Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 May 2012 20:52

chackoj, Why dont you ask your sources? Barrels are hydrotested for pressure and the final assy tested to show it works before customer acceptance. I can believe that IA would accept artillery with just QA signoff for certs and dimensions.

Anyway my question was realted to whether OFB had tested the gun before delivery to IA for trials?

I recall watching a black and white newsreel in the mid 60s showing a 3 inch(?) gun being made and proof tested at an OFB factory before delivery to Indian Army. This was an effort to show the govt was ensuring that the forces were armed after the 1962 debacle.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 16 May 2012 21:02

Shiv

there should be a testing range nearby (relatively) even a truncated one

I would be shocked if the IA accepted it and did not test it

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 16 May 2012 22:07

ramana wrote:Anyway my question was realted to whether OFB had tested the gun before delivery to IA for trials?

If you are talking the new guns for trials, it has been firing > 300 rounds at PXE.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 17 May 2012 04:14

A report on the Nyoma incident as per the report by J&K Police, as reported by IE.

‘All-night hunt for officers, slogans on loudspeakers’

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 17 May 2012 05:48

What a shameful episode. What a horrible year for army leadership. Izzat is a very fragile thing. Once shattered like this, its going to be very difficult to regain.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 May 2012 07:14

Surya wrote:Shiv

there should be a testing range nearby (relatively) even a truncated one

I would be shocked if the IA accepted it and did not test it

The question in my mind is the exact mechanism for doing that. For example a car is test driven in the factory and then sent out. But a helicopter delivered to the end user is usually formally handed over to the buyer/operator with both factory and end user people being involved.

A massive artillery piece might need to go beyond the imagined satisfaction of "Fire once in the factory and if it is OK then thank you and goodbye". I am guessing that a more likely scenario is that the material of the gun and the tolerances of the barrel etc are measured and compared against standards during the manufacturing process. Other components are delivered to the army un-assembled while final assembly is done at the army base/workshop and testing is done either by army or army in the presence of an industry representative. The first firing test is done by the army. This is a guess. Not knowledge, which I seek.

I suspect that this is what happened for example to the tens of thousands of Beretta submachine guns imported by the BSF. It was the BSF that tested them individually and came up with the following report:

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/video/bsf- ... 73233.html
The video shows that after the weapon consignment was delivered

113 weapons had new corrosion
164 weapons with tool marks
9 weapons showed machining ring problems
1 weapon bulged on firing

member_23469 · Post by **member_23469** » 17 May 2012 09:02

This is my first post on a Bharat Rakshak forum thread. I would like to express my deep respect for all the members of the forum and I hope that they shall not object to my presence here. I have a question:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamshed_Gu ... of_2001-02

Above is the Wikipedia page dealing with Lieutenant-General Jamshed Gulzar Kiani of the Pakistani Army and the ISI. I would like to bring the attention of the forum members to the the following lines (presented below in quotes), specially the highlighted portion, taken from the above page .

Indo-Pakistan Conflict of 2001-02:
In November 1999, Kiani was promoted to Lieutenant-General and took over the X Corps under the command of Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmed. In 2001, he was made the General Headquarters (GHQ)'s adjutant general.[7] After he completed his term in GHQ, he was again given the command of X Corps. The X Corps again saw the action against Indian Army when, in late 2001, Indian Army launches the Operation Parakram. LTG Kiani, having a long career as an intelligence officer, commanded the X Corps posted in Azad Kashmir. The X Corps quickly neutralized the Indian Army's Operation Parakram, leaving 798 Indian Army's soldiers dead. In October 2002, both Indian and Pakistani governments had begun to demobilize their troops along their border and, in 2003, a cease fire pact was signed.

Now, the broad details of Operation Parakram are obviously well known to the forum members. While the Indian Army did suffer casualties during the operation the above lines are worrisome. Can any of the members, who are far more knowledgeable regarding these matters than me, clarify how the X Corps under the aforementioned officer "neutralized" the Indian Army's operation? Or is this simply a case of some cyber jihadi form the TSP willfully altering facts? If the later is the case then I would humbly request the senior members present here to edit the relevant portion from the above Wikipedia page.

Thank you.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 May 2012 09:08

^^ cyber jihadi onlee...

most deaths in Parakram were during during laying mines... toilet paper propagated a figure of 798 recently ... seems gross exaggeration ..piss ops for political reasons onlee.. The above note of an indian operation being neutralised by porki is bull crap...

member_23455 · Post by **member_23455** » 17 May 2012 09:51

gakakkad wrote:^^ cyber jihadi onlee...

most deaths in Parakram were during during laying mines... toilet paper propagated a figure of 798 recently ... seems gross exaggeration ..piss ops for political reasons onlee.. The above note of an indian operation being neutralised by porki is bull crap...

So Gurmeet Kanwal must be your average DDM when he quotes the same figure, which the RM is supposed to have tabled in Parliament.

http://www.indiandefencereview.com/mili ... akram.html

The porkis had no need to neutralize OP PARAKRAM - we had already done it to ourselves. Learning from it might be a good place to start repaying the debt of the 798 (or whatever number one's conscience is comfortable with) - rather than being in denial about it.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 May 2012 09:54

^^ I meant porki x corp lead by some yahoo neutralizing Indian army and killing 798 people..most deaths in op-parakram were caused by our own errors only...

member_23469 · Post by **member_23469** » 17 May 2012 10:01

gakakkad wrote:^^ I meant porki x corp lead by some yahoo neutralizing Indian army and killing 798 people..most deaths in op-parakram were caused by our own errors only...

This is EXACTLY what I was referring to. I am not attempting to dispute the casualties. If the Indian Army does not learn from that experience then the sacrifice of all those soldiers will have been in vain. But the the article and the relevant portions that I was pointing towards gave the whole event another spin altogether, virtually pinning a medal on the Pakistani officer and the X Corps under his command for having concocted and executed some plan that directly led to the casualties. That is what I was inquiring about.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 May 2012 10:08

wikipedia has been infiltrated by poaqs .. Read about porki missiles and nuke program from there.. you ll have a good laugh.. porki missiles have mid air refuelling it seems ..

member_23469 · Post by **member_23469** » 17 May 2012 10:13

gakakkad wrote:wikipedia has been infiltrated by poaqs .. Read about porki missiles and nuke program from there.. you ll have a good laugh.. porki missiles have mid air refuelling it seems ..

I am sorely in need for some entertainment. Could you provide the relevant links and direct me to the relevant sections?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 May 2012 10:15

B.Kumar wrote:the article and the relevant portions that I was pointing towards gave the whole event another spin altogether, virtually pinning a medal on the Pakistani officer and the X Corps under his command for having concocted and executed some plan that directly led to the casualties. That is what I was inquiring about.

Your actual question is not clear to me.
As far as I can tell the facts as I seem to read them are:

Op Parakram occurred over a period of time
700 plus Indian soldiers dies due to various reasons in that mobilization
The mobilization did not lead to war
Those deaths occurred due to reasons related to the mobilization and not hot war
Those deaths were publicised as part of an ongoing Indian policy of being open about such issues
Pakistanis "neutralized" op Parakram by doing things that did not lead to war
Among things done by Pakistan were a very pubic climbdown by Musharraf and a promise to crack down on terrorists
The separate facts of Indian deaths and Pakistani actions that contributed to lack of war are being spun as a great victory
This is exactly the same Pakistani behavior that was displayed in the "victories" of 1965 and 1971

Now please explain your question and any differences you may have with the points made above

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 May 2012 10:26

X corps killing 798 soldiers in a 'secret' hot mini-war would be akin to me saying I coughed twice in the morning and killed the 100 people who perished to road accidents all over the country today.

member_23469 · Post by **member_23469** » 17 May 2012 10:27

My question is with regard to the point that you have pointed out Sir.

The separate facts of Indian deaths and Pakistani actions that contributed to lack of war are being spun as a great victory

The portion that I highlighted reads as if the actions of the Pakistani X Corps led to the Indian casualties. I was simply asking members of the thread to deny or concur with the veracity of the claim that the relevant portion posits.

Q-1: Yes we suffered casualties, but why does the page try to paint it as if the casualties were brought about DIRECTLY by the actions of the Pakistanis?

Q-2: If the above claim is false then should someone, a senior and experienced member as far as my humble request called for, not edit the relevant portion on the page?

After all Wikipedia is an international forum of sorts and the common people of the world gather their opinions from information gleaned from that site.

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 17 May 2012 11:15

B.Kumar wrote:After all Wikipedia is an international forum of sorts and the common people of the world gather their opinions from information gleaned from that site.

Wikipedia can be edited by any one, and tailoring to suite his/her own agenda. Wiki, I feel can be only used as an Encyclopedia for obvious, straight forward things. War histories, or narrations of events can be inaccurate, or written to support a clear agenda.

member_23469 · Post by **member_23469** » 17 May 2012 11:39

Sachin wrote:
B.Kumar wrote:After all Wikipedia is an international forum of sorts and the common people of the world gather their opinions from information gleaned from that site.
Wikipedia can be edited by any one, and tailoring to suite his/her own agenda. Wiki, I feel can be only used as an Encyclopedia for obvious, straight forward things. War histories, or narrations of events can be inaccurate, or written to support a clear agenda.

Sir, with all due respect, all I am suggesting is that one of the senior members should edit the page so that it represents accurate information. We are all aware of the 'free for all nature' of wiki. But any forum/page/site whether it be open source, prone to rampant editing or otherwise which present information about our soldiers must present accurate info. It is galling to see that anyone can just get up and attempt to cast aspersions on our brave soldiers. I hope I am not creating too much of a fuss about a matter which other members may deem to be not very important. I just don't like seeing biased and false info about our soldiers being flung around over the net courtesy some panda or bearded-swine.

Deepest apologies if I've taken up valuable space.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 17 May 2012 12:41

An example on working of Wikipedia could be that there is no page on Genocide in Croatia during WW2. All it has is one section here.

The point is unless it is acknowledge explicitly, which it is not, Wikipedia will not add such substance. In other words, stuff will be on Wikipedia only if academic sources etc. make a point to mention so.

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 17 May 2012 14:08

B.Kumar wrote:
Sir, with all due respect, all I am suggesting is that one of the senior members should edit the page so that it represents accurate information. We are all aware of the 'free for all nature' of wiki. But any forum/page/site whether it be open source, prone to rampant editing or otherwise which present information about our soldiers must present accurate info. It is galling to see that anyone can just get up and attempt to cast aspersions on our brave soldiers. I hope I am not creating too much of a fuss about a matter which other members may deem to be not very important. I just don't like seeing biased and false info about our soldiers being flung around over the net courtesy some panda or bearded-swine. Deepest apologies if I've taken up valuable space.

There is a wikipedia edit thread in the general forum created precisely for this purpose. Report any such articles there.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 17 May 2012 17:51

Shekhar "Coup" Gupta tries to hush up media criticism of his coverage of the Army.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18100213

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 17 May 2012 18:53

Some of the deaths were unfortunately as my seen it all SF friend says - ch********

He described two deaths in the Barmer area within a day of ach other

foggy morning

Row of trucks come to halt on the side of the highway. Soldiers get down and 1 goes to cross the road from the front of his truck

another line of Trucks rumbling down the road crush him

A complete waste of a life

Sadly it was repeated the very next day inspite of convoys being told to be careful in the foggy mornings

Imagine variations of these in the 1000s all across the front

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 May 2012 19:20

B.Kumar wrote: Sir, with all due respect, all I am suggesting is that one of the senior members should edit the page so that it represents accurate information. ...

does not matter..the farticle in wiki is insignificant..never try to get into key board battles with porkies...since most of them are unemployed they have more time at there disposal than any 20 brfites combined..they ll keep re-editing what you have edited..

ParGha · Post by **ParGha** » 17 May 2012 20:18

Active combat operations were ongoing during the 2001-03 period, and the sacrifices in these operations were not "errors" -- they were willfully undertaken for the nation. Most of it, I assume, was low-key work along the LOC, but a few did make it into public domain like this one http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... gil#p35067

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 17 May 2012 21:31

B.Kumar wrote: Deepest apologies if I've taken up valuable space.

Dear B.Kumar ji, no need to apologise, for something you saw as inaccurate.
At least it shows an interest and you brought it to someone's attention.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 17 May 2012 23:13

putnanja wrote:A report on the Nyoma incident as per the report by J&K Police, as reported by IE.

‘All-night hunt for officers, slogans on loudspeakers’

If the report is correct, and I don't think why it should not be, then the officers need to be kicked out of the army. Beating a jawan, denying him medical aid, charging CO, running once the situation became volatile - these sh*t heads need to be made an example.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 17 May 2012 23:39

^^

Report is based entirely on the Police's version of events. And, I will add, its in INDIA TODAY. A publication which has not entirely been... balanced in its reporting on the armed forces of late.

anjan · Post by **anjan** » 18 May 2012 00:53

If the Police says there is no case then this is like an FIR perhaps. My understanding is that without an investigation none of the information is verified. It is primarily a record of whatever is reported to them. Which might explain why the report is somewhat confusing. I'm not sure how a barber would ever be attached to a specific officer. I'm not even sure what a barber would be doing in a field firing range. Then again there were families floating around so why not a barber I guess.

At any rate I think other than the guns everything and everybody in that unit is tainted for life. I wouldn't want to be the brigade and div commanders either. And getting kicked out will the least of anyone's problems. Assaulting a superior officer or abetting is a prison term by itself. My guess is a whole bunch of provisions of the Army Act will be thrown against them.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 18 May 2012 01:37

Not just against the officers, but against any and all Jawans who rioted. Once that has happened, they simply arent fit to be soldiers anywhere, and in any unit. Its all over for this Fd. Regt., im afraid. Id said this before, but some posters didnt believe that the regt would be nameplated.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 May 2012 01:42

ASP what is gained by last sentence?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 May 2012 06:59

B.Kumar wrote:
Q-1: Yes we suffered casualties, but why does the page try to paint it as if the casualties were brought about DIRECTLY by the actions of the Pakistanis?

I think that is a conclusion that is not easy to wiggle out of. "If I was never born I wouldn't die" is banal logic but is nevertheless true and it does not pay to argue with a Paki on this point. If Op Parakram had not taken place those men would not have died. So looking for reason from Pakistanis is a mistake IMO. If I threaten to hit someone and I fail to hit him, that guy will be free to go about claiming that I was too scared. That is a risk I take by making threats that I do not carry out.

B.Kumar wrote: Q-2: If the above claim is false then should someone, a senior and experienced member as far as my humble request called for, not edit the relevant portion on the page?

After all Wikipedia is an international forum of sorts and the common people of the world gather their opinions from information gleaned from that site.

It certainly needs correction. But again, in my view, on the internet there are Pakis who do little else apart from make cosmetic propaganda changes to history. This is deliberate Pakistani policy that dates back to the days of John Fricker being paid to tell lies and write good things about Pakis.

But my personal viewpoint is that Pakistani propaganda needs to be countered on two levels. One level is to employ a legion of people who can edit editable sources like Wiki every time they are modified by some brainless Paki.

My own efforts are aimed more at countering propaganda that cannot be edited like Wikipedia and has already entered references as fake history. Why don't you edit that link yourself?

rajrang · Post by **rajrang** » 18 May 2012 09:17

rohitvats wrote:
putnanja wrote:A report on the Nyoma incident as per the report by J&K Police, as reported by IE.

‘All-night hunt for officers, slogans on loudspeakers’
If the report is correct, and I don't think why it should not be, then the officers need to be kicked out of the army. Beating a jawan, denying him medical aid, charging CO, running once the situation became volatile - these sh*t heads need to be made an example.

I agree with you strongly. This is shocking because it was multiple officers. I can imagine one person going over the edge but how can so many?

I would have thought that the army would have psychological tests to identify officer candidates (and jawans) who have such "loose cannon" personalities and not recruit them. I wonder if the selection criteria has gaps through which such characters can slip through and join the IA.

peter · Post by **peter** » 18 May 2012 09:23

rajrang wrote:... I wonder if the selection criteria has gaps through which such characters can slip through and join the IA.

Well three years ago apparently we were short of 11387 officers! http://www.indianexpress.com/news/army- ... ny/494678/

peter · Post by **peter** » 18 May 2012 09:25

ramana wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:Guns don't have to be tested with live ammo. it has to meet quality standards laid.

Really! I thought every gun that is manufactured is fired or proofed at the factory prior to delivery. Thats the process in any country. Otherwise how does the buyer know he is getting a good product? You know this for sure?

I understand other weapons are not proofed like missiles, ammo, etc.

Ofcourse it has to be fired multiple times to test it with real ordinance else it might be dead on arrival.

peter · Post by **peter** » 18 May 2012 09:28

kmkraoind wrote:Indian Express asks for the mother of all embarrassments - Firstpost

he Indian Express, Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta, and journalists Ritu Sarin, Pranab Dhal Samata and Ajmer Singh have sent a legal notice to Manu Joseph, Editor, Open magazine, R Rajmohan, publisher, Open magazine, Open Media Network Pvt Ltd, Hamendra Singh, Hartosh Singh Bal and Vinod Mehta, former Editor of Outlook, threatening to sue them for a total of Rs 500 crore (Rs 100 crore each for IE, the Editor-in-Chief, and the four journos).

The reason: the magazine published an interview with Vinod Mehta during the course of which Mehta discusses The Indian Express story that hinted at a possible coup.
At least we have got names of Sekhar Gupta's blue eyed chelas.

This is a good development and I hope Mehta sues back. This is the only way these errant journalists will learn their lesson. Once they have to cough up money or loose their jobs they will not lie willfully as is rampant today.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 18 May 2012 09:49

ramana wrote:ASP what is gained by last sentence?

Just angst at not being believed methinks

schowdhuri · Post by **schowdhuri** » 18 May 2012 10:40

putnanja wrote:A report on the Nyoma incident as per the report by J&K Police, as reported by IE.

‘All-night hunt for officers, slogans on loudspeakers’

The report seems to be junk. Lot's of things do not seem right:
1. Has the sahayak become sevadar now?
2. It is a bit difficult to believ that a barber would be an orderly.
3. If the Major(s) called the barber (when they were having lunch), and beat him up, other orderlies would not be present.
4. If all the jawans were at the firing ranges, how come 4 majors were not?
5. Where were all the JCO's (missing in action)? Normally, if the NCO's would go to the CO, they would at least take the SM, other JCO with them.
6. No Capt's or Lt's or Lt Col's in the regt at all (they also seem to be missing).
7. If the CO was rushing to the camp how did he meet the officers along the way?
8. Why would the jawans beat the orderlies of the CO, specially if it seems they were in support of the CO.
9. Jawans not weraing their rank stripes seems very odd - rank is a matter of too much pride - unless there was some premeditated brainwashing happening.
10. Officers would run towards reinforcements, why away from reinforcements. Even if they were to blame, initial though would be reach protecttion.
11. Cdr and GOC pacifing troops seems like a copy/paste from the stories we read daily of senior police officers pacifying mobs on the road.

Finally, and with a sad heart, I have to say that looking at many of the officers of today, I am not very surprised at such behavior.

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 18 May 2012 10:44

anjan wrote:If the Police says there is no case then this is like an FIR perhaps. My understanding is that without an investigation none of the information is verified. It is primarily a record of whatever is reported to them.

Seems to be from the First Information Report (FIR) or from a report which may have been sent to higher ups in the police hierarchy. Yes, FIR need not be very accurate. It is just an official recording of a crime. The information could be even given by a person who did not actually see the event, or having no clue on the rules and law. It is only when an investigation gets carried out, things move into the more legal way.

In the last part of the report, it looks like the police are not planning to get involved in this at all. And they have left it to the Army's own mechanism to tackle problem with in its ranking (M.Ps, Court Martial etc. etc., I guess).

ASPuar wrote:Not just against the officers, but against any and all Jawans who rioted.

Do you think that the the progress on this case (handled using the Army's own rules and regulations) would be given out to the media. It would be good to know the punishments meted out to the officers and the jawans in this case. Hope it does not end in simple "cashiering".

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 18 May 2012 11:11

Depends. A speaking order is given out of court martial proceedings (per SN Mukherjee v. Union of India), and will be made available in the public domain.

nelson · Post by **nelson** » 18 May 2012 11:47

All punishments of recordable nature, awarded by DCM & GCM to Commissioned officers (including JCOs) are published in the Gazette of India Part - 1.

But, why are we talking of punishment, only after a media trial. Let the law take its own course, and we all know that the course is shorter and stricter for Army personnel.