International Military Discussion

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
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

just shows china is very vulnerable to apeing the US blindly.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

Acharya wrote:
Avinandan wrote:
I am just wondering how PLA would react to this report. They too have adopted this pattern.
Additionally,what about the LCH TD2 , should we change the colour scheme ?
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/07/he ... -td-2.html
What is strange is that helmet and outfit for PLA matches the US army and marines

It looks like they may sync up later against a common enemy
Apart from 1962 and later in Vietnam, the PLA hasn't got toomuch combat experience includign fighting insurgencies, so I don't it matters too much to them as they are for more show than any real use. PRC will get into a war as an aggressor and never will it be in the war where someone declares war on it. It is a luxury we do not have
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by svinayak »

Aditya_V wrote:
Apart from 1962 and later in Vietnam, the PLA hasn't got toomuch combat experience includign fighting insurgencies, so I don't it matters too much to them as they are for more show than any real use. PRC will get into a war as an aggressor and never will it be in the war where someone declares war on it. It is a luxury we do not have
PRC war doctrine are different from rest of the major powers.
They just use the troops for cannon fodder and they do not worry of global stability to achieve their aims.

PRC protects its national interest at all costs.
It does not have a domestic opinion to worry about and does not worry what other country would do when it protects is own territory
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Philip »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... n-spy.html

Top level British secrets 'compromised by Canadian spy'
Top secret British intelligence may have been compromised and potentially sold to Russian sources, it has emerged, following the arrest of a Canadian naval officer on suspicion of leaking high-level information to foreign entities over the last five years.

xcpt:
By Amy Willis, Los Angeles
7:45AM BST 25 Jul 2012
Comment
Jeffrey Paul Delisle, a naval intelligence officer, has been charged with selling a vast trove of top secret information between July 2007 and January 2012.

Authorities are investigating whether the foreign entities involved may be Russian diplomats, following the recall of four envoys from Ottawa. Moscow has denied any links despite the diplomats having been recalled before their postings had been completed.

Top level British intelligence gathered by radio and radar signals is believed to have been included in the leak as well as confidential Australian, New Zealand, Canadian and American material. The countries make up the "Five Eyes" intelligence community.

The exact specifics of the information were not disclosed, although some of the data is thought to have originated from the UK's Government Communications Headquarters.

Earlier this year, a secret international conference was held in New Zealand to discuss the alleged espionage case and any potential repercussions, according to reports. High-level consultations between the Australian and Canadian governments were also held.

Much of the data is considered more highly classified than the disclosures attributed to US Private Bradley Manning, who is accused of releasing a vast cache of classified files to whistleblowing website WikiLeaks, according to security sources who spoke to Australian newspaper The Sydney Morning Herald.

"The signals intelligence community is very close, we share our intelligence overwhelmingly with the US, UK and Canada," an unnamed former Australian Defence Signals Directorate officer said.

An Australian Defence Department spokeswoman said the government did not comment on intelligence matters.

"However, the Australian government takes national security very seriously and is continually reviewing and strengthening policies, practices and techniques to ensure Australia's national security," she told AFP.

Delisle's offences allegedly occurred in the Canadian capital Ottawa, Halifax and in towns in Ontario and Nova Scotia provinces, court documents said.

He has been charged under Canada's Security of Information Act, with a conviction carrying a maximum penalty of life in prison
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by chetak »

Portsmouth man facing arson count in nuclear sub fire


Casey James Fury is charged with setting the blaze that caused $400 million in damage at the Kittery shipyard.
By David Hench dhench@mainetoday.com
Staff Writer


The fire that raged through a nuclear submarine this spring at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery was deliberately set by a 24-year-old worker who told investigators he was suffering from anxiety and depression, according to Navy investigators.



The May 23 fire did $400 million in damage to the USS Miami and was fought by firefighters from three states.

Casey James Fury of Portsmouth appeared in federal court Monday and was told he faces up to life in prison if convicted of setting the fire to the sub, which was in the middle of a 20-month overhaul at the shipyard.

Fury was articulate and polite, clean-shaven and with medium-length hair at Monday's hearing. He wore orange jail clothing and handcuffs when he entered the courtroom. At one point he shared a chuckle with his court-appointed attorney.

Several family members attended the hearing, some of them crying periodically. They would not speak with the media.

Investigators with the Naval Criminal Investigative Service arrested Fury at the shipyard Friday night.

The arrest left shipyard workers bewildered.

"There is shock at the reality of the situation and the absurdity and the irrational reasoning of why those fires were started," said Paul O'Connor, president of the Metal Trades Council, which represents many of the workers at the yard.

"We're a community in the shipyard and we take our work seriously. For someone to be so reckless and callously irresponsible ... the actions just don't make sense and they never will to a rational human being."

Authorities initially said the fire appeared to have started in a vacuum cleaner found near where the fire originated.

But the incident prompted a massive inquiry into all aspects of the fire, which led shipyard workers to believe there was more to it, O'Connor said.

NCIS investigators apparently identified Fury as a suspect following a second fire June 16, according to an affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Portland by NCIS Special Agent Jeremy Gauthier.

That fire, which was set among alcohol cleaning wipes placed on the dry dock scaffolding that supports the submarine, did little damage and the Navy said it appeared unrelated.

But another worker saw someone wearing green overalls and a hard hat near the area where the second fire started. Investigators interviewed people who had been working in that area, including Fury, who was employed as a painter and sandblaster.

He denied setting the smaller fire at the time, but was interviewed again last Wednesday and admitted setting it, the court papers said.

Fury told investigators that he had become anxious after texting his former girlfriend because he had come to believe that a man she was seeing was not merely a friend as she had claimed, the court papers said.

He told investigators he set the fire so he could leave work early. His mind was racing and he walked toward the rear of the boat, stuffed some alcohol wipes on the structure used to hold up the sub on the dry dock, and set fire to them.

During Wednesday's interview, Fury continued to deny setting the May 23 fire, which broke out in the area of a forward stateroom on the middle level of the ship and burned for 10 hours. Shipyard firefighters, submariners and firefighters from three states battled the blaze.

Firefighters were forced to enter the tight, blistering hot confines of the 360-foot submarine for short shifts to fight the blaze, battling smoke so dense they often couldn't see.

Nobody died, but seven people were injured. There were no weapons on board, the nuclear reactor was shut down and the propulsion area was not affected.

Fury had been working in the forward torpedo room, stripping paint with a tool on May 23, according to the court affidavit.

He initially told investigators he was alerted to the fire by a co-worker and saw billowing smoke as the two made their way up and out of the sub.

Investigators asked Fury to take a polygraph, which he did Friday, the court papers said.

When confronted with the results of the lie detector test, he admitted setting the May 23 fire as well, the court papers said.

"The reason he set the (May 23) fire was in order to get out of work," Gauthier said in his statement.

Fury said he initially lied about setting the fire because he was scared and "everything was blurry to him and his memory was impaired due to his anxiety and the medications he was taking at the time."

Fury walked investigators through the USS Pasadena, an identical Los Angeles attack submarine undergoing work at the shipyard, to show them step-by-step what he had done on May 23. He then did the same aboard the USS Miami.

Fury said he was working in a torpedo room in the forward part of the ship and was feeling extremely anxious.

He grabbed his cigarettes and a lighter and went up one flight of stairs to the staterooms.

There he set fire to some rags and left the room when the flames were two inches high, the court papers said.

A vacuum cleaner was on the bed near where he started the fire.

Fury had trouble remembering some details, describing the period as a blur during which he was intensely anxious.

He told authorities he was taking medicine for anxiety, depression, insomnia and allergies.

Days after the June 16 fire, Fury checked himself into an in-patient mental health facility for two days.

Fury is scheduled to be back in court Wednesday for a combined hearing to determine whether the government had probable cause to charge him and whether he should be released on bail.

U.S. District Court Judge John Rich III said the government can have Fury held for now.

"The government says there are no conditions of release that will ensure either your appearance or the safety of others in the community," Rich said.

As a sign of the case's significance, U.S. Attorney Thomas Delahanty II sat at the prosecutor's table and indicated afterward he will personally be involved in the prosecution along with Assistant U.S. Attorney Darcie McElwee and other assistant U.S. attorneys.

Fury faces two counts of arson in connection with the two fires. Delahanty said that arson is always a serious crime, with the possibility of death and serious injury, and the extent of damage to the submarine will not be a factor in determining Fury's guilt.

The Navy still has not said officially whether it will repair the Miami, at a cost of $250 million to $440 million, but O'Connor said he has been told it will be repaired at the Kittery shipyard.

However, the Navy is dealing with budget cuts and the possibility of even deeper, automatic cuts on Jan. 1 if Congress and the president can't reach agreement on deficit reduction, he said.

O'Connor said he does not know Fury or how long he had worked at the yard. He suspects Fury will spend a long time in prison.

"This one guy's irrational actions have had a negative impact on our national security," he said.

"How 'bout the men and women who risked their lives, whose lives were threatened by this reckless behavior?"

Staff Writer David Hench can be contacted at 791-6327 or at: dhench@pressherald.com
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32283
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by chetak »

James Stavridis: A Navy Admiral's thoughts on global security
Imagine global security driven by collaboration -- among agencies, government, the private sector and the public. That's not just the distant hope of open-source fans, it's the vision of James Stavridis, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Commander of the US European Command. Stavridis shares vivid moments from recent military history to explain why security of the future should be built with bridges rather than walls.

What will 21st-century security look like? Navy Admiral James Stavridis suggests that dialogue and openness will be the game-changers. Full bio »
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

russian new class of destroyers will apparently mount a naval version of the S500 to counter both ballistic missiles and new american hypersonic global strike missiles. Fakel has declined to reveal more details at present.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by nakul »

Are they copying the Americans who are deploying the Aegis system on ships since most countries apart from Poland & Czech have refused BMDs on their soil? USA was planning to place some of these BMD ships on the east coast of China apart from the Mediterranean & Baltic Sea. It would be interesting to sea where these ships are deployed.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

they have a much bigger problem - only the sole operational Kirov CGN has the area defence capability of SA-N-6 (navalised S300). no other fleet ship has anything beyond SA17.
compare to USN which has around 60 Aegis equipped ships packed with SM2 and soon the SM6.

if RuN wants to project force on the surface they need carriers and AAW ships...submarines are ok but for sea denial and raiding only, not showing the flag and muscling in on situations like the arctic dispute and south china sea contest.

they have not inducted a single large capital ship in 2 decades now! most of their large ships like the slavas, sovremeniys and udaloys are highly dated and probably with low time on deployment.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by NRao »

pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by pentaiah »

The Syrian forces are severely handicapped for want of UAVs in the fight for Allepo. If only Russia had advanced at least surveillance UAVs to give real time pictures of lane by lane location of the so called rebels..
Yesterday Anderson cooper report suggest that there are lot Bangladeshi and Pakis in the streets in Syria ... must be getting very well paid like kalapani company fighters...
SKrishna
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 21 Jan 2008 19:18
Location: Bombay
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by SKrishna »

We didn’t know what 90 percent of the switches did

A very interesting western point of view of Soviet aircraft from a test pilot who's job was to fly them. (John Manclark, commander of the 4477th Test & Evaluation Squadron, 1985-87)
On the MiG-21: "It had no gas – a point-defense fighter.
"We didn’t know what 90 percent of the switches did. We changed the ASI and parts of the oxygen system. ...."

"It was fun to fly. You could see out pretty well. The limitations included the throttle – there were two rpm gauges, and if you got them too far apart, and to 80 percent rpm, it would take you 17 seconds to get military power. When you flew it a long time you found a little notch that was there to remind you not to do that.
It was a great aircraft to fight if you wanted to fight slow – maybe not against an F-18. You’re at 120 knots and still pointing at him and all he’s looking at is your nose… you get down to 80 knots, dump the nose, go to 120 and from 30 deg nose low to 40 deg nose high and you didn’t go up, but the other guy goes 'holy smokes, here he comes'." Evasive action against this deceptive maneuver often put the unwary student inside the MiG-21's weapon envelope.
Probably this is what happened at Cope India exercises where Bisons managed to surprise the F-15s.
"The MiG-23 was a nightmare, maintenance was a nightmare. The guys hated flying it, and we checked people out when they had 3-5 months left.

"We had eight MiG-23s, two of them the air-to-ground version [MiG-23BN]. At high AOA (angle of attack) they were not as stable as the radar nose types.

"It would accelerate until it blew up. The limit was 720-710 knots, but guys would look down inside and see they were going 850-880.

"Everyone who flew it spun it at least once. You’d be in a separation maneuver at 1.4 and the nose would start searching from side to side. The stab-aug was terrible – although it was faster than anything we had, you weren’t ever comfortable.

"At Red Flag in the 1970s we were told that the MiG-23 would sweep its wings [forward] and kill you. Ron Iverson [4477th operations officer 1975-79, retired as a Lt Gen] flew one of the first ones. He said, “don’t worry about it -- most of the time it’s trying to kill me”.

Overall, the operation was hazardous. Tactical Air Command "asked us for our accident rate. TAC average was three to four major accidents per 100,000 hours, Five to six was a concern. We had a rate of 100/100,000, and that wasn’t counting all of them. We spun one and we never flew it again, because you got a fire light every time you started it."
Does this hold true of all Mig 23s or was this a case of not knowing hot fly the aircraft within its limits?


Another interesting tidbit which is an important lesson for designing to counter the countermeasures...
The CIA gave us a flare dispenser from a Frogfoot [Su-25] that had been shot down in Afghanistan. We gave it to maintenance – it was just a thing with wires coming out of it. Four hours later they had it operational on a MiG-21."

That proved to be a very important test. "In 1987 we had the AIM-9P, which was designed to reject flares, and when we used US flares against it would ignore them and go straight for the target. We had the Soviet flares – they were dirty, and none of them looked the same – and the AIM-9P said 'I love that flare'. :rotfl: :rotfl:

"Why’d that happen? We had designed it to reject American flares. The Soviet flares had different burn time, intensity and separation. The same way, every time we tried to build a SAM simulator, when we got the real thing it wasn’t the same.

"I use the AIM-9P because it is out of the system and I can talk about it. The same thing happened to a lot of things that are still in the system and that I can’t talk about." :eek: :eek:


Shows any weapon's performance in simulation and against and actual adversary are two different things. :wink: :wink:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

>> We had designed it to reject American flares. The Soviet flares had different burn time, intensity and separation.

I guess Cheen extracts value from buying up scraps and crashed stuff from around the world incl the F117 in Serbia (the USAF 'mistakenly' bombed the Cheen embassy for that?) , the SilentHawk from Abbotabad, etc etc
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Surya »

Does this hold true of all Mig 23s or was this a case of not knowing hot fly the aircraft within its limits?

seems rubbish to me - never heard anything like this from IAF pilots

take it with a ton of salt
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by NRao »

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

US Navy Ship Collides with Oil Tanker in Gulf
By ASSOCIATED PRESS | August 12, 2012 |

http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/ ... 66a08c6acb
Learn More
(DUBAI, United Arab Emirates) — A U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer was left with a gaping hole on one side after it collided with an oil tanker early Sunday just outside the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

The collision left a breach about 10 feet by 10 feet (three by three meters) in the starboard side of USS Porter. No one was injured on either vessel, the U.S. Navy said in a statement.

The collision with the Panamanian-flagged and Japanese-owned bulk oil tanker M/V Otowasan happened about 1 a.m. local time. Photos released by the Navy showed workers standing amid twisted metal and other debris hanging down from the hole.


Read more: http://world.time.com/2012/08/12/us-nav ... z23OGOoj5u
vishal
BRFite
Posts: 336
Joined: 27 Feb 2002 12:31
Location: BOM/SIN

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by vishal »

A good article on the few, but major, differences between these units. Especially what they fall back on under fire in an ambush.

The Difference Between DELTA and SEAL TEAM SIX
http://sofrep.com/5447/differences-delt ... al-team-6/

Extract: There is no “special” way to react to an ambush or contact that is taught only to SOF units and kept hidden from other units. React to ambush is a basic infantry battle drill...
::
::
The vast majority of Delta are infantrymen by MOS or were infantrymen at some point in their careers. SEALs are not or never were infantrymen nor have they spent time training as infantrymen; they are a maritime special operations force that focuses on direct action and special reconnaissance.
::
::
a squad leader with the Rangers, who has hit countless objectives side by side with ST6 expresses that the unit is incapable of making the switch from “operators” to “basic infantry grunts” when the need to do so arises. It’s not a fault of the unit but simply a by-product of where the shooters were “raised.”
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Singha »

per a old book I read, Delta started out in ST6 mode as mainly a CT/hostage rescue unit. but then branched out into conventional SF role also given the lack of assignments and the unwillingness of many foreign govts to allow american units to operate on their soil.
domestic hostage rescue has a dedicated unit of the FBI already. even the SWATs can tackle 99% of domestic incidents.
member_20067
BRFite
Posts: 627
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by member_20067 »

NATO releases details of brazen raid on base in Afghanistan


Six Harriers destroyed. We need to be increasingly careful about safeguarding our bases.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/15/world/asi ... ?hpt=hp_t1
SKrishna
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 21 Jan 2008 19:18
Location: Bombay
Contact:

Re: Indian Space Program Discussion

Post by SKrishna »

That smooth SpaceX launch? Turns out one of the engines came apart

This type of failover recovery is the advantage of using multiple small liquid engines. Even Saturn V had it. For GSLV Mk III instead of 2 large Semi cryo engines they could have used 5 or 7 smaller Vikas sized (semi cryo of course) and have the same advantage of failover recovery. Maybe ISRO could reconfigure PSLV in the future once they master the semi-cryo propulsion.

Video of engine failure:
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Space Program Discussion

Post by JTull »

Not the right thread for this discussion.

Anyway, the cargo capsule was launched succesfully but the second mission of launching a private satellite didn't reach the right orbit. Please google for more details.
SKrishna
BRFite
Posts: 151
Joined: 21 Jan 2008 19:18
Location: Bombay
Contact:

Re: Indian Space Program Discussion

Post by SKrishna »

JTull wrote:
Not the right thread for this discussion.

Anyway, the cargo capsule was launched succesfully but the second mission of launching a private satellite didn't reach the right orbit. Please google for more details.

I debated which thread to put this on that but since my point was in context of Indian rockets and SpaceX was only an illustrative example I figured that I should post it here. Anyway will move it to International Aerospace thread if moderator so desires.

Not sure which satellite launch you are talking about as afaik Falcon 9 has only flown 4 times (3 experimental flights and 1 commercial flight) and all have carried the Dragon resupply capsule for ISS. The second flight did carry some cubesats apart from the Dragon demo module. Do you mean it failed to put them in correct orbit? I found no references to any such failure.

The flight on October 7 successfully demonstrated the "engine-out capability". Quoting wiki "Falcon 9 is the first rocket "since the Saturn series from the Apollo program to incorporate engine-out capability" My point was to bring this capability into discussion wrt our own rocket design.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3118
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Space Program Discussion

Post by JTull »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html

SpaceX rocket delivers for NASA, but commercial satellite owner not so lucky because of glitch
jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5727
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by jamwal »

Army to Congress: Thanks, but no tanks

- If you need an example of why it is hard to cut the budget in Washington look no further than this Army depot in the shadow of the Sierra Nevada range.

CNN was allowed rare access to what amounts to a parking lot for more than 2,000 M-1 Abrams tanks. Here, about an hour's drive north of Reno, Nevada, the tanks have been collecting dust in the hot California desert because of a tiff between the Army and Congress.

The U.S. has more than enough combat tanks in the field to meet the nation's defense needs - so there's no sense in making repairs to these now, the Army's chief of staff Gen. Raymond T. Odierno told Congress earlier this year.

If the Pentagon holds off repairing, refurbishing or making new tanks for three years until new technologies are developed, the Army says it can save taxpayers as much as $3 billion.

That may seem like a lot of money, but it's a tiny sacrifice for a Defense Department that will cut $500 billion from its budget over the next decade and may be forced to cut a further $500 billion if a deficit cutting deal is not reached by Congress.

Why is this a big deal? For one, the U.S. hasn't stopped producing tanks since before World War II, according to lawmakers.

Plus, from its point of view the Army would prefer to decide what it needs and doesn't need to keep America strong while making tough economic cuts elsewhere.

"When a relatively conservative institution like the U.S. military, which doesn't like to take risks because risks get people killed, says it has enough tanks, I think generally civilians should be inclined to believe them," said Travis Sharp a fellow at the defense think tank, New American Security.

But guess which group of civilians isn't inclined to agree with the generals on this point?

Congress.

To be exact, 173 House members - Democrats and Republicans - sent a letter April 20 to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, urging him to continue supporting their decision to produce more tanks.

That's right. Lawmakers who frequently and loudly proclaim that presidents should listen to generals when it comes to battlefield decisions are refusing to take its own advice.

If the U.S. pauses tank production and refurbishment it will hurt the nation's industrial economy, lawmakers say.
DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 1048
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by DavidD »

Avinandan wrote:
I must admit, I was very much fascinated with these uniforms and wanted the Indian Army to adopt that. This contradicts the common man's view that all US stuff are gold standard.

I am just wondering how PLA would react to this report. They too have adopted this pattern.
Additionally,what about the LCH TD2 , should we change the colour scheme ?
http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2011/07/he ... -td-2.html
It's not the digital pattern per se that's the problem, it's the colors used. The U.S. has been fighting in desert environment for the past decade plus, and that green/grey color combo sticks out like a sore thumb. Digital camo works great, and that's a scientific fact, but green/grey works well only in environments that have a lot of green/grey, for obvious reasons. They need to adopt multiple color combos for different situations, as the article mentioned. The marines are doing just fine with digital camos, the difference is that they use a green(lighter and not as bright as the army green)/brown combo, which works much better in desert and relatively bare mountain environments ala Iraq and Afghanistan.
Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: International Military Discussion

Post by Avinandan »

Thanks for the info. That means that Digital Camo is better. In that case what are the implications of implementing it in Indian Armed Forces ?

Some time back, I was travelling with a group of army men in train. They revealed that the supplied quality of cloth is not up to the mark and they were forced to buy some of their uniforms from their own pocket. The other stuff like boots, belts etc were okay. The armymen were wearing their uniforms and I could validate the quality between the supplied and bought uniforms at that time. Depressing but true.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Singha »

and this when India supplies clothing to all the worlds top retailers. must be some woebegone ofb plant supplying least cost clothing.
rather than apaches I think we need more funds devoted such daily use items. why not better boots and bags too? sure the current ones are tough but tech is always making things lighter and better. moisture wicking 'technical' hats and shirts could help in humid conditions.
Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Shrinivasan »

Singha wrote:rather than apaches I think we need more funds devoted such daily use items. why not better boots and bags too? sure the current ones are tough but tech is always making things lighter and better. moisture wicking 'technical' hats and shirts could help in humid conditions.
this is rather sad state of affairs... i know we have come miles since the days of Kargil in terms of kit but we still have to advance a lot. Let us aim for Khan level, then we would atleast get to the level of Munnas. we can't just be comparing ourselves to the TFTA pigs across the border.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Paul »

The annual airshow in Miramar in San Diego is on. They have brought the JSF this time. Will post the pictures tomorrow.

Thanks,
Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 884
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Mihir »

http://www.businessinsider.com/behind-t ... ld-water-9

Lookit what the Amirkhans copied from SDREs! :shock:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Singha »

yeah but they have the books, tshirts and discovery HD videos to prove they invented it. :mrgreen:
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Mihir wrote:http://www.businessinsider.com/behind-t ... ld-water-9

Lookit what the Amirkhans copied from SDREs! :shock:
What particularly are you refering to?
Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 884
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Mihir »

The Ledo jump
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Mihir wrote:The Ledo jump
What is the Ledo jump?
TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by TSJones »

Never mind, I looked it up.

All I can say is that in December 1969, I went through a similar obstacle course (they called it the "confidence course") in boot camp at Parris Island. The first time I tried it, I couldn't make it and took the long drop into the water. A month later, I made it all the way through the course(I was much stronger at the time and not wore out). We called the rope slide at the end, the "slide for life". I'm sure that course had been there for 15-20 years. The whole obstacle course was about three miles long. I recall seeing a slide for life across a river that was in a US Army Ranger training video that was done in the 1950's. A lot of the commando training tactics used by the Rangers were acquired from the British commandos during WWII when they trained in Britain for D-Day. That included rope climbing, slide for life, etc.

When I went through boot camp we used a lot of Chicom training concepts and quite frankly some of the those training concepts predated the Chicoms. For instance the Marines "Gung Ho" (together with spirit) may have originated back during the days of the Boxer Rebellion when the Marines were sent there to the international embassy compound. We also were issued a "little red book" of basic Marine Corps information that we were required to know. Whenever we were wainting in line for something we were expected to stand at attention and read our little red book. I think that concept came from Chairman Mao and the Korean war days. The Marines are if nothing else, adaptable.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Military & Space Discussion

Post by Austin »

Post Reply