Newbie Corner & Military Miscellaneous

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Mar 2011 12:55

There has been news recently which talks about EW integration into PV-1. This made me think of this question. After Tarang RWR was not found very effective, has there been any progress made on that end?

sum · Post by **sum** » 05 Mar 2011 15:18

^^ Could you please post any links about Tarang not being found effective? Havent come across that news till today ( even on BR)...

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Mar 2011 15:33

sum wrote:^^ Could you please post any links about Tarang not being found effective? Havent come across that news till today ( even on BR)...

Irrelevant now. It was said some time back that R118 system (which includes new RWR,MAWS & LWS) will replace Tarang. However, someone trustworthy had incorrectly told me that R118 is a Russian system. Hence my question. But after doing some googling I came across the post by rakall from previous AI. He clearly states that R 118 is DARE product and incorporates a new RWR will greater frequency range. So, I was obviously wrong to think that the system was Russian and consequently assuming that Tarang was found deficient and hence needed to be replaced by a Foreign System.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 05 Mar 2011 16:49

Suneetji,
I am not sure on the numbers but that fact is true. The Indian Army is the world's LARGEST ARMY, comprised of only volunteer. The Indian army doesn't have conscription like Israel, where everyone above the age of 18(IIRC) is required to serve a stint in the IDF.
Hope this help.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Mar 2011 17:25

Bala Vignesh wrote:Suneetji,
I am not sure on the numbers but that fact is true. The Indian Army is the world's LARGEST ARMY, comprised of only volunteer. The Indian army doesn't have conscription like Israel, where everyone above the age of 18(IIRC) is required to serve a stint in the IDF.
Hope this help.

Does anyone have any idea regarding the rough percentage of conscripts in IDF (specially in army)?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 05 Mar 2011 18:59

I tried wiki but couldn't find anything there... Can't utilise google uncle fully since i am traveling and using my mobile.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Mar 2011 19:03

Bala Vignesh wrote:I tried wiki but couldn't find anything there... Can't utilise google uncle fully since i am traveling and using my mobile.

I had tried a little googling myself. It gives various details like list of conscript regiments, ranks etc but nowhere did I come across the number or % of conscripts in IDF. Will give another try later.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Mar 2011 21:06

http://www.mahal-idf-volunteers.org/inf ... ontent.htm

Israel is unique in that military service is compulsory for both males and females. It is the only country in the world that maintains obligatory military service for women.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Mar 2011 21:32

^^
That is a very interesting bit. However, women are given a little leeway if they are unwilling to join. But the most interesting part is that IDF is not unique in conscripting women.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscripti ... g_of_women

As of 2010[update], countries that were drafting women into military service included Benin, Chad China, Cuba, Eritrea, Israel, Libya, Malaysia, North Korea, Peru, Taiwan, Tunisia, Côte d'Ivoire, and Mongolia

Also take a look at the first map showing conscription armies across the world. I had no idea that they cover more than half the globe! But then again, with China and Russia maintaining conscript forces, this should not come as a big surprise.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 06 Mar 2011 18:54

shiv wrote:
AdityaM wrote:How does one obtain a url link for a particular post
like this that was done by ramana somewhere:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 43#p642043
Look for the following icon on the top right side of the post whose url you want

Right clicking on the icon will enable you to copy the url.

shiv saar. me too a newbie. just wanted to know which icon are you referring to?? the icon you pasted is not seen now.

TIA.

added later : shiv saar, i got it. sorry for the bother. but i would be happy if you could help on this. i posted this on the main site feedback. copy pasting the question -

pragnya wrote:i don't know if this is the right forum to ask this. i checked the FAQ too but did not see the answer. my question is 'how to multi quote' to reply??

TIA.

@Marten sir. got around it before i saw your reply. thanks.

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 08 Mar 2011 10:57

shiv wrote:
vasu_ray wrote:when the first crash of MKI happened, it was the failure of FBW and the aircraft couldn't be controlled by manual piloting

yet for Tejas the manual controls exist in addition to the FBW, will the pilot be able to save the plane if the FBW were to fail?
vasu_ray you need to buy and Read "The Tejas Story" by Air Marshal Rajkumar. Kapil (of BR) may stil have a few copies left

shiv sir, is there any chance i can buy one?? i know it is a bit late in the day but still...

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 08 Mar 2011 17:13

was going through the article written by the Colonel regarding the financial aspects of the LCA

ministry of defence (MoD) sanctioned Rs 2,188 crore in 1993 (which included the initial Rs 560 crore). This allocation was to fund the building of two ‘technology demonstrator’ Tejas fighters.

“Within this budget, we flew the Tejas in 2001, and even built two extra Tejas prototypes,”

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... it/426073/

What i would like to know is, which of the LCAs are being referred to when the Directors says 2 extra prototypes

is it

1. TD-2 and PV-1

OR

2. PV-1 and PV-2 [since TD-1 & TD-2 were already expected to be built as part of Phase 1 financing]

any help in clarifying the doubt would be highly appreciated

TIA

jai · Post by **jai** » 08 Mar 2011 19:00

Did HAL ever consider the GE F110-132A for Tejas ? Could not find this info....members please enlighten !

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 09 Mar 2011 00:19

^^^ Give me a reason why it should!

pragnya · Post by **pragnya** » 11 Mar 2011 18:12

shiv wrote:Talking about LCA, elevons, stall and spin tests reminded me of my boyhood days and playing with planes. While I have resolved to buy material to start making models again - here is a time-pass video I have created entitled "Aerodynamics for dummies - a "crash" course"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3xdC6VnCHc

shiv saar, fantastic.

all i can do is - 'shira saashtanga pranamagalu'.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 11 Mar 2011 21:42

Haha..

This video should also go to the humour thread I think

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 11 Mar 2011 21:51

Hiten wrote:was going through the article written by the Colonel regarding the financial aspects of the LCA

ministry of defence (MoD) sanctioned Rs 2,188 crore in 1993 (which included the initial Rs 560 crore). This allocation was to fund the building of two ‘technology demonstrator’ Tejas fighters.

“Within this budget, we flew the Tejas in 2001, and even built two extra Tejas prototypes,”
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... it/426073/

What i would like to know is, which of the LCAs are being referred to when the Directors says 2 extra prototypes

is it

1. TD-2 and PV-1

OR

2. PV-1 and PV-2 [since TD-1 & TD-2 were already expected to be built as part of Phase 1 financing]

any help in clarifying the doubt would be highly appreciated

TIA

Anybody??

RSoami wrote:Haha..
This video should also go to the humour thread I think

such lucid albeit clear & precise explanation of an Aerodynamic concept the video puts across, & you, Sir, want it to go to the humor thread

marimuthu · Post by **marimuthu** » 11 Mar 2011 21:59

Hiten wrote:
What i would like to know is, which of the LCAs are being referred to when the Directors says 2 extra prototypes

is it

1. TD-2 and PV-1

OR

2. PV-1 and PV-2 [since TD-1 & TD-2 were already expected to be built as part of Phase 1 financing]

any help in clarifying the doubt would be highly appreciated

TIA

It is PV1 and PV2.The Initial amount was to build TD1 and TD2 only. But they also build PV1 and PV2 with that amount. The first phase came to a close on March 31, 2004. Till that date they had completed TD1,TD2,PV1 and PV2 and also 500 flights.Hope this helps

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 11 Mar 2011 22:07

RSoami wrote:Haha..
This video should also go to the humour thread I think

Sandeep_ghosh · Post by **Sandeep_ghosh** » 12 Mar 2011 03:21

is there a Conspiracy Theory thread????

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Mar 2011 09:32

Thanks to those who liked the video. It was done for timepass and people are not required to enjoy it. If you did I'm happy. Actually I would like to video some spins and other odd maneuvers as an illustration of how all aircraft behave - from paper plane to yellseeyay.

I have always believed that a country like the US where boys (and girls) can play with real flying model aircraft easily leads to an environment of innovation. I would like to see that being replicated in India.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 12 Mar 2011 11:20

shiv wrote: Thanks to those who liked the video. It was done for timepass and people are not required to enjoy it. If you did I'm happy. Actually I would like to video some spins and other odd maneuvers as an illustration of how all aircraft behave - from paper plane to yellseeyay.

I have always believed that a country like the US where boys (and girls) can play with real flying model aircraft easily leads to an environment of innovation. I would like to see that being replicated in India.

Saarji,
Eagerly waiting for you to upload these videos.

jai · Post by **jai** » 12 Mar 2011 12:31

indranilroy wrote:^^^ Give me a reason why it should!

The whole reason for going for 414 for Mk2 was to get more power as IAF found 404IN and Kaveri underpowered....well the F 110 132A seems to be much more powerful than 414...hence the question.

Hiten · Post by **Hiten** » 12 Mar 2011 13:43

jai wrote:
indranilroy wrote:^^^ Give me a reason why it should!

The whole reason for going for 414 for Mk2 was to get more power

400% in total agreement. Should have equipped the Mk2s with a pair of GE90s i'd say. Hopefully in Mk2.08

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 12 Mar 2011 14:28

jai wrote:
indranilroy wrote:^^^ Give me a reason why it should!

The whole reason for going for 414 for Mk2 was to get more power as IAF found 404IN and Kaveri underpowered....well the F 110 132A seems to be much more powerful than 414...hence the question.

Sirji,
Please take a look at F110's dimensions and compare them with those of GE-404/414 and EF-200. Now decide whether F110 can fit inside LCA's musharraf.

Hiten wrote: 400% in total agreement. Should have equipped the Mk2s with a pair of GE90s i'd say. Hopefully in Mk2.08

You don't spare people much, do you?

Gurneesh · Post by **Gurneesh** » 14 Mar 2011 01:59

When HAL takes up licensed production of a plane, how is the price divided.

Does GOI pay HAL to make the planes and also pays some royalties to the OEM or is all of the money paid to OEM which then pays HAL some to make the planes?

I had this doubt wrt MKI as HAL is already making the planes under a contract which stipulates a price. But the new contracts that are being talked of mention a price that is significantly higher. IIRC for these new planes only radar (ASEA ?) and some avionics might be different (And suff like airframes, engines will be same and made in India). So, who gets the extra dough ?

And don't most contracts have clauses for additional future purchases at the original cost ?

manum · Post by **manum** » 14 Mar 2011 03:44

shiv wrote: Thanks to those who liked the video. It was done for timepass and people are not required to enjoy it. If you did I'm happy. Actually I would like to video some spins and other odd maneuvers as an illustration of how all aircraft behave - from paper plane to yellseeyay.

I have always believed that a country like the US where boys (and girls) can play with real flying model aircraft easily leads to an environment of innovation. I would like to see that being replicated in India.

I use Rhinoceros 3d for my 3d modeling as an architect...and it has a plugin which calculates radar rcs of the aircrafts...I've shornet 3d model, will try doing something out of it...though I don't find time to model anything except the buildings...so guy if you have any model please mail me.
"CADRCS is based on a unique theory, which covers physical theory of diffraction (PTD), physical optics (PO) and shooting and bouncing of rays. It works in a very efficient way, which allows the user to add the environment in the calculation, i.e. for simulation of ships the multipath effect can be added by adding the water surface. Due to the fast calculation time, CADRCS can also be used to calculate the radar signal seen from a radar placed anywhere in a CAD environment."

manum · Post by **manum** » 14 Mar 2011 11:24

this is the diagram generated by the software i used for RCS of a ship model I had...I don't understand a thing though, maybe someone can explain it to me.

jimmy_moh · Post by **jimmy_moh** » 15 Mar 2011 10:17

During the Tsunamis like that happend in jap shores , the naval submarines or ships can sustain the impact..?

koti · Post by **koti** » 15 Mar 2011 13:45

^^. The power of tsunamis can be summed up it terms of wave height. This wave height is negligible at deeper points and becomes more profound as we move towards the shores. So berthed vessels will be at high risk compared to others away from shores.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Mar 2011 14:47

jimmy_moh wrote:During the Tsunamis like that happend in jap shores , the naval submarines or ships can sustain the impact..?

Nothing happens to subs and ships in deep water. They just move up and down gently with he water. But the "up" of the wave approaching the shore smashes everything in its path, fills the land with water for miles inland after which all that water flows back to the sea causing more damage as stuff is washed away.

The coast off Japan was probably full of ships. Not a single report exists of any ships having felt anything leave alone suffer damage.

C_Bhat · Post by **C_Bhat** » 16 Mar 2011 03:17

Hey fellas, I have a slightly off topic question for guys familiar with Indian Army recruitment procedures. I'm an Indian born Canadian. I am Indian by birth but my citizenship changed automatically when my parents acquired the Canadian citizenship. I am curious to know if someone like me would be eligible for recruitment in the Indian Army. I have several years of law enforcement experience here in Canada. Also, what are the career prospects in private security in India?

Thanks in advance,

Cheers

Jatt

C_Bhat · Post by **C_Bhat** » 16 Mar 2011 07:38

Kind of confused as to how my username changed itself :S Does this mean my account is hijacked?

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 16 Mar 2011 08:03

C_Bhat wrote:Kind of confused as to how my username changed itself :S Does this mean my account is hijacked?

Its probably because some adminullah wanted so.

C_Bhat · Post by **C_Bhat** » 16 Mar 2011 08:18

pgbhat wrote:
C_Bhat wrote:Kind of confused as to how my username changed itself :S Does this mean my account is hijacked?
Its probably because some adminullah wanted so.

Interesting.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 16 Mar 2011 08:27

C_Bhat, you need to have a human sounding username. Those are the board rules. If not, the admins will change it. Like they did in your case.

C_Bhat · Post by **C_Bhat** » 16 Mar 2011 08:29

nachiket wrote:C_Bhat, you need to have a human sounding username. Those are the board rules. If not, the admins will change it. Like they did in your case.

Roger that.

r sawant · Post by **r sawant** » 16 Mar 2011 13:03

To C_Bhat

Unfortunately the current army recruitment enlists the following conditions as pre-requisites on nationality :
(a) Nationality : A candidate must either be :

1. A citizen of India, or

2. A subject of Bhutan, or

3. A subject of Nepal, or

4.
A Tibetan refugee who came over to India before the 1st January 1962 with the intention of permanently settling in India, Or

5.
A person of Indian origin who has migrated from Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka and East African Countries of Kenya, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Malawi, Zaire, Ethiopia and Vietnam with the intention of permanently settling in India.

About private dont know.

r sawant · Post by **r sawant** » 16 Mar 2011 13:28

Arent the screenshots of IR signature, RCS and Acoustic Signature.

The following page shows the same graphs for shivalik class http://www.indiandefencereview.com/defe ... rship.html

C_Bhat · Post by **C_Bhat** » 17 Mar 2011 08:05

r sawant wrote:To C_Bhat

Unfortunately the current army recruitment enlists the following conditions as pre-requisites on nationality :
(a) Nationality : A candidate must either be :

1. A citizen of India, or

2. A subject of Bhutan, or

3. A subject of Nepal, or

4.
A Tibetan refugee who came over to India before the 1st January 1962 with the intention of permanently settling in India, Or

5.
A person of Indian origin who has migrated from Pakistan, Burma, Sri Lanka and East African Countries of Kenya, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Malawi, Zaire, Ethiopia and Vietnam with the intention of permanently settling in India.

About private dont know.

Thanks for the info! I guess moving back to India and living there for 6 years and regaining the citizenship is the only way. Alas, my dream shall never come true.

hehe