Evaluate the **Development-cum-Production Partner (DcPP)** model adopted by DRDO with reference to recent missile projects.

The DcPP model inducts private/PSU firms as partners from the development stage itself — not merely as post-design manufacturers — to compress the lab-to-launch cycle. DRDO's Long Range Land Attack Cruise Missile (LRLACM), with Bharat Dynamics Ltd (BDL) and Bharat Electronics Ltd (BEL) as DcPPs, is a flagship illustration [1].

Merits

• Early industry integration: partners engaged in "development and integration", easing transition to serial production and cutting delays [1].
• Atmanirbharta: LRLACM's sub-systems — propulsion, guidance, airframe — are wholly indigenous, reducing import dependence [1].
• DRDO as anchor, not sole builder: frees labs for R&D while consortia industrialise, a shift validated by LRLACM's successful June 2026 flight-test off Odisha [2].
• Structured funding: routed via DAC with Acceptance of Necessity as a Mission Mode Project, ensuring committed demand [1].

Limitations

• PSU-heavy: reliance on BDL/BEL narrows the private-sector base the model was meant to widen.
• Concentration risk: two-partner dependence can bottleneck scale-up.
• IPR and cost-sharing ambiguities and long gestation (maiden test Nov 2024 to follow-on 2026) persist [2].
• Absorptive capacity of partners remains untested at export scale.

Verdict: The DcPP model is a genuine advance over the linear develop-then-transfer approach, demonstrably de-risking production, but its promise hinges on broadening beyond PSUs toward a competitive private ecosystem. Deepened via DAP-2020 reforms and iDEX, it can make India a credible defence exporter, advancing self-reliant security.