SOURCE: AFI
The Indian Navy and Army’s decision to procure the Drishti 10 Starliner unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) without comprehensive trials has recently come under scrutiny, particularly in light of a costly crash incident involving one of these drones. This situation has raised questions about the decision-making processes within India’s military procurement system, casting a shadow over the operational readiness and strategic planning of the armed forces.
The Drishti 10 Starliner, developed by Adani Defence and Aerospace in collaboration with Israeli firm Elbit Systems, is a variant of the Hermes 900. It was intended to bolster the surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities of the Indian Navy and Army. The decision to purchase these drones was made with urgency, invoking emergency procurement powers to expedite the process.
The Navy and Army each ordered two Drishti 10 drones, aiming for a swift enhancement of their intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. Unlike standard procurement practices, these drones were acquired without the usual thorough testing phases that would assess the system’s performance across various operational scenarios and environments.
The spotlight intensified on this decision when one of the Drishti 10 Starliners, costing around ?145 crore, crashed off the coast of Porbandar during pre-acceptance trials by the vendor. The crash was attributed to a technical failure, highlighting potential issues with the drone’s reliability or the robustness of its design. Not only did this incident result in a significant financial loss, but it also underscored the risks associated with deploying untested, high-cost equipment in sensitive military operations.
Critics argue that bypassing extensive trials for such a critical piece of military hardware was a lapse in due diligence. This has potentially compromised the safety, effectiveness, and reliability of the systems deployed. The decision reflects a broader issue of strategic planning where the rush to acquire new technology might overlook long-term operational needs and the maturity of the technology. There are concerns about the implications of depending heavily on a private defense contractor without ensuring the product meets all technical specifications through standard testing protocols.
NOTE: AFI is a proud outsourced content creator partner of IDRW.ORG. All content created by AFI is the sole property of AFI and is protected by copyright. AFI takes copyright infringement seriously and will pursue all legal options available to protect its content.