CHILEAN NAVY
The 1500t Scorpene, built for the Chilean Navy, has a length of 66.4m. The two vessels are being equipped with four diesel generators which provide more than 2,500kW and use GM synchronous motors with permanent magnets.
The Chilean Scorpene will have a hull-mounted medium frequency active/passive sonar. The vessels will be armed with WASS (Whitehead Alenia Sistemi Subaquei) Black Shark heavyweight torpedoes. The Black Shark is a dual purpose, wire-guided torpedo which is fitted with Astra active/passive acoustic head and a multi-target guidance and control unit incorporating a counter-countermeasures system. It has an electrical propulsion system based on a silver oxide and aluminium battery. Black Shark will also arm the two Scorpene vessels for the Royal Malaysian Navy.
The six torpedo tubes will be capable of firing SM-39 Exocet anti-ship missiles, which have a range of 50km, but will not initially be carried. The vessels will be equipped with EDO Reconnaissance Systems AR-900 electronic support measures/direction-finding (ESM/DF) system.
WEAPONS SYSTEMS
Scorpene is equipped with six bow-located 21in torpedo tubes providing salvo launch capability. Positive discharge launching is by an air turbine pump. The submarine’s weapons include anti-ship and anti-submarine torpedoes and anti-surface missiles. 18 torpedoes and missiles can be carried, or 30 mines. The handling and loading of weapons is automated.
SUBTICS COMBAT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
The SUBTICS combat management system, with up to six multifunction common consoles and a centrally situated tactical table, is collocated with the platform-control facilities. The combat management system is composed of a command and tactical data handling system, a weapon control system and an integrated suite of acoustic sensors with an interface to a set of Air Surface Detection sensors and to the Integrated Navigation System. The system can also download data from external sources.
The Integrated Navigation System combines data from global positioning systems, the log, depth measurement and the ship’s trim/list monitoring system. The Scorpene monitors the environment including seawater density and temperature and the submarine’s own noise signature.
SONAR SUITE
The vessel’s sonar suite includes a long-range passive cylindrical array, an intercept sonar, active sonar, distributed array, flank array, a high-resolution sonar for mine and obstacle avoidance and a towed array.
CONTROL AND MONITORING
All submarine handling operations are carried out from the Control Room. The vessel features a high level of automation and surveillance, with automatic control mode of rudders and propulsion, continuous monitoring of the propulsion systems and platform installations, centralised and continuous surveillance of all potential hazards (leaks, fires, presence of gases) and the status of the installations that affect the safety while submerged.
CONSTRUCTION
The submarine incorporates a high level of system redundancy to achieve an average 240 days at sea per year per submarine. The maximum diving depth is 300m, giving the commander more tactical freedom than previously available on conventional submarines. There is no limit to the duration of dives at a maximum depth, other than the power systems and crew limitations. The structure of the submarine uses high yield stress-specific steel which allows for as many dives to maximum depth as necessary.
The use of high-tensile steels has reduced the weight of the pressure hull, allowing a larger load of fuel and ammunition. The reduced complement minimises training costs and increase combat efficiency by making more space, while a larger payload enhances the ship’s autonomy.
When dived the Scorpene has low radiated noise which permits improved detection ranges of its own sensors and reduced risk of detection by hostile sensors. The low radiated noise is achieved through the use of advanced hydrodynamics with an albacore bow shape, with fewer appendages and an optimised propeller.
Between the suspended decks, the equipment is mounted on elastic mountings wherever possible, and the noisiest systems have a double-elastic mounting to reduce the risk of their noise profiles being radiated outside the submarine. The shock-resistant systems have been developed from systems incorporated in advanced nuclear-powered submarine designs. The low acoustic signature and hydrodynamic shock resistance give the Scorpene class the capability to carry out anti-submarine and anti-surface ship warfare operations in closed or open sea conditions, as well as the capability of working with special forces in coastal waters.
CREW FACILITIES
The ship can hold a total company of 31 men with a standard watch team of nine. The control room and the living quarters are mounted on an elastically supported and acoustically isolated floating platform. All living and operational areas are air-conditioned. The submarine also has space for six additional fold-down bunks for special operations crew.
The vessel is especially equipped with all the necessary systems to provide vital supplies, water, provisions, regeneration of the atmosphere, to ensure the survival of all the crew for seven days.
The ship is equipped with full rescue and safety systems. A connection point for a diving bell or Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicle (DSRV) allows collective rescue operations.
STEALTH DESIGN
The planning and design of the Scorpene was directed towards achieving an extremely quiet vessel with a great detection capability and offensive power.
The forms of the hull, the sail and the appendages have been specifically designed to produce minimum hydrodynamic noise. The various items of equipment are mounted on elastic supports, which are in turn mounted on uncoupled blocks and suspended platforms. The isolation also provides better shock protection to the equipment.
PROPULSION SYSTEMS
The Scorpene has two diesel generation sets providing 1,250kW of power. At the top of the hull immediately above the diesel generator sets is a Dutch Breach machinery shipping hatch. The submarine has an elastically supported 2,900kW electronic engine.
There are two variants of Scorpene, the CM-2000 with the conventional propulsion system and the AM-2000 equipped with air independent propulsion. The AM-2000 is capable of remaining submerged on underwater patrol for three times longer than the CM-2000.
AIR INDEPENDENT PROPULSION
A conventional diesel-electrical submarine sailing underwater is difficult to detect. However the need to come repeatedly to periscope depth to recharge the batteries using the diesel engine greatly increases vulnerability by:
Its aerial detectability, since the snorkel projecting from the water is detectable by radar
Its underwater detectability due to increase in radiated noise from the working diesels
The ratio between this time of greater vulnerability and the total operating time is known as the “indiscretion rate” and for all conventional modem submarines the indiscretion ratio ranges typically from 7 to 10% on patrol at 4 knots, and 20 to 30% in transit at about 8 knots.
To lessen the submarine’s vulnerability, the vessel can be equipped with an air independent propulsion system such as: the Stirling engine, the fuel cell, the closed circuit diesel and the Module d’Energie Sous-Marine Autonome (MESMA) system .
The MESMA anaerobic system, in which heat in the primary circuit is produced by burning ethanol with oxygen, can be easily installed either at the start of the submarine’s construction or in a later modernisation to convert the CM-2000 to an AM-2000 build standard. With the MESMA system the AM-2000 submarine can stay down in underwater patrol three times longer than the CM-2000. Its performance features remain the same in all other respects, except that the length increases to 70m and its submerged displacement to 1.870t (against the 61.7m and the 1,565t of the CM2000).
The PAF will get the F-16’s but they wont be top of the line. And no way are they going to release the AMRAAM to Pakistan.The US is not going to give the PAF any top of the line equipment not with Pak’s close relationship with the Chinese. If there’s one thing the US fears its a strong China bristling with sophisticated weapons in the future.
They will try to prop up India to act as a counter to China. The Indian’s should make the best use of this fact but not trust the US one little bit. All the US is interested is its national interests. But that goes for any country I guess.
Maybe this will get Indian butts moving on the M2k purchase and the MCA 😉
The DRDO side of it.
‘Flaws Are Normal In Development Cycle’
The Arjun project’s architect M. Natarajan took over as DRDO chief in September. He calls the Arjun battle-ready but the army refuses to operationalise it. Excerpts from an interview:
A court of inquiry investigating a Jaguar crash has faulted the FBRN-4I fuse.
The existing fuse design was reviewed by two independent teams and both deemed it safe. However, modifications have been proposed to improve reliability. Since the impact ballistic mode of operations fuse FBN-2I already exists with the IAF, the use of FBRN 4I will be restricted to RTU (Retarded Tail Unit or a bomb with parachute which explodes shortly after release) mode. The existing explosive-filled fuses will be modified to convert the fuses into retarder mode. Production of the fuses will be taken up with the modifications.
Is Arjun induction-ready?
Yes. The tanks are being made ready for operational induction. Certain residual mandatory quality checks are being carried out by the DRDO and the army now.
They say Arjun can’t be deployed in areas like Suratgarh and Hanumangarh, that the bridges can’t bear its weight.
The Arjuns are designed as per tactical requirements of the army. These tanks have been fully ‘exploited’ during the user’s evaluation in the subject terrain extensively, even in several “declared not-tankable areas” such as the Gurdaspur areas.
The Trishul, Akash and Nag missiles have been delayed.
Akash and Nag are nearing developmental trials to be fielded for evaluation.
Serious problems are cited with the Kaveri engine.
This comprises its core engine, that is, high-pressure compressor, combustor and turbine, afterburner and exhaust system. During the ‘resting’ of the core engine for its performance, certain problems were observed in the fuel control system—common in the development cycle of aero engines. They are not expected to affect overall schedules.
What about the Lakshya?
The ADE has supplied five Lakshyas to IAF. They’ve done over 32 flights. Two were lost due to malfunctioning of the parachute recovery systems; the problem is being rectified. The hal has orders for more.
Damning Report On DRDO
The below article is from the outlook magazine. Didnt know where to place it but it inludes the LCA and Missiles so decided to place it here.
It has been exaggerated to an extents but a lot holds true. DRDO is really a white elephant. If India has to progress in indeginous systems the
private sector HAS to come in.
I Know there are a lot of guys who are going to crow about this report specially you know from where. But we live in a democracy and we have the guts to admit it when things are wrong. In the democracy the truth does out in the long run inspite of corrupt politicians and officials.
Everyone knew that DRDO was a white Elephant. Hardly 10 % of the people work there they say. Its a typical govt office. High time the Indian govt did something about it.
——————————————————————-
http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20041018&fname=Cover+Story+%28F%29&sid=1
——————————————————————–
COVER STORY
No Bang For The Buck
An annual budget of Rs 4,000 crore, 51 hi-tech laboratories… Yet India’s premier defence R&D organisation—DRDO—has little to show for it.
SAIKAT DATTA, RAJESH RAMACHANDRAN
It was a cold, clear February morning when Wing Commander Ravi Khanna took off from Bikaner on a routine flight commanding the Jaguar squadron. He was preparing for the Maha Vayu Shakti 2004 air exercise, the first major one in the new millennium. Except that plane and pilot exploded in an angry fireball over the desertscape.
Now, an official court of inquiry (CoI) has identified a fuse as the culprit for the February 26 mishap. Of course, no one will be punished for the failure of the fuse. Yet, the inquiry into the air crash has for the first time held the Defence Research and Development Organisation’s Pune laboratory responsible for the accident.
“Sure, it’s a heavy tank…but Arjun can go over terrain few tanks can, because of its power to weight ratio.” Dr V.K. Atre, Ex-DRDO Chief
The report, which was sourced by Outlook, recreates the incident in damning detail. Soon after takeoff, Khanna followed the lead aircraft in the squadron, flying at a distance of 13 km. His target located, Khanna released the bomb. In less than one-tenth of a second, the fighter pilot and his plane exploded.
The report blamed the FBRN-4I fuse, fitted on all 1,000-pound bombs used by the IAF.
The fuse had inherent design deficiencies. It didn’t have any “unsafe indicators” nor were its sensors functioning. This, said the report, was what caused the explosion. The fuse was designed by the Armament Research and Development Establishment, DRDO’s Pune-based lab, which had copied it from an old Soviet design.
Thanks to the Jaguar incident, DRDO and its functioning have come under the scanner. Despite being India’s ‘premier’ defence R&D organisation, DRDO has consistently failed to deliver. And it’s not for want of infrastructure or funds, given its annual budget of Rs 4,000 crore and its 51 hi-tech laboratories. But set up in 1958 with the aim of cutting down on arms imports through indigenisation, it’s this very objective that the DRDO seems to have lost sight of.
Almost half of this year’s Rs 77,000-crore defence budget is earmarked for imports. In fact, the organisation’s first major act in the new millennium was to approve a perspective plan from the services entailing defence imports worth Rs 1,20,000 crore for the next 15 years.
Today, everything that matters in the Indian military is imported, be it the Russian main battle tanks, Swedish artillery, British aircraft carriers, Russian and German submarines, Russian and French fighters, Israeli electronic warfare systems or British jet trainers.
Its harshest critics describe the DRDO as a white elephant. Others see it as an organisation which begins with grandiose plans but
“The problem with DRDO is that it is over-ambitious. There is no coordination between the DRDO and the users.” Gen S.R. Chowdhury, Ex-Army Chief
ends up with just copying dated Soviet designs. Says former army chief Shankar Roy Chowdhury, “The biggest problem with the DRDO is that it is over-ambitious. There is no coordination between the DRDO and the users.” Consequently, programmes are launched or prototypes are developed which are out of sync with the requirements of the services.
A special review in 2000 by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of DRDO’s Vehicles Research and Development Establishment, Ahmedabad, says it all. According to the CAG, this lab developed a light tank the army did not need. The project was sanctioned in 1983, the army wanted it scrapped in two years. In 1993, the army reiterated its stand and the DRDO chief also recommended its closure. But it was only after firing trial rounds for two more years that the DRDO finally called a halt to the project. The CAG report noted, “The fact remained that R&D efforts and money were spent on equipment the need for which had ceased.” The CAG also found 48.76 per cent of the lab’s budget spent on salaries; with a ratio of 11 non-scientists for every scientist. In 10 years, from 1988 to 1998, only 18 of the lab’s projects were completed, of which only four went into bulk production.
Two years later, in 2002, the parliamentary standing committee on defence reached similar conclusions.
“It seems that sometimes priorities are missing,” it noted.”The poor conceptualisation and over-ambition in trying to make world-class products had sometimes resulted in delays and slip-ups in completion of projects which are vital for modernisation of the forces indigenously. The users—the army, navy and air force—too should share the blame because they pick up brochures abroad and insist the DRDO fulfil all claims made by foreign manufacturers.”
There is much the DRDO lists among its achievements: the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme, the Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun, the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas, the Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) Nishant and the pilotless target vehicle Lakshya.
“The LCA is going a bit slow and I have asked the DRDO for a mid-term quality review of Kaveri.” S. Krishnaswamy, Chief of Air Staff
But the army is hesitant to operationalise MBT Arjun and has instead gone in for Russian T-90s, while the LCA is still years away from completion. Why, but for fundamental support from ISRO, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam’s missiles too would not have taken off. And even among them, it’s just Prithvi, with a range of 250-300 km, that can count as a success; its naval version is yet to be perfected. In fact, as DRDO chief, it was
Kalam himself who cleared the import of Barak missiles worth Rs 1,250 crore from Israel as a substitute. There is little therefore that can be said about its successes, but plenty about the DRDO’s duds:
Nuclear Submarine Project
INS Chakra It was taken on lease from the erstwhile Soviet Union midway through the nuclear submarine project. But 30 years and Rs 7,500 crore later, India may still have to rely on imports.
It was in 1975 that then prime minister Indira Gandhi gave the go-ahead for the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) project to develop an indigenous nuclear-powered submarine. But 30 years on and Rs 7,500 crore later, the DRDO’s most prestigious project is yet to materialise. The latest projection is that the country will have a nuclear sub by 2008. But this could well be another case of “indigenous” technology with its vital equipment imported.
Controversy has dogged the project all along. There was even a move to refer it to the central vigilance commissioner in the late 1990s to investigate the “leakage of funds”. Though serious allegations were raised, the project was too “hot” for the vigilance commission. In 1992, the CAG attempted an audit, but the report remained unpublished. This makes it the only major military project left unreported by the CAG.
The submarine project’s ‘top secret’ label puts it effectively beyond scrutiny. Till 1983, funds for it were routed through various ministries—surface transport, shipping and atomic energy. An attempt in 1996 to get a techno-economic study done by eminent technocrats was scuttled, with the DRDO conveniently invoking the secrecy clause.
According to those involved with the project, lack of coordination and focus marked the ATV project out as a failure from day one. The first 10 years were wasted in debating what reactor would suit the vessel. The navy, the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) and the DRDO failed to agree on crucial issues. The navy was supposed to provide the design, BARC the reactor. Raja Ramanna, then the director of BARC and also the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, simply told the navy to keep off the reactor design.
The Soviets had informally offered India a fleet of nuclear subs way back in 1979. But the DRDO and the scientific advisors claimed it could be built indigenously. Says a senior official associated with the project, “Eight years later, in 1987, the Soviet offer was renewed. This time Ramanna and others at an apex board meeting said we’d produce it in no time.
..all that was required was to lease a Soviet vessel.”
That happened in 1988. The intention was to copy the design and to train Indian officers to operate the indigenous version as soon as it was ready.All the manuals and detailed documentation were studied but nothing much came out of it. INS Chakra, as the leased sub was called, was a symbol of India’s presence in the Indian Ocean till 1991.Thereafter, the lease lapsed.
When Kalam took over DRDO in 1992, the project was still plagued with reactor and design problems.His first deadline was 1995-96; extensions were given continuously. Then PM H.D. Deve Gowda agreed to pump in Rs 2,500 crore. The first trials were a scream—the reactor would not fit into the hull of the submarine! Soviet scientists had pointed to this design discrepancy earlier itself but, alas, too late. The DRDO design was based on the conventional battery-charged SSK class of subs and the reactor was a derivative of BARC’s Apsara reactor. A patent mismatch.
For a while, the NDA government toyed with a proposal to lease two Akula class nuclear subs and to acquire technology through reverse engineering, with critical parts imported from Russia. The new proposals would keep the middlemen in defence deals happy and the DRDO ‘proud’ of building an ‘indigenous’ nuclear submarine. But the proposals haven’t materialised.
——————————————————————————–
Main Battle Tank Arjun
MBT Arjun “Officially handed over” to the army in August 2004 after 30 years and Rs 307.48 crore. Time overrun forced army to import T-90s from Russia. Also unsuitable for prime tank country.
Two months ago, defence minister Pranab Mukherjee “officially” handed over the first set of MBT Arjuns to the army. As the minister and his retinue left the venue, the tanks were promptly rolled back into the factory at Avadi, Tamil Nadu. The army said it was not ready to deploy it in a war theatre. This is the story of one of DRDO’s biggest ‘successes’, a project sanctioned in 1974, expected to go into production in 1984, handed over to the prime minister in 1995 and exhibited at Republic Day parades since 1996.
The director-general of quality assurance has still not given the tank the clearance, a mandatory requirement before any weapon system is inducted into the armed forces. From the initial sanctioned budget of Rs 15.5 crore, the DRDO ended up spending Rs 307.48 crore for a tank which is useless to the army. A former project manager of MBT Arjun had in 1997 said he would never take the tank to war. The DRDO’s failure obviously resulted in the country importing Russian T-90s at a cost of over Rs 3,000 crore. For all practical purposes, T-90 will remain India’s main tank for more than a decade.
Arjun, senior army officers say, cannot be used in classic ‘tank country’. At 58.5 tonnes, it cannot be ferried across bridges which lead to Hanumangarh and Suratgarh in Rajasthan, considered prime tank battlefields by military planners. Concedes Dr V.K. Atre, who retired last month as DRDO chief and scientific advisor to the defence minister, “Sure, it is a heavy tank and we will have to reinforce the bridges.” But he defends the tank stating that “it can go over terrain few tanks can because of its power-to-weight ratio”. But weight alone is not the tank’s failure. In listing its major deficiencies in 1998, the CAG cited the lack of “accuracy of gun at battle ranges, mission reliability, lethality of ammunition bin, emergency traverse, etc”.
So much so that Parliament’s public accounts committee which looked into the CAG report was categorical that no R&D benefit was derived out of the Arjun project even 26 years after it was sanctioned.
In 2000, the committee had said that “the delay in development and productionisation of MBT Arjun was attributable, to a considerable extent, to deficient project management and monitoring.Underlining the need to review the existing institutional mechanism for management and monitoring of the project”.Needless to say, vital components like engine, fire control system, transmission unit, tracks, thermal sight and night sight were all imported and that too in the early 1980s.
Now, the army is only prepared to use the tank to train its personnel. The limited series production of 124 tanks would thus imply a colossal waste of money. But Dr Atre believes the project has “given us the capability and the confidence to develop better tanks.We have made major strides in self-reliance in defence technology”. Sure. The next-generation tanks have already been imported.
——————————————————————————–
Guided Missile Programme
Akash Part of the Rs 2,000-crore Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme, the missile is still awaiting development trials after 20 years. It’s also yet to prove its mettle against multiple targets.
You could call the Agni and the Prithvi surface-to-surface missiles reasonable successes.But the lack of progress in the smaller missiles vexes the army and the navy because they desperately seek a missile cover which the DRDO promised long ago. Trishul, Akash and Nag, part of the DRDO’s surface-to-air guided missile programme, have already consumed RS 2,000 crore—and they are yet to be delivered.
In fact, the DRDO went so far as to promise a Rs 6,000-crore anti-ballistic missile defence system in 1998. The presentation was simple, an arrow drawn towards the Rashtrapati Bhawan and another arrow intercepting the first one. Politicians were impressed because Delhi’s safety has always been selfishly given exaggerated priority. But the service chiefs opposed this grand idea pointing out that even superpowers have not yet produced any credible missile umbrella against ballistic missiles.
Rather than ballistic missiles, what the army was looking for was a replacement for its ageing Kvadrath and Strella missile of the ’60s vintage. The navy wanted a surface-to-air missile for its frigate, INS Brahmaputra. With the DRDO failing to deliver, the navy had to finally go in for the Israeli Baraks.
——————————————————————————–
Light Combat Aircraft
Sanctioned in 1983, the Light Combat Aircraft (Tejas) was to replace the MiG-21 fighters. But 21 years down the line, that seems an even more distant possibility. After an investment of nearly Rs 5,500 crore, the parliamentary standing committee in 2002 noted considerable cost and time overruns in the LCAs. One valid reason for the delay was the US sanctions on critical components, including the GE-404 engines which were to power the Tejas.
Simultaneously, the DRDO began work on an indigenous engine called the Kaveri. However, just last week, the Kaveri engine had another setback when it failed at a height of 18,000 feet while being tested in Russia. With delays in the programme, the IAF is desperately looking for 126 Mirage 2000s to make up for the lack of the Tejas. While addressing the media on October 6, prior to the Air Force Day, Air Chief Marshal S. Krishnaswamy had said, “The LCA is going a bit slow and I have asked the DRDO for a mid-term quality review of the Kaveri aero engine to accelerate its development. Since there will be a delay, we will have to get other aircraft and we are awaiting government approval.”
——————————————————————————–
Remotely Piloted Vehicle
RPV Nishant Sanctioned Rs 35 crore initially, 14 years down the line, the army has been forced to scale down nearly 20 original parameters.
Hailed as India’s first Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), Nishant was first conceptualised in May 1990.Sanctioned by the government in October 1991 with an initial budget of Rs 34 crore, it is far from induction by the Indian army 14 years later. It is understood that the army had to waive off nearly 20 parameters it had set in the original quality requirements framed in 1990. In short, it was waiving technical specifications it had set 14 years ago! Meanwhile, much foreign exchange has been lost as all three services have sourced their UAVs from Israel.
So, if we all know what is wrong with DRDO, why isn’t someone setting it right? Some would say this is how the powerful arms import lobby would like things to remain. As they see it, as long as India sources its defence requirements from the international market, they’re in business. As for arms-exporting countries, it is important that the developing world does not become self-sufficient. The US has to export one fighter plane for every plane inducted into its air force; in France, the ratio is 3:1. This explains how important DRDO’s failures are to exporters. But arms exporters and middlemen alone aren’t to blame. The bigger goons are the corrupt politicians and bureaucrat, who collect kickbacks.An incompetent DRDO, it suits them just fine.
——————————————————————————–
Saikat Datta And Rajesh Ramachandran
The Chinese have a long way to go to being a maritime power. Just building fancy looking ships dosent make you one. Its what is in those toys and the training that makes a navy.
The Brahmos is a product of the Koral missile program doing the rounds some years back isnt it. Its the Koral under a different name?
Hehehe nice to see people trying to delude themselves thinking that India dosent have nukes that can bite – but its becoming a drag!!! :rolleyes:
Thoughts along the same lines Sameer . Validate it first before going in for an official launch.
Building up an an impressive airdefence suite aint they.