Reindustrialisation - A Generational Project

Loss of manufacturing in a country is not only shutting down of factories. Its repercussions are far deeper and wider. Factories are run over by nature, machines and assembly lines jam up, corrode, rust and crumble and can never be revived. Industrial towns are abandoned; one only has to look at the fate that befell once celebrated industrial cities of USA – Detroit, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cleveland and many more, where populations have declined to half or a third of their peak. People move out to seek other avenues of earning. Shops and restaurants, schools and colleges, town halls and parks, hospitals and offices, car dealerships and cab companies, all shut down. The loss of jobs is several times larger than just those of shop floor workers. All this is only because some unknown city across the ocean can sell cars and steel, televisions and toys a few percent cheaper.

What is worse is that the very backbone of the affected industry is broken. Skilled workers, who could make the finest cars and implements, toys and gadgets scatter, never to come back together under one roof to recreate the magic. The entire supply-chains, which typically come from the Medium and Small Industries (MSMEs), dry up since the bulk buyer has downed its shutters. MSMEs are the major job creators in any country and economy. Shutting down of these smaller units is devastating though not as spectacular as that of a car company. The latter’s loss of business is a subject of headlines and debates but not of the feeder small industries even though the impact on jobs and livelihood of workers of these MSMEs is far bigger. Entire capital is wiped out and bankruptcies are more common among MSMEs. Their employees often have lower levels of social security and entire families are driven to penury.

What Happens When a Car Factory Shuts Down?

Let’s take the example of a large car factory with US$10 billion in sales and the cascade of job losses and misery that follows when it shuts down. Such a car plant would typically be manufacturing 5,00,000 cars per annum.

The factory sources its parts and sub-assemblies as follows (only material cost taken here):

    In-house production:              10-15%

    Tier 1 (large) Suppliers:          50-60%

    Tier 2&3 (MSME) Suppliers:  25-30%      

When the factory shuts down:

• Main Plant: 7500 direct employees of the company are laid off

• Tier 1: 30,000 workers are laid off (These suppliers typically employ 3-5 workers per every worker in the main plant). Tier 1 companies typically manufacture engines, transmissions, brake systems, and electronics.

• Tier 2: 75,000 workers lose their jobs. (Tier 2 suppliers typically employ 2-3 workers for every one worker in Tier 1). They manufacture sub-components such as wiring, seats, rubber-parts, and smaller assemblies.

• Tier 3: 1,12,500 employees are rendered jobless. (Tier 3 suppliers typically employ 1-1.5 workers for every one worker in Tier 2). They typically produce basic components, such as metals, plastics, rubber and small parts.

• Indirect Job Losses: 5,60,000 work hands lose their livelihood. As a multiplier effect for every manufacturing job lost 2-3 additional jobs are lost. They are typically in activities such as logistics, sales, dealerships, maintenance, catering, janitorial, services, security, transportation, schools, city-workers and all other local businesses that rely on factories and factory workers as customers.

Let’s summarise these job losses:

    Total manufacturing jobs:   2,25,000

    Indirect jobs:                        5,60,000

    Total Estimated Layoffs:     7,85,000

A disclaimer: Not all job-losses will be in the same country, state, or neighborhood. The ripples of a major factory shutting down will be felt across the world given the way supply-chains are established. One should look at ghost cities of China as a result of supply-chain dislocation let alone major factories closing down.    

Knee Jerk Reaction

Loss of factories, large and small, their equipment, skilled manpower, market-lines of their products, the service and after-sales business, all happen slowly, over years, decades or sometimes over the span of an entire generation.

Governments, policymakers, captains of industry and occasionally the affected population suddenly wake up one day and begin to talk in fuzzy terms like reshoring, onshoring, tariffs, China+1 etc. Little do they realise that in a deindustrialised country, bringing back factories must take the same long route in reverse. You can’t simply bring back blast furnaces and rolling mills to Pittsburgh, or cotton mills to Mumbai. Re-industrialisation is a generational project, not to be achieved in a few years of a government’s rule span. Remember these industrial centres were built by the blood and sweat of generations of entrepreneurs and workers.

What Needs to be Done?

Some of the unavoidable and quick action plans may include:

• Policy changes that facilitate easy creation of industrial units, large and small
• Easing of regulatory control
• Easy access to banking and capital
• Infrastructure Development – Highways, ports, power plants and power grids
• Easy availability of land and permits
• Low energy cost
• Healthcare and social security
• Education – Engineering and Research Oriented. Universities to take a relook at their programmes.
• Training – Entrepreneurship, Vocational and business practices
• Above all, nurture a culture of innovation.

Unless these and many more necessary steps are taken by the governments of those countries that have seen deindustrialization no significant job and wealth creation is possible slogans and statements of intent notwithstanding.

Even after that it will be a long haul.

 ---ooo---

Addendum:

Americans (USA) bought 16 million cars, SUVs and light trucks in 2024. Out of this 8 million were imports. Even in the cars made in USA only 40-50% was local content. Hence, local content in US car market is only 25%.

The US’ share in global R&D in automotive sector is a mere 18%.

Rolling Stock Exports – Indian Business that Needs to Grow

 

Figure: Export of Passenger Rail Vehicles from ICF, Perambur, Chennai

Hon’ble Railway Minister’s statement in the Parliament on the 17^th of March may come as a surprise to many that India is emerging as an exporter of Rolling Stock. The Production Units of Indian Railways have been active players in the competitive world market of Rolling Stock, i.e. Passenger Coaches, Diesel Locomotives and Diesel Electric Multiple Units (DEMUs). This is not a new or recent phenomenon. IR has been exporting rolling stock for over five decades. A summary is given hereunder:

Diesel Locomotives

The Diesel Locomotive Works (DLW), now BLW, regularly exports locomotives to other countries such as Nepal, Mali, Senegal, Tanzania, Angola, Mozambique, and Vietnam, and Sri Lanka. The first diesel locomotive was exported to Tanzania as early as in the year 1976. IR has also exported remanufactured locomotives to many countries in addition to new stock. The DLW has also been a supplier of choice for non-railway diesel loco users, such as ports, power-plants, steel plants, and coal companies. Over 175 locomotives have been exported and nearly 650 to non-railway users in India. DLW/BLW has also supplied DG Sets for critical power backup to the Nuclear Power Corporation.

Passenger Coach Exports

Likewise, the Integral Coach Factory also exports railway coaches to other countries. and the factory has since exported 875 bogies and coaches to over 13 Afro-Asian countries, Angola, Bangladesh, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, Sri Lanka, , Taiwan, Tanzania, Uganda, Vietnam, and Zambia. The first export was of 47 coaches to Thailand as early as in1967. ICF has also supplied special coaches for movement of troops to the Army and other classified purposes. Of late the newer units, viz. RCF and MCF have also found ready international buyers for their produce.

As can be seen, Indian Railway’s Production Units have been exporting rolling stock since 1967. They are also maintained and serviced by Indian Railway personnel till the local engineers and artisans become adept at it.

Private Sector Export

Private Sector has been a recent entrant in the export of India-made rolling stock in the world market primarily in the Metro Rail Sector. Bombardier-ALSTOM have been exporting for many years. Titagarh is a new player. That they have exported to discerning European and Australian markets is particularly commendable. Indian Railways, as a Ministry, has had no role in their ventures. Their success has come after years and decades of patience, high-quality design and world class manufacturing setups.

Recent efforts by the Marhowra Diesel Loco Factory towards export of India-made diesel locomotives is another success story of the Indian private sector. The Marhowra factory was setup by GE, now Wabtec, with a minority share of Indian Railways and the contract had enabled GE to export after meeting local needs.

What Gives Confidence to Foreign Buyers?

Trains and Locomotives have long working life – twenty to thirty years. This is far longer than the lifespan of an automobile or a consumer durable. Besides, trains are pubic transport and safety is of paramount importance. It is therefore expected that the buyer looks for a reliable, safe, easy-to-maintain, and low lifecycle cost designs. Demonstration of these attributes is often achieved by long term use of the rolling stock in the home country that manufactures them or some relatable variant of the design on offer. This is also the case in rolling stock exports from India. Whether it is locomotives, mainline passenger coaches, DEMUs, or metro coaches, the strength to export them from India was built up after years and decades of local use. A robust supply-chain to help maintain these stocks long-term is also an essential factor.

Are the Indian Industry and the Government Doing Enough?

The current level of exports from India doesn’t even scratch the surface of the worldwide railway business of US$51 billion. A lot needs to be done by way of government policy and private enterprise to capture a significant slice of the pie.

1.    Special Economic Zones – Railway vehicles, by the nature of their size and manufacturing process, require large areas to setup factories. Tax relief on import and manufacture of subassemblies, design and exports to be offered.

2.   Import of technology and R&D Centres for indigenous technology development to be encouraged.

3.     A workable industry-academia interface needs to be developed.

4.  Indian Railways’ own Production Units need to be synergised into a conglomerate on the lines of the CRRC of China, which has over forty companies under one umbrella.

5.   Diesel Loco technology in India, which is heading towards oblivion, must be revived. There is a vast market for Indian diesel locos waiting to be tapped what with our ultra low prices. The potential spin-off gains to the industry at large is huge.

6.    A Test Track for extensive testing and design prove out – Test tracks can test rail vehicles of various gauges, applications at different speeds and track conditions. Fortunately, the long overdue Indian test track is being built in Rajasthan and is nearing completion. This should be opened to private builders of rolling stock in much the same way Army’s armament test ranges have been opened to private players.

Conclusion

It is essential that we recognise the good work that has been done by Indian Railways’ manufacturing units and encourage them to develop new designs and build. This is a highly competitive business, and these units need to be free from the fear of Railway Vigilance and enquiries by authorities, who don’t understand complex manufacturing. There is also a need to empower the management of these units to at least the levels of those of Maha Ratna PSUs. This is easily within sight and can be done tomorrow.

---ooo---

 

Of High Perch and the Hard Ground

 

Picture Courtesy: freepik.com

It is necessary to know your men (and women) if you want to deliver magic and go beyond the incremental. The difference between a leader and a manager is stark even though books have been written to explain it as if it was a fine and indistinguishable gap.

A manger sits on a high perch and expects the men to deliver on the ground. So, they do deliver, but just the way they have been doing and maybe a bit better. A leader is out there with his team roughing it out on the ground and makes them climb heights neither they nor he himself ever thought was possible. For a leader the sum is always more than the parts; in fact, it is not a sum, but a new number altogether. A leader doesn’t do two plus two to make four; he makes them march together and makes a twenty-two. Being out there in the field doesn’t necessarily mean working on that nut and bolt. It means being able to wield the spanner and show them how it is done if the occasion arises, and in good faith.

As one grows in the organisation the size of the team assigned to him grows and a time comes, when knowing all your men becomes impossible. While it is true that the team directly reporting to a senior manager (I prefer the term leader) is still small and it is possible to know them intimately, the satisfaction of knowing all the men out there diminishes. What does a people’s man, the leader, do under such circumstances?

What does a leader do, when there are a thousand men working in the organisation or ten thousand? This is a question that have been frustrating me for years. Even as one wishes one could put one’s hand on the fellow worker’s shoulder and ask about his welfare, health and family, it is not possible as a regular behaviour. You simply can’t know all of them personally.

But the reverse is still possible. Nothing prevents your people from knowing you intimately. It is the next best thing if your men look at you and see in you “their man”. If you walk among them, each one of them should bond with you even if you can’t do the same, to the same degree, in return. The biggest proof of being owned by your men is that one of them, anyone of them, can walk up to you without fear and hesitation, look into your eyes, and speak with you. Believe me, the feeling is electrifying. 

If your men break into a smile upon seeing you, if they think they can come to you with a problem and go back with a solution, if they meet you with sadness and go back with hope and reassurance, they will deliver magic for you.

This is not to say that a leader should shirk from taking tough decisions or being unpleasant when the occasion demands. But when one does that, people understand.

(Please pardon my use of the word “men” repeatedly. There is no gender bias, just the need to let the language flow easily)

Hydrogen as Fuel: A Technical Critique

• 
  

Image Courtesy: greatgameindia.com

 

Hydrogen is often touted as a “fuel of the future,” but a technical examination reveals that it functions primarily as an energy carrier rather than a primary fuel. Recent introduction of hydrogen-powered trains by the Indian Railways has brought the discussion on hydrogen to public mind-space in India and must trigger a reasoned debate.

By definition, a fuel provides more energy than is required for its extraction or production. Examples include fossil fuels (coal, petroleum, natural gas) and nuclear fuels (enriched uranium or plutonium). Hydrogen, however, requires substantial energy input for production, storage, and distribution, making it analogous to a battery in its role as an energy storage medium, only less efficiently.

Thermodynamic Analysis

1.  Electrolysis Efficiency:

State-of-the-art electrolysers operate at a maximum efficiency of approximately 65%, constrained by thermodynamic limits. For every unit of energy input, only 65% is converted into usable hydrogen energy. This process will not see dramatic improvements due to the inherent energy losses governed by the second law of thermodynamics.

2.  Fuel Cell Efficiency:

Hydrogen is typically used in fuel cells to convert chemical energy back into electricity. The most advanced proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells achieve an efficiency of around 65%, with a theoretical maximum close to 70%.

3.  Roundtrip Efficiency:

Combining electrolysis and fuel-cell efficiencies, the roundtrip efficiency of hydrogen energy systems is further adversely affected by:

Additional energy losses occur in hydrogen compression (to 800 bar), liquefaction (-253°C), and transportation, which consume another 7–10% of the energy. This reduces the effective efficiency to approximately 35%, or lower.

4.  Comparison with Batteries:

In contrast, lithium-ion batteries have a charging efficiency of about 90% and a discharging efficiency of roughly the same. The practical roundtrip efficiency for batteries is 80+%.

Batteries thus offer more than twice the efficiency of hydrogen systems for energy storage and retrieval.

Hydrogen in Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs)

When used in ICEs, hydrogen’s efficiency drops dramatically. ICEs have a peak thermodynamic efficiency of around 35%. Combining this with electrolysis efficiency of 65%, and after accounting for compression, storage, and transportation losses, the effective efficiency falls to a mere 16%. This makes hydrogen a poor choice for ICE applications.

Infrastructure Challenges

1.  Storage and Transportation:

Hydrogen has a very low volumetric energy density, requiring compression to 800 bar or liquefaction at -253°C. Both processes are energy-intensive, with compression consuming 10–15% of the energy content and liquefaction consuming up to 30%. Hydrogen is also prone to leakage due to its small molecular size, which causes embrittlement in storage and transport materials, a serious technical challenge.

2.  Electrolyser and Fuel Cell Costs:

The capital costs of electrolyser systems and fuel cells remain high, with significant maintenance and replacement costs over time. Furthermore, large-scale hydrogen storage infrastructure (pipelines, cryogenic tanks) is underdeveloped, requiring significant investment.

3.  Energy Source Dependency:

Hydrogen’s environmental benefits depend heavily on the energy source used for electrolysis.

•      Green Hydrogen: Produced from renewable electricity, it is sustainable but expensive. Even considering that renewal energy is available in plenty and in surplus amounts, use of battery to store and deliver that energy beats the hydrogen cycle again.

•     Grey/Blue Hydrogen: Derived from methane or coal, it undermines the environmental benefits due to CO₂ emissions and methane leakage.

 Potential Niche Applications

While hydrogen struggles as a general-purpose energy carrier, it holds promise in specific high-value applications, such as:

1.  Industrial Feedstock:

•   Green Steelmaking: Hydrogen can replace coke as a reducing agent in iron ore processing. Since hydrogen is consumed chemically, only the electrolysis efficiency (65–70%) matters. Tata Steel and other major players are investing heavily in green steel production. Besides, high pressure or cryogenic storage may be dispensed with.

•  Ammonia Production: Hydrogen is essential for synthesizing ammonia, a critical component of fertilizers.

2.  Hard-to-Decarbonize Sectors:

 Hydrogen may possibly be viable for:

•    Long-haul aviation, where batteries are impractical due to weight constraints though hydrogen tanks pose a challenge here too.

•       Maritime shipping, using hydrogen-derived fuels like ammonia or methanol.

•      Seasonal energy storage for grid balancing in regions with high renewable penetration.

 Hydrogen vs. Batteries: The Practical Reality

Hydrogen systems currently lag behind batteries in terms of efficiency, cost, and infrastructure readiness. Batteries dominate in applications where high roundtrip efficiency and scalability are crucial, such as electric vehicles and grid-scale energy storage.

The enthusiasm for hydrogen often appears to be driven by economic interests rather than scientific principles. Equipment manufacturers and infrastructure developers stand to benefit from hydrogen’s adoption, regardless of its inefficiency. This recalls the gold rush era, where the blacksmiths profited more than the miners themselves.

Policy Recommendations

Policymakers must approach hydrogen with a nuanced understanding:

• Prioritize hydrogen development for niche applications where it offers unique advantages (e.g., green steelmaking, aviation).
• Avoid over-subsidizing hydrogen for areas where batteries or other technologies are more efficient.
• Invest in renewable energy expansion to ensure hydrogen production (via electrolysis) is sustainable.
• Support research into reducing the costs of electrolysers, fuel cells, and hydrogen storage systems.

Conclusion

Hydrogen’s role in the energy transition should be realistic and targeted. While it has potential in industrial processes and hard-to-decarbonize sectors, its inefficiency and infrastructure challenges preclude it from becoming a universal energy solution. Discussions around hydrogen must be grounded in thermodynamic principles, economic feasibility, and practical considerations, rather than being swayed by hype or vested interests.

By focusing on where hydrogen truly adds value, we can avoid misallocating resources and accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy future. If the launch of hydrogen-trains by Indian Railways leads to intelligent and techno-commercial debate in the country, such a venture would have served a far bigger purpose than simply being a technology demonstrator or people-carrier.

                                                         ---ooo---

Rare Earths are not Rare

Rare Earth Elements have been in news for over a decade now primarily due to their application in electronics and Electric Vehicles. In high school we were just shown a band at the bottom of the Periodic Table, which contained some mysterious metals, which the chemistry teacher never bothered to explain, and we never asked. Afterall, who wanted an additional chapter in the syllabus.

Well, while we weren’t watching this group of 17 chemical elements in the periodic table, comprising the 15 lanthanides, plus scandium and yttrium, came to the centre-stage in our technology-driven lives. Some of them were used earlier too but the quantities were so small that their supply was never a constraint.

Today we use them in almost all everyday technology applications, gadgets and in many areas, where they are not openly visible. Neodymium is the most widely known; it is used in permanent-magnets in motors of Electric Vehicles, generators of wind turbines, in medical and industrial lasers and even as a glass additive to improve UV protection.

But there are many others, such as Terbium, Europium, and Yttrium that are used in phosphers in our display screens. Then there are many others that are used in high-temperature superconductors (Yttrium, again), high-strength alloys for aircraft and military applications, and something as mundane as welding-goggles (Praseodymium). They are used in precision guided missiles, smartphones, high-performance audio-systems, as neutron absorbers in nuclear-reactors, petroleum refining, fuel-cells, MRI contrast enhancement, optical-fibre, and even anti-counterfeiting features of currency notes. Simply speaking our modern lifestyle is not possible without the Rare Earths. The clean and green energy industry will collapse in absence of these elements.

Are They Really Rare?

Even though their collective name suggests so Rare Earth elements (REEs) are not geologically rare, but several factors make their extraction and processing complex and challenging:

• Rare earths are typically found in low concentrations within ores and are rarely found in economically concentrated deposits. Many rare earths occur together in the same ore but have different chemical properties, necessitating precise and lengthy separation methods.

• They are often mixed with other minerals, making separation a multi-step and energy-intensive process.

 Extraction of REEs is an Environmental Challenge

• Extracting and refining rare earths require chemical-intensive procedures, such as acid leaching and solvent extraction, to separate the desired elements from impurities.

• The extraction and processing of rare earths produce toxic waste, including radioactive byproducts, which require costly and stringent environmental management.
• In many countries, strict environmental regulations limit mining and processing activities, making the process less economically viable.

High Upfront Costs

• Setting up rare earth mining and refining operations requires significant capital investment.
• Infrastructure, expertise, and advanced technologies are essential, which can be prohibitive for new entrants.
• China, the largest producer of REEs, has historically used low and predatory prices to drive competitors out of the market and has forced mines in the U.S., Australia, and elsewhere to shut down due to unprofitability.

• Historically, the rare earth market has been volatile, with fluctuating prices discouraging long-term investment outside established production hubs.

Why Does China Dominate Rare Earth Production?

China's dominance in rare earth production is due to a combination of resource availability, government policy, and historical developments:

• China holds some of the world’s largest rare earth reserves, particularly in regions like Inner Mongolia.
• While other countries also have reserves, China's resources are geographically accessible and have been developed extensively.

• China recognized the strategic importance of rare earths early on and began investing heavily in mining, refining, and processing capabilities in the 1980s and 1990s. The Chinese government actively supports the rare earth industry, recognizing its importance for strategic sectors such as defence, electronics, and clean energy.

• The country built a robust supply chain, including research and development, giving it a technological edge over competitors.

• For many years, China had relatively lax environmental regulations, allowing it to process rare earths at a lower cost compared to countries with stricter environmental controls.

• China controls not just mining but also the midstream and downstream parts of the supply chain, such as refining and manufacturing rare earth-based products. This vertical integration makes it difficult for other countries to compete.

Challenges for Other Countries

• Lack of Infrastructure: Many countries lack the established infrastructure for mining and refining rare earths.

• Economic Viability: The high costs of labor, environmental compliance, and technology deter new projects.

• Dependence on China: Even when rare earths are mined outside China, refining often occurs there because of its established capabilities.

---

Current Developments

• Diversification Efforts: Countries like the U.S., Australia, Canada, and now India are investing in rare earth mining and processing to reduce dependence on China.
• Recycling: Efforts to recycle rare earths from electronic waste are gaining momentum to mitigate supply risks.
• Strategic Alliances: Governments are forming partnerships to secure rare earth supplies.
• However, building the mining-to-product supply-chain will take time and significant investment.

Developments in India

The Government of India, realised the importance of Rare Earths early and established the IREL (India) Limited, formerly Indian Rare Earths Limited, is a government-owned corporation under the Department of Atomic Energy as early as in 1950. The company operates several facilities across the country, including units in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Odisha, and a Rare Earths Division in Aluva. IREL has been instrumental in extracting and processing rare earth minerals like monazite to produce rare earth compounds.

There is a plan to boost the production of REEs by 400% over a decade. Efforts are underway to find new deposits, providing funds for research, and to incentivise production of downstream products. This aligns with India’s march towards green and renewable energy targets. Whereas Indian my not become self-reliant in the entire supply-chain of Rare Earths and their utilisation, we may reduce our dependency on imports significantly in years to come. The private sector has to pitch-in with equal enthusiasm to make it happen, something not yet seen in a large measure on the ground.

---ooo---

Engineering Design - An Exercise in Humility

It was early 2018. The basic design of the Train 18 (later rechristened the Vande Bharat Express) was complete, and the manufacture of prototypes had started. I was visited by the International Business Head of SolidWorks from France. SolidWorks is a 3-D engineering design software from Dassault Systems, the same people who make Rafale fighter planes. It is not as vast and complex as the Unigraphics (Now NX) but was good enough for design of a train system. After all the Dassault Systems designed aircraft on it. 

Over a dinner the man asked me candidly, “Why don’t you design the Main Battle Tank for the Avadi people? They have been doing it for so long.” Avadi, about ten kilometers from the ICF, was the Heavy Vehicle Factory (HVF) of the Ordinance Factory Board. The visitor from Dassault, during his visits to Chennai, would visit both the units, the ICF and the HVF. He told me that the Avadi people had been designing the MBT for over thirty years and there was the ICF that had designed a full train in six months. ICF was his prized customer that he would showcase all over the world.

That got me thinking. This was the remark of a neutral observer. Why was it that the HVF Avadi was still struggling with finalising the design what with MTechs and PhDs as their designers? At the same time how was it that the ICF had done it in six months and was going ahead with production? It must be mentioned here that the design of the Train 18, as finalised in the year 2018, continues to be the production model for over six years and after sixty trains now. The Titagarh-BHEL JV, M/S KINET (TMH-RVNL JV) and the BEML, for their Sleeper versions, have finally adopted the same ICF design after a lot of look around.

I decided to spend some time in the ICF Design Department to understand what made it tick. There are about a hundred designers some of whom were working on Train 18. There were Mechanical and Electrical designers and then there were final integrators. All of them were Group C staff, a far cry from the accomplished designers of a Defence Unit. Yet they had achieved something that Dassault Systems considered a feather in the cap of SolidWorks.

Some of the factors, in my opinion, that made the design department of ICF a superlative achiever were as follows:

1. Design is an iterative process. This, in itself, necessitates that the designer should keep his ego aside and be ready to revise his designs repeatedly, and as many times as required, to find a workable model.

2. There must be a seamless flow of information between the shopfloor and the design office. This includes transmission of data on incompatibility, manufacturability, and misfits from production to design and the humility of the latter to listen carefully and make necessary changes and improvements. 

3.  Don’t wait for perfection. That day never comes. The Train 18 team had begun the production as soon as the basic design was ready and kept improving and improvising on the go.

4. There must be a design freeze at some point in time. Someone in the management should have the authority, courage, and maturity to order a stop to endless tinkering. Freeze the design and push ahead. 

                                                        ---ooo---

 

 

Quo Vadis, ICF? And, why?

 

The Japanese are playing pricey for the supply of trains for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Corridor on the back of them funding the project. The Ministry of Railways had done right to order the ICF to make two trains for the High-Speed line to establish the price line and to take a major step towards Atmanirbhrata. It would have been a welcome challenge for the ICF to venture into the Standard Guage territory and to make truly high-speed trains for 250kmph operations. The Vande Bharat was only a semi-high-speed design although scalable to 200 with some tweaking.

But the news goes that the ICF has handed over this godsent opportunity on a platter to the BEML. I have nothing against the BEML, they are competent people and can deliver what they have been asked to do. But so could the ICF, and at much lower costs. It is a shame that ICF thinks that they can’t do it even though they designed and manufactured the Vande Bharat train in a record time of eighteen months, a feat never seen before anywhere in the world.

Let me try to understand what could have gone wrong with and within the ICF. Surely, they are no less confident today than they were in the year 2018, when they made the Train 18. Probably the Railway Board thinks that the ICF can’t and have, therefore, ordered so. But what does the Railway Board know about the design department, the bold procurement system, and the shop floor skills of the ICF? And, indeed what do they know about the innovative engineers of the ICF? After all wasn’t it the same Railway Board that, in one of the worst ever libelous campaigns destroyed the careers and lives of the great team of ICF.

Even if the Railway Board allowed the ICF to make the 250kmph train, would the ICF officialdom have taken the risks that such an ambitious project entails? Haven’t they seen the fate that befell the bold decision makers of ICF in the aftermath of the wildly successful Train 18?

Let me recount the story lest it should remain unsaid.

Those were the days! O, those were the days, when the Integral Coach Factory, Perambur was a Temple of Modern India. It was on the must-visit list of foreign dignitaries. The Government of India would showcase it as a great feat of industrialization. The Chinese Premier, Chou-en-Lai, during his visit on the 6^th of December 1956 wrote thus:

“This is a modernized Coach Factory. It is worthwhile for the Chinese to come and learn. This factory is well-built and well-organised. The technology and training given are very good. It is worthwhile for the Orientals to take pride in it.”

Indeed, the ICF was a stellar symbol of the baby steps that a newly independent India was taking in becoming Atmanirbhar – steel plants, irrigation and power projects, national highways, a locomotive factory at Chittaranjan, space research, dozens of scientific laboratories, and of course the ICF. More was to come later. But ICF, from the word go, got into the act and has been an icon of innovation and large-scale production since then. The ICF has so far designed over six-hundred types of railcars and has manufactured over seventy thousand of them making it the largest rail-car builder in the world. Starting from a humble 75kmph Swiss Schlieren design the ICF went on to make 130kmph air-conditioned coaches, the 3-tier AC being a real innovation in the field of rail travel. It even delivered a rail platform for mobile missile launchers for the armed forces. It seamlessly integrated the German LHB in its production lines and delivered coaches for speeds upto 160kmph.

The Vande Bharat Express is the jewel in the crown not only of the ICF but of the entire nation. It immediately caught international attention for its futuristic design, the ultra-low cost, a third of international prices, and the speed of delivery, from concept to prototype in eighteen months. The train successfully upset the applecart of international players and delivered a proverbial iPhone at Android prices. It, on the other hand, also aroused departmental jealousies in some hearts, who would rather import than innovate. The reason was not only a chance at corruption in international purchases but worse, a total lack of confidence in our own abilities to think big and deliver. Sudhanshu Mani’s idea brought the edifice of the import lobby, vested interests, and naysayers crashing down.

Not to give up, the same lobby then launched a massive vilifying campaign against the team that had brought this dream train to life. It also, to justify its nefarious game, condemned the train itself, calling it energy-inefficient, an incomplete work, done through non-transparent tenders, needing improvement etc. A spate of Vigilance cases was filed against twelve senior officers, GM and lower down. Nothing came of these cases; the CVC trashed them all and reprimanded the Railway Ministry too. But the delay cost at least one officer, who could have gone to become the Chairman, Railway Board, his possible rise. They all suffered years of ignominy and social stigma, “They must have done something wrong, after all.”

In a brutal environment reminiscent of the Nambi Narayan case of ISRO, which delayed the cryogenic rocket engine for several years, the production of Vande Bharat Express was stalled for over three years – the dedicated design and shop-floor teams were scattered and the supply chain dried up with brilliant MSME entrepreneurs turning cynical. The saboteurs’ lobby was so strong and well-entrenched that even the PMO, through its interventions, could not find a quick way out of the mire.

To justify their actions even the CRB went on record, without data, that the Vande Bharat train made thus far wasn’t up to the mark, was energy-inefficient and that a level playing field was not provided in tenders. Indeed, the pioneering team had never claimed that they had made a prefect product; prototypes can be anything but. Then started a long-drawn process of revising the technical specifications to improve the design and revamp the tender conditions to create a level playing field. But much ado about nothing – there were mere cosmetic changes in the design and the same vendor emerged the supplier for series production too repeatedly in tender after tender. Several tenders were issued and cancelled, all this leading to a loss of over three years of production, a period during which at least fifty semi-high-speed Vande Bharat trains could have rolled out. But, whereas in the case of victimization of Nambi Narayan and loss of similar number of years at ISRO, the government has woken up and is fixing the perpetrators, those who sabotaged a far bigger national project, one that touches millions of lives, and one that the government now swears by, have gone unchallenged.

Do I, therefore, blame the ICF? Hmm..! They must have swallowed their pride to surrender such a great opportunity of becoming a true world player. Now, the BEML will become one albeit riding on the basic design of the ICF and sourcing from the ICF’s supply chain.

I wish you the best, BEML!

I don’t empathize with you, ICF! You could have tried harder.

                                        ---ooo---