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.
An year ago, we thought a bit ahead and decided that. 1024 resolution is going to go out of phase and the sites were designed for the 1280 res screens
But now with Netbooks and ipads. 1024 is coming back into play. We will try something out and see
My knowledge regarding websites and stuff is almost 0. I thought it was simply a matter of somehow "removing" the ad. Where does screen resolution come into this?
NOTE: If this cannot be explained in very simple words, please do not make the effort (of typing a long, technical explanation). Everything will go above my head!
to put it simply , its the width of your screen in pixels. websites are designed for specific widths - otherwise an ugly horizontal scroll bar will appear.
The forum for example will work across all widths without any issues. same cannot be said for the main site. they will not fit correctly in smaller screens without a horizontal scroll bar appearing.
I think who ever crosses 100 posts will become BRfite and who crosses 2000 posts will be Oldie. But I would like mods to change a modification, so that members who have completed 10 years in BRF and yet not crosses 100 posts will be designated as other name, but not "BRfite Trainee," probably most of them distinguished personalities and still designated as Trainee, while newbies and naives like me crossed that level. This is my humble request.
kmkraoind wrote:I think who ever crosses 100 posts will become BRfite and who crosses 2000 posts will be Oldie. But I would like mods to change a modification, so that members who have completed 10 years in BRF and yet not crosses 100 posts will be designated as other name, but not "BRfite Trainee," probably most of them distinguished personalities and still designated as Trainee, while newbies and naives like me crossed that level. This is my humble request.
I agree. I am a BRFite, but most of my posts are questions, rather than answers. While I have noticed some trainees around who have absolute knowledge over some subject and give brilliant answers. Must be coming from years and years of lurking, or because they are associated with that field. Since it is not possible to rank on the basis of the latter (their background, knowledge, etc.), long time lurkers should be labelled something other that "trainee".
^^^^ you know what atreya true professionals are not interested if they are labeled as trainees or oldies as we really dont know who they are in their real lives its just the handle that we know ... it doesn't matter as it is too trivial ....have you seen noobs being pushed around here ??? if this happened there is a valid case to be considered this is not defence .pk\forums for gods sake so be cool
why for last two days there has been no updates in news section in BR main page when lot has been reported ? i have to go searching other sites to be updated when i don't find BR news section updated , if you require any volunteers to update it then count me in i will be glad to help
In the past we have had situations where the kin of Gen Thapar & Lt Gen JFR Jacob himself trying to propound their importance in history. Lt Gen. Jacob has gone to extents as to potray Lt.Gen Aurora in a dim light to corner the limelight for himself. And the way the article the article revers LtGen Jacob as a war hero, I won't be surprised if this turnbs out to be one of those attempts(I also have my doubts about the credentials of the website on which it is published, but thats another matter)
I'm not for thought policing but, since we do not know the complete truth(or till we know) lets not publish something which IMHO is "blasphemous" to all believers of Indian Military history, on a website which in IMVVHO was initially conceived to be platform to highlight the Indian Armed Forces, their history and achievements.
In the past we have had situations where the kin of Gen Thapar & Lt Gen JFR Jacob himself trying to propound their importance in history. Lt Gen. Jacob has gone to extents as to potray Lt.Gen Aurora in a dim light to corner the limelight for himself. And the way the article the article revers LtGen Jacob as a war hero, I won't be surprised if this turnbs out to be one of those attempts(I also have my doubts about the credentials of the website on which it is published, but thats another matter)
I'm not for thought policing but, since we do not know the complete truth(or till we know) lets not publish something which IMHO is "blasphemous" to all believers of Indian Military history, on a website which in IMVVHO was initially conceived to be platform to highlight the Indian Armed Forces, their history and achievements.
Thanks and Regards
Anirban
well I am against deleting it. Any article that generates thought and debate in this field is welcome. Even Sandeep Unnithan did a story on the controversy in India- today so I dont see anything new in the above report.
Jagan wrote:well I am against deleting it. Any article that generates thought and debate in this field is welcome. Even Sandeep Unnithan did a story on the controversy in India- today so I dont see anything new in the above report.
Rahul M wrote:I'm with Jagan on this, right or wrong, any information that comes from a source like this has to be presented.
THough I disagree, I accept the decision of the Mods.
Mods, I am not able to 'contact' the mods on the 'profiles of courage' page in the image gallery of Indian Army link from the main page. This is the msg I am getting:-
404 - Component not found
You may not be able to visit this page because of:
1. an out-of-date bookmark/favourite
2. a search engine that has an out-of-date listing for this site
3. a mistyped address
4. you have no access to this page
5. The requested resource was not found.
6. An error has occurred while processing your request.
I'm not for thought policing but, since we do not know the complete truth(or till we know) lets not publish something which IMHO is "blasphemous" to all believers of Indian Military history, on a website which in IMVVHO was initially conceived to be platform to highlight the Indian Armed Forces, their history and achievements.
Thanks and Regards
Anirban
It appears that there was nothing blasphemous in the thought that the Ghazi sank itself. From a Former CNS and veteran of 71 War. (Forwarded to me)
I'm afraid thare is nothing new, dramatic or embarrasing about Lt Gen Jacob's "revelation". "Transition to Triumph" which is Vol II of the official IN history is available on the net, and it devotes a full chapter (pp 140-153) to the Sinking of the Ghazi. Gen Jacob's complete statement is quoted there.
The history clearly brings out that Ghazi sank because of an internal explosion - either a mine that she was carrying or hydrogen leak from the batteries. There is some confusion whether she sank on night of 1/2 or 3/4 Dec. Not in its wildest dreams did the IN imagine that Ghazi would sail all the way from Karachi to Vizag (no mean feat) and sink herself at our doorstep!!
This was written by an obscure anti-India NGO Matthew_H - who also posted some crap on BR Forum a little while ago. Why do we give oxygen to such articles/authors on BR itself? I have written the same feedback on Ajai Shukla's blog
Jagan, earlier, BR used to have data on all aircrafts in IAF's inventory. Now, if I go to IAF site on BR, I see data on only three craft(Mi-26 helicopter, Mig-29 fighter and Do-228 transport). What happened to info on all the other aircraft that BR used to host earlier?
putnanja wrote:Jagan, earlier, BR used to have data on all aircrafts in IAF's inventory. Now, if I go to IAF site on BR, I see data on only three craft(Mi-26 helicopter, Mig-29 fighter and Do-228 transport). What happened to info on all the other aircraft that BR used to host earlier?
Hey sorry for not noticing this before. The data pages are to be moved, but got stuck in preparing some new information, mostly on procurement numbers and units. When completed they will have both Current as well as retired aircraft. So the section will be larger than before. No ETA currently
JTull,
ACIG is run by Tom Cooper and friends - and as far as i know they have long term plans and there is no danger to the content going AWOL - yet. Still its a good idea to download a copy of the site for future ref.
just a note. the news section is being bought down temporarily. unfortunately, the rest of the main page will also be down for the duration, while we try to fix the holes.
Most Paki sites use formal CMS software, most of them do not have holes which can be exploited. This is not the case with BRF, there could be a case for switching to some CMS.
JTull wrote:When are the news updates going to be allowed?
shortly .. the old username passwords have to be replaced by new ones.. will set them up this weekend - after the br hyd meet. updates will resume from sunday or monday latest.
404 - Component not foundYou may not be able to visit this page because of:
1.an out-of-date bookmark/favourite
2.a search engine that has an out-of-date listing for this site
3.a mistyped address
4.you have no access to this page
5.The requested resource was not found.
6.An error has occurred while processing your request.
Please try one of the following pages:
•Home Page
If difficulties persist, please contact the System Administrator of this site.
Component not found
Last edited by Jagan on 01 Sep 2010 18:52, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:Thanks - Fixed Now. New URL points to Coast-Guard.html instead of Link1.html
The following page: In Dhanush section, the paragraph start with description of NAG...!
The Nag (Cobra) is a third generation, all weather, top-attack, fire-and-forget anti-tank guided missile. It is one of five missile systems developed by the Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO) under the Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (IGMDP).
I have no idea whether this has been noted or not...!
There is no central email address where people who are not members can contact decision makers of this site and make suggestions. Also why are Yahoo email accounts etc not allowed and why are some old forum members are not allowed to register?
Plus, if someone wishes to donate to BR for its continuation, how does one do that?
michael T wrote:There is no central email address where people who are not members can contact decision makers of this site and make suggestions. Also why are Yahoo email accounts etc not allowed and why are some old forum members are not allowed to register?
Plus, if someone wishes to donate to BR for its continuation, how does one do that?