Indian Defence Websites Watch

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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby shiv » 27 Aug 2012 06:18

Not Tamil. Could be Sinhala or a far east language like Thai

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2415
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby Prem Kumar » 27 Aug 2012 07:37

Google translate to the rescue (it does automatic recognition of characters). Surprisingly, its Georgian!

It did look South Indian'ish to me (Telugu like, though I knew it wasnt Telugu)

sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4449
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby sanjaykumar » 27 Aug 2012 07:40

Thai is a South Indian Brahmi script, from the Cholas likely.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby rohitvats » 30 Aug 2012 11:57

The owner of the Georgian website (http://scout-thedeaddistrict.blogspot.in/2012/08/aw-101.html) from where I thought Prasun had lifted the article about AW 101, has clarified that it is he who had copied Prasun's blog entry. Please see the comments section of the post.

In the light of the above, I have asked moderators to remove my post. I stand corrected. Apologies for the inconvenience caused.

vishal
BRFite
Posts: 336
Joined: 27 Feb 2002 12:31
Location: BOM/SIN

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby vishal » 11 Sep 2012 16:11

India, Abbottabad, and Osama bin Laden: Did New Delhi Assist the U.S. on Operation Neptune Spear?

http://www.redstate.com/2012/09/10/indi ... une-spear/

Extract: The fourteenth page of images in No Easy Day contains a map showing the routes taken by the two flights of helicopters: the Black Hawks taking the assaulters to Abbottabad, and the MH-47 Chinooks carrying a quick reaction force (QRF) and forward area refueling point (FARP) team. While the latter flew due east to a staging area northwest of Abbottabad, the former flight is shown on Owen’s map as crossing over Pakistan’s eastern border with India before looping around and approaching Abbottabad from the southeast, rather than approaching directly from the west (or west-northwest).
:::
If clearance to use Indian airspace was requested (and granted), what was the Indian government told, either about the real objective of Operation Neptune Spear or as a cover story?

What other assistance did India provide, either in terms of aerial diversion or supplying the U.S. with guidance on the best route back into Pakistan? (It seems clear that the latter would involve providing the U.S. some insight into India’s intelligence and route planning for a possible strike on Pakistan should hostilities resume between the two states.)

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby nakul » 11 Sep 2012 16:14

I am afraid the aothor is kite flying. It is a story based on the authenticity of this picture

Image

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby rohitvats » 11 Sep 2012 17:17

The SIGINT and ELINT aircraft with US Air Force would have mapped the blind spots in the AD Radar network of Pakistan and come out with the most optimum entry/exit strategy. A look at the geography to east of Abbottabad will tell you that there is a series of north-south mountain features/ridges with height varying from 1200 meters (immediate east of Abbottabad) to +2500 meters along the LOC. Crossing into India would have required them to go above 5000 feet. So, unless the uncle and his super-man commandos wanted to fly at 4000 feet+ and let the whole world to know that they were there, there is no way they came into Indian airspace. And I don't think helicopters need 50 kms to loop around to their targets. Also, PAF/PA would have been their eyes open to traffic coming from east...why walk into unnecessary complications?

Seems like cheap stunt to win publicity.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 880
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby Mihir » 11 Sep 2012 18:28

Umm... to me, the border shown on that map looks like the original J&K border that India claims. So even if the American helicopters took the route shown in the book, it took them over PoK, and not Indian-controlled territory.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby shiv » 26 Jan 2013 19:19

This should be here no?
www.aame.in

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby rohitvats » 05 Feb 2013 18:32

Well, it seems Mr. Chorgupta has crossed all levels of decency and is blatantly passing other people's stuff with his own watermark.

Check this from http://orbat.com/

We received a very angry letter from a reader saying the source of the material we had quoted in our post yesterday on Kargil 1999, and credited to http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/

I saw your blog website entry on 'new' study which shows the correct Orbat for PA in 1999.

The pictures of maps and documents (Mr. Prasun Sengupta) has put up are from the book 'A Ridge too Far: War in Kargil Heights 1999' by Captain Amarinder Singh (retd). As you would know, he is from the royal family of Patiala and has over the years written some very detailed books on Indian Army. I have copy of the book and apart from discussing the major outlines of Kargil War, its main focus is on the conduct and operations by 10 (Indian Army) Infantry Battalions which received 'Bravest of Brave' Award from the COAS. Mr. Sengupta has not once mentioned the source of those maps and information. On top of it, he feels it is all right to put the watermark of his blog on it. Some habits die hard.


And here is the link to the post where this these pics were posted:

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2013/01/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-op.html

Some habits really die hard... :roll:

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby rohitvats » 11 Sep 2013 13:25

After a long break, we're ready with next round of copy-giri by our favorite defense anal-cysts.

This time, the gyaan is about ATGMs and he holds forth with his deep technical knowledge. Please be ready to be dazzled by in-depth technical analysis:

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2013/09/long-overdue-but-welcome-accretions.html

The relevant part:

In contrast, the Javelin uses a cooled mid-wave IR (MWIR) sensor that can passively lock-on to targets at up to 50% farther range than an uncooled sensor, thus allowing the firing crew greater and safer standoff distance, and less likely to be exposed to counter-fire. As far as weight is concerned, the cooling equipment adds less than 2 lb per weapon.

The uncooled sensor is not only less reliable, but its long-LWIR spectrum is only compatible with a dome made of softer materials that vulnerable to abrasion in harsh environments (e.g., deserts) and consequently require replacement more often. The cooled seeker’s MWIR spectrum allows a durable hardened dome, and it is better than LWIR in discerning threats in certain geographic locations or environmental conditions. An uncooled sensor thus brings increased repairs, decreased operational availability, and dangerous vulnerabilities, while a cooled IIR sensor saves lives, lessens fratricide, minimises collateral damage, lowers risk, and protects its firing platforms/crew.


Now, a some gentleman claiming to be VP of Tactical Missiles at LM also have 'similar' views...What was that funda about 6 degrees of separation?

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/mfc/pc/jagm/mfc-jagm-commentary-card.pdf

Furthermore, in many likely combat situations, a cooled I2R seeker can “passively” lock on to targets (that is, without alerting the enemy) at significantly greater range than an uncooled seeker, thus allowing the platform and aircrew greater and safer standoff distance, less likely to be exposed to counter-fi re . Against some advanced threats, a missile with extended-range passive detection lets the launching aircraft engage enemies from outside their lethal weapons envelope. Our cooled I2R sensor gives warfighters passive “fire-and-forget” capability from outside the enemy’s reach, allowing the platform to move on to prosecute other targets or return to base to fight again tomorrow. As far as weight is concerned, the cooling equipment adds less than two pounds per weapon, and cooled sensors are combat-proven and highly reliable. The uncooled seeker is not only less reliable, its long-wave infrared (LWIR) is only compatible with a dome made of “softer” materials, vulnerable to abrasion in harsh environments (e.g., deserts), requiring replacement more often, negating any initial savings from the cheaper seeker itself over time. The cooled seeker’s mid-wave IR (MWIR) allows a durable hardened dome, and it is better than LWIR in discerning threats in certain geographic locations or environmental conditions (e.g., littorals, maritime). An uncooled seeker brings increased repairs, decreased operational availability, and dangerous vulnerabilities.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Defence Websites Watch

Postby rohitvats » 11 Sep 2013 13:33

And here, out friend copies directly without any remorse from CAG documents:

http://trishul-trident.blogspot.in/2013/09/long-overdue-but-welcome-accretions.html

The GSQR of the in-service Milan-2 had provided for an essential range as 1,850 metres and a desirable range of 2,000 metres. The GSQR of 2003 for the Milan-2T had indicated the range as 2,000 metres. The RFP for procurement of 4,100 Milan-2Ts was issued to BDL in January 2007. The MoD’s Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) did not find the product offered by BDL compliant with the GSQR as the range of 2,000 metres offered had only 1,850 metres under wire-guidance phase, while the last 150 metres was left unguided (along with the first 75 metres after missile launch). The case for procurement was therefore closed in May 2007. Subsequently, BDL confirmed that the guidance-range of the Milan-2T would be 2,000 metres. The case was re-opened and trials of the Milan-2T were conducted in February 2008. Based on the firing trial results, Indian Army HQ did not recommend its introduction into service in view of difficulties in engaging moving targets during the last 150 metres. In addition, the requirement was not met in terms of flight-time and overall weight. Furthermore, third-generation ATGMs were already available in the global market by June 2006.


Based on representations from the staff union of BDL to the then Minister of State for Defence Production & Supplies (since non-placement of orders for Milan-2Ts would result in redeployment of BDL’s workforce and already procured materials common to Milan-2/-2T would have to be junked), it was decided to procure a minimum required quantity of Milan-2Ts in May 2008 by amending the GSQR in August 2008 for the Milan-2T with 1,850 metres range and with the waiver of in-country firing-trials, after considering the long lead-times required for procuring third-generation ATGMs, and the fact that the shelf-life of existing stocks of Milan-2 would expire by 2013. The revised RFP was issued to BDL in September 2008 as per the amended GSQR. The MoD concluded a procurement contract with BDL in December 2008 for the supply of 4,100 Milan-2T ATGMs at a cost of Rs.587.02 crore with a staggered delivery schedule to be completed within 36 months from the effective date of contract.


From CAG Document - http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/defence/2010-11_12DS/chap2.pdf

Army HQ formulated a General Staff Qualitative Requirement
(GSQR) in 2003 for the upgrade version, with tandem warhead. The tandem
warhead was to be obtained under TOT from the OEM. The GSQR of inservice missile Milan-2 provided for essential range as 1850 metres and desirable range of 2000 metres. The GSQR of 2003 for Milan 2T indicated the
range as 2000 metres to meet the need of modernisation of forces. Based on
GSQR of 2003, RFP for procurement of 4100 Milan 2T was issued to BDL in
January 2007. The Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) did not find the
product offered by BDL compliant with the GSQR as the range of 2000
metres offered had only 1850 metres under guidance phase while the last 150
metres was left unguided. The case for procurement was therefore closed in
May 2007.

Subsequently, the BDL confirmed that the range of Milan 2T would be 2000
metres. The case was reopened and trials of Milan 2T were conducted in
February 2008. Based on trial results, the General Staff did not recommend its
introduction into service in view of difficulties in engaging moving targets
during last 150 metres. Besides, requirement was not met as regards flight
time and weight. Further, third generation missiles were already available in
the global market.

Based on the representation of Staff union of the BDL to the then Raksha Up
Rajya Mantri as non-placement of order for Milan-2T, would result in
redeployment of work force of BDL and wastage of already procured material
common to Milan-2/2T, it was decided to procure minimum required quantity
of Milan-2T in May 2008 by amending the GSQR for Milan 2T with 1850
meters range and with waiver of trials, considering the time required for
procurement of the 3rd generation missile and that the shelf life of existing
stock of Milan-2 would expire by 2013.

. In August 2008, the GSQR of 2003 was amended in favour of BDL to suit the trial results of February 2008. The
revised RFP was issued to BDL in September 2008 as per amended GSQR
seeking commercial offer. The Ministry concluded a contract with BDL, Hyderabad in December 2008
for supply of 4100 Milan ATGM equipped with Tandem warhead (Milan 2T)
at a cost of Rs 587.02 crore with a staggered delivery schedule to be
completed within 36 months from the effective date of contract.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: greatde, Sagrawal and 113 guests