Your claims quoting a disgruntled senior officer were countered by many others who quoted serving officers and others on public record. You choose to disregard those. Even when those reports are posted merely a few pages away on multiple threads. Speaks volumes.
There have been dime a dozen other times, when you have quoted dubious news reports and then sought to state they represented the only facts regarding the matter.
The very fact that the ADA,HAL,etc. haven't performed as expected with delayed dev. and low production rate is why the SEF deal has emerged.
For instance. The SEF deal merely flows from the cancelled MMRCA deal, for which the Tejas was not there to begin with. The fact that you casually throw around such assertions besmirching local organizations by comparing apples to oranges, is typical of bias at play.
The worst attitude is to sweep the dirt under the carpet and fool oneself that everything is hunky-dory.Performance matters and unfortunately the lack of accountability in the DPSUs is one major reason why their performance is patchy.
Please bring the same claimed sense of objectivity when it pertains to anything and everything Russian. Who is fooling whom? Clearly not the forum, judging by the number of reports that periodically accumulate on the forum and as complaints regarding your posts. The issue is also not of accountability with DPSUs alone as you claim, but with multiple vendors, our procurement process & there is a huge lack of nuance in your posts in even analysing what we have achieved and havent.
I am merely trying to provide as wide as poss. info that gives as total a picture as possible and draw conclusions, make observations and offer options and solutions to the problems bedevilling the issue of providing the armed forces with the weapon systems they require in our unique context.
I wish that were the case. However, what we have seen is diametrically the opposite in multiple cases:
- Namecalling Indian organizations and Indian programs with insulting acronyms and accusing them without an iota of real evidence bar "he said, she said"
- Quote selectively from disgruntled individuals who never worked for ADA etc whom you insist are the only truth about programs like the LCA as versus the public statements of many folks from the IAF, ADA and DRDO who have given their heart and soul to the program
- Refusal to accept facts when countered with objective data, on multiple topics. Shoot & scoot posts with incendiary comments made & then sidestep rebuttals entirely & then post much the same in other threads
-When anything non-complimentary about Russian organizations is posted, Indian programs and projects are unecessarily dragged into the picture.
- Furthermore, your technical assertions are often merely verbatim reports of biased reportage from news mags. Then ignoring details posted on BR itsel countering those reports.
The above are examples of deep-rooted bias which vitiates the forum atmosphere.
I have stated the issues & have no personal animus with you. As I recall, ages ago we may have even met at a BR meet. It is genuinely my wish that you continue to contribute to BRF & not have to state the above.
Having said that, it increases moderation workload and vitiates the atmosphere by an incredible amount to have the usual flame war between you & multiple posters on thread after thread.
Kindly take the above in the right spirit. Thank you.