BR Forum Feedback

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
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

Rahul M wrote:>> Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.

Please understand that if you degrade forum quality in an effort to shore up the echandee of your mumbling farting prez a permaban will be issued.
perhaps some ARF (america rakshak forum) and not BRF is the right place for you ?
I thought we are moving on.

Now that you raise the issue of citizenship, is BRF only for Indian citizens?
What about people with OCI?

(Just so that everybody understands, I always speak for India as a former Indian citizen naturalized American. That will not change even I get permabanned at BRF. The only thing permaban is going to do is prove <your pet theory>)
Last edited by Vayutuvan on 07 Jan 2022 03:49, edited 2 times in total.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

hnair wrote:
Rahul M wrote:>> Please understand that I would stand up to anybody attacking my POTUS.

Please understand that if you degrade forum quality in an effort to shore up the echandee of your mumbling farting prez a permaban will be issued.
perhaps some ARF (america rakshak forum) and not BRF is the right place for you ?
:lol: poster Vayutuvan certainly got his quorum of BRadmins in this thread and so the pertinent question that we all have, “Does he know he is your POTUS?” can be asked and giggled.
How very dignified.
nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9097
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by nachiket »

Vayutuvan wrote: Now that you raise the issue of citizenship, is BRF only for Indian citizens?
What about people with OCI?

(Just so that everybody understands, I always speak for India as a former Indian citizen naturalized American. That will not change even I get permabanned at BRF. The only thing permaban is going to do is prove <your pet theory>)
No one has raised the question of citizenship here except you. The problem is your expectation from BRF of treating POTUS as some hallowed entity. That will not happen here because this is an Indian forum. You need to accept that. It is best you stop with these allegations against mods immediately. We have been very patient with you but if you continue in this manner you will get banned. We cannot be any more clear than that.
k prasad
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 17:38
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by k prasad »

We don't even treat our (India's) PMs and presidents as hallowed entities... except maybe for APJ.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Vayutuvan wrote:I am moving on.
Hmm… this is not happening since last page and you are littering this thread with increasingly frivolous allegation after allegations.

User warned and sent off for a week
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

<Poof>
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

<poof>
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Ugh… you again? Off to the corner for a month. Try to get some self control and post
basant
BRFite
Posts: 889
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by basant »

I see a lot of repetitive discussions, esp. questions, that are well served by FAQ included Wiki type of pages. Can we have such a forum that is moderated? Like MediaWiki with moderation extension?
basant
BRFite
Posts: 889
Joined: 20 Mar 2020 20:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by basant »

k prasad wrote:We don't even treat our (India's) PMs and presidents as hallowed entities... except maybe for APJ.
Have seen finest of wars on BRF on APJ. Really long time back!! :|
YashG
BRFite
Posts: 936
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by YashG »

Cybaru wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: No fear of that. Brar has left.
Whaaat, why? He was fun to debate and he was quite knowledgeable..
Guys, we should request him to come back. Depth of his posts was what made this forum post way different than twitter. It is the depth of the BR posts that cant be found anywhere else. Otherwise twitter is way more convenient. I miss all posters who did long indepth posts. Brar in particular would cram an article worth of info in just one long para.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

YashG wrote:Guys, we should request him to come back. Depth of his posts was what made this forum post way different than twitter. It is the depth of the BR posts that cant be found anywhere else. Otherwise twitter is way more convenient. I miss all posters who did long indepth posts. Brar in particular would cram an article worth of info in just one long para.
We are all either posters OR moderators. We are not the Almighty. We cannot force him to post on BRF. It is each person's individual choice.

More importantly, he has not been banned. He left voluntarily. His posting privileges are NOT revoked. The choice is HIS.
ks_sachin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2906
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by ks_sachin »

I am upset because Brar was a treasure trove of info on aUS weapons programs. No one here even came or comes close. Some of these probs are important to study and understand as India is also attempting them.
Everyone has their biases.
Even Some others who have left BRF who had actual operational exp.
Guess who looses out. You can see the impact of a lack of knowledge and frog in well attitude in the Agniveer thread.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

ks_sachin wrote:I am upset because Brar was a treasure trove of info on US weapons programs. No one here even came or comes close. Some of these probs are important to study and understand, as India is also attempting them.
Everyone has their biases.
Even some others who have left BRF who had actual operational exp.
Guess who looses out. You can see the impact of a lack of knowledge and frog in well attitude in the Agniveer thread.
Sachin, the old Russia-Ukraine war thread was closed because it was hard to police both the war and the politics surrounding it. Discussions were all over the place.

The post of US Generals hiding in caves was utter nonsense. But when the moderator issued a general admonishment to all, I did not expect brar to be that brittle. He was not singled out by the mod, but he chose to leave. That was his decision.

Many who voluntarily leave BRF eventually come their way back (in another username). But some do not. This comes with running a forum. We cannot expect everyone to remain forever. We have lost moderators as well. But the forum moves on. There is no other way.
maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 621
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by maitya »

Mods, just realised that, haven't posted quite a few of Turbofan Tech related materials (in form of my old posts), to the Kaveri Saga thread - which was supposed to be a one-stop place for most of the info wrt Kaveri/Kabini indigenous Turbofan tech.

So want to plug in a few such materials, especilly after this particular post to maintain the "flow".
However, withut privileges of editing threads, no clue how to go about it.

So pls could you let me know,
a) if any such enrichment is required of the Saga thread
b) and if yes, how to get that done (wrt editing a particular thread (and only that thread), and insert a few posts in between)

Ofcoure, if not an appropriate ask, pls remove this post.
sumsumne
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 15 May 2004 11:31
Location: Bangalore

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by sumsumne »

The main Bharat Rakshak site's SSL certificate seems to have an issue for quite some time now.
Browsers keep displaying the "Not Secure" message.
bharathp
BRFite
Posts: 453
Joined: 24 Jul 2017 03:44

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by bharathp »

@Rakesh Ji:
In response to your message to multiple users in the lines of:
Please *DO NOT* quote entire posts with a one or two line reply.
is it not possible to get a plugin that sets the size of a quote to 3-4 lines (irrespective of the size of the message being quoted) which can then be expanded by any user as per their convenience? Am failry certain there should be plugins of that sort already available - if not, I am willing to lend a hand to write it or get that written by someone on my team.

Thank you
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Response to poster John’s post:

John wrote: The same is true with hnair who made claims and attacked that I said Kremlin will fall and how I said 1 Ukrainian = 100 Russian. While I never stated any of that heck I even predicted Putin will survive back in Feb.

Pro Russian sentiment isn’t bad but personally attacking anyone as Pro Ukrainian because they don’t believe in Tu-160 can be used for AshW purpose is new low.
First about a new low for forum: Over last two decades, when people decide to leave, there is always a “new low has been reached” claim, because something affected them, so it is a new low. All sorts of folks have claimed that cliche as their very own. Your russo-phobia is ok, if it can be in context of issues India faces from their weaponry, but pushing that in every thread is not something we want in BRF, please use some social media handle for that sort of campaigns

As for the Kremlin Defense you are using:
hnair: John, please do take it easy, let us keep “one Ukrie flatulence = 100 Russians” in that other thread.

john: where did I say Ukrainian faltulence causes 100 Russian babies to be born?
hnair: Everyday it is “Kremlin has fallen” posts and that is ok. But spilling that into this thread is not ok and you got upset when I pointed out?

john: where did I post Kremlin is falling
hnair: Don’t cry wolf

john: Where did I say a wolf is going to come and chew our legs?
DISCLAIMER (for john): That last one is a metaphoric one and neither hnair nor john wrote that. But the first two are actual posts hnair did :D

Having “warning: contains coffee that is hot” type disclaimers is good for a western audience, but won’t get it from me for all my posts, so that you won’t twist the posts to suit your grievance. Take it easy john

Also brar_w does not need you as his advocate because. brar_w was not banned so he can speak up for himself, if he wants. From the forum admin POV, brar_w left because he can’t even take a benign advice from ramana, to be less aggressive in pushing Ukrainian POV and picking up fights in that thread. brar_w’s post on other topics are well received as is your’s.

So stick around if you can, but totally your choice. But your posts can and will be contested for biases and irrelevance for Indian interests
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by John »

Brar wasn’t shit posting things like Russian 80 yr old generals leading Russian offensive or Russia using chemical weapons and he along few others including myself called out what is obviously a shit post about some NATO general in Mariupol (well I am still waiting for Russia to display them or elite NATO soldiers). Few mods including Ramana defended that post, calling out BS propaganda news article is not posting from Ukrainian POV. I guess for some reason people like you see it that way which is sad shows how basically the viewpoint nowadays, agree with our views or get labeled and attacked.
hnair: Everyday it is “Kremlin has fallen” posts and that is ok. But spilling that into this thread is not ok and you got upset when I pointed out?

john: where did I post Kremlin is falling
You have yet to show me a single post I have said Kremlin is falling every day, let alone prove I am doing that every day . I even noted I actually made it clear that I made a large post back in March on how Putin will survive this while few folks noted the opposite.

When I ask for proof you keep simply spinning your words in circle claiming I have done that when I asked for proof, even making fake posts with my name (I guess if it is mod they can do mocking posts now) . Which is shameful to have mods making false accusation and attacking folks because they don’t agree their views. Every post I have done is informational on recent strike or new weapon that was added. I have said what needs to be said good luck.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

John, let go of brar_w’s coat tails. It is none of your business what happened between him and a senior admin

Your daily posts in that Ukrainian thread etc is fine, no admin ever had a problem, since many people do it within forum rules. Also claiming victimhood over my post is not going to to get you anywhere. In the above posts, I was clearly showing you the absurdity of your claims based around “show me the literal post” defence. For the records, I had never claimed you made a literal post as you repetitively claim I did, that is if you can stop spinning around with your BS defence and go back and read my original post.

There is nothing to spin for me: my message was blunt, you were turning into an admin liability in the IAF thread with your unwarranted russophobic post about a matter that came up due to an IAF chief’s public pronouncement. I might have agreed or disagreed with your past views on various matters, before this incident as would have many other admins. And even now I did not issue a warning etc. So if you can’t take a pointed message without claiming martyrdom, I can’t help it.

Once again you are not banned or anything. It is your choice to post or not.
John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3447
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by John »

hnair wrote:

There is nothing to spin for me: my message was blunt, you were turning into an admin liability in the IAF thread with your unwarranted russophobic post about a matter that came up due to an IAF chief’s public pronouncement. I might have agreed or disagreed with your past views on various matters, before this incident as would have many other admins. And even now I did not issue a warning etc. So if you can’t take a pointed message without claiming martyrdom, I can’t help it.
Once again having to defend absurdity how is pointing out that Tu-160 cannot be used for maritime strike ( as it doesn’t exist in such configuration ) or has to be modified to carry Brahmos being Russiaphobic. Chief only mentioned about need for strategic bombers (did not say Tu-160) and he even later clarified there was no negotiation for Tu-160 and once again strategic bomber not maritime bomber, not sure I said here but I even noted this hints that there could be large stealth UCAV platform.

If someone posted similar statement on B-1b or whatever I would say the exact same thing. This goes back to earlier statements if people question any absurd claim on Russian weaponry the usual suspects are quick to attack claiming Russia-phobia while not even offering any counter argument to support their claim.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

The above post should go into IAF thread not here, where Karan M has already given rather sound rebuttals. No discussions about Tu160 here, please
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

John, this brar_w crutch that you are falling on...is just downright awkward and weird. He has moved on from BRF. What are you still holding on to brar_w for????

Secondly, how much more of this are you going to force everyone on BRF to go through? This is not a kindergarten day care centre. Mods don't have time to deal with these kinds of tantrums.

You have made your point and hnair has made his. Act like a mature adult John and move on. I told you this nicely in the IAF thread as well.

OR OTHERWISE

Follow the example of brar_w and leave when you said you were going to. That is what he did. Stop with, "...this is my last post." Then later, "...this is really my last post." Then still a little while later, ""...I am serious....NOW this is my last post."

Adopt one principle and stick to it.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

John wrote:Once again having to defend absurdity how is pointing out that Tu-160 cannot be used for maritime strike ( as it doesn’t exist in such configuration ) or has to be modified to carry Brahmos being Russiaphobic. Chief only mentioned about need for strategic bombers (did not say Tu-160) and he even later clarified there was no negotiation for Tu-160 and once again strategic bomber not maritime bomber, not sure I said here but I even noted this hints that there could be large stealth UCAV platform.
Given the number of absurd posts you have made on multiple topics and have had to be corrected, you are the last one to be basically telling anyone about what is absurd or not. So far, everyone has been mostly polite with you, responding only with light sarcasm, despite how arrogantly you behave with opinions that contradict your often poorly researched opinions. Dont take it for granted. All you do is respond with more obnoxious posts. What you are doing in the above post is making incorrect assertions about others opinions and then fishing for information.
If someone posted similar statement on B-1b or whatever I would say the exact same thing. This goes back to earlier statements if people question any absurd claim on Russian weaponry the usual suspects are quick to attack claiming Russia-phobia while not even offering any counter argument to support their claim.
Multiple counterpoints have been posted. All you do is go on and on like a broken record, claiming the same things again and again. Multiple people have noted your Russo-phobia. Most of us couldnt give a darn about your beliefs. However, when those biases end up making you behave obnoxiously on the forum and act like thought police, then it becomes an issue.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

naraswami, if you don’t like someone’s post, report it. If not, contest it with points. So dial down on sarcasm and engage in more productive posts.

No more explanation is needed nor forthcoming.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

naraswami wrote:And yet, HAL made those budget and timeline projections that they were awarded.

If only they would have come to twitter to learn how to stabilize projection and how to do proposals based on scale, right? its unclear what you are accusing them of... cluelessness about how to estimate their own deliverables ? Or lack of integrity in making fake proposals about production ?

Its one thing to understand general principles of production and scaling; but to get stuck on that groove while ignoring how capability plays a role is putting your head in the sand. You must live in a world where as far as manufacturing capability/production technology capability is considered, "everyone is above-average and all the women are beautiful".... and its only order size that matters.

As Haridas-ji said, classic case of "blind men in a room with an elephant". A courageous desh-bhakt comes in with a concrete example, disclosing which could result in a shit-storm for himself professionally, a karma-yogi even as he's trying to help HAL solve it.... surely that deserves a better response than bromides about scale ?
Sir you've already received a warning for overdoing the sarcasm in an above post. Please heed that warning. Picking fights with all the forum members and constantly disparaging their views via sarcasm is not acceptable. Surely you can disagree without being disagreeable. If everyone starts on the same vein the thread will lose all value. Let's please avoid all this stuff.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

naraswami wrote:Ok- feedback noted & post modified. I would request the same amount of vigilance from the mods about repeated misplaced blame and allusions of conspiracy or sabotage towards IAF for HAL not meeting its own forecast/promised production targets. For a Defence forum, it seems unsavory to create an open season atmosphere to attack the IAF primarily and directly for roles in which they only have secondary or tertiary responsibilities
The IAF has far more important issues of significance to deal with, than having to defend itself against some forum members on the internet highlighting issues that affect their service. If false accusations are levelled against the service, other forum members will call it out. Whatever accusation - right or wrong - that is put on the IAF on BRF, is of no consequence to the service. The IAF does not need you to do her PR work. But if you feel that this forum is unsavory for you, then you are more than welcome to leave.

You don't need to worry about BRF's status as a defence forum. We are fine.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20772
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Karan M »

naraswami wrote:Ok- feedback noted & post modified. I would request the same amount of vigilance from the mods about repeated misplaced blame and allusions of conspiracy or sabotage towards IAF for HAL not meeting its own forecast/promised production targets. For a Defence forum, it seems unsavory to create an open season atmosphere to attack the IAF primarily and directly for roles in which they only have secondary or tertiary responsibilities
The entire point you seem to be missing sir is that people are pointing out the IAF needs to take up more responsibility in the design and development of it's platforms apart from being merely an user. This is the case for multiple AF worldwide. If you disagree, fine, move on to an interesting topic. You cannot keep engaging in AD hominem attacks on members for their views disagreeing with you. How many posts do moderators have to edit and "poof" sir, to keep you out of trouble. You've been extended a lot of courtesy already despite the fact the moment you've arrived, it's been set of fights after another over topic after topic. You've insulted, mocked multiple members, attacked the forum itself, and yet we keep interceding to prevent things from boiling over.

Second, as far as we know, you don't represent the IAF either. There are multiple IAF veterans who themselves would disagree with some of the statements you've made about the IAFs set of responsibilities and even HAL and other DPSUs. I know some of them. I got an earful myself from one for castigating HAL a few days back. He said without HAL he wouldn't have been able to do even a fraction of what he did achieve. Fair enough.

They have better things to do than come and engage in muck raking flame wars on forums so let things slide. If you wish to position yourself as an insider, then please share your details on the forum. We have had imposters so we have to be strict.

If you wish to maintain your privacy that's fine too but in which case don't keep attacking fellow members saying you have inside info and they don't. It's unfair to them.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

naraswami wrote:I dont need you to tell me that all the social media noise will be less than a gnat's fart in the IAF's face. I call it out and hope to reduce it because I believe it will allow for more informed, factual and nuanced debate and learning in the forum - right now, these gross oversimplifications (IAF is the reason for all trouble!) instead of digging into relevant details create a bias against balanced debate and exchange that allows true root causes to emerge and be understood. Thats the 'unsavory' part that I hope to influence.
You are not here to have informed, factual and nuanced debates. That much is certain.

You can make your points known without the sarcasm and the mud you throw on the forum and its members. Mods do not have time to clean up threads, because you are on some one-man mission to prove a particular point.

You have been given a formal warning to cease & desist. But if you don't want to listen, go ahead and roll the dice. I will determine your play.
nits
BRFite
Posts: 1155
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by nits »

any thread on Gandhinagar Defexpo - or should we use some existing one ?
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

nits wrote:any thread on Gandhinagar Defexpo - or should we use some existing one ?
Going to start one right now. Thanks for reminding.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12060
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Vayutuvan »

hnair wrote:Vayutuvan, you have a history with almost all admins. If this is time for your annual vacation from forum, say so. But please don’t litter threads with personal attacks on admins.

No more claptrap from you here.
Could poster @hnair provide evidence of the "history" I have with "almost all admins"? I never went against BRF admins and followed rules since I am a stickler for rules and believe in self-restraint.

I have not engaged in personal attacks against admins. I objected to poster @hnair's suggested course of action that India owns Vijaya Gadde as their agent provocateur.

Characterizing it as a "personal attack" on an admin by the very same admin in question is self-serving, to say the least.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4633
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by hnair »

Vayutuvan wrote:I never went against BRF admins and followed rules since I am a stickler for rules and believe in self-restraint.
You are posting this claim in same page where traces of your attack posts (from your last ugly meltdown) and responses from admins (other than me) still exist?

You show zero self restraint in this forum, when a warning is given and go on to slowly circle the drain by personal attacks. Last time also you gave some convoluted logic about why you have a right to do that etc. And it is happening again now. Up to you to make a choice
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12187
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Pratyush »

Ramana,

You have stated that i am being obstinate.

You are correct, because of the following reasons.

1) Within the Indian government and PSU procurement process. I have designed and gotten approved enough RFIs to exclude specific vendors from the qualification.

2) Reading it tells me that the Indian army has made its mind to exclude ATAGS from the future procurement. Or a preference for under 15 tons would not have been placed in the qualification criteria.

3) The absence of shell handling crane will disqualify the Bharat 52 as well.

Leaving Dhanush 52 and Athos as contenders. Once that takes place. Athos can be produced by the Indian industrial partners as an indigenous system. Just as the T 90.

4) if i am wrong, then the Indian army is going to procure over 3600 towed 155 in 52 and 45 calibre. At the same time we not seen any evidence that the Indian army has separate requirements for 1580+1580+ 450, 52 &45 calibre towed howitzers.

I have seen reports for a requirement of upto 900 ULH. Of which 145 nos have been procured. With the remainder being met by an indigenous system. Something that Kalyani is expecting to be able to meet with its design.

But this is a seperate system.

On top of this, completely unsubstantiated claims are being made about orders placed. When nothing has happened.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3113
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by JTull »

What happened to the Missile thread? HSTDV test to be reported.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

JTull wrote:What happened to the Missile thread? HSTDV test to be reported.
Report away ---> viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7891&start=400#p2575352

It was on Page 2 of the Mil forum.
JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3113
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by JTull »

Cheers
Anoop.G
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 28
Joined: 27 May 2017 08:06

Re: BR Main Site Feedback

Post by Anoop.G »

Admins /Mods
There seems to a junk/spam post from my ID which I did not post.. Not sure how this appeared. Can I request you to please delete this??

I have been accessing BRF only on my phone (iOS 16.3). I am totally clueless on how an external malware etc may have caused to post this with a Telegram link. In my professional life, I am not even linked remotely to the subject topic.

I have changed my BRF password. Is there anything else I need to do??

Regret any inconvenience for this!
Thanks.
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18190
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by Rakesh »

putnanja wrote:Video of 1st LCA landing on INS Vikrant ....
Received your report/comment about your posts being removed from the Vikrant thread and Naval Aviation threads. I certainly empathize with your concerns and let me address them.

1) First off, let me state that it was I who removed/deleted those posts, but preserved the post you made in the Naval Tejas thread.

2) It was solely done to keep discussions in one particular thread and not in multiple threads. A number of posts - from other posters - were merged (from the Vikrant and Naval aviation threads) into the Naval Tejas thread for this sole purpose.

3) Sometimes valuable info is split between multiple threads and readers will miss info that could have been collated/preserved in one thread. This causes another issue where posters will ask the same question that was already answered in another thread. So while I do understand this info needs to be preserved, the underlying issue is which thread should everything be collected in?

4) In this case, the best option was to move all the discussions to the Naval Tejas thread, as the primary discussion is about the aircraft in question. The secondary, but equally important, issue is the vessel the aircraft landed on. It is important to give visibility to the appropriate threads, as they get lost in the successive pages of the forum and most posters rarely ever visit them.

5) With regards to the issue of preservation and future reference, you will see that the first post of the Naval Tejas thread contains all the info that is required for a newbie (or even an oldie!) to refer to, when required i.e. when the Tejas first landed on the Vikrant + video of the event, when the Tejas first landed on the Vikramaditya + video of the event, the first flight of each of the two prototypes, etc.

Hope this answers your question. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank You.
putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4665
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: BR Forum Feedback

Post by putnanja »

Rakesh wrote: 4) In this case, the best option was to move all the discussions to the Naval Tejas thread, as the primary discussion is about the aircraft in question. The secondary, but equally important, issue is the vessel the aircraft landed on. It is important to give visibility to the appropriate threads, as they get lost in the successive pages of the forum and most posters rarely ever visit them.

Hope this answers your question. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank You.
Thanks for detailed feedback.

I don't fully agree with this statement. The primary discussion was about first aircraft landing on INS Vikrant. For an aircraft carrier, that is a significant milestone as it is it's raison d'être. Even the news of landing on Mig-29k was removed from INS Vikrant thread. I feel it's important milestone of the aircraft carrier about when/which aircraft made the first few landings and take-offs. Just like first aircraft landing on a new civil airport is celebrated, the first few operations of aircraft from an aircraft carrier needs to be celebrated, as that is the primary purpose of an aircraft carrier. In this particular case, it shouldn't be an issue to have posts in both threads as there are operational issues that can be discussed in carrier thread, while the aircraft performance issues can be in the naval LCA thread. Just my $0.02.
Post Reply