Indian Army: News & Discussion

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.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7532
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Gerard » 20 Aug 2009 06:01

Also were they really from the PBJs or are they from the other units which are present their for other duties..


2003...
In an expression of his displeasure, President A P J Abdul Kalam has indefinitely postponed a ceremony to present the unit with his silver trumpet and trumpet banner. The army, on its part, is working on a strategy to send members of the President's Bodyguard to the field, including counter-insurgency operations.

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7532
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Gerard » 20 Aug 2009 06:29

Army changes promotion policy for Maj Gens, Lt Gens
The General-rank officers of the Army will now either execute administrative duties only or lead troops in operational formations, according to a new promotion policy implemented by the force.

The new policy for Major Generals and Lieutenant Generals categorised them into either staff or command streams based on their merit, Army sources said here on Wednesday.

Under the policy, which had come into effect from January 1 this year, officers under the staff stream will perform only administrative tasks while the command stream officers will get to lead troops in field formations.

The change in the promotion policy came in the backdrop of Ajai Vikram Singh Committee (AVSC) report which was implemented in December last year thereby creating 75 additional Major General and 20 Lieutenant General posts.

Officers in the respective streams would, however, get no opportunity to change streams while moving up the career ladder. Also, the promoted officer would be allotted a stream on a pro-rata basis keeping in view the availability of staff and command posts at any given point of time.

This, in effect, would mean that once a Major General or a Lieutenant General was placed in staff stream, he would not get opportunity to command an operational formation.

"The new policy has been in discussion at the Army Commanders' Conferences for the last two years and came into effect from January one this year," sources said.

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 20 Aug 2009 07:33


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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 20 Aug 2009 13:43

It is a stupid idea of Command and Staff stream.

It is only the Arty COAS (Rodrigues and now Kappor) who could be harebrained!

Generals are as competent or as incompetent as they come!

And anyway ACRs are subjective, even if tomtomed as objective!

Competence is all in the minds of the seniors, who maybe really incompetent but survived the system!

the promotion board had not agreed to split the recommendations into command and staff, and had witnessed "heated arguments" over the proposal. General Kapoor had, at the meeting, apparently agreed to carry out a study on the impact of such a move, according to thesources.

At least three of the army commanders who participated in the promotion board meeting have now opposed in writing the move to split the promotion list into two, sources told DNA.

It is not clear if the army chief has acted on the objections of the generals whose consensus he claimed while forwarding the promotion list to the ministry.

Dumb

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby ASPuar » 20 Aug 2009 15:22

This new policy sounds like bovine faeces to me.

The leadership of an army is supposed to have both command and staff experience... What purpose does this imbecile policy serve? Someone should file an RTI to find out who was the harebrained genius who came up with this moronic plan.

I have heard of no other army of any standing which has ever implemented such an idiotic idea. Even the famed Prussian, and later German Imperial army, which originated the concept of a general staff, never said that officers "Im Generalstabsdienst", should not serve in field formations....

I am continually bewildered at the series of body blows and resulting damage being dealt to the soul of the army, apparently by the dotards at its head.

I imagine this again has something to do with some people wanting to be "elites within the army". Its enough to make one's head spin.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5038
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Surya » 20 Aug 2009 17:32

Sanku - Can I now rant against the COAS aka the gunner Chief :)

To those who have access to some of the awesome stuff this COAS has done - such nonsense is not surprising

AmitR
BRFite
Posts: 322
Joined: 25 Jan 2009 17:13

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby AmitR » 20 Aug 2009 19:06

Surya wrote:Sanku - Can I now rant against the COAS aka the gunner Chief :)

To those who have access to some of the awesome stuff this COAS has done - such nonsense is not surprising


:eek:
Are things really this bad.

kancha
BRFite
Posts: 899
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby kancha » 20 Aug 2009 19:11

Surya wrote:Sanku - Can I now rant against the COAS aka the gunner Chief :)

To those who have access to some of the awesome stuff this COAS has done - such nonsense is not surprising


Pl don't mind my butting in, but it's not as much about the "Gunner Chief", as it is about the office held by him - that of the COAS. I am not aware of any of the "awesome stuff" you are in the know of, but would definitely not want to know of it on an open forum such as BR, esp when in these times of the constant tussle between the army and the rest of the establishment, it may only end up giving more ammo to the other side. JMTs.

Ranjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 17
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 18:57
Location: under the shadow of death

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Ranjan » 20 Aug 2009 20:09

Surya wrote:Sanku - Can I now rant against the COAS aka the gunner Chief :)

To those who have access to some of the awesome stuff this COAS has done - such nonsense is not surprising

In a professional organisation like the IA it does not matter what combat arm you come from when you reach such a high level of office. It is your own perosnal thoughts and your experience gained over the years that make you to bring in certain policies. Maybe certain political compulsions also play at those levels :?: . Though I cannot comment on the pros and cons of this new policy at such an early speculative stage however it must have it's own merits. Point is being a gunner,infantarian,armoured or a paratrooper does not change your basic traits. They remain as they are and I have seen it all. Belonging to a specific arm is a professional direction. Wrong policy decisions can be taken by anyone human. IMHO Stereotyping someone based on his profession is grossly out of line and tends to influence a large section of people especially in the IA where it is rampant to a certain extent.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5038
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Surya » 20 Aug 2009 21:11

Kancha

I am not putting anything here - hence I said those in the know.


Sometimes other things one does can give some lovely insights into the persons thinking process or lack off.


Ranjan

I used the word Gunner purely because thats the constant reference\advice I get from my Army friends when I complain about the arty issue.

Again the context was with reference to a diaglog I and Sanku had - no demeaning of gunners

only criticism of some jernails - who I have followed with great trepidation.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Sanku » 20 Aug 2009 21:26

Surya wrote:Sanku - Can I now rant against the COAS aka the gunner Chief :)

To those who have access to some of the awesome stuff this COAS has done - such nonsense is not surprising


Well Surya, I will not say that what you say is necessarily something that I oppose :-)

However I suppose it would still be good if you could restrain yourself to merely critiquing the actions rather than his person since
a) he is not a political/public figure but COAS (as opposed to those who are directly answerable to public)
b) The person in COAS post spends much lesser time than the duration of the post itself and the time is also fixed.
c) If you have to directly talk of him in person please do use the term Gen Kapoor rather than the "chief"

I do agree that I am rather puzzled by this particular choice of promotion doctrine in this case.

Ranjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 17
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 18:57
Location: under the shadow of death

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Ranjan » 20 Aug 2009 21:30

Surya wrote:Ranjan

I used the word Gunner purely because thats the constant reference\advice I get from my Army friends when I complain about the arty issue.

Again the context was with reference to a diaglog I and Sanku had - no demeaning of gunners

only criticism of some jernails - who I have followed with great trepidation.

Exactly my views on the rampant stereotyping in the IA. You are made to believe this right from the word go when you join the academies. It is so engrained in you that you SIMBLY refuse to see the things in correct perspective when you can do so on ground after you wear your stars !!! :( There was a time when the IA was not so heavily committed in CI ops and stuff when there were certain arms which "enjoyed" more than others simply due to their nature of job and therefore the J factor as regards to those particular arms manifested into them being called the "unfit ones". Not anymore. Almost everyone shares the shit now....of course the QUEEN does get the larger share...after all she is larger ain't she :lol:

kancha
BRFite
Posts: 899
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby kancha » 20 Aug 2009 21:57

Surya wrote:Kancha

I am not putting anything here - hence I said those in the know.


Sometimes other things one does can give some lovely insights into the persons thinking process or lack off.




I understand what you mean. The fauj has its own share of red herrings, just that the person in contention as per you also happens to be the COAS. That's all.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16769
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 20 Aug 2009 22:17

ray sir, you have PM.

aditp
BRFite
Posts: 437
Joined: 15 Jul 2008 07:25
Location: Autoland

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby aditp » 20 Aug 2009 23:33

This brilliant General assumed office on 30 Sep-07. Any idea when does he retire?

negi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13102
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 17:51
Location: Ban se dar nahin lagta , chootiyon se lagta hai .

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby negi » 21 Aug 2009 00:09

I think we should cut the General some slack as it is this policy was first devised by Gen. Sundarji . And from whatever is available in open source what is objectionable here ?

This is because promotions are based on a merit ranking system that takes into account an armyman's annual confidential report (ACR), which also covers parameters such as courses attended, commands held, and awards received. In fact, 95% of the marks are allotted on these considerations. The remaining 5% was awarded by senior generals on the basis of the reputation of an officer ("spoken reputation").

General Kapoor initiated his second controversial change to change this. He made the assessments automatic with 5% marks being proportional to marks in the ACR. This took away all the discretion left with senior officers to identify promising officers who may otherwise have scored a bit less in their ACRs.
(this infact is even better , more scientific and rules out nepotism and jack system)

A senior army officer in the headquarters, however, defended General Kapoor's moves, saying the decisions have "actually made the system much more scientific, and it is not left to the discretion of seven or eight army commanders now."

Many army commanders have objected to this saying that giving undue weightage to what is on the ACRs "will breed sycophancy." (How ...if ACR accumulated during service years is a mark of sycophancy then how does one explain the Zaradarisque 5% based on reputation which is arrived at based on personal bias/opinion or even hear say or oopari orders) A senior army officer whom DNA spoke to said that the contributions of army officers who dared to speak up, while remaining within discipline, must be recognised. "And it cannot be left to the ACRs and awards alone. Leadership is more than that, depending much on spoken reputation." (how does one quantify leadership if ACR and awards/accolades don't mean nothing, infact even for awards one needs to be recommended which again is dependent on superior's personal opinion no ? )

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 21 Aug 2009 02:36

To the best of my knowledge, IIRC, this policy was implemented during Gen Rodrigues time including the criteria that a Corps Cdr requires a minimum of 3 years residual service or else a junior would take over.

No assessment of a subordinate in any field/profession can be objective. It is mostly (not all) subjective.

The aim should be to narrow down the area of subjectivity.

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 21 Aug 2009 03:01

This is because promotions are based on a merit ranking system that takes into account an armyman's annual confidential report (ACR), which also covers parameters such as courses attended, commands held, and awards received. In fact, 95% of the marks are allotted on these considerations. The remaining 5% was awarded by senior generals on the basis of the reputation of an officer ("spoken reputation").

General Kapoor initiated his second controversial change to change this. He made the assessments automatic with 5% marks being proportional to marks in the ACR. This took away all the discretion left with senior officers to identify promising officers who may otherwise have scored a bit less in their ACRs. (this infact is even better , more scientific and rules out nepotism and jack system)

A senior army officer in the headquarters, however, defended General Kapoor's moves, saying the decisions have "actually made the system much more scientific, and it is not left to the discretion of seven or eight army commanders now.


Spoken reputation cuts both ways.

It can help those who are being victimised for personal grudges of the senior assessors as also it can ruin those who are independent minded and with less tact!

Capt Amrinder Singh writes in his book 'Lest We Forget' that there was an Army Commander who ran away from battle. If spoken reputation worked, would he have made it to such a rank where he decided operational matter and put people in, what Bush says, in harm's way? What moral rights does he have to do so?

There was this recent case of the golf carts being bought as some recce vehicles!! If spoken reputation of the person who had Okayed this had been known earlier, he would have not made it to such high rank!!

Of course, everything should be scientific, but then the human race is not a cloned robot to respond in a scientific way!

The senior officer who defended the COAS' decision will surely be rewarded with higher ranks. To be an Army Cdr is not easy. It requires luck as also some professional acumen, even if theoretical and not practical! And to believe that they are total idiots and have no idea of assessment, indicates that either the system of promotion is totally flawed or that too much of subjectivity is inherent!! Now, it is for the so called 'senior officer' who backed the COAS to answer. I am sure he will get his promotion and prove that the system is rotten!! I wish I knew who he was and would have taken him on in the media!

Many army commanders have objected to this saying that giving undue weightage to what is on the ACRs "will breed sycophancy." (How ...if ACR accumulated during service years is a mark of sycophancy then how does one explain the Zaradarisque 5% based on reputation which is arrived at based on personal bias/opinion or even hear say or oopari orders) A senior army officer whom DNA spoke to said that the contributions of army officers who dared to speak up, while remaining within discipline, must be recognised. "And it cannot be left to the ACRs and awards alone. Leadership is more than that, depending much on spoken reputation." (how does one quantify leadership if ACR and awards/accolades don't mean nothing, infact even for awards one needs to be recommended which again is dependent on superior's personal opinion no ?


Of course, the ACR is subjective. Just too bad. There are many who have risen to higher ranks without even commanding companies or battalions (no names) and they have directed wars, given Doctrines and conducted COIN and have only got the AVSMs and PVSMs which are like reciprocal gifts given to children at birthday parties!

I think the idea of this Chief is flawed!

He too has risen because of the system!!

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby VinodTK » 21 Aug 2009 03:58


abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Aug 2009 08:36

RayC wrote:Of course, the ACR is subjective. Just too bad. There are many who have risen to higher ranks without even commanding companies or battalions (no names) and they have directed wars, given Doctrines and conducted COIN and have only got the AVSMs and PVSMs which are like reciprocal gifts given to children at birthday parties!

I think the idea of this Chief is flawed! He too has risen because of the system!!


I think these AVSMs or PVSMs are a joke. Only medals which should count are the ones earned in line of fire. Although 5% discretion is no good either. In govt service it usually means that you are washing dishes at your boss'es residence. I would have taken out this 5% long time ago.

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 21 Aug 2009 11:32

abhiti wrote:
Although 5% discretion is no good either. In govt service it usually means that you are washing dishes at your boss'es residence. I would have taken out this 5% long time ago.


What is your suggestion to make the Assessment scientific and objective?

This has been debated and modified many a time in the Army and it is still not perfect and each Chief tinkers to show that he understands the issue.

The only Chief that I know did a good thing was Gen Roychowdhury (no relation of mine). To ensure that people don't manipulate peace postings and avoid going to the field and operational areas, he directed that for promotions, extra points are given to those who go to field, HAA and operational areas.

Even this can be manipulated. Sitting in Sugar sector for a while and then returning to a peace location on temporary medical grounds your record still indicates that you have served in the HAA!! Likewise for operational or field areas!!

One just can't beat the ingenuity of the brain at work to shortchange the system!

Ranjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 17
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 18:57
Location: under the shadow of death

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Ranjan » 21 Aug 2009 12:54

RayC wrote:
abhiti wrote:
Although 5% discretion is no good either. In govt service it usually means that you are washing dishes at your boss'es residence. I would have taken out this 5% long time ago.


What is your suggestion to make the Assessment scientific and objective?

This has been debated and modified many a time in the Army and it is still not perfect and each Chief tinkers to show that he understands the issue.

The only Chief that I know did a good thing was Gen Roychowdhury (no relation of mine). To ensure that people don't manipulate peace postings and avoid going to the field and operational areas, he directed that for promotions, extra points are given to those who go to field, HAA and operational areas.

Even this can be manipulated. Sitting in Sugar sector for a while and then returning to a peace location on temporary medical grounds your record still indicates that you have served in the HAA!! Likewise for operational or field areas!!

One just can't beat the ingenuity of the brain at work to shortchange the system!

Best way to stem this kind of wrong doings is:-
a. Notify areas based on threat analysis which would count towards these extra points for promotions. Points could be lessened for less threatened sectors.
b. Ensure that if person does not have requisite no of points he cannot qualify to appear in promotion or career courses or get instructional appointments.
c. Give extra points for regimental service. Peace tenures in regimental service should have more points than staff tenures in regimental service. Likewise in field and operational areas.
Baseline is that if you have to lead a group of men you should have worked and fought with them. Thus maximum points should be awarded for a guys tenure in a regiment rather than on staff or instructional appointments which are rather individualistic tenures.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1879
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby manjgu » 21 Aug 2009 13:56

abhiti... you seem to reading too many commando comics or watching rambo movies.


are you expecting everybody in uniform to be in line of fire? there has to be a way to motivate and reward people from other branches/ disciplines.. how will you reward a engineering , logistics, education etc officer for rendering meritorious services. i think AVSM, PVSM etc... have a rationale.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16769
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 21 Aug 2009 14:20

I think these AVSMs or PVSMs are a joke. Only medals which should count are the ones earned

:roll: so the army officers who came up with and executed (say) the latest secure communication net or a new doctrine are jokers !!

I hate to see the way a 'project IGI' commando thinks, I dislike even more that I have to read it on BR.

Although 5% discretion is no good either. In govt service it usually means that you are washing dishes at your boss'es residence.

the trust you have in the senior army officers is indeed impressive.

now answer this, when you can't trust them to decide on 5% of a subordinate's ACR, how can you trust them with the country's defence ?

let's disband the army right ?

========================

anyone who is a little aware of human nature knows that a systematic evaluation is not necessarily an accurate one.

human history is overflowing with examples of people who fared poorly in regular examinations created by the 'system' but went on to exceed the system's limits many times over.

in most cases it needed an experienced person to identify the potential. this new method puts paid to any such flexibility.

I would have taken out this 5% long time ago.

thank god you were not there. I do hope you are not in a HR position, if you are god knows how many potential talents you will destroy by eliminating all <99 %.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Sanku » 21 Aug 2009 15:04

I think the issue of concern here is less ACR are more of splitting the brass into Ops and Staff lines. That is something I dont understand.

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 21 Aug 2009 15:59

Sanku wrote:I think the issue of concern here is less ACR are more of splitting the brass into Ops and Staff lines. That is something I dont understand.



It is the ACRs which decide who is for Staff or Command.

It is the performance that decides and that is based on the ACR.

That is unless you have some inside info to the contrary which I am sure you will share with us!

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 21 Aug 2009 16:04

manjgu wrote:abhiti... you seem to reading too many commando comics or watching rambo movies.


are you expecting everybody in uniform to be in line of fire? there has to be a way to motivate and reward people from other branches/ disciplines.. how will you reward a engineering , logistics, education etc officer for rendering meritorious services. i think AVSM, PVSM etc... have a rationale.


I don't disagree.

But it would be a rare case that a General, after having been a General and not before, is without an AVSM or a PVSM or both!!

Too much of a coincidence that ranks bestows honour!!

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Aug 2009 16:55

Rahul M wrote:
Although 5% discretion is no good either. In govt service it usually means that you are washing dishes at your boss'es residence.

the trust you have in the senior army officers is indeed impressive. now answer this, when you can't trust them to decide on 5% of a subordinate's ACR, how can you trust them with the country's defence ? let's disband the army right ?

Saar you are asking too deep a questions...my tiny brain has always wondered how does India work? How does rails come on track even though late? How do govt buses still drive on road? How does Air India in the end deliver better service than Continental and American? How come you still get your post (mostly if isn't something expensive)? How come folks still go to govt hospital and still survive? My answer so far is that in Yindooostan logic doesn't work. Yindoo commander Bachitar Singh is all cunning and keeps his bibi happy by getting free mali, atta, and naukar. But Bachitar Singh has a big mooch as well. Everyday oils his mooch to stay up. If enemy goes after his Mooch, Bachitar Singh will chak de phatee. But mostly Bachitar Singhs priority is atta and naukar.

thank god you were not there. I do hope you are not in a HR position, if you are god knows how many potential talents you will destroy by eliminating all <99 %.

Saar I have seen govt far too closely than I desire. Only fundas that ever worked in Yindoo land are Chanakya. There are two kinds of folks in govt service - Type I: who just want to do their job, get paid, and go home and in the process do some good for everyone. You will see the likes of these dying fighting insurgency every day on the front line. Then there are the other types (Type 2) who are busy bring their boss whisky, get his boy chocs, and his wife mithai. They soon become family and hey everyone helps family (nothing bad in that)! The only grudge Type I have against the system is as to why did the system give them discretion in promotion. So taking away 5% will make sure the ratio of good and bad is the same at the top as at the bottom (best you can ask for in Yindoo land).
Last edited by abhiti on 21 Aug 2009 17:24, edited 2 times in total.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Sanku » 21 Aug 2009 17:19

RayC wrote:
Sanku wrote:I think the issue of concern here is less ACR are more of splitting the brass into Ops and Staff lines. That is something I dont understand.



It is the ACRs which decide who is for Staff or Command.

It is the performance that decides and that is based on the ACR.

That is unless you have some inside info to the contrary which I am sure you will share with us!


Allow me to restate, I think the bigger issue in having a 5% selective (or not) ACR marks is the division of brass into two ranks as you said here

RayC wrote:It is a stupid idea of Command and Staff stream.

It is only the Arty COAS (Rodrigues and now Kappor) who could be harebrained!



http://publication.samachar.com/pub_art ... extIndex=3

The army officials are unhappy due the new promotion policy, which will split officers into two ranks, reports DNA.


General kapoor has proposed to split senior officers into two streams: staff and command. The former would be given administrative and staff duties while the latter would be given corps and army commands.


So what I am saying is that the split into two different streams is the one which is something I don't understand.

I find the following less contentious (IMVHO)

General Kapoor made the assessments automatic with 5% marks being proportional to marks in the ACR. This took away all the discretion left with senior officers to identify promising officers who may otherwise have scored a bit less in their ACRs.


There are two different steps taken here, and I am saying one part of it is something I don't understand the rational for.

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Aug 2009 17:46

manjgu wrote:abhiti... you seem to reading too many commando comics or watching rambo movies. are you expecting everybody in uniform to be in line of fire? there has to be a way to motivate and reward people from other branches/ disciplines.. how will you reward a engineering , logistics, education etc officer for rendering meritorious services. i think AVSM, PVSM etc... have a rationale.


Saar you also criticize me for watching commando movies. But these commando movie like Band of Brothers are better than Yindoo reality shows. You see how Amriki don't have no officer entrance exam. Everyone joins as a soldier and based on performance in line of fire go up. You get param vir chakra you are guaranteed to retire as a general. But in Yindoo reality shows param vir chakra buys you some 200 paisa stipend only. No promotion and no being a commander. Commanders all are ones who get PVSM or AVSM. So much for meritorious service!

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12530
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Sanku » 21 Aug 2009 17:54

abhiti wrote:Saar you also criticize me for watching commando movies. But these commando movie are better than Yindoo reality shows. Rambo movies like Band of Brothers are indeed impressive


No a more accurate movie is HOT SHOTS please watch that for real learning.

. You see how Amriki don't have no officer entrance exam.


Oh dear, they forgot to tell this to US Army... quick tell them to correct their webpage
http://www.goarmy.com/careers/becoming_an_officer.jsp

Everyone joins as a soldier and based on performance in line of fire go up.



Including their officers who are in JAG? I must say the thought of lawyers setting up a MMG instead of briefcases brings tears in my eye (of joy of course)

:rotfl:

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby abhiti » 21 Aug 2009 18:20

Sanku wrote:No a more accurate movie is HOT SHOTS please watch that for real learning.
Charlie sheen movies suc. I hardly watch any CS movie or tv show. And you comparing CS to Band of Brothers. You must be nuts.

Oh dear, they forgot to tell this to US Army... quick tell them to correct their webpage http://www.goarmy.com/careers/becoming_an_officer.jsp

You are right that people join directly as SL as well. But you forgot to mention that enlisted soldiers can become officers too http://www.goarmy.com/rotc/enlisted_soldiers.jsp. And anyone who gets medal of honor quickly has his career set in army. That is my whole point.

Sanju
BRFite
Posts: 921
Joined: 14 Aug 2005 01:00
Location: North of 49

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Sanju » 21 Aug 2009 19:13

Abhiti,

It is called "sarcasm" - I am referring to Sanku's post! :P

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16769
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 21 Aug 2009 20:31

But you forgot to mention that enlisted soldiers can become officers too http://www.goarmy.com/rotc/enlisted_soldiers.jsp.

but you are completely unaware that the Indian army also has similar avenues for its enlisted men.
but you are aware of a far-off country's army recruitment procedures.
kudos !

p.s. how many US army chiefs are MOH awardees ?

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19481
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Raja Bose » 21 Aug 2009 21:42

abhiti wrote:
Oh dear, they forgot to tell this to US Army... quick tell them to correct their webpage http://www.goarmy.com/careers/becoming_an_officer.jsp

You are right that people join directly as SL as well. But you forgot to mention that enlisted soldiers can become officers too http://www.goarmy.com/rotc/enlisted_soldiers.jsp. And anyone who gets medal of honor quickly has his career set in army. That is my whole point.


Before you are quick to diss the IA, I hope you are aware that enlisted men have a path to officer school in IA and quite many go thru that path. As regards MOH setting anyone's career in the US Army - is that your fond hope or is it backed by facts coz it seems to me it is the former. BTW the selection criteria of the PVC is much more stringent than the MOH (possibly due to the British influence) - the statistics speak for themselves. So in most cases the PVC winner is no longer alive to continue his career.

The Army is not all about blasting the enemy to smithereens. Behind the scenes work thousands of soldiers who daily toil enables the infantry man/tank man/pilot/gunner to blast the enemy to smithereens. Would hardly be fair to club all these soldiers who dont directly participate in combat, into the dish-washing category :roll:

Anoop
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 16 May 2002 11:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Anoop » 22 Aug 2009 02:29

The fact that such a proposal to split the officer cadre into Staff and Command was even discussed at that level, let alone recommended, is inexplicable. How do they expect to groom officers for higher ranks if one critical avenue of experience is denied? This is a pointer to the deep malaise that exists, where the relevant issues of parity and career prospects are leading to stunning non-solutions. I hope and pray that better sense prevails before its too late.

Katare
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2477
Joined: 02 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby Katare » 22 Aug 2009 04:56

I think this recommendation came from AVS committee and makes sense on certain aspects of organizational structures. Major General and Lt Gen are last leg of officer's career. It makes sense to separate two functional areas and create specialist leaders. Something similar is being implemented for IAS too. It makes sense especially after implementation of AVS II which has increased the number of Generals. Instead of choosing the senior most officer from administrative duty for last 3 years and than promoting him as in charge of command to be a moved again to an administrative position when next opening comes up in 3-4 years.

By the time these folks are selected for Staff College courses they and army should know what is their interest/competence is. Some would be good at administrative jobs others may be better commanding troops. Keeping those streams separate makes sense for creating highly specialized (and job satisfied) leaders.

abhiti
BRFite
Posts: 248
Joined: 26 Apr 2009 00:39

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby abhiti » 22 Aug 2009 06:09

Rahul M wrote:but you are completely unaware that the Indian army also has similar avenues for its enlisted men.
but you are aware of a far-off country's army recruitment procedures.
kudos !

p.s. how many US army chiefs are MOH awardees ?


You see the country isn't so "far-off" as I live here. An army chief from the lowest rank may indeed be a long journey. But among the ones who get MOH and continued to serve (not killed, disabled, or otherwise leave) did seem to go to rank of Colonel. I see officers who got MOH and continued to serve go to Major General, Vice Admirals, etc. I see PVC recipients in Indian army rise to a rank of captain or major.

As regards MOH setting anyone's career in the US Army - is that your fond hope or is it backed by facts coz it seems to me it is the former. BTW the selection criteria of the PVC is much more stringent than the MOH (possibly due to the British influence) - the statistics speak for themselves. So in most cases the PVC winner is no longer alive to continue his career.


You r right, after researching it some time I stand corrected, I don't see too many becoming generals from soldiers even with MOH. But a large number of them seem to rise to Colonel. I totally agree it is harder to get PVC than MOH. All the more reasons the ones who survive should rise quickly. They do seem to rise to Captain or Major. Don't know why...may be due to difference in education level of folks.
Last edited by abhiti on 22 Aug 2009 07:03, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 22 Aug 2009 06:48

abhiti wrote:
manjgu wrote:abhiti... you seem to reading too many commando comics or watching rambo movies. are you expecting everybody in uniform to be in line of fire? there has to be a way to motivate and reward people from other branches/ disciplines.. how will you reward a engineering , logistics, education etc officer for rendering meritorious services. i think AVSM, PVSM etc... have a rationale.


Saar you also criticize me for watching commando movies. But these commando movie like Band of Brothers are better than Yindoo reality shows. You see how Amriki don't have no officer entrance exam. Everyone joins as a soldier and based on performance in line of fire go up. You get param vir chakra you are guaranteed to retire as a general. But in Yindoo reality shows param vir chakra buys you some 200 paisa stipend only. No promotion and no being a commander. Commanders all are ones who get PVSM or AVSM. So much for meritorious service!


I would like to dispel two popular myths that keep appearing on this forum:

1. The decorated people do not rise to be Generals.

2. The Paratroopers/ SF do not rise to be Generals.

There are too many highly decorated (gallantry awards) officers who became General. If people have the time they could Google and check. Some of the decorated officers who rose to be Generals that I can recall from memory are:

1. Lt Gen PS Bhagat, VC. He had the highest gallantry award inspite of being an Indian - Victoria Cross (equivalent to the Param Vir Chakra)

2. The Northern Army Commander, Lt Gen P C Bhardwaj, PVSM, AVSM, VrC, SC, VSM is a General and and a Paratropper.

3. The former COS of Northern Command Lt Gen PC Katoch, UYSM, AVSM, SC a paratrooper. Please note UYSM and SC.

Lt Gen IS Gill, PVSM, AVSM, MC. MC = Military Cross equivalent to Sena Medal and given for gallantry. He too was a Paratrooper.

Sena Medal can be won for gallantry or for other acts of note like in disaster relief and so on.

4. Lt Gen RS Dayal, PVSM, MVC, ADC. He too was a Paratrooper.

5. Lt Gen HS Lidder, UYSM, YSM, VSM. He is also a Paratrooper.

6. Lt Gen S Pattabhiraman, apart from other medals also has a SM. He is a Paratrooper and an Engineer.

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

Re: Indian Army Discussion

Postby RayC » 22 Aug 2009 07:03

I see PVC recipients in Indian army rise to a rank of captain or major.


Lt Gen PS Bhagat got the VC, lived and became a Lt Gen!!

Remember Col Hoshiyar Singh, Colonel Dhan Singh Thapa? They won the PVC and lived.

Most of the others who have got PVC got it posthumously. The irony is that they did not live to get higher ranks.

PVC is given for the highest order of gallantry and thus while doing such an act, most of the times, one has to give his own life for the Nation.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests