Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Post Reply
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chaanakya »

Navy, IAF to have dedicated satellites in next 2 years: Antony
Armed with the capability of providing real time data from multiple sites, the dedicated communication satellites for Indian Navy and Air Force will be launched in the next two years, government told the Lok Sabha today.

In a written reply to a question in the House, Defence Minister A K Antony said, "The naval satellite is planned to be launched in 2012-13... A dedicated communication satellite for Air Force is planned to be launched in 2013-2014."

The Tri-services Defence Communication Network (DCN) is being progressed as per the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP). DCN envisages a network of optical fibre cables, satellite earth stations and transportable and portable satellite terminals with high security features, he told the House.


"The design of these systems have features that enable conduct of simultaneous real time networked operations from multiple sites to cater for contingencies and failures, as well as hardware redundancies for fail-safe operations," Antony said.

Replying to a question on testing of Pinaka Multi Barrel Rocket Launcher (MBRL) he said, "Pinaka was test fired on 28-29 March. Ten Rockets were fired. Objective of the trial was testing of fuse system."

Developed by DRDO, Pinaka weapon system has already been inducted into Service with the Indian Army raising its two regiments.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chaanakya »

Army Aviation lacks helicopters: Parliament Standing Committee on Defence
New Delhi: Parliament's Standing Committee on Defence has confirmed that there are huge gaps between sanctioned and existing weapons platform with the Army. According to the Standing Committee on Defence report tabled in Parliament on Monday there is a huge shortage of helicopters with the Army Aviation unit. The Army faces a shortage of 18 Cheetah, one Chetak, 76 Advance Light Helicopter and 60 Advance Light Helicopter with weapon systems.

The report reveals that the letter written by Army Chief General VK Singh to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the poor state of Army's war preparedness and the obsolete weaponry showed the factual status. In the letter addressed to the Prime Minister dated March 12, General Singh had written that the Army's tank regiments lacked ammunition to defeat the enemy, the air defence was almost obsolete and the infantry falling short of critical weapons.

He underlined that the country's security might be at stake due to the critical shortage of ammunition. The letter, sent to the Prime Minister's Office, had asked Manmohan Singh to 'pass suitable directions to enhance the preparedness of the Army'. The explosive letter comes amidst claims made by the Army Chief that he was offered bribe to clear a deal for sub-standard vehicles in the Army.
Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Craig Alpert »

Soldiers yet to get bulletproof vests, ballistic helmets
NEW DELHI: Leave alone big-ticket items like missiles, helicopters or specialized tank ammunition, the government is yet to even provide soldiers with basic protective gear like modular bulletproof vests or ballistic helmets.

After going around in circles for several years, the much ballyhooed project to acquire 1,86,168 bulletproof jackets for the humble soldiers has come to a big naught. Similarly, the case for ballistic helmets with internal communication gear is yet to make any headway.

The 1.86 lakh jackets were to be inducted in the first phase under the fresh global tender or RFP (request for proposal) issued once again in March 2011, after obtaining approval from the defence acquisitions council chaired by defence minister A K Antony in October 2009.

While the first lot was to be inducted in the 11th Army Plan (2007-2012), another 1.67 lakh jackets were to be acquired in the second round.
Around a dozen companies did come forward with their proposals and were ready for trial evaluation but the RFP was "retracted'' last December due to problems in the technical parameters or the GSQRs (general staff qualitative requirements) drawn up for the jackets. The entire process will begin afresh this year, with "suitable'' tweaking of the GSQRs.

Soldiers currently are saddled with heavy, ineffective jackets and helmets, which greatly restrict their mobility during counter-insurgency and other operations. Over 150 security forces personnel, incidentally, die every year while battling militants in Jammu and Kashmir and the North-East.

The new gear is supposed to more effectively protect the head, neck, chest, groin and sides of soldiers as well as allow them to move with greater agility. The trials of the new "ergonomically designed'' jackets will be conducted both in hot and cold conditions, as also in the Terminal Ballistics Research Lab in Chandigarh to ensure they provide adequate protection against the latest lethal bullets.

As reported earlier by TOI, the Army wanted the modular jackets to provide "graded levels of protection''. For a "low threat perception'' mission, for instance, the jacket was to weigh less than 4 kg and have "a trauma pad with all-around soft armour plate, including front, sides, back, collar and neck''.

Conversely, for a high threat mission, the jacket's weight could go up to 11.5 kg, with "hard armour plates'' for front, rear, sides, upper arms, groin and throat, capable of protecting against 7.62mm x 39mm mild steel core ammunition fired from an AK-47 from 10 metres.

Taking note that it has been "consistently'' raising the critical shortage of bulletproof jackets over the years, the parliamentary standing committee on defence said it was high time the government fast-tracked their acquisition.

"We express unhappiness over the way procurement of such an important life-saving item required for the armed forces is being delayed. We also deplore the way the defence ministry has dealt with the issue of the weight of jackets by holding that soldiers are not required to wear them at their maximum weight under low threat levels,''
it said.
Craig Alpert
BRFite
Posts: 1440
Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Location: Behind Enemy Lines

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Craig Alpert »

Army gears up for life without its 'buddies'
NEW DELHI: It's a system that is often decried as colonial, but evokes considerable nostalgia among children of Army officers who grew up thinking of the 'Bhaiyyas' as members of their extended family. Now, in a surprise move, the Indian Army has come up with a proposal to end the 'sahayak' system, or deputing trained soldiers to do personal work of officers.

The proposal was submitted to the defence ministry in early April, and has received a "positive" response from defence minister A K Antony, sources said.

Estimates vary, but at least 30,000 combatants, more than an Army Corps strength, are believed to be deployed to assist serving officers and their families as part of the buddy system.

The Army headquarters has suggested that the 'sahayaks' be replaced by civilian personnel. Sources said Shimla-based Army Training Command carried out a detailed study of the concept of buddy system existing in major armies around the world. The study was ordered by General V K Singh early on his tenure as Army chief. The training command submitted several scenarios, from which the final 'solution' was submitted to the ministry.

Besides instances of misuse of these soldiers, there has also been concern about the kind of jobs they are made to do, and it being an affront to soldiers' self-esteem. The parliamentary standing committee on defence had called for its end, and Antony too has been in favour of abolishing it.

The Army proposes to replace soldiers with two kinds of civilians - Service Assistants (SA) and Non-Combatant Assistants (NCA). It would require 2,358 SAs and 22,620 NCAs to replace sahayaks. The Army has projected a monthly expenditure of Rs 3.54 crore for the SAs and Rs 11.31 crore for NCAs. The annual expenditure for the civilian setup to be brought in place of 'sahayaks' would be Rs 178.20 crore a year, according to Army estimates.

The proposal is to provide service assistants to all the 'flag ranks', officers above the rank of brigadier. There are 1,510 officers in the flag ranks of brigadiers, major generals, lieutenant generals and general.

Of the 1,414 colonels holding command of battalions, the 848 who are in family stations would also be entitled to SAs. Together, 2,358 SAs would be required, Army says. Each of these SAs would cost the exchequer Rs 15,000 per month.

There are 30,450 'field ranks' (major, lieutenant colonel and colonel), excluding the 1,414 colonels who are commanding battalions. Of them, 18,270 are in peace stations while 12,180 are in field stations. The Army has proposed that those in peace stations (18,270) would be authorized a non-combatant assistant each. The NCAs can be hired on a contract of Rs 5,000 per month, the Army suggested.

In the rank of captain and lieutenant, the Army has a sanctioned strength of 14,500 officers. Of them, 8,700 are in peace stations while the remaining 5,800 are posted in the field. Only those posted in peace stations would be entitled to NCAs, that too two officers will share one NCA. This would mean that 4,350 NCAs would be required for captains and lieutenants
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by VinodTK »

^^
It's a system that is often decried as colonial, but evokes considerable nostalgia among children of Army officers who grew up thinking of the 'Bhaiyyas' as members of their extended family.
I wonder as to what kind of families would ask their extended relatives to do the house hold work these brave folks were asked to do!!! 30,000 of them,that is a crime pure and simple. Who ever is responsible for putting an end to this practice, should be given a lot of credit.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by rohitvats »

^^^You're commenting on a system based on a report and which you don't understand. Yes, there are instances of misuse of the Sahayak system but the system has evolved a lot from the colonial times. And there is a simple reason for this - the officers are not the same as are the other ranks. As for combatants being deployed and hence, there be some sort of gap because of this, well, it sounds alarmist but is nowhere close. Sahayak of an officer is a man drawn from the paltan and who does all the training and other activities as required of him. More often than not, men are rotated out of the Sahayak profile with an officer so that they can fulfill other duties.IMO, this new move creates additional burden on the exchequer and takes away a very vital link between the officers and their families and jawans.
anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by anjan »

VinodTK wrote:^^
It's a system that is often decried as colonial, but evokes considerable nostalgia among children of Army officers who grew up thinking of the 'Bhaiyyas' as members of their extended family.
I wonder as to what kind of families would ask their extended relatives to do the house hold work these brave folks were asked to do!!! 30,000 of them,that is a crime pure and simple. Who ever is responsible for putting an end to this practice, should be given a lot of credit.
I think this puts the misuse before the use of the system. And it misrepresents what a sahayak is actually meant for. An officer is under tremendous stresses in the field. The system exists primarily to spare him as much of the non-essential stress as possible. An officer is better put to looking at the disposition of his men than straightening out his equipment and uniform. I know officers who in their bachelor days used to hand over money management to their sahayaks and only get money for cigarettes and petrol. I just mention that to illustrate the level of trust there and point out the type of relationship that exists. It's worth asking if the original problem has somehow gone away(...no) or in what manner and how well the new system will address the same issues.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by shiv »

I believe this army "batman" business needs to be seen in the context of how society was structured say 50-80 years ago cpmpared with what it is now.

My own grandfather had an absolutely loyal servant whose entire family lived in an outhouse. He was totally trusted and totally trustworthy. Right up to my own teens, long after my grandfather was dead this man used to ready my bed at night. He would clean out cupboards and keep his head bowed in respect as he dusted off my dead grandfathers durbar coat. There was nothing in his life that suggested that he was being enslaved. this was his life. It was his vocation. His son, older than me got an education and left, but he man stayed on.

In this day and age I can no longer get people to live and work this way. There are now laws about rental and tax and days off etc that were not there previously and a man or woman who can work in this way will be paid five times more to do the same work for 2 hours a day in 3 different homes.

The army batman whom I used to see when I was a boy belonged in the society of that day in which his employment gave him dignity, purpose, security and an address. Today the family of such a man will receive an education because education is that much more freely available. Jobs too are more varied, better paying and more easily available making this kind of loyal servant job meaningless.

After the old man I spoke of above, Papaiah died, my parents had a series of live in servants, better paid and less loyal. I got rid of the last set over a decade ago. This again was a family where the got free accommodation and electricity and the lay did all the housework and the man doubled up as gardener although he worked odd jobs outside. But from my viewpoint were concerns that did not exist for my grandfather. First of all, accommodation, electricity and water were free. That allowed me to keep the salary lower as compensation for rent. But the family earned enough to wire up their house with all sorts of electrical gadgets (TV, mixer, washing machine) and technically I had no legal right to not give them one day off in a week. But collecting rent would put me at the mercy of the rent control and tenancy laws. I kicked this family out after i realized that they were essentially using 25% of my property as their own. The man's eldest son is now driver earning 8000 a month. The wife and family earn 8000 + free accommodation in another block of flats, the husband get some more on the side, while a younger son is getting educated. No more live-in help for me. Those days are gone.

Sorry to go OT, but I think it has become unsustainable to keep the kind of close officer-batman relationship that used to exist on a large scale. The batman was always from a family that had little other opportunity in the past. Today they have opportunities and rights that conflict with the concept of batman. But describing it as demeaning and inhuman is inappropriate. It was not in that day and age.
samsher
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 49
Joined: 28 Jan 2009 05:23

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by samsher »

I would like to add some perspective to this discussion. Having grown up in the 'Sahayak' culture I have have observed both the 'use' and 'misuse' of the so called "pracice".

Considering the fact that education levels of our Jawans (and the country as a whole) have increased tremendously, combined with the fact that the Indian Army is constantly looking at providing more leadership roles to the NCO cadre, I do think the decision to do away with the system is the right decision.

This statement hits home:
shiv wrote: But describing it as demeaning and inhuman is inappropriate. It was not in that day and age.

To give you an example, my dad was commisioned in '65 and he did indeed have a "Sahayak" from his unit. He was indeed his "buddy" who had served with him in the field and when we were stationed in a so called "peace station" he was with us for many years and travelled with us on a couple of postings.
By the time I really started to get to "know" him we were on the move but I would talk to him and my dad would tell me stories about him. He only had a basic education. If I remember correctly you only needed to be "5th pass" to join the army...that was him. He was only a sepoy and retired as a sepoy and even after retirement he came back to visit us a couple of times, and by that time I was already in my late teens and he still had the same pride and respect for his unit.

I remember growing up in the 80's and 90's and we had a few "sahayaks" and in my teen years I could sense that not all of them were happy with that role but it didnt mean they werent proud soldiers or proud of their unit .
When I visited folks in the A/F or Navy I would always wonder.." how come they dont have any help", they too need focus on their stressful jobs rather than "mundane" duties..

Anyways, sorry for the rant and probably OT but just another perspective.

Cheers,
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by merlin »

rohitvats wrote:More often than not, men are rotated out of the Sahayak profile with an officer so that they can fulfill other duties.
Just an anecdotal data point here - I know of one Sahayak who rose to be the SM of his paltan.

I think it is difficult for civilians to understand the role of a Sahayak and how it fits into the IA culture and hence the many misconceptions.
Sachin
Webmaster BR
Posts: 8965
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Undisclosed

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Sachin »

"Batman returns.." :)

This would be one of the most recurring topics in the Army News and Discussions.
rohitvats wrote:Yes, there are instances of misuse of the Sahayak system but the system has evolved a lot from the colonial times. And there is a simple reason for this - the officers are not the same as are the other ranks.
I have not served in the Armed forces, neither have my parents. But as you said sahayak system can be grossly misused. That is because there is no way the work alloted to these folks can be monitored and marked as official (i.e assisting the officer) or un-official (i.e doing the normal household chores). I am all in for having a personal assistant who can assist the officer with his official activities (including maintaining uniforms etc.). But if it comes to stuff like cooking, purchasing groceries, driving family folks around, then I guess they should hire normal civilian folks.
anjan wrote:An officer is under tremendous stresses in the field. The system exists primarily to spare him as much of the non-essential stress as possible. An officer is better put to looking at the disposition of his men than straightening out his equipment and uniform.
This has been the regular theory floated around. As I said above, sahayaks should be provided for upkeep of uniforms or helping the officer in any of his official activities. But I do have my reservations on having too many sahayaks in a peace station helping out the officers. This free servant business should stop sooner or later.

BTW, IN and IAF officers do have a pleathora of uniforms, their life is also stressful and they too have a fair share of peace areas and field areas. But I have not seen any sahayaks for them. And the officers do have drivers etc. from IAF itself. If I get it right they have a trade NCE (Non-Combatant enrolled) who workes as gardners, dhobis, safai-walahs etc. Navy I guess do have a trade known as "Topaz", whose one activity is to make sure that the toilets are clean. No other navy has this "exclusive trade", the sailors and officers maintain their respective toilets well.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

shiv wrote:I believe this army "batman" business needs to be seen in the context of how society was structured say 50-80 years ago cpmpared with what it is now.

My own grandfather had an absolutely loyal servant whose entire family lived in an outhouse. He was totally trusted and totally trustworthy. Right up to my own teens, long after my grandfather was dead this man used to ready my bed at night. He would clean out cupboards and keep his head bowed in respect as he dusted off my dead grandfathers durbar coat. There was nothing in his life that suggested that he was being enslaved. this was his life. It was his vocation. His son, older than me got an education and left, but he man stayed on.
Shiv,

I have lived quite a lot in Army and a good part of it in Jalandhar cantt. Batman is not the 'willing' or 'loyal' servant. I cannot generalise , but as far I have seen, 'majority' are treated like 'slaves.' Most abhor batman duties. Its my personal opinion.

But as a joke, if someone has a issue please don't kick me. I have already been kicked by Shyam Thapa on Cantt football field. Actually not directly. He kicked my football and I was unfortunately standing in the front. So, the football hit my stomach (I was around 7 yrs (edited)) and I flew along with football for a good distance (my first superman experience). Muttu, the batman of a particular officer (and my fav) and Thapa took me to the MI Room and I was there for a day, trying to breath. A sorry Thapa came to my house for at least five days to check on me.

Talking about Muttu. A Tamil chap, assigned to a Punjabi officer. Each day I woke up at 5.30 Am to got out to school (Kendriya Vidhyalaya No 2) , I could see Muttu in fatigues and army boots doing house hold chores and get abused by the wife of the officer the whole day. He hated it. if he says that he doesn't want, then he will be punished. If he runs away from Army, you know what happens. It was hilarious some times. Out of anger he brought a sack of brinjals for Rs 50. The lady did not have change.

Once she tried to instill some civility in Muttu and asked him to add 'ji' for everything he says. So, Muttu said "Madamji, gayji ne Gobarji kardiya ji."

Just some old memories.......
Last edited by chackojoseph on 04 May 2012 00:06, edited 1 time in total.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Lalmohan »

my uncle (long time in IA) made it very clear to my aunt that his batman was for his military duties and not for her household needs :)
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by peter »

Antony knew about the quality of Tatra trucks since 2008. http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_dn ... ng_1683325
The general only reiterated what the army as well as defence minister AK Antony knew since 2008 — Tatra trucks are substandard and not suited for operational needs — when he wrote to the PM about the lack of defence preparedness. [..]

The army had brought the matter up before Antony at a meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) on September 26, 2008. The DAC is the defence ministry's apex body that takes the final call on purchases.

DNA has the minutes of the meeting that talk of the little use these redundant trucks have in a modern army.
[..]

Despite such specific findings, Antony did not intervene and the army had to continue with obsolete Tatra trucks. In fact, an order for 600 Tatra trucks is still pending with the army headquarters after General VK Singh refused to authorise the purchase following a “bribe offer of Rs14 crore”.
How on earth is Antony an honest person Chacko ("ji")?
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

peter wrote:Antony knew about the quality of Tatra trucks since 2008. How on earth is Antony an honest person Chacko ("ji")?
I just typed an reply and then decided to type this instead (I have kept it saved in text file and will post it after ). Tell me why he is a corrupt person. I will also request you to read what I typed and reply as per that. It should not be like last time. I would like to understand your POV and reply as per that.
anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by anjan »

samsher wrote: When I visited folks in the A/F or Navy I would always wonder.." how come they dont have any help", they too need focus on their stressful jobs rather than "mundane" duties..
Sachin wrote: BTW, IN and IAF officers do have a pleathora of uniforms, their life is also stressful and they too have a fair share of peace areas and field areas. But I have not seen any sahayaks for them. And the officers do have drivers etc. from IAF itself. If I get it right they have a trade NCE (Non-Combatant enrolled) who workes as gardners, dhobis, safai-walahs etc. Navy I guess do have a trade known as "Topaz", whose one activity is to make sure that the toilets are clean. No other navy has this "exclusive trade", the sailors and officers maintain their respective toilets well.
It is ludicrous to compare the field conditions for Infantry officers with Air Force and Naval officers. I can only imagine that commentators here don't really understand the conditions of service in the Infantry or the sustained periods for which Infantry officers are constantly in them.

None of this suggests there is no misuse. In good battalions COs come down on them and that sets the practice. Bad Gen. Offrs also sometimes misuse it with multiple sahayaks. Perhaps there are other ways of stopping misuse if it no longer works. Most officers I've known do act like Lalmohan's uncle and make the role of the Sahayak crystal clear.
Nikhil T
BRFite
Posts: 1286
Joined: 09 Nov 2008 06:48
Location: RAW HQ, Lodhi Road

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Nikhil T »

anjan wrote:
samsher wrote: When I visited folks in the A/F or Navy I would always wonder.." how come they dont have any help", they too need focus on their stressful jobs rather than "mundane" duties..
Sachin wrote: BTW, IN and IAF officers do have a pleathora of uniforms, their life is also stressful and they too have a fair share of peace areas and field areas. But I have not seen any sahayaks for them. And the officers do have drivers etc. from IAF itself. If I get it right they have a trade NCE (Non-Combatant enrolled) who workes as gardners, dhobis, safai-walahs etc. Navy I guess do have a trade known as "Topaz", whose one activity is to make sure that the toilets are clean. No other navy has this "exclusive trade", the sailors and officers maintain their respective toilets well.
It is ludicrous to compare the field conditions for Infantry officers with Air Force and Naval officers. I can only imagine that commentators here don't really understand the conditions of service in the Infantry or the sustained periods for which Infantry officers are constantly in them.

None of this suggests there is no misuse. In good battalions COs come down on them and that sets the practice. Bad Gen. Offrs also sometimes misuse it with multiple sahayaks. Perhaps there are other ways of stopping misuse if it no longer works. Most officers I've known do act like Lalmohan's uncle and make the role of the Sahayak crystal clear.
One point here is that defining the role of the 'Sahayak' should not be left unto the good sense (or the lack of it) of the concerned Officer. The Army is the employer of the Sahayak, it should clearly define the role, and kudos to the leadership for moving in this direction.

My personal experience here has been mixed. A very senior Lt Gen I'm related to (now retd) while living in Lutyens Delhi always had his XX paltan's Batmen serve at his house for all parties and family get-togethers. And worse, even after his retirement, he got (multiple) batmen from his paltan to serve at his house in Gurgaon. On being asked, I was told that 'sympathetic' CO's of the paltan send the batmen to his house, since the Lt Gen was one of the senior-most Army officers and this was a 'matter of pride' for the paltan. Now, the Lt Gen has no dearth of money - 90% of it a huge inheritance - but he prefers the batmen to hired help even after his retirement.

Another relative, a Lt Col in Ordnance living in Delhi's Army Cantt, only had one sahayak who'd come to clean the officer's dress, shine his shoes and his leather belt each morning and do no more.
rohitvats wrote: IMO, this new move creates additional burden on the exchequer and takes away a very vital link between the officers and their families and jawans.
Rs. 178 crore is not a burden on an Army that spends Rs 3600 crore on salaries for civilians and Rs 45,000 crore on paying the fighting forces. [Reference] I'm sure you'll agree that, today there are undoubtedly better ways of creating these 'links' between the officers, their families and the jawans. The jawans need not work in the officer's house to get close to the family.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Surya »

I have generally been against batmen because of the many misuses I have seen.

now my friends strongly disagree with me on somethings.

eg. a batman helping out the wife\kids

My friends argue that the batman by taking over the trusted care of them takes pressure off the officer.

When my friend was post haste deployed for parakaram, the batman accompanied the wife\kids and helped her move back home before getting back to rejoining.

I can agree on this point.

Again while I understand good officers do not misuse and bad officers do - knowing how things happen in India - the time has come to start winding down this practice over the next decade.
Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Virupaksha »

IMHO without any known use/misuse, I feel that Sahayaks of any kind in a non-field i.e. (home base/anywhere family is allowed to stay) setting for me should definitely be removed.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by rohitvats »

^^^ And what is your definition of a non-field station?
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

Nikhil T wrote:One point here is that defining the role of the 'Sahayak' should not be left unto the good sense (or the lack of it) of the concerned Officer. The Army is the employer of the Sahayak, it should clearly define the role, and kudos to the leadership for moving in this direction.

Rs. 178 crore is not a burden on an Army that spends Rs 3600 crore on salaries for civilians and Rs 45,000 crore on paying the fighting forces. [Reference] I'm sure you'll agree that, today there are undoubtedly better ways of creating these 'links' between the officers, their families and the jawans. The jawans need not work in the officer's house to get close to the family.
+1.

The raising profiles of the recruits is driving this. They are not village bumpkins anymore. They watch TV, are more educated (not 10 pass literates) etc.

Hopefully in future the officer - jawan bonding will be network centric. :D
ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1538
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by ASPuar »

How much dyou want to bet this wont go through?

Not because of the army. The army leadership actually wants to push this through, oddly enough.

The opposition is coming from the Babus in the ministry of defence, who have, some years ago, got themselves also authorised for an Army Sahayak. I am told that They are fighting tooth and nail not to lose this privilege.

Chacko, could you please do some research on this fact, and see what turns up?
schowdhuri
BRFite
Posts: 174
Joined: 15 Dec 2010 12:24

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by schowdhuri »

You will see a lot of differences between Air Force/Navy and the Army 'only' because a) the army has a far higher level of manpower, and b) because the army jawan is far less educated than his equivalent in Air Force/Navy.

Having 'lived' in air forces bases also, I have seen the differences first hand. Shiv is absolutely right. Batmen when I was small would often not allow the officers wife to wash dishes if the maid would not come. They would clean the floors also without even being asked. A decade later, this was no longer the case, sometimes they would refuse outright.

In almost all cases batmans would clear their corrosponding exam's and pick up ranks along with their work. WE had one who joined us as a gunner (sepoy), and left as a havildar, and when he left he was the no 1 of a gun. There are two problems: a) other jawans assume and accuse the batman of having picked up his rank not on capability, but on the officers recommondation b) the batman is seen as a shirker who is avoiding hard work. This is a huge burden on the batman (a bit like the ADC's are considered shirkers ;-))
VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2982
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by VinodTK »

Indian army shelves British colonial system of batmen
RAHUL BEDI in New Delhi

THE INDIAN army plans to abolish the colonial system of batmen or personal orderlies it inherited from the British military at independence 65 years ago.

Once implemented – sometime later this year – it would release some 30,000 combatants, or more than a regular army corps, allowing them to dump menial household chores and to rejoin their units as regular soldiers.

In exchange, the army proposes to replace batmen – renamed as sahayaks (assistants or helpers) some years ago in a feeble effort at distancing itself from its colonial heritage – by civilian personnel.

According to recommendations army headquarters submitted recently to the defence ministry, this change-over would entail hiring more than 25,000 civilians dubbed service assistants and non-combatant assistants at an annual outlay of Rs 1.78 billion (€312 million).

“The system of batmen in the army is demeaning for soldiers and should have been done away with years ago,” said former major general Sheru Thapliyal.

In recent times many of them were treated little better than domestic servants by officers and their families, a role that robbed them of their self-esteem and made them the object of scorn in their units, he said.

Many were even forced to undertake household chores such as cooking and cleaning

The term batman evolved in the British army during the inter-war years, before which they were known as soldier servants.

Moreover, in the British and Indian armies prior to independence in 1947 and shortly thereafter, when officers typically came from the privileged classes, it was not unknown for a batman to follow them into later civilian life as domestic servants.

For officers batmen were meant to be “runners”, to convey their orders to subordinates, maintain their uniform and personal equipment and drive vehicles.

They often acted as the officer’s bodyguard and in deceptively vague military jargon were required to perform other “miscellaneous tasks” demanded by the officer.

This latter nebulous responsibility in the British Indian army, particularly in modern day Pakistan’s North West Frontier, at times ended up as a euphemism for sexual liaisons between some officers and their batmen.

Many 19th and 20th century regimental histories hint broadly at steamy relationships between officers and Pathan batmen which, when they became known, resulted either in dishonourable discharges or the honourable alternative of suicide to sidestep regimental and familial disgrace.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Aditya_V »

OT-> This Batmen discussion reminded me of how during Mushraf years Paki Army transferred 50000 Batmen from Miltary to civilian thus reducing Defence expense and Increasing civilian expenses. Given the size of thier Army, those PA Afsars must be really leading a life of luxury with divisions of Batmen attending to them.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Austin »

Just a noob question , Do we have SF for Strategic Covert Operations deep inside Pakistan or China ? If not is there a need to have one along the lines Israel has newly established ?

Israel Establishes Strategic Covert Operations Force
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chaanakya »

X-Posted
Jarita wrote:DNA exclusive: Government did impose Tatra on the army
Started in 1986 - same year as Bofors

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_dn ... my_1683806

The Government hasn't imposed it (Tatra Truck) on the Army to have this vehicle
— AK Antony in the Rajya Sabha on May 2, 2012

The Union defence minister is either unaware of the defence audit wing’s warnings against the outdated and overpriced Tatra trucks or he is feigning ignorance.

In fact, the audit wing, which comes under the Comptroller & Auditor General (CAG), found in 2006 that orders for Tatra trucks were placed after considerable manipulation “to keep the production line of BEML alive”.

If Antony were to go through the files, he would have noticed the several audit findings that point out Tatra trucks were imposed on the army many a time.

Of course, it would be unfair to pin the entire blame on Antony. Several army officers, too, ensured that the racket kept rolling ever since the first truck was purchased in 1986. Some of them or maybe all those involved will have to answer the CBI in the coming days.

Of the various audit findings, DNA found one buried in
the files of the Master General of Ordnance (MGO) and the War Establishment (WE) — the two directorates in the army headquarters responsible for all procurements.

In 2006, the defence audit wing audited the performance of the army’s vehicle management. S Kalyanraman, a senior audit officer in the wing, chanced upon a transaction
with several anomalies in connection with the purchase of Tatra trucks. In a query note, accessed by DNA, to the army headquarters, he pointed out these discrepancies.

The infantry — the largest and most potent combat arm of the Indian Army — Kalyanraman noted in his query, needed high-mobility vehicles to rush troops to the front during war.

Based on its experience in the Kargil war in 1999 and during Operation Parakram in 2002, the army issued a fresh set of parameters for buying trucks (six-wheel drive trucks under GSQR 486). And three firms, BEML with its Tatra trucks, Tata Motors and Ashok Leyland, were shortlisted.

Strangely, BEML made it to the list with the Tatra T-815, a four-wheel drive truck. Tata Motors and Ashok Leyland were running six-wheel drive trucks on trial when the list was prepared.
"Subsequently the LPTA 1621 truck of Tata Motors qualified for induction in the army because the firm had carried out the suggested modifications successfully and it was approved by VRDE", Kalyanraman said in his note.


But inexplicable changes followed and an order for 490 trucks were placed with BEML in March 2006 at an estimated cost of Rs254.54. Kalyanraman's audit investigation revealed that the order went to BEML after "secretary (defence production) strongly recommended" the public sector unit to the then defence secretary and the then vice-chief of the army.

Shekhar Dutt was the defence secretary then. He is now the governor of Chhatisgarh. Considered close to the senior Congress leadership, Dutt received several assignments after retirement.

The defence ministry justified the switch by changing the parameters. It used a GSQR meant for some other truck to push the deal in favour of BEML. All this was done "to keep the production line of BEML alive".


Last year, too, the CAG reported negatively against BEML and Tatra. The CBI, a source said, will use these reports as evidence in its investigation into the Tatra scam.

The audit report (No. 24 of 2011-12) on defence services noted: "The increase of Rs352 crore under heavy and medium vehicles was mainly due to… additional requirement of funds for the new scheme (HMV Tatra Quantity 788)".

At least Rs314.85 crore was paid as advance for contracts that were hastily pushed through in March 2010 "for Tatra vehicles". But "no benefit could be achieved" and there was a case of "over-booking".


Once General VK Singh took over as the army chief, he refused to authorise a purchase of Tatra trucks, following a "bribe offer of Rs14 crore". The general has accused Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh of making the bribe offer. The CBI is investigating the matter.

But the fact is Kalyanraman's audit findings were buried under files and a scam was allowed to flourish for several years.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by peter »

Thanks Chaanakya. Saikat is doing excellent work.

Chacko Chayan ji,

Please read below and let us know how Mr Antony is not corrupt?

a) Antony knows about the bad quality of Tatra trucks in 2008
b) Knows about hanky panky in Tatra deals in 2009
c) Hears about General VKS's bribery complaint in 2010
(Antony does nothing on this complaint)
d) Tatra trucks are sub standard, Tatra charged Indian Govt 300% extra price and all this meant nothing to Antony?

Is looting of Indian tax payer money on substandard equipment under Antony's watch not enough for you?

chaanakya wrote:X-Posted
Jarita wrote:DNA exclusive: Government did impose Tatra on the army
Started in 1986 - same year as Bofors

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_dn ... my_1683806

The Government hasn't imposed it (Tatra Truck) on the Army to have this vehicle
— AK Antony in the Rajya Sabha on May 2, 2012

The Union defence minister is either unaware of the defence audit wing’s warnings against the outdated and overpriced Tatra trucks or he is feigning ignorance.

In fact, the audit wing, which comes under the Comptroller & Auditor General (CAG), found in 2006 that orders for Tatra trucks were placed after considerable manipulation “to keep the production line of BEML alive”.

If Antony were to go through the files, he would have noticed the several audit findings that point out Tatra trucks were imposed on the army many a time.

Of course, it would be unfair to pin the entire blame on Antony. Several army officers, too, ensured that the racket kept rolling ever since the first truck was purchased in 1986. Some of them or maybe all those involved will have to answer the CBI in the coming days.

Of the various audit findings, DNA found one buried in
the files of the Master General of Ordnance (MGO) and the War Establishment (WE) — the two directorates in the army headquarters responsible for all procurements.

In 2006, the defence audit wing audited the performance of the army’s vehicle management. S Kalyanraman, a senior audit officer in the wing, chanced upon a transaction
with several anomalies in connection with the purchase of Tatra trucks. In a query note, accessed by DNA, to the army headquarters, he pointed out these discrepancies.

The infantry — the largest and most potent combat arm of the Indian Army — Kalyanraman noted in his query, needed high-mobility vehicles to rush troops to the front during war.

Based on its experience in the Kargil war in 1999 and during Operation Parakram in 2002, the army issued a fresh set of parameters for buying trucks (six-wheel drive trucks under GSQR 486). And three firms, BEML with its Tatra trucks, Tata Motors and Ashok Leyland, were shortlisted.

Strangely, BEML made it to the list with the Tatra T-815, a four-wheel drive truck. Tata Motors and Ashok Leyland were running six-wheel drive trucks on trial when the list was prepared.
"Subsequently the LPTA 1621 truck of Tata Motors qualified for induction in the army because the firm had carried out the suggested modifications successfully and it was approved by VRDE", Kalyanraman said in his note.


But inexplicable changes followed and an order for 490 trucks were placed with BEML in March 2006 at an estimated cost of Rs254.54. Kalyanraman's audit investigation revealed that the order went to BEML after "secretary (defence production) strongly recommended" the public sector unit to the then defence secretary and the then vice-chief of the army.

Shekhar Dutt was the defence secretary then. He is now the governor of Chhatisgarh. Considered close to the senior Congress leadership, Dutt received several assignments after retirement.

The defence ministry justified the switch by changing the parameters. It used a GSQR meant for some other truck to push the deal in favour of BEML. All this was done "to keep the production line of BEML alive".


Last year, too, the CAG reported negatively against BEML and Tatra. The CBI, a source said, will use these reports as evidence in its investigation into the Tatra scam.

The audit report (No. 24 of 2011-12) on defence services noted: "The increase of Rs352 crore under heavy and medium vehicles was mainly due to… additional requirement of funds for the new scheme (HMV Tatra Quantity 788)".

At least Rs314.85 crore was paid as advance for contracts that were hastily pushed through in March 2010 "for Tatra vehicles". But "no benefit could be achieved" and there was a case of "over-booking".


Once General VK Singh took over as the army chief, he refused to authorise a purchase of Tatra trucks, following a "bribe offer of Rs14 crore". The general has accused Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh of making the bribe offer. The CBI is investigating the matter.

But the fact is Kalyanraman's audit findings were buried under files and a scam was allowed to flourish for several years.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by Surya »

Saikat is a double edged sword

the man has some serious contacts
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chaanakya »

peter wrote:Thanks Chaanakya. Saikat is doing excellent work.
You should thank Jarita. He first posted it. :)
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

peter wrote:Thanks Chaanakya. Saikat is doing excellent work.

Chacko Chayan ji,

Please read below and let us know how Mr Antony is not corrupt?

a) Antony knows about the bad quality of Tatra trucks in 2008
b) Knows about hanky panky in Tatra deals in 2009
c) Hears about General VKS's bribery complaint in 2010
(Antony does nothing on this complaint)
d) Tatra trucks are sub standard, Tatra charged Indian Govt 300% extra price and all this meant nothing to Antony?

Is looting of Indian tax payer money on substandard equipment under Antony's watch not enough for you?
Pedro,

Not just Antony, the Tatra trucks is being under scanner since 2003, if you are not aware of it. In 2005, the case was in karnataka HC. IMO, tatra has not been nailed.

The 2008 onwards vigilance on BEML has been already discussed in the discussions before, of course, you have again chose to not read it. I am not going to repeat that.

Also, don't mislead. BEML is the one which has charged excess to Army and not Tatra. The tatra investigations are still going on. All people are reporting is a loss of Rs 13 crore on BEML and still not nailed Tatra.

Why don't you search and read the TOI interview by vectra Owner? I know you are not going to read it, i will not bother taking pains. But, if you are really interested on the other side of the story, i will recommend it to you. FYI, he has given very detailed replies on each aspect like, the ownership, the costs, the method of payments etc.

The 2006 report is for keeping "BEML lines open." You should check if that is corruption of Antony or not. They are stating that army officers have kept the wheels running inspite of this and that. let the investigations be over.

I will also suggest you reading the other articles which also shed different facts and not indulge in bringing in one write up and then asking me same thing again and again.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by peter »

chackojoseph wrote:
peter wrote:Thanks Chaanakya. Saikat is doing excellent work.

Chacko Chayan ji,

Please read below and let us know how Mr Antony is not corrupt?

a) Antony knows about the bad quality of Tatra trucks in 2008
b) Knows about hanky panky in Tatra deals in 2009
c) Hears about General VKS's bribery complaint in 2010
(Antony does nothing on this complaint)
d) Tatra trucks are sub standard, Tatra charged Indian Govt 300% extra price and all this meant nothing to Antony?

Is looting of Indian tax payer money on substandard equipment under Antony's watch not enough for you?
[..]

Also, don't mislead. BEML is the one which has charged excess to Army and not Tatra. The tatra investigations are still going on. All people are reporting is a loss of Rs 13 crore on BEML and still not nailed Tatra.
Unbelievable. You have no comment on the fact that Antony is allowing substandard trucks to be used by Indian army from a company which tried to bribe the COAS? Your silence on this point makes it amply clear that you will defend Antony and your POV at any cost no matter what.

Read this to understand who is misleading whom: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 015008.cms
chackojoseph wrote: Why don't you search and read the TOI interview by vectra Owner?
Read them all. Have you ever met a human being on this planet who says that he took bribes and all his deals are highly corrupt? Comeon buddy time to call a spade a spade.
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

There is no proof that it is substandard. Army chief has his definition. As per what he said is that it is of older gen, inadequate support (BEML) and highly prices (BEML). DRDO has its opinion and says its very good. Soldiers on border have their own good words for it. So, its not exactly 'substandard,' IMHO.

What is unbelievable is that you claim to have read all the sources and still post this.

Call a spade a spade. That's apt for you.

Added later....

I am not saying that Army chief is wrong when he says "substandard" when the definition is " below the prescribed standard or norm." At the same time, if you would have read that interviews and stories (as you claim to have), both BEML and Tatra Sipox have said that they have gone a step forward in some cases even when the prescribed limits were lower.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by rohitvats »

chackojoseph wrote:There is no proof that it is substandard. Army chief has his definition. As per what he said is that it is of older gen, inadequate support (BEML) and highly prices (BEML). DRDO has its opinion and says its very good. Soldiers on border have their own good words for it. So, its not exactly 'substandard,' IMHO.<SNIP>
Have you read this: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... ion-engine
TOI is in possession of five secret letters in which the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), ordinance depots, Indian Air Force and Border Roads Organisation have rattled off a litany of defects found in Tatra trucks purchased recently. BEML has been grappling to fix the problems in the trucks, highly placed sources said.
In the letter, the SFC said the trucks had nagging problems relating to cabin lifting pump. Sources said that in some trucks, the cabin lifting was not stable, making the fleet unusable for crucial tasks like radar monitoring. "If the truck is unstable, then the radar monitoring goes for a toss, because for monitoring, the vehicle has to be stabilized. In these trucks, the cabin lifting is erratic," said an Army source.

The SFC also complained about the poor quality of parts in the truck. In one truck, the steering wheel came off during the test drive while the entire body of some trucks had dents all over and greasing of the fleet was also not done. The fleet was earmarked for SFC operations and correction of the defects is underway.

Similarly, the IAF also wrote to BEML about technical defects in Tatra trucks. On March 26, the IAF station in Bhaisiana, Bhatinda complained about faults with hand brakes and ignition-starter malfunction in three trucks which are under guarantee period. The IAF also wrote about problems like hard steering, wheel wobbling at 50 km/hr speed and engine knocking and problems with the clutch.

In another letter, the DG, BRO, that purchased 50 trucks recently pointed to repeated engine failure and engine oil leaks. BEML was informed about the engine failure instances reported in two places -- Manali in Himachal Pradesh and Gauchar in Uttarakhand.

The latest complaint, on April 16, was made by the central ordinance depot (COD) Dehu Road, where the commandant stopped payment after finding that an engine had stalled. Along with the letter, BEML was also sent photographs of numerous damaged spare parts received recently and was asked for speedy replacement.
peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by peter »

chackojoseph wrote:There is no proof that it is substandard. Army chief has his definition. As per what he said is that it is of older gen, inadequate support (BEML) and highly prices (BEML). DRDO has its opinion and says its very good. Soldiers on border have their own good words for it. So, its not exactly 'substandard,' IMHO.
Plain and blatant lie! This is from Saikat's article linked above in my post (which you did not read): http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_dn ... ng_1683325
......provided the army with ample evidence that Tatra trucks could never meet the army standards.

The army had brought the matter up before Antony at a meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) on September 26, 2008. The DAC is the defence ministry's apex body that takes the final call on purchases.

DNA has the minutes of the meeting that talk of the little use these redundant trucks have in a modern army. The army headquarters even revised the parameters for new generation trucks that would meet its operational requirements.

Despite such specific findings, Antony did not intervene and the army had to continue with obsolete Tatra trucks
.
Note that:
a) It is not COAS who is saying that Tatra trucks don't meet army standards as you have been claiming.
b) It is the opinion of *all* soldiers which includes the Soldiers on the border which was presented to DAC in 2008 by army.

Will you please stop mis-representing facts now?
chackojoseph
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4297
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 22:42
Location: From Frontier India
Contact:

Re: Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

Post by chackojoseph »

rohitvats wrote:Have you read this: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... ion-engine
No I did not. I will in few hours.

added later....

Just read, Thanks, had missed it. I am not stating that there is no complaint on Tatra. Every vehicle has issues. Army has been using it for long time. As I said before, We have various statements on Tarta which claims from very good to some problems. How can we universally paint it sub standard 'except' that its not 'as per the QR'?

One thing, I wish to make clear. I have read many of these and has claims and reverse claims. Hence, I am not 'yet' willing to form an opinion.

The CBI is working on it. I have stated what the investigation has brought out (the 13 cr loss). till now, I have not found anything that I can form my opinion upon. I am not talking about a conclusion, forming an opinion.
Post Reply