Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Kargil War Thread - IV

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 01 Aug 2006 15:12

Lalmohan wrote:[quote

er... IAF dropped LGB's on Tiger Hill amongst other places, you can see the video on youtube.


Lal Mohan ,
Were these guided in by laser from the air or from the ground ?

CPrakash
BRFite
Posts: 126
Joined: 04 Sep 2000 11:31
Location: Mahboobnagar

Postby CPrakash » 01 Aug 2006 16:41

Jager wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:[quote

er... IAF dropped LGB's on Tiger Hill amongst other places, you can see the video on youtube.


Lal Mohan ,
Were these guided in by laser from the air or from the ground ?


They were designated from the air. Phil Camps article on the BR site gives the details.

rakall
BRFite
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:26

Postby rakall » 01 Aug 2006 18:43

Jager wrote:Negi ,

LGBs are laser guided bombs . They are bombs that are guided on to the targets that are lit up by a laser either from the ground or from the air .
AFAIK India does not have these bombs (Airforce Experts help?)

.



IAF used Paveway-II LGB's dropped from Mirages.. designation provided by Litening LDP.

its all there on BR.. read, boys, read.. read & google before you surmise & conjecture...




Lalmohan wrote:laser designators need something to light up, a foxhole on a mountain doesn't strike me as being all that easy to light up - all of the ballistics problems we discussed on this thread remain


A foxhole on a mountain is usually pre-identified from recce images.. so the designator knows what exactly he is looking for.. so its not that difficult..

Ballistics is not great a problem when compared to dumb bombs which are liable to be carried away by changes in wind conditions & variations in air density.. because the LGB uses its fisn to manuevre follwing the relfected laser cone..

the more serious problems are providing continous illumination -- which can be interrupted by rain, clouds, bad weather.. and to have achieved such good hits in that mountainous weather (picking literally small bunkers) shows the proficiency of IAF/Mirages..

and the need for continous illumination also keeps the aircraft in the threat range for SAM's..

Shankar
BRFite
Posts: 1905
Joined: 28 Aug 2002 11:31
Location: wai -maharastra

Postby Shankar » 01 Aug 2006 19:55

Threat range of long range sams but not stingers which was what was available to the pakistanis in kargil and maybe a few anaz . The mirages were careful to stay out of the stinger aquistion envelope by maintaing minimum altitude and ingress path along with very short time over target .

Ved
BRFite
Posts: 154
Joined: 08 Jul 1999 11:31

Postby Ved » 01 Aug 2006 23:08

Lalmohan wrote:
er... IAF dropped LGB's on Tiger Hill amongst other places, ...


Right. The Mirage for example, had them.

Ved
BRFite
Posts: 154
Joined: 08 Jul 1999 11:31

Postby Ved » 01 Aug 2006 23:14

RayC wrote:
2).......At the age of 55, what do you expect them to play? Rugby? .....


That was GOOD!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 02 Aug 2006 00:25

rakall wrote:its all there on BR.. read, boys, read.. read & google before you surmise & conjecture...


Gotcha ! Maybe i should visit the airforce and navy threads too ocassionally . Thanks for pointing out .

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 02 Aug 2006 00:28

Rakall / Lal mohan ,

Do we have the kind of missiles that are guided in by infantry men on the ground , with the laser designators and stuff .

I read in the paper's some time ago that the army was working/developing/buying "smart " artillery rounds , guided in by lasers again ? Does anyone know much bout this ?

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12503
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Postby Lalmohan » 02 Aug 2006 13:43

jager - you really should read the BR pages more carefully!

the answer is yes, the problem is alltogether different and it involves human beings being able to exist above 15000 altitude

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 02 Aug 2006 19:43

Lalmohan wrote:jager - you really should read the BR pages more carefully!

Will do

the answer is yes, the problem is alltogether different and it involves human beings being able to exist above 15000 altitude


This does'nt sell much . Why couldn't infantry / commandos guide LGB's onto bunkers a few 100 metres away , like the SAS did with the scuds in Iraq . This way even small targets like bunkers , machine gun nests , tents etc could have been neutralised .



If it's there , why was'nt it used lalmohan ?

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 02 Aug 2006 20:13

jager

It is there but one of the biggest factors India has to deal with is cost. LGBs are expensive. Designators are expensive. We cannot use it like the Us on every tent , fox hole.

Precision weapons have to be carefully employed.

Off course lasing upwards at 15000 ft may be another issue in iteself. And how do you lase a unit dug in on the other side. when you still have not claimed the top.

Anyway the capability exists

ASPuar
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 07 Feb 2001 12:31
Location: Republic of India

Postby ASPuar » 02 Aug 2006 20:18

Surya wrote:jager

It is there but one of the biggest factors India has to deal with is cost. LGBs are expensive. Designators are expensive. We cannot use it like the Us on every tent , fox hole.

Precision weapons have to be carefully employed.

Off course lasing upwards at 15000 ft may be another issue in iteself. And how do you lase a unit dug in on the other side. when you still have not claimed the top.

Anyway the capability exists


Dyou have any source for cost being the reason? Or is this speculation?

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12908
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Cost baaaaaah...

Postby negi » 02 Aug 2006 20:43

Surya wrote:jager

It is there but one of the biggest factors India has to deal with is cost. LGBs are expensive. Designators are expensive. We cannot use it like the Us on every tent , fox hole.

Precision weapons have to be carefully employed.



Cost!!! since when was it a consideration for a country on war (as it is GOI burnt more money in Parliament and Kargil aftermath than on actual war)? anyways coming to LGB's and their cost let us look at it this way what is the probability of hitting a fortified enemy bunker via artillery/unguided(free fall bombs).say 1 in 10 or more which I think would be achieved in atmost 2 LGB hits(if first misses).Now it is upto our experts to calculate how many sorties our pilots would have to fly with Free fall bombs as against using L/Tv guided munitions.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 02 Aug 2006 20:44

It is based on some sources which I cannot indicate so discard that.

But you can derive the same from
- statements about increased funding as the forces request more precision weapons

- compare it with richer countries like UK, France who still have to carefully fund this. (outside of US and Israel no one else buys and uses them in massive numbers)

- the fact that the number and make of precision weapons is a carefully guarded secret in the Indian forces

- We know we have LGBs but only a few missions were with LGBs - that should indicate that we cannot use it for a couple of foxholes or 1 tank in the midle of nowhere.


And it is not just LGBs etc. Generally in the Indian context, expensive weapons have to be carefully used



negi - Remember this was in Kargil times - totally diff from parakaram where the flood gates were opened.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48148
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 02 Aug 2006 20:59

Also in the background is a general war in case of escalation. So no point in exhausting the inventory to ferret out a few rats. Some LGBs were used. There are press reports of Litening pods integration and some DRDO types working around Delhi to make things happen.

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12908
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

No, issue

Postby negi » 02 Aug 2006 21:04

Surya wrote:It is based on some sources which I cannot indicate so discard that.

But you can derive the same from
- statements about increased funding as the forces request more precision weapons- compare it with richer countries like UK, France who still have to carefully fund this. (outside of US and Israel no one else buys and uses them in massive numbers).


again Surya the very argument that LGB's or precision munitions are expensive sounds so lame.I think you are right in saying that GOI saved a lot of money by spending the vintage 70's bombs and shells rather going for the new one's ,but I would not buy your argument that using free fall bombs is more economical than a guided bomb(specially in Kargil where the target it self was a pin head so you are talking in terms of say 10 or even 20 bombs against atmost 2 LGB's +risk due to Man POrt SAMS in case of each extra sortie).

- the fact that the number and make of precision weapons is a carefully guarded secret in the Indian forces

- We know we have LGBs but only a few missions were with LGBs - that should indicate that we cannot use it for a couple of foxholes or 1 tank in the midle of nowhere.[\quote]

Bah...... Number of LGB's a guarded secret ? again you might be correct for it might be a cause for embarrasment for IAF(in case we had very few)

And it is not just LGBs etc. Generally in the Indian context, expensive weapons have to be carefully used
negi - Remember this was in Kargil times - totally diff from parakaram where the flood gates were opened.


Flood gates opened !!! MOney was never a problem dude spending it on the right stuff was and perhaps remains,sometimes my heart goes out for the Armed forces for they always are on the recieving end from both the sides. :evil:

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12503
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Postby Lalmohan » 02 Aug 2006 21:05

some questions to ponder:

how well do lasers reflect off rocks?

how heavy is a laser designator? what about its batteries? What about recharging? How heavy is that?

how much can a man carry above 15000 ft?

what about radio comms? with whom? how does it integrate to the aircraft? what is the sensor to shooter loop? how heavy is the radio gear?

in gusty conditions in a rarefied atmosphere, what is the CEP of an LGB? is it <2m? Or is it more?

much pondering!

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12908
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

No issue

Postby negi » 02 Aug 2006 21:23

Lalmohan wrote:some questions to ponder:

how well do lasers reflect off rocks?

how heavy is a laser designator? what about its batteries? What about recharging? How heavy is that?

how much can a man carry above 15000 ft?

what about radio comms? with whom? how does it integrate to the aircraft? what is the sensor to shooter loop? how heavy is the radio gear?

in gusty conditions in a rarefied atmosphere, what is the CEP of an LGB? is it <2m? Or is it more?

much pondering!


I went through BR and found IAF used LDP aboard Mirage-2000's for designation so foot soldiers carrying more weight isnt an issue.As far as Rarified atmosphere is concerned you see the gusty winds have little effect at high altitude as they would have in lower altitudes for more the density of air more will be the effective drag that bomb will encounter while it's fall(glide) so cep should improve if at all we go by that argument..

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 02 Aug 2006 21:26

Negi:

Again we are talking about 1999 time period.See where we were technolgically, economically , politically in the preceding years -


anyway we are not going to use a $25000 or $50000 LGB to take out a foxhole with 2.

And like the US we are not going to use cruise missile on a coupleof tents and camels (well maybe in 2025 :))

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 02 Aug 2006 21:49

Lalmohan wrote:how heavy is a laser designator? what about its batteries? What about recharging? How heavy is that?

how much can a man carry above 15000 ft?



Compared to what our troops carried with them during Kargil , a laser designator would not be any great load , specially if they have a designated person to carry /operate it .

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 02 Aug 2006 22:00

Jager

Could you tell me how you will lase upwards (enough for it be picked up by fighters coming in from the top) or the other side of the mountain where the supporting infrastructure would be??

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 02 Aug 2006 22:20

Surya wrote:
Could you tell me how you will lase upwards (enough for it be picked up by fighters coming in from the top) or the other side of the mountain where the supporting infrastructure would be??


These tasks can and should have been done by Commandos who can get close enough to actually lase the target , or to a position from where the target can be lased . It's not necessary that they would have to lase upwards . The advantages of a mountain terrain can be fully expolited as there would be a number of ridges /rocks / depressions from where a target can be lased , without the " team " getting caught .

In short a sort of a FOO role that guides artillery , only more accurately .

Yerna
BRFite
Posts: 108
Joined: 17 Oct 2003 11:31

Postby Yerna » 02 Aug 2006 22:33

Jager wrote:These tasks can and should have been done by Commandos who can get close enough to actually lase the target


Why do you want to do that when you have LDP's? Ground based assets are used when the fighter jet is already in air and does not have the co-ordinates of the target. For example, a covert commando force in enemy territory has just identified an enemy mobile command and control unit, it can be lased for the fighter jets.

Negi:
again Surya the very argument that LGB's or precision munitions are expensive sounds so lame


Does expensive and in short supply sound any better? India does not make LGB's and IAF can stockpile only so many in peace time. It is not prudent to expend all your precsion guided munitions on a 2$ target when there is every chance of the theater conflict escalating into a full fledged war. I remember reading an article on BRF sometime back which stated that a total of 9 LGB's were used in the conflict.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 02 Aug 2006 23:00

jager

Using commandos (SF??) for lasing is a waste of their skills.

RayC can answer whether there were mountains close by where we had control and could lase the targets. I doubt it. Anyway remember inmost cases they occupied the highest ridges.


Again you are assuming that the Army, Air Force guys cannot think of other options only you can.

The eventual options used were the best under those circumstances.

pmund
BRFite
Posts: 166
Joined: 14 Jul 2006 00:49
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Postby pmund » 02 Aug 2006 23:07

Agreed. We were losing men trying to get within firing distance of the Pukis so it would be really unrealistic to expect SF guys doing a suicidal climb to light up some sangars. I think the IAF was more interested in ammo dumps and command centres. Bunkers and sangar were targets of opportunity.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12503
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Postby Lalmohan » 02 Aug 2006 23:48

nice to see the newbies enjoying themselves! :)

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 03 Aug 2006 00:24

Surya wrote:jager

Using commandos (SF??) for lasing is a waste of their skills.



Using them as conventional infantry is an even bigger waste . BTW most wetern countries use their commandos to do just that . Lase up targets of importance for their airforce to blow up .

mountains close by where we had control and could lase the targets. I doubt it. Anyway remember inmost cases they occupied the highest ridges.

I really can't understand this particular point of yours , about getting "close enough" . The infantry got up close when they fought hand to hand battles to retake points . What exactly is your point ?

Anyhow I don't think pakis can see four five chaps at a distance of 100-200 metres in the night (lasing their target ).

Again you are assuming that the Army, Air Force guys cannot think of other options only you can.


No such assumption i assure you . Was just thinking out loud

The eventual options used were the best under those circumstances.


I am still not clear if they were .

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 03 Aug 2006 00:46

jager

I can have any soldier do the lasing - why a SF guy???

The SF lazing you are talking about is about the SF units deep behind enmey lines.

in this case it is not a behind the lines, it is an exposed ridge and therefore no need for SF -


With a laser, you have to a certain coverage of the reflection for it to be picke up. There must be some range limitations.

When I mentioned the upward facing issue you implied they could do it from enighbouring mtn tops. Hence the distance thing.

Even if all this is accounted for, there is STILL NO WAY to lase the other side of the mountain where they were entrenched which is why the IAF had to do this.


As for you not being certain - well join up and find for yourself.

RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Postby RayC » 03 Aug 2006 02:25

How many PGMs were used in the Kargil War and how many hit?

One really does not require the SF to operate a Laser designator or does one?

However training is required.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12503
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: No issue

Postby Lalmohan » 03 Aug 2006 02:48

psnegi wrote:

I went through BR and found IAF used LDP aboard Mirage-2000's for designation so foot soldiers carrying more weight isnt an issue.


not in this case, but finding a target from the air and designating is much harder than having a man on the ground who can see it


As far as Rarified atmosphere is concerned you see the gusty winds have little effect at high altitude


suggest you go hiking in sikkim this puja and come back and tell us how the wind is up in the mountains :roll:

as they would have in lower altitudes for more the density of air more will be the effective drag that bomb will encounter while it's fall(glide) so cep should improve if at all we go by that argument..


i don't think you've cracked this particular problem my friend... the gusts will move the bomb from its trajectory. and btw - lift and drag properties are non-linear, so effects at altitude are very different... jeez i don't have the energy to persevere with this...

8)

negi
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 12908
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Trying to mellow down :)

Re: No issue

Postby negi » 03 Aug 2006 10:26

i don't think you've cracked this particular problem my friend... the gusts will move the bomb from its trajectory. and btw - lift and drag properties are non-linear, so effects at altitude are very different... jeez i don't have the energy to persevere with this... 8)


in any case whether target is at 15k feet or at sea level the Mirages would have dropped the LGB at more or less the same height for a greater height(i.e above the clouds it would be impossible to lase the target)so the bomb would encounter similar changes in density gradient in both the cases,as far as windy conditions are concerned they arent dependent on Landscape but on wheather patterns(they can occur randomly anywhere on earth) it's just that atop a mountain peak people feel the effect is more pronounced.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34011
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 03 Aug 2006 14:00

Question: Why on earth would one want an SF man lugging equipment up a mountainside to laser designate a target when the damn Mirage can do the designation and LGB dropping on its own?

That is exactly what was done.

And the designator also takes a video of the target being decimated

Video available on BR

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/CLIPS/ - see clip number 40

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 03 Aug 2006 19:40

Surya wrote:jager

I can have any soldier do the lasing - why a SF guy???

in this case it is not a behind the lines, it is an exposed ridge and therefore no need for SF -


in this case it is not a behind the lines, it is an exposed ridge and therefore no need for SF -




Agreed . Just thought in some cases it might make sense to use the SF , but on a retrospect i might be a misallocation of resources .


With a laser, you have to a certain coverage of the reflection for it to be picke up. There must be some range limitations.


What are these range limitations? . The SAS lased scuds in the desert from a reasonable distance without being seen . Don't tell me we can't manage to do the same in a rock mountainous terrain

Even if all this is accounted for, there is STILL NO WAY to lase the other side of the mountain where they were entrenched which is why the IAF had to do this.


May be special forces can be used here .

As for you not being certain - well join up and find for yourself.


Such a clever idea ! When i do i will send you a postcard , but until then i guess it's this forum for me .

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5029
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Postby Surya » 03 Aug 2006 20:02

Ok at least with Jager we are getting somewhere

1- I have not been to Kargil so I will RayC to exaplain whether it would have been possible for a soldier to laze from another nearby mountain top.

2. SF units were on the other side.One unfortunate team got daylighted and clobbered. But interms of hitting the mountain sides on the other side- the IAF did that. (BTW we are not exactly overflowing with SF units -they were highly stretched in thse days and are still stretched now)

Again the IAF and IA thought of numerous options. Some day when they comeout you will know -in the meantime you are free to doubt them.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34011
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Postby shiv » 03 Aug 2006 21:12

Thread cleaned up

I have taken a LOT of trouble here and might as well blow my trumpet.

It is a LOT easier to delete users.

Please do not let your ego and manhood get in the way of reading what someone says and agreeing or disagreeing politely without making a taunt out of it.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 48148
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 04 Aug 2006 01:37

Book review. Pioneer, 4 August 2006.

Live for once or die everyday

The central theme coming out of Gen Malik's book is that there will not be an end to Kargil-like situations till Pakistan is convinced of India's military superiority and political will to retaliate against such misadventures, writes MV Kamath

Kargil: From Surprise to Victory - VP Malik; Harper Collins, Rs 595

So much has been written about the Kargil war and how the despicable armed forces of Pakistan cheated India. And how, even as then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was hugging his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharief, that country's Army, in the guise of jihadi militants, was infiltrating India. That one wants to know even more how events came to pass and how, in the end, India won the war.

General VP Malik, who was then Chief of the Army Staff and played a vital role in panning co-ordinating and over-seeing the military operations, avers that the war in Kargil will go down in the history of India as a saga of "unmatched bravery, grit and determination displayed on the battlefield by the Indian Army". The word "battlefield" is slightly misleading. The Indian Army was not fighting in Panipat, but on the snow-covered mountains of Kargil under heavy strain. That, however, did not deter our soldiers who succeeded in eliminating Pakistani forces from their hideouts and planting the tricolour where it rightly belonged.

General Pervez Musharraf had managed to get tactically secure heights taken over by his men in the hope that he would be able to bring Indian Army to their knees. He failed, as other Army Generals had failed earlier. The attempt to capture Kargil has since been described by Pakistani writers as "a complete disaster", "a trauma", "a catastrophe" and "a debacle". One Pakistani writer described Kargil as "the biggest blunder committed in the history of Pakistan", which had given its people "a sense of humiliation".

What moved Gen Musharraf to undertake this hazardous operation? The tragedy with the Pakistan Army is that it functions under the delusion that one Muslim sepoy is equal to 10 Hindu counterparts and that it can get away with murder. As Gen Maik himself put it: "The Pakistan military appeared to have convinced itself that India would not resort to a full-scale war, apprehensive that it may escalate to the nuclear level." And so, remarks Gen Malik, "Such conviction on the part of the Pakistan Army had seriously eroded India's conventional military deterrence."

India did not follow an 'activist' policy. The belief in Pakistani military quarters was that India would not cross the LoC despite the deliberate aggression from its neighbour and that India primarily is a 'status quo' nation. In other words, it was - and probably still is - the feeling in Pakistani military circles that India would not react quickly and would not get provoked easily.

Gen Malik states, "Such an impression may encourage the Pakistani military to continue its adventurous forays into Indian territory under the nuclear umbrella." This has been India's undoing all these years. For one thing, India has never attacked any nation on its own. The nation has suffered for centuries and it has become part of its natural psyche. The time has come for India to teach Pakistan that it will not tolerate any nonsense from Pakistan in future.

India has to be constantly on the guard. Let us face it: Pakistan is untrustworthy. Gen Musharraf had even the impertinence to bring out nuclear weaponry close to the Indian border. The General says that even prior to the Lahore meeting between Mr Sharief and Mr Vajpayee, the former knew what was going on, though he claims that he had been kept in dark. There is no guarantee that such things will not happen in future again.

What should India do then? After Kargil, the Government appointed a Review Committee that brought out several serious deficiencies in India's security management system, particularly in the areas of intelligence, border patrolling and defence management. The report pointed out that despite far-reaching developments affecting India's national security in the past few decades, the country's higher and defence-related decision-making system did not change.

There were other things that came to public notice. One was the crisis of confidence among civil and military officials in the Ministry of Defence and services Headquarters regarding their respective rules and functions. A Group of Ministers, too, had deliberated and found that there was a lack of inter-intelligence agencies' co-ordination, preparation and distribution of assessments about the adversaries with each other and the users.

The defence planning process was handicapped by the absence of a national security doctrine and commitment of funds beyond a financial year. The process suffered due to the lack of a holistic approach, inter-service prioritisation in annual, mid-term and long-term planning and requisite flexibility. The system governing defence acquisitions suffered from a lack of integrated planning and requisite flexibility. Similarly, the system governing defence acquisitions suffered from a lack of integrated planning, weaknesses in linkages between plans and budgets, endless make-or-buy discussions, cumbersome administrate, technical and financial procedures and the absence of a dedicated, professionally-equipped common procurement structure within the Ministry of Defence.

Worse, finding, identifying, educating, motivating and retaining quality manpower for the armed forces had become difficult. A service career needed to be made more attractive. All these and other matters have been effectively discussed by Gen Malik.

The first half of the book details how decisions were taken and how the battles were fought. It describes the heroism shown by our soldiers, besides other matters such as the Army Family Support System, the splendid manner in which the armed forces - the Army, the Navy and the Air Force - worked as one unit. It also talks about the China factor, the role of the US and similar relevant matters.

Gen Malik quotes the words of a well-known Pakistani defence analyst: "To be fair to Musharraf, it is not possible for him to convince his generals and other senior officers of changing the old mindset regarding India. New Delhi (for Pakistan) still remains that top enemy that will have to be fought or vanquished." It is time India gave Pakistan one big wallop to teach it to behave in future, nuclear parity notwithstanding. Living permanently in fear is no way to handle a treacherous enemy.


RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Postby RayC » 04 Aug 2006 03:07

Laser designators are Line of Sight (LOS) equipment. The target has to be LOS both from the designator and also the bomb.

Jager
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Nov 2004 10:42

Postby Jager » 05 Aug 2006 12:31

Ray Sir,
Could you please tell me what is the maximum range (distance ) of a laser designator ? And does the target have to be "lased" until the bomb hits ?

Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Postby Vivek_A » 05 Aug 2006 15:03

ramana wrote:Book review. Pioneer, 4 August 2006.


What moved Gen Musharraf to undertake this hazardous operation? The tragedy with the Pakistan Army is that it functions under the delusion that one Muslim sepoy is equal to 10 Hindu counterparts and that it can get away with murder. As Gen Maik himself put it: "The Pakistan military appeared to have convinced itself that India would not resort to a full-scale war, apprehensive that it may escalate to the nuclear level." And so, remarks Gen Malik, "Such conviction on the part of the Pakistan Army had seriously eroded India's conventional military deterrence."




Which is why the NFU policy is the stupidest idea in this history of the world. India should ocnstitute a WFU policy: Waiting for First Use. The paki look cross-eyed at India and India launches a first strike. The Pakis are bluffing about their willingness to let a conflict go nuclear. A NFU plays right into their hands.

satya
BRFite
Posts: 711
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 03:09

Postby satya » 05 Aug 2006 20:46

Vivek,

NFU policy gives India a chance to go for preemtion should indian establisment is willing and ready to do this .

If we drop our this policy , Pakis will raise the chante of nucler war in south asia and they will find many supporters in US .

Another thing is dropping NFU policy will need a lot of clarifications on other factors like under wht circumstances will we use the Nukes first and will Military option be considered to take back PoK , bottomline its not tht simple and tht too for a spineless Gandhi believer current politicians on both side of parliament .

Unless India is willing to raise the defence budget to such levels to raise the conventional edge against pakistan beyond the foreign military aid to shore up its defences , leaving NFU will only make us laughing stock and make us lose the so called ''moral edge'' tht India's Leadership so dearly hold close to.

If we drop this NFU , pakistan too will get close to using Nuke more probably through some jehadis , giving them one more and more deadly card to play against india , so it will be utterly foolish to change this stance .

As for them issuing the threats there's a saying '' a barking dog never bites''


Return to “The Kargil Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest