Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Agusta Westland Chopper SCAM: Ex-NSA tried to avoid single-vendor situation

New Delhi: Was it a bid to prevent a scandal almost a decade ago which has now led to the present VVIP helicopter scam? It was actually the late Brajesh Mishra, the then national security advisor and principal secretary to PM Atal Behari Vajpayee, who in 2003 had directed the MoD and IAF to change the technical specifications for the acquisition of the 12 VVIP helicopters.

“I am concerned that the framing of the mandatory requirements for the new helicopters has effectively led us into a single-vendor situation,’’ Mishra, in his letter of December 22, 2003, to the then IAF chief Air Chief Marshal S Krishnaswamy had said.

“It is unfortunate that neither the PMO nor the Special Protection Group (which provides proximate security to the PM) was consulted while framing these mandatory requirements. I suggest you and the defence secretary may jointly review this matter to draw up realistic requirements satisfying operational, security and convenience requirements for VVIPs,’’ it added.

Top defence ministry sources say this need to avoid a “single-vendor” situation, in consonance with the laid down norms in India’s defence purchases to avoid corruption and other allegations, was the key for subsequent developments.

“Money and bribes could have changed hands...the CBI will probe that. But the technical evaluation process was followed meticulously, as per the directives of the PMO. There were no short-cuts, no tweaking to suit a particular company,” said a source.

It all began in 1999. IAF had then first proposed the replacement for its ageing Russian-origin Mi-8 helicopters, which are still being used by the elite Communication Squadron to ferry around President, PM and other top dignitaries.


The tender or the RFP (request for proposal) for eight new VVIP choppers was subsequently issued in 2002. Of the four vendors that responded, only the Eurocopter EC-225 chopper passed muster as far as the requirement for being capable of flying at an “operational ceiling” of 6,000-metre was concerned. The AW-101, then called the EH-101, could not participate since it was not certified at that time to fly at 6,000-metre.

With only the EC-225 figuring in the subsequent report submitted to the PMO, Mishra raised the question of the single-vendor situation. The SPG also objected to the cabin height of 1.39-metre, holding it was not adequate for the VVIPs and the armed security personnel who would be on board as well as casualty evacuation.

Apart from also not having the missile airborne warning system, the S-92 also failed to meet the requirement for the 4,500-metre service ceiling. The AW-101 sailed its way through the trials to bag the contract finally inked in February 2010.

Top defence ministry sources say the need to avoid a ‘single-vendor’ situation, in consonance with the laid down norms in India’s defence purchases to avoid corruption and other allegations, was the key for subsequent developments
COURTESY:
Rajat Pandit TNN
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2013/02/14&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01301&ViewMode=HTML

No comments:

Post a Comment