Defence manufacturers need funding or firm orders, says ADSL’s Raj Kumar Pandey

We need greater certainty and shorter timelines. Companies invest in product development, retain teams and undergo trials, but tenders can still be cancelled or requirements changed.

In one light specialist vehicle programme I worked on, it took three years for a request for proposal to emerge. We then spent about a year developing the product, only for the requirement to change from an unarmoured vehicle to an armoured one. Another lengthy procurement cycle followed.

A company has to sustain its people and investment throughout this period. Procurement should ideally lead to induction within one or two years. Once industry has developed a product against a requirement, there should at least be a commitment to procure a minimum quantity.

We have to remove one “N” from NCNC. If a company is putting in its own money, give it a commitment. If there is no commitment, support the development cost.

Expecting industry to invest without either funding or procurement assurance is not a good model. There must be participation from the buyer through cost-sharing or a commitment. That would give companies a stronger basis for investing in technology and product development.

Follow Defence Watch on Whatsapp channel 

There is a strong preference for precedent. I have encountered a requirement for equipment built to new specifications, alongside a demand for a reference showing where exactly that equipment has already been used.

Those expectations cannot always be met together. If a product is being developed specifically for your new requirement, an identical operational reference may not exist.

The mindset is changing, and I have seen individuals take initiatives that move projects forward quickly. But that willingness needs to become more widespread.

My background is in design and product development. I studied at IIT Kharagpur and began in the automotive industry with Mahindra. Later, working in defence showed me how difficult it was to build a supply chain for specialised, low-volume manufacturing.

An automotive supplier might regard an order for 500 components as only a few hours of production. Persuading such suppliers to support defence requirements was a challenge.

When we established ADSL in 2018, the objective was to develop niche technologies that could reduce imports and increase exports. Our four verticals are aerial delivery systems, maintenance, repair and overhaul, combat system technologies, and land systems.

We identified an opportunity to develop aerial delivery systems for American-origin aircraft operated by India, including the C-130 and C-17.

We worked with DRDO on these products and have supplied more than 15 units to it. The systems have undergone Air Force testing, and we are preparing for the next stage of production.

Our aerial delivery work includes parachutes and heavy-drop systems. The larger aim is to build domestic capability in areas where India has depended on overseas suppliers.

Our intention was never to remain limited to maintenance, repair and overhaul. We want to extend the useful life of equipment and modernise it for current requirements.

Many Russian-origin platforms use analogue electronics. Upgrading these systems with digital technologies can improve their relevance and capability.

We have developed capabilities in spare parts, maintenance and modernisation. There are also overseas opportunities, particularly where the Russia–Ukraine war has disrupted support for existing fleets. We are pursuing work in Africa and looking at European opportunities, including support for platforms such as the T-72 and T-90.

Two areas need particular attention: critical subsystems and testing infrastructure.

A company may be capable of building a drone’s structure but still depend on imported propulsion systems, avionics or other specialised components. These technologies require substantial research and investment.

Government-supported development of such subsystems would allow private manufacturers to use them in Indian products. It would strengthen the wider industry rather than help only one company.

Testing is equally important. Developing a product becomes much harder when suitable facilities are unavailable or difficult to access.

High-altitude drone testing is one example. Moving teams and equipment to remote locations is expensive and time-consuming. Shared facilities that simulate operating conditions could help companies complete initial testing and resolve problems before going to user locations.

We also need facilities for propulsion, counter-drone systems, software and AI-based applications.

Such infrastructure involves substantial capital expenditure. A government-backed, neutral facility would be easier for competing manufacturers to use. The development of shared ballistic testing infrastructure offers a useful example of how access can support both private and government organisations.

Follow Defence Watch on LinkedIN

I am optimistic because I have seen the change over the past five to ten years. When I entered defence manufacturing, the supplier base, specialist skills and supporting ecosystem were much less developed. Today, institutions are training people, and testing infrastructure is more accessible.

Private participation can help expand exports faster. Defence exhibitions should also focus more on generating and concluding business, bringing users, manufacturers and technology partners together while respecting competitive procurement processes.

Progress is real, but it needs to accelerate. If I had to give the ecosystem a score, I would put it at five out of ten. The ambition must be to reach ten.