Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 364
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by Eric Leiderman »

Welcome Sattili
raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by raj.devan »

Hi! My name is Raj Devan, military enthusiast, avid student of history (particularly military history) and an amateur (and as yet unpublished) writer of military fiction. I have followed BRF for years now, and am overjoyed on finally being allowed to join up. I am grateful for the privikege.

Those interested can visit my fledgling website www.rajdevan.net and go through a few excerpts of my under construction book.

Once again, thanks for having me here.

Raj D
KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by KiranM »

KiranM wrote:What is the difference between Landing Platform Dock (LPD) and Landing Ship Dock (LSD)? Both have a well dock for Landing Crafts and a flight deck for helicopters.
Bumping my post up to hopefully get an answer.
sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by sattili »

KiranM wrote:
KiranM wrote:What is the difference between Landing Platform Dock (LPD) and Landing Ship Dock (LSD)? Both have a well dock for Landing Crafts and a flight deck for helicopters.
Bumping my post up to hopefully get an answer.
If the ship primarily operates Landing Crafts with a well dock and has helicopter deck it is LSD. Ships that have helicopter deck with hangars and operate an air wing of helicopters and VTOL aircraft is LPD

From Wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dock_landing_ship
A ship with a well deck (docking well) can transfer cargo to landing craft in rougher seas than a ship that has to use cranes or a stern ramp.[2] The US Navy hull classification symbol for a ship with a well deck depends on its facilities for aircraft - a (modern) LSD has a helicopter deck, a LPD also has a hangar, and a LHD or LHA has a full-length flight deck.[2]
LPD: http://ipv6.navy.mil/navydata/fact_disp ... d=600&ct=4
LPDs are used to transport and land Marines, their equipment and supplies by embarked air cushion (LCAC) or conventional landing craft and Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles (EFV) or Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV) augmented by helicopters or vertical take off and landing aircraft (MV 22). These ships support amphibious assault, special operations or expeditionary warfare missions and can serve as secondary aviation platforms for amphibious ready groups.
LSD: http://ipv6.navy.mil/navydata/fact_disp ... =1000&ct=4
These ships transport and launch amphibious craft and vehicles with their crews and embarked personnel in amphibious assault operations.

LSD 41 was designed specifically to operate LCAC vessels. It has the largest capacity for these landing craft (four) of any U.S. Navy amphibious platform. It will also provide docking and repair services for LCACs and for conventional landing craft.

In 1987, the Navy requested $324.2 million to fund one LSD 49 (Cargo Variant). The ship differs from the original LSD 41 by reducing its number of LCACs to two in favor of additional cargo capacity.
dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by dinesh_kimar »

Request Gurus pics of 75/25 Pack Howitzer of IA (ARDE Design), unable to find on Google.
TIA
raj.devan
BRFite
Posts: 106
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by raj.devan »

Hi, I have a question with regard to the Indian Navy's doctrine of using carrier battle groups. The other day a foreign friend of mine was talking about how the INS Vikramaditya costed over five billion dollars, aircrafts included, and asked me why a country with as scarce resources as India had opted for an apparently expensive option like carriers for naval defence. He particularly mentioned that India had first considered fielding a carrier back in the late 50s when it was a really poor country compared to today. He was of the opinion that carriers were orimarily instruments to project military strength far from home, and that in the last fifty years as a carrier force, the Indian Navy had neither conducted a military deployment away from home waters, nor had it even held strategic intentions apart from home defence.

I gave him two answers after sone considered thought:

1. Given our long and heavily populated coastline, our defence planners were concerned about naval attacks by Pakistan or other countries. In such a situation, had our navy to operate only under cover from shore based aircraft, it would have to stay close to the coast, and any war would have to be fought in close proximity to heavily populated areas. A carrier gave the navy the capability to operate in the deep sea, where it could engage the enemy away from the coast, saving civilian lives and property. Also if a western power sent a fleet against us, as Portugal had threatened to do after 61, we could head out and meet that force long before it came within range of our shore.

2. Military doctrine called for a naval blockade against Pakistan in case of war, and a carrier was a cost effective means of achieving this. Whether it was to enforce a blockade or otherwise carry out a naval engagement, India would have needed a much larger naval force in terms of destroyers and frigates if it had not opted for a carrier, and consequently would have spent far in excess of what it spent on the Vikramaditya.

I was wondering if my answer was right and if any of the learned folks here had anything to add to it. Thanks!
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by jamwal »

One more noobie pooch.
What happens to discarded parts of an upgraded weapon system ?
For example engines and avionic of upgraded aircraft, barrels of up-gunned artillery guns and so on ?
member_26535
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 47
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by member_26535 »

A noob Q
The first 100 F-35s include 44 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variants, 42 F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variants, and 14 F-35C carrier (CV) variants. The U.S. Department of Defense will receive 95 of the first 100 jets from the F-35 assembly line here. The remaining five jets were delivered to two of the program’s partner countries. The United Kingdom received three F-35B aircraft and two F-35As have been delivered to the Netherland
Is it common to produce 100 + ACs for testing. With IOCs for Marine, AF and Navy versions to get IOC by 14,16 and 19 respectively ? ( If we compare our own baby, does this look too high ?)
KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by KiranM »

Hi Orbat Gurus like Rohit and Vaibhav. I would like to know how many aircrafts like An-32 and IL-76 are needed to deploy and sustain the 50th Ind. Para Bde?
sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by sattili »

raj.devan wrote:Hi, I have a question with regard to the Indian Navy's doctrine of using carrier battle groups. The other day a foreign friend of mine was talking about how the INS Vikramaditya costed over five billion dollars, aircrafts included, and asked me why a country with as scarce resources as India had opted for an apparently expensive option like carriers for naval defence. He particularly mentioned that India had first considered fielding a carrier back in the late 50s when it was a really poor country compared to today. He was of the opinion that carriers were orimarily instruments to project military strength far from home, and that in the last fifty years as a carrier force, the Indian Navy had neither conducted a military deployment away from home waters, nor had it even held strategic intentions apart from home defence.

I gave him two answers after sone considered thought:

1. Given our long and heavily populated coastline, our defence planners were concerned about naval attacks by Pakistan or other countries. In such a situation, had our navy to operate only under cover from shore based aircraft, it would have to stay close to the coast, and any war would have to be fought in close proximity to heavily populated areas. A carrier gave the navy the capability to operate in the deep sea, where it could engage the enemy away from the coast, saving civilian lives and property. Also if a western power sent a fleet against us, as Portugal had threatened to do after 61, we could head out and meet that force long before it came within range of our shore.

2. Military doctrine called for a naval blockade against Pakistan in case of war, and a carrier was a cost effective means of achieving this. Whether it was to enforce a blockade or otherwise carry out a naval engagement, India would have needed a much larger naval force in terms of destroyers and frigates if it had not opted for a carrier, and consequently would have spent far in excess of what it spent on the Vikramaditya.

I was wondering if my answer was right and if any of the learned folks here had anything to add to it. Thanks!
Let me answer point by point:

1. It is wrong to include cost of the airplanes in the cost of carrier itself. Vikramaditya costed $2.3billion. Total cost of operating a carrier group is different - in that case we need include the escort and support ships costs as well. Not just acquisition costs but operating costs as well.
2. We are not same India of 1950s. We can definitely spend that kind of money to acquire strategic assets.
3. Why do India needed carrier? - Power projection. We used INS Vikrant effectively in Bangladesh war.
4. Why does India need carriers now? - one word Aspiration. Indian Navy intends to be a blue water navy and dominate the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) as a regional power. No other asset can project this better than a carrier group. India did project power in the region with our intervention in Maldives(which raised many eyebrows in the Western military circles) and in other regional events. It has projected significant presence from Mauritius to Andamans and into Indo-China sea(Friendship visits, joint excercises etc). Given the strategic importance of sea lanes and chokepoints around straits of Malacca, we cannot always impose our will from shore based air assets only.
5. Mig29K is not that short legged. With its 1200NM range (as per Wikipedia) it is comparable to FA18 that US Navy operates. With its multirole capability its a potent fighter. Consider this- Vikramaditya when fully operational can impose a 500KM radius of Air dominance bubble, anyone challenging it will have to pay heavy price.
6. IN is moving towards 3 carrier groups in the coming years and its intent is very much strategic (as your friend has put it).

Hope this helps.
sattili
BRFite
Posts: 162
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by sattili »

srikven wrote:A noob Q
The first 100 F-35s include 44 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variants, 42 F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variants, and 14 F-35C carrier (CV) variants. The U.S. Department of Defense will receive 95 of the first 100 jets from the F-35 assembly line here. The remaining five jets were delivered to two of the program’s partner countries. The United Kingdom received three F-35B aircraft and two F-35As have been delivered to the Netherland
Is it common to produce 100 + ACs for testing. With IOCs for Marine, AF and Navy versions to get IOC by 14,16 and 19 respectively ? ( If we compare our own baby, does this look too high ?)
My take (on lighter note only :) ) - May be F-35 program managers want to make it too big to be sunk (same logic helped US govt to bail out AIG). By producing 100planes they made the sunk cost of the project so huge, withdrawing from it is more costly/painful than continuing. My previous company had similar experience when they tried to trim down some jobs in Europe (esp France & Germany) they found out that cost of reducing those positions is so huge (requiring 2-3years of salary to be paid as compensation for employee) they decided to keep those jobs as it is but decided not hire any more positions in those countries.
Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by Nikhil T »

Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) likely to take up Naresh Chandra panel’s proposals
With the announcement of general elections just a few weeks away, the UPA government is racing against time to push through a significant initiative on the issue of national security — the recommendations of the Naresh Chandra task force.

Top sources said that with the comments of various stakeholder ministries/ agencies now being collated by the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS), the government is ready to place the recommendations before the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

“We are confident we will get a date to put the task force recommendations on the CCS agenda. The government does not want to let such a major agenda item slip through,’’ a senior official in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) told The Indian Express.

Officials said the task of processing the 400-odd recommendations put forward by the 14-member task force in May 2012, and seeking comments from about 35 stakeholders was a complex one. In all, about 3,000 comments from the concerned ministries/ agencies on specific proposals were received. A few, though minor, comments are still awaited by the NSCS.

While the earlier thinking was that portions of the task force report would be made public, it is now expected that this will happen if and when the CCS endorses the recommendations.

However, sources admit that during the lengthy consultation process, no consensus has emerged on what is seen as one of the most significant recommendations — creation of the post of Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee. With the service chiefs expressing different opinions on the issue, Defence Minister A K Antony will have to iron out the differences if the proposal has to be pushed through.

The report is said to contain a slew of other proposals aimed at strengthening civilian-military ties, including having a higher representation of uniformed personnel posted on deputation in the Ministry of Defence. A rejig of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and better coordination between military and civilian intelligence units is another issue that has been examined by the task force.

The other proposals put forward by the task force are: a revised mandate for some of the intelligence agencies, setting up an oversight mechanism in some agencies, and improvement of linguistic and technical skills in the external security network.


Officials in the PMO said even as the proposals were under examination, the UPA government introduced reforms on issues like cyber security and police modernisation. So, several key proposals of the task force have already been “implemented’’.
member_28468
BRFite
Posts: 198
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by member_28468 »

I had started a topic but due to some member comment my thread is closed without even giving me a chance of clarifying...
I am new here but mods should at least let me reply that member comment.

It is very rude and disheartening.
vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2394
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by vivek_ahuja »

Vishant,

Mods on the forum regularly have to deal with threads that get created by mistake, by people misusing the fora or if a duplicate thread exists. I don't think you need to take this as a personal slight. I can assure that it was not their attention. Generally, the opening of the new thread is judged by the content in the first few posts. If there is a critical consensus that the thread is outside the mandate of the forum, it is unilaterally closed.

The point being that it's more an issue of forum administration than a means to send any poster a message.

If you feel you have a response to make that will allow your content to remain open, please quote the post from that thread and paste it here. You can then respond underneath it just as you would do on that other thread. Based on your response, the mods can guide you in terms of what is best needed.

Regards

-Vivek
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by Manish_Sharma »

Is it possible to turn missiles/rockets like Prahaar and Pinaka can be given the capability of anti-radiation missiles to attack the radar sites of enemies?
rajeshks
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 22:43

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by rajeshks »

My dumb question 8)

why do we need 20+ commissioned officers in a 'regular infantry' battalian? is it a good thing(for the country and officer cadre) to have more than 5 senior officers(15+ years exp Lt Cols) in a unit. did army explore the possibility of building a better JCO cadre to takeover many responsibilities from commissioned officers. direct recruit JCOs. State and Central police forces have this for long time.

It would be really great if someone who has real experience (like commanding a unit) answer to this stupid question.
deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4024
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by deejay »

Hello everyone,

My first post but I felt that this is where I can get serious replies to some questions which have troubled me for some time now:
- Do we have a doctrine for deployment in an aggressive role in a foreign country involving One / Two or all Three of the services?
- Do we test enough / adequate scenarios painted at HQ's in a tri-service environment during exercises?
- What is acceptable attrition in any aggressive action such as hot pursuit?
- In a joint services action such as hot pursuit or limited area action on foreign soil which service will hold command? Is it role based or does some one supersede over control of assets? Have we been able to define role and control in such situations?
- Are we changing our doctrines to incorporate new technological force multipliers like Spy Satellites? If yes, then is it done prior to incorporating technology or after it is done?
vaibhav.n
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 575
Joined: 23 Mar 2010 21:47

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by vaibhav.n »

rajeshks wrote:My dumb question 8)

why do we need 20+ commissioned officers in a 'regular infantry' battalian? is it a good thing(for the country and officer cadre) to have more than 5 senior officers(15+ years exp Lt Cols) in a unit. did army explore the possibility of building a better JCO cadre to takeover many responsibilities from commissioned officers. direct recruit JCOs. State and Central police forces have this for long time.

It would be really great if someone who has real experience (like commanding a unit) answer to this stupid question.
Rajesh,

The Authorized strength in an Unit, whether an Infantry/Armoured/Artillery/Engineer one is in accordance with a format.

Most Infantry Battalions except those on UN Missions, would have to make do anywhere between 12-15 Officers earlier the situation was much worse but seems to have rectified somewhat with 3 Officers Academies and larger course strengths.

The Indian Army traditionally has had a fairly low officer strength ever since the British era and the former depended on the VCO's to run the unit. This is in complete contrast to the West where, ultimately it is the officers who bear the burden of command and their numbers are much more than their Indian counterparts.

Take the example of a Rifle Platoon in an Infantry Battalion, While in the British Army an young subaltern (ie. a Lt) runs it. In the Indian Army it is commanded by a Subedar/Nk Subadar assisted by a Platoon Havaldar. So we have devolved the onus of command, to the junior Officer ranks. However, there are still certain positions where one cannot do without officers example at the Company Commander & Company Officer level for the 4 Rifle Companies and the CO, 2IC, Battalion Adjutant, RMO, Battalion QMO.

In a nutshell it all boils down to training and other ranks are unlikely to be taught the finer points of more exotic disciplines such as Combined Arms/Counter Insurgency/Mountain Warfare. With the junior ranks each man is trained for a specific amount of time on his particular role in the set-up. That may be in the form of a Section Commander, Rifleman No1, LMG No2 etc. This economises on the training aspect while allowing individuals from diverse backgrounds to absorb the content.

CPO as such suffer from a two class system where the IPS acts as the executive authority and rarely venture out, while the Cadre for that particular Paramilitary Force rarely rises to even a DIG level forget the top.

Army Officers on the other hand, will also double up to perform Staff Duties at a Brigade/Division/Corps/Army level. These will be different branches in the form of:

G - Operations and Intelligence
Q - Quartermaster
A - Administration


Hope this helps!!

PS: I donot have any real experience with command or otherwise!!
JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4567
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by JayS »

This is embaracing. I unintentionally ended up starting a new topic instead of posting in in a thread:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... f=3&t=6785

How can I delete that??
member_28579
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 35
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by member_28579 »

After lurking, enjoying and getting educated for more than five years on BRF I couldn’t resist but to become BRFite at the Beginning of a New Era in Bharatvarsh. Hoping for the great time ahead and contribute my 2 paises where ever possible.


Ravi
Ajit.C
BRFite
Posts: 160
Joined: 10 Sep 2008 13:15
Location: Middle East
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Ajit.C »

@darshan-you mean something in lines politial officers or in lines with SS-waffen?
Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5128
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Manish_Sharma »

^^What he means is that an Army which cut porkistan in two parts not worrying about amreekan 7th fleet advancing towards Bharat, failed to remove that bit(h indira from power when she imposed emergency on the nation suspending our constitution.
member_27862
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by member_27862 »

I will go any day with a Waffen SS type formation. Fanatic to the cause (Here Indian - nism), Brave to the core, Disciplined and motivated, smart enough to lift the spirit of the nation. All volunteers to swear for 'India' and not anything else. And under direct control of the PM ONLY (he he....the stereo type of a 'private army' is obvious). The best arms and mandatory SF training etc etc

But alas my friends........our generations just don't have that 'right stuff' for the 'fanaticism personified patriotism'. We are good at 'sabre rattling', but to fight like the Waffen SS, I have serious doubts......for that we have to indoctrinate at a very young age and keep them away from the 'iphone' crowd......

It will be fruitful if we can look after our present armed forces, get them the best equipment and training and pay them well........keeping them out of reach of the bourgeois bureaucrats and wily politicians .......again hoping for something next to impossible perhaps :(

Godbless the Indian Armed Forces......
Ajit.C
BRFite
Posts: 160
Joined: 10 Sep 2008 13:15
Location: Middle East
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Ajit.C »

@ Dhananjay - So that would mean an army like the one that is Pakistan, Thailand, Egypt, which has its own mind..all coup's take place to correct a political mistake and then it becomes permanent.

@ sameerjoshi - ah! we do have something on that line - the RSS.
KiranM
BRFite
Posts: 588
Joined: 17 Dec 2006 16:48
Location: Bangalore

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by KiranM »

Wonderful! We have arm chair warriors professing an organization like Waffen SS or Iranian Revolutionary Guards to uphold 'dharmic values' when they do not understand the meaning of dharma. If we need a 'dharmic force' does it mean our armed forces are adharmic? I guess Indian Army were not fanatic for the cause to capture back our territory from Pakis during Kargil War by frontal attacks and climbing imposing heights with just knives in their mouths. Similarly I guess Indian Navy was not crazy to send piddly missile boats against the PN and PAF to strike Karachi in 1971 war. And IAF was not crazy to land helicopters in the midst of firefight in Sylhet in 1971. What a joke! Fanaticism for cause now means dying for no reason and not using the head to achieve the same cause in a sensible way, the sensible way also being suicidal if required. And if a polarising figure like Owaisi or Azam Khan becomes PM then India as a nation has already lost.
Armed forces are apolitical for the unity of the nation not to execute a civil war. Else, there will be no difference between them and the gundas with arms who SS turned out to be. And regarding Indira's emergency, she was taught a lesson in the next election by the people. That is how internal strife is stopped. Not from bullet, but by ballot.
Jay
BRFite
Posts: 697
Joined: 24 Feb 2005 18:24
Location: Gods Country
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Jay »

sameerjoshi wrote:I will go any day with a Waffen SS type formation. Fanatic to the cause (Here Indian - nism), Brave to the core, Disciplined and motivated, smart enough to lift the spirit of the nation. All volunteers to swear for 'India' and not anything else. And under direct control of the PM ONLY (he he....the stereo type of a 'private army' is obvious). The best arms and mandatory SF training etc etc

But alas my friends........our generations just don't have that 'right stuff' for the 'fanaticism personified patriotism'. We are good at 'sabre rattling', but to fight like the Waffen SS, I have serious doubts......for that we have to indoctrinate at a very young age and keep them away from the 'iphone' crowd......

It will be fruitful if we can look after our present armed forces, get them the best equipment and training and pay them well........keeping them out of reach of the bourgeois bureaucrats and wily politicians .......again hoping for something next to impossible perhaps :(

Godbless the Indian Armed Forces......

Shall we go ahead and also order mobile courts and death chambers? you know, for those pesky people who does not confirm to your standards of patriotism...
darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2937
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by darshhan »

KiranM wrote:Wonderful! We have arm chair warriors professing an organization like Waffen SS or Iranian Revolutionary Guards to uphold 'dharmic values' when they do not understand the meaning of dharma. If we need a 'dharmic force' does it mean our armed forces are adharmic? I guess Indian Army were not fanatic for the cause to capture back our territory from Pakis during Kargil War by frontal attacks and climbing imposing heights with just knives in their mouths. Similarly I guess Indian Navy was not crazy to send piddly missile boats against the PN and PAF to strike Karachi in 1971 war. And IAF was not crazy to land helicopters in the midst of firefight in Sylhet in 1971. What a joke! Fanaticism for cause now means dying for no reason and not using the head to achieve the same cause in a sensible way, the sensible way also being suicidal if required. And if a polarising figure like Owaisi or Azam Khan becomes PM then India as a nation has already lost.
Armed forces are apolitical for the unity of the nation not to execute a civil war. Else, there will be no difference between them and the gundas with arms who SS turned out to be. And regarding Indira's emergency, she was taught a lesson in the next election by the people. That is how internal strife is stopped. Not from bullet, but by ballot.
Indian Army is a great organization with a glorious history both under British as well as largely congress rule since 1947. So what is the problem with creating another great organization? We will have two great organizations and one of them will be more responsive to Indic/Dharmic needs. I am unable to see your point. Also are you insinuating that Dharmics will become gundas? If not then you are assuming too much.

SS became gundas because Nazi ideology was evil. But since dharmic/Hindu is much more benevolent, the chances of Dharmic military organization becoming rogue is practically nil.

And actually India has a long history of such Dharmic Military organizations. What was Maratha Army during and after the time of Chattrapati Shivaji. And what about Khalsa army during the golden period of Sikhism. Did they turn into gundas?
atreya
BRFite
Posts: 541
Joined: 11 Dec 2008 16:33

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by atreya »

Indian Army is a great organization with a glorious history both under British as well as largely congress rule since 1947. So what is the problem with creating another great organization? We will have two great organizations and one of them will be more responsive to Indic/Dharmic needs. I am unable to see your point. Also are you insinuating that Dharmics will become gundas? If not then you are assuming too much.

SS became gundas because Nazi ideology was evil. But since dharmic/Hindu is much more benevolent, the chances of Dharmic military organization becoming rogue is practically nil.

And actually India has a long history of such Dharmic Military organizations. What was Maratha Army during and after the time of Chattrapati Shivaji. And what about Khalsa army during the golden period of Sikhism. Did they turn into gundas?
Please define 'dharmic/Indic needs' first. What will this organization do, apart from covert activities against the enemy?
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Lalmohan »

darshhan wrote:
SS became gundas because Nazi ideology was evil. But since dharmic/Hindu is much more benevolent, the chances of Dharmic military organization becoming rogue is practically nil.
the SS were created specially to be gundas, they were required to be an alternate power base to the army and the SA (brown shirts). the army was the german equivalent of dharmic and not overly given to nazi ideology. the SS were needed to first kill the SA (night of the long knives) so that hitler could remove his political opponents on the right, and then to become powerful enough politically and militarily to force the army to comply with the new nazi bosses

and then later to hold the country together against the turning tide of the war

the final defence of the reichstag as the soviets closed in was by remnants of the divisions SS Nordland and SS Charlemagne, comprised of scandinavian and french nazi sympathisers, the germans having already thrown the towel in
darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2937
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by darshhan »

atreya wrote:
Indian Army is a great organization with a glorious history both under British as well as largely congress rule since 1947. So what is the problem with creating another great organization? We will have two great organizations and one of them will be more responsive to Indic/Dharmic needs. I am unable to see your point. Also are you insinuating that Dharmics will become gundas? If not then you are assuming too much.

SS became gundas because Nazi ideology was evil. But since dharmic/Hindu is much more benevolent, the chances of Dharmic military organization becoming rogue is practically nil.

And actually India has a long history of such Dharmic Military organizations. What was Maratha Army during and after the time of Chattrapati Shivaji. And what about Khalsa army during the golden period of Sikhism. Did they turn into gundas?
Please define 'dharmic/Indic needs' first. What will this organization do, apart from covert activities against the enemy?
Discussion is going OT. I can take it to another thread i.e if you want.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by svinayak »

Please do not use western model and western concept of nation state and western concept of ideology to define Indian organization.
Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17168
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Rahul M »

I'll move this discussion to mil. misc thread.

anyone posting on 'dharmic army' henceforth in this thread will get a warning.

Dhananjay wrote:^^What he means is that an Army which cut porkistan in two parts not worrying about amreekan 7th fleet advancing towards Bharat, failed to remove that bit(h indira from power when she imposed emergency on the nation suspending our constitution.
what utter BS, it is not the army's job by any stretch of imagination.
member_27862
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 86
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by member_27862 »

Jay wrote:
sameerjoshi wrote:I will go any day with a Waffen SS type formation. Fanatic to the cause (Here Indian - nism), Brave to the core, Disciplined and motivated, smart enough to lift the spirit of the nation. All volunteers to swear for 'India' and not anything else. And under direct control of the PM ONLY (he he....the stereo type of a 'private army' is obvious). The best arms and mandatory SF training etc etc

But alas my friends........our generations just don't have that 'right stuff' for the 'fanaticism personified patriotism'. We are good at 'sabre rattling', but to fight like the Waffen SS, I have serious doubts......for that we have to indoctrinate at a very young age and keep them away from the 'iphone' crowd......

It will be fruitful if we can look after our present armed forces, get them the best equipment and training and pay them well........keeping them out of reach of the bourgeois bureaucrats and wily politicians .......again hoping for something next to impossible perhaps :(

Godbless the Indian Armed Forces......

Shall we go ahead and also order mobile courts and death chambers? you know, for those pesky people who does not confirm to your standards of patriotism...
Jay....you are behaving just the way the Allies behaved after WW2. Please know the difference between the Waffen SS and 'normal' SS. The Waffen SS, albeit with a Nazi ideology, was the fighting arm of the SS and was not involved in death camp management. Yes, they have committed war crimes in the course of fighting, but so had the Soviets, The Brits and the Yanks...it just happens that Waffen SS happens to be on the loosing side. BTW any historian worth his salt will tell you that the Waffen SS divisions were the best fighting formations amongst all troop groups of WW2. And it is their fighting qualities that one needs to inculcate - and not the Nazi ideology.

And half baked knowledge from so called 'pesky patriots' is the exact cause of the mess that India is in.... Gentlemen everyone knows what what we are talking about - please don't hijack a linear and logical thought towards a nonsensical debate.
rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by rkhanna »

what utter BS, it is not the army's job by any stretch of imagination.
Protect the country (constitution) from all threats foreign and domestic?
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by rohitvats »

Let it be clearly understood by one and all - BRF does not encourage discussion(s) which are about political involvement of Indian Armed Forces. Please keep that in mind henceforth.
Bhaskar_T
BRFite
Posts: 278
Joined: 13 Feb 2011 19:09

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by Bhaskar_T »

Hello All, have been a lurker all the times, hope this is the right place to ask queries by non-military jingoes like me. Was reading Kargil war background since somewhere it came up on facebook that 15 years ago on 13th June 1999, Tololing peak was captured from the Pakistani militants/army & was one of the first successes in the Kargil war. I looked upon Google to understand the topography, distance from LOC, NH1D and now I understand that how strategic it would be for Paki infiltrants to keep an eye over NH1D. In the below image, the small purple horizontal line in the bottom right has a scale of 2kms & I have approximately highlighted the LOC in red dashed line.

Interestingly, Google shows a picture where a hill behind a mosque with school girls is taken & the uploader has fixed this picture to a location in Drass.

Is that hill behind the mosque the ToloLing Peak? Is the ToloLing Peak shown correctly in the Google map picture?

Image
image post
dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by dinesh_kimar »

As a gut feeling, I am expecting a Chinese intrusion on the LAC,done to gauge Modi's response.....hope our guys are ready.
member_28652
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 38
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by member_28652 »

Hi folks. This is my very first post on BRF. I have been lurking here for a very long time. Finally managed to register. I had always wondered what the GDF forum held . Now I know. A scifi thread too. Thank you administrators!
member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by member_28640 »

Hi my second post here...
Really love the mix of real world administration and Technical knowledge on show here ..
And of course the B.E.N.I.S thread :p
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Post by RamaY »

What is the added advantage of howitzer guns compared to Pinaka MBRL which is produced domestic? Can the need for light-weight howitzers be covered by canisterizing 4-12 Pinakas which can be mounted in smaller mobile platforms and can be air-lifted by Indian helicopter platforms?

In other words, can we design our MBRL batteries based on payload limitations of Indian helicopter platforms?
Post Reply