Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) : News and Updates

[redpanda]

I understand your pov. However, how about increasing the budget for a couple of years and see its outcome? There are plenty of schemes that are run by GoI and states that do not generate any income. If the agency does not provide decent results, pull the funding back to its avg. levels. Never understood this half hearted attempts. If you are serious about Deep-Tech and want DRDO to be in a position to produce decent results; give them a commitment of X years and if they don't deliver you have the option to pull the plug.

I agree that DRDO could use higher funding for a few years. My concern is that budget allocation alone doesn't automatically translate into better outcomes.

Take ISRO as an example. In many cases, funds are allocated for projects, but work proceeds phase by phase. Organizations often can't move to the next stage until testing, validation, or approvals for the current stage are complete. As a result, part of the allocated budget may remain unutilized and get returned.

Deep-tech R&D is also different from conventional spending. It's not something that can be scaled simply by increasing the budget. There are structural constraints such as availability of skilled researchers, testing infrastructure, industrial capacity, and project management bandwidth.

That's why I think India needs a more decentralized R&D ecosystem. DRDO should remain the lead agency and provide direction, requirements, and technical oversight, but universities, startups, and private industry should be much more deeply involved in the actual research and development effort. Otherwise, DRDO ends up trying to do everything itself, which limits how much additional funding it can effectively absorb.

So I'm not against increasing the budget. I just think higher funding should be accompanied by stronger private-sector and academic participation if we want the best return on that investmentfor sure.

 

[Shan]

I agree with you. But, see a lot of the money gets underutilised by government organisations because of how govt organisation functions. Take ISRO for example, government has increased allocation YoY for certain projects but the problem is they don't move to next step till one phase's work is done. And what happens is funds get underutilised and it gets returned.

The Govt. should do its bit and let the results speak for themselves. If an organisation has multiple opportunities and fails to prove itself, certain steps can be taken. I would not compare ISRO and DRDO. There are certain aspects of comparison that have no commonalities. If the govt. is serious about funding R&D for its forces through GoI lead initiatives, it will have to upgrade certain spending packages - especially the ones that are tied directly to infra spending related to defence R&D.

 

[redpanda]

The Govt. should do its bit and let the results speak for themselves. If an organisation has multiple opportunities and fails to prove itself, certain steps can be taken. I would not compare ISRO and DRDO. There are certain aspects of comparison that have no commonalities. If the govt. is serious about funding R&D for its forces through GoI lead initiatives, it will have to upgrade certain spending packages - especially the ones that are tied directly to infra spending related to defence R&D.

I'm saying the government needs to look beyond just funding. They need improve the underlying R&D ecosystem. It will benefit both DRDO and everyone else involved. Increasing funding alone won't ever do anything. Otherwise, it will only lead to the usual disappointment cycle. My disappointment with the government is less about funding and their slowness at bringing those changes in the R&D ecosystem. They are doing the work but at very slow pace.

 

[Shan]

I'm saying the government needs to look beyond just funding. They need improve the underlying R&D ecosystem. It will benefit both DRDO and everyone else involved. Increasing funding alone won't ever do anything.

I understand that Panda. I am saying that certain packages related to Deep-Tech Infra needs to be upgraded if you wish to start jogging towards the goal. If you wish to run towards it, you will have to overhaul the HR aspects as well. Since, I cannot change HR aspects, I can only provide money where there are gaps visible when eyeballing the problem. I am not saying "paise feko, problem solved". Try to engineer the best financial packages depending on the problem that they wish to solve. If they still cannot solve the issue, the problem lies elsewhere. Run a RCA and you can eliminate the funding aspect. In my view, looking at the set of problems they have at hand - 2000 Cr. is not a lot especially if you want new ISR toys.

You're talking about a holistic approach. I am talking about using the nerds they already have and see if they can do better with more money. If there are funding related bottlenecks, they can be resolved using spending directly on testing infra and other tangible aspects like new labs etc. All of this hinges on the fact that they are getting 2000 Cr only. I do not understand how they are running their P&O considering how vast Deep-Tech actually is as a sector.

 

[Shan]

I'm saying the government needs to look beyond just funding. They need improve the underlying R&D ecosystem. It will benefit both DRDO and everyone else involved. Increasing funding alone won't ever do anything. Otherwise, it will only lead to the usual disappointment cycle. My disappointment with the government is less about funding and their slowness at bringing those changes in the R&D ecosystem. They are doing the work but at very slow pace.

I understand. The slowness is because of a multiple factors. I am aware that certain aspects are not linked to funding exclusively. My push for funding is based on the sheer task that they wish to tackle and the amount that they have allocated to tackle those issues.

 

[redpanda]

I understand that Panda. I am saying that certain packages related to Deep-Tech Infra needs to be upgraded if you wish to start jogging towards the goal. If you wish to run towards it, you will have to overhaul the HR aspects as well. Since, I cannot change HR aspects, I can only provide money where there are gaps visible when eyeballing the problem. I am not saying "paise feko, problem solved". Try to engineer the best financial packages depending on the problem that they wish to solve. If they still cannot solve the issue, the problem lies elsewhere. Run a RCA and you can eliminate the funding aspect. In my view, looking at the set of problems they have at hand - 2000 Cr. is not a lot especially if you want new ISR toys.

You're talking about a holistic approach. I am talking about using the nerds they already have and see if they can do better with more money. If there are funding related bottlenecks, they can be resolved using spending directly on testing infra and other tangible aspects like new labs etc. All of this hinges on the fact that they are getting 2000 Cr only. I do not understand how they are running their P&O considering how vast Deep-Tech actually is as a sector.

I agree with you. Also, seriously they need first increase the salary of those guys . For what they do their salary is pathetic. IT coolies earn more than them.

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

I agree with you. Also, seriously they need first increase the salary of those guys . For what they do their salary is pathetic. IT coolies earn more than them.

That big salary hike is coming, in 8th pay, a scientist (who has worked 3-4 years, one promotion basically) in DRDO would easily be making 27 Lakh+ PA (excluding special allowance and incentives). This is with assuming the minimum reasonable fitment factor.
25-30L is what most mid-high IT people make.

 

[Rajput Lion]

That big salary hike is coming, in 8th pay, a scientist (who has worked 3-4 years, one promotion basically) in DRDO would easily be making 27 Lakh+ PA (excluding special allowance and incentives). This is with assuming the minimum reasonable fitment factor.
25-30L is what most mid-high IT people make.

Depends upon fitment factor though.

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

Depends upon fitment factor though.

2.57 is quite likely and it's one of conservative estimates, it could go higher particularly if the commission recommendation are delayed close to 2028 (just a year before the election)

 

[Ashwin]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2059193921188852018

 

[Choice_of _inevitability]

[MED

IA=twitter]2059193921188852018[/MEDIA]