CT & COIN Operations in India: News, Images and Discussion

Siddhu · Post by **Siddhu** » 08 Feb 2013 23:56

Assumption is that IAF men took decision on their own.Dude there are radios,etc through which they can contact base , it is possible that they got orders from the base to do whatever they did best in the situation .

Siddhu · Post by **Siddhu** » 09 Feb 2013 00:07

Here is what I believe might have happened:
- came under fire and got hit
- contacted the base ,asked for orders
- got the orders (land safely) ,tried their level best not to crash
- contacted the base ,asked for orders
- got the orders (get out of there alive asap)

At that point, either of this happened
- swallowed the pride and executed the orders given to them (they were emotional leaving man behind

).
- tried to help the injured realized that they cannot do any thing , headed towards base.

sprinters in IAF

.. are u kidding

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 09 Feb 2013 00:36

no one has called them cowards

A terribly poor judgment\decision is where it stands at this point

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 09 Feb 2013 00:43

Siddhu wrote:Here is what I believe might have happened:
- came under fire and got hit
- contacted the base ,asked for orders
- got the orders (land safely) ,tried their level best not to crash
- contacted the base ,asked for orders
- got the orders (get out of there alive asap)

At that point, either of this happened
- swallowed the pride and executed the orders given to them (they were emotional leaving man behind ).
- tried to help the injured realized that they cannot do any thing , headed towards base.

sprinters in IAF .. are u kidding

Who are Garud commandos then Siddhu

Their chopper was out of radar coverage for a full 1-2- hours. They had no contact with anyone. Contacting base theory is BS. They made a mistake. Admit it or hide it but ensure not to repeat it. Zimble onlee.

Siddhu · Post by **Siddhu** » 09 Feb 2013 00:59

A terribly poor judgment\decision is where it stands at this point

Dude don't come to conclusion until you know all the facts, It may not be poor judgment\decision .

Quick response and professional handling of helicopter, flying it away from the fire zone to a safer zone, averted major loss of life and equipment. The complete crew then assessed the threat situation and condition of the injured jawan and decided to seek immediate medical aid.

They actually assessed the situation and then decided . Show little faith in them bro they tried their level best .

Siddhu · Post by **Siddhu** » 09 Feb 2013 01:07

http://www.dailypioneer.com/home/online ... laims.html

Their chopper was out of radar coverage for a full 1-2- hours. They had no contact with anyone.

U were there ?

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 09 Feb 2013 01:09

Siddhu wrote:http://www.dailypioneer.com/home/online ... laims.html

Their chopper was out of radar coverage for a full 1-2- hours. They had no contact with anyone.
U were there ?

No I was not there there but I have read reports.

Were u there ?

Siddhu · Post by **Siddhu** » 09 Feb 2013 01:28

@SagarAg

reports u read are wrong ... Take the word of IAF chief ,if u don't believe in that person, then it can't be helped since u r so determined to point out IAF's mistake.

I would believe what IAF Chief said rather than some stupid arbitrary reports or some high level babus in ac rooms.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 09 Feb 2013 03:36

(I did not want to further express my angst at the current ACM's recent public pronouncements, but....)

Siddhu, IAF Chief did not say anything that corroborates your own narration (which SagarAg has pointed out as false assumption) that an order to abandon the wounded was conveyed over radio. Infact there are parts of what he said, that I felt was completely unwarranted and was hesitant to post

The link you posted says:

The crew then decided to stick together as there was an apprehension that someone left behind with the injured constable could be taken hostage and then we would have to face another serious situation for the next few weeks,” the IAF Chief said.

Faced with this possibility, the crew decided to get help for the wounded constable and three hours later the CRP team rescued him in an armoured car and “not on a motorcycle as reported,” he said.

The IAF chief clearly says it is the crew decision and not any control's.

ACM knows his politics all right - subtly blame the crew (for bad decisions) to protect the IAF command from any culpability, while attacking the air-condition loving Home Ministry types to make sure his juniors feel he is defending the small guys. Finally, he sidesteps confirming any remedial measures with a "maoists will know", when a taut "yes, we have taken steps" will not give anything away.
(inference: confirming remedial steps means admitting there was a problem in the first place, something he doesn't want to)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Feb 2013 04:53

FYI.

Garud's wounded, and the injured operator could not be moved.

Chemical burns don't sound good. Corrosive hydraulics fluids? Supposedly an issue in most MBTs as well.
Or battery acid?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Feb 2013 05:07

Hydraulic oil in Mi-17 is OM-15, source:dgca.nic.in/accident/reports/VT-PHF(2).pdf

And:http://www.avi-oil.com/hydraulic.asp?lk=3&sublk=1

Perhaps high pressure, high temp - result burns.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Feb 2013 05:11

Spinal injury for the chattisgarh cop. I hope he recovers.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 09 Feb 2013 05:21

Quote:
Quick response and professional handling of helicopter, flying it away from the fire zone to a safer zone, averted major loss of life and equipment. The complete crew then assessed the threat situation and condition of the injured jawan and decided to seek immediate medical aid.

They actually assessed the situation and then decided . Show little faith in them bro they tried their level best .

yea yea
simble question again

if it was an IAF person would they have done the same.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 09 Feb 2013 05:35

Three options here Surya:
A. They panicked/made a mistake
B Their SOPs said this
C. They did the correct thing given the situation

Now, what do we do with any of these 3? B and C exonerate them.

With the first, should they be hung out to dry? They are human & mistakes can occur.
Only thing is hopefully, SOPs will change in lieu of this incident & such an issue does not reoccur.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 09 Feb 2013 06:08

^^^ Agree. I felt sympathy for the entire crowd in that chopper, since the story first broke out as it sounded like they were in above their heads. It was an unfortunate event and all the parties has to move on. The subtle and not so subtle angles being welded on to the original unfortunate event is kind of unseemly, including the HMin leaking of letters, the recent press conference etc. Shree AKA did the right thing by toning it down with the mountains and molehill comment, but others under him too need to diffuse this.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 09 Feb 2013 13:21

?

Surya wrote:yea yea
simble question again

if it was an IAF person would they have done the same.

Do you have a reason or basis to believe otherwise?

You need to appreciate that the Policeman is alive today thanks to the IAF men who first flew and landed the crippled helicopter in a safe manner. And then proceeded to seek help immediately for the injured comrade.

The comments by some of the members here on the integrity and courage of our air warriors is plain disgusting. Perhaps the IAF should also start endulging in some rhetoric to swing in some tears in its favour;

"Since the helicopter belonged to IAF, the Chattisgarh police intentionally did not lay the perimeter to protect it"

"Since most of the men were IAF, the CRP team did not send out CSAR mission."

etc

The reality is that IAF has been complaining to Home and State forces on these issues for a long time as evidenced by various reports from last few years. And now that tragedy has struck, the culprits are resorting to preemptive bull$hit to deflect attention on their mistakes. These lies on the "motorcycle rescue" and "LMGs left by IAF" were planted by the very same people looking to save their own skin.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 09 Feb 2013 18:48

Do you have a reason or basis to believe otherwise?

YES

ask the ACM - lets see if he says no

am going to ignore rest of post - the IAF is tying itself into knots trying to explain this.

combining reply to Karan's post

I am not so concerned about whether they need to be punished. I would be happy if this did not occur again.

In the services these sort of things leave a question mark that others will be aware of.

just like when certain piliots could not find the LZ while the other aircraft in flight found it and were hammered with intense fire.

back in the sqd the murmurs start about why the the pilot could not find the LZ. No points for guessing what happens over time.

In SL - pilots flying over sometimes saw wounded men on the ground after a firefight with the LTTE and circled back and took some risks in extracting them. there were others who will check if it was sanitised and if told yes would descend. both scenarios are understandable but needless to say the army men remember the pilots who extracted their wounded in a middle of a firefight

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 10 Feb 2013 14:44

Surya wrote:
Do you have a reason or basis to believe otherwise?
YES

ask the ACM - lets see if he says no

am going to ignore rest of post - the IAF is tying itself into knots trying to explain this.

combining reply to Karan's post

I am not so concerned about whether they need to be punished. I would be happy if this did not occur again.

In the services these sort of things leave a question mark that others will be aware of.

just like when certain piliots could not find the LZ while the other aircraft in flight found it and were hammered with intense fire.

back in the sqd the murmurs start about why the the pilot could not find the LZ. No points for guessing what happens over time.

In SL - pilots flying over sometimes saw wounded men on the ground after a firefight with the LTTE and circled back and took some risks in extracting them. there were others who will check if it was sanitised and if told yes would descend. both scenarios are understandable but needless to say the army men remember the pilots who extracted their wounded in a middle of a firefight

Surya - after giving it more thought, I'm willing to reconsider my position on the whole event. I was one of the posters initially who had red-flagged the behavior of IAF crew. However, given the recent data points about the extent of damage to the chopper and nature of injury of CRPF Trooper, I'm not too sure.

But - One question that I still mantain (and that you've asked also) - would they leave an IAF personnel behind? This I cannot answer - I guess, the dynamics of the situation at hand and those split seconds decide the subsequent flow of events.

BTW - was reading the book on Helicopter service in IAF - the performance of IAF helicopter crews in SL was nothing sort of brilliant. More often than not, they went fighting in and came fighting out with their Mi-8 and 17s. I guess we are amongst the most experienced force when it comes to Mi-8/17 use in all the roles possible. Same goes for Mi-35. Them birds played a stellar role.

narmad · Post by **narmad** » 12 Feb 2013 00:52

Two commandos suffered chemical burns and Entire cabin was filled with Leaking Fuel

Reports seem to suggest that the Radio Operator was not moved away from the helicopter.
What was the possibility of accidental fire since there was so much fuel / hydrolic fluid leaking around ?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 12 Feb 2013 02:27

Rohit can you scan those pages and email to moi

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 12 Feb 2013 09:37

Pliss to bijli daak me too Surya/rohitvats saar: bk (dot) atreya at the rate Jee-mail dot com

Thanks!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Feb 2013 10:07

Surya wrote:Rohit can you scan those pages and email to moi

Surya - it is a whole bloody book and the chapters on Sri Lanka Campaign form a very large part of it. But still, please give me some time and let me see what I can do.

This is the book:

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Feb 2013 10:08

atreya wrote:Pliss to bijli daak me too Surya/rohitvats saar: bk (dot) atreya at the rate Jee-mail dot com

Thanks!

Will do the needful when I manage to scan the pages...

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 12 Feb 2013 11:29

Surya wrote:no one has called them cowards. A terribly poor judgment\decision is where it stands at this point

Surya, in certain combat situations, certain hard decisions have to be taken.

For example, in case of warships under air or submarine attack, it is usually disallowed for any capital ship to assist any disabled or sinking ship, because a slowed/stopped ship itself presents a target. The SOP is to keep fighting. Typically tugs & minesweeper are used for rescue, since they're not worth wasting missiles or torpedoes. That justifies INS Kirpan's actions. That is why Pakistan sent minesweeper PNS Muhafiz to assist destroyer PNS Khyber that radioed air attack. Later gunboats were used to rescue survivors from both ships.

The Jaffna University, the IAF stopped flying after assessment of the situation.

If the policeman could not be moved, then for someone staying back to protect him, probably the following played on their minds.
1. The priority imperative of getting help 2. The larger the party, the better the chance of someone getting through 3. Capture of IAF personnel, especially officer, would be a huge propoganda victory for the maoists 4. Forced the government to make concessions.

IAF in J&K, Uttaranchal, NE support BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles ops respectively. I doubt there is a we-vs-them bias on the minds of the IAF institution.

IAF in Maoist Operations does disrespect MHAs but for different reasons. 1. The CRPF & State policemen are poorly trained & led vis-a-vis ITBP/Assam Rifles/BSF. Hence they're clumsy in combat situations The manpower surge in CRPF & state forces is not supported by adequete training 2. CRPF & State Police leadership do not put themselves on the ground unlike Army/ITBP/BSF/Assam Rifles. They MHA just sit in state capital/district HQ and the only action they take is with their tongues.

Which is why the naxal problem arose in the first place.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 12 Feb 2013 11:57

tsarkar wrote: If the policeman could not be moved, then for someone staying back to protect him, probably the following played on their minds.
1. The priority imperative of getting help 2. The larger the party, the better the chance of someone getting through 3. Capture of IAF personnel, especially officer, would be a huge propoganda victory for the maoists 4. Forced the government to make concessions.

1. They should have first helped him to get out of the chopper, carried him to a safe distance and given first aid which is no where to be reported by the different articles. They should have focused on giving help first rather than getting help

2. To a base camp which was 2-3 km away with 2 garuds 2 lmgs etc etc.

3. and 4. Why such discrimination sarkar ji.

IMHO shooting down a freaking MI-17 chopper is no short of a thumping victory for the maoists/naxals. Moreover how come govt would have made more concessions if God forbid IAF crew was captured by Maoists/naxals over CRPF jawan. How is their life more precious that that of CRPF jawans who are actually fighting with Naxals/Maoists.

I don't endorse such a view.

As I said before...it was a mistake..admit it or deny it but do not repeat it

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 12 Feb 2013 14:18

Whatever information I have on the incident is from news reports, and while the appropriate action would have been couple of people staying behind to guard the police radio operator & the plane, the actual action undertaken isnt inappropriate either - go get help fast. Moving an injured person may aggravate his injuries.

The fact remains that the pilots returned with the CRPF team.

The same dilemma was also faced by INS Kirpan in 1971.

The IAF has increased the number of Garuds for asset protection per sortie since the incident.

My concern is the firepower of the naxals in the heartland of India. Where does their logistics come from?

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 12 Feb 2013 14:34

Minor, but important nitpick tsarkar ji: IAF did not return with a rescue team, CoBRA found them on their own. I think they are being conferred with awards too, by the state government

vinod · Post by **vinod** » 12 Feb 2013 14:44

Many forget that Pilots main job is to fly aircrafts and not fight like an ordinary soldier. IAF pilots are trained to fly into combat zones. In this situation, they were doing a rescue job in a supposedly safe zone. After they were shot they did a very damn good job landing the helo in next few seconds and fortunately away from the view of the shooters. The pilots were not shot because of the armoured plates.

I know this from a highly reliable chaiwala, that as soon as they landed they wanted to evacuate the helo. That is when they realised that one of them had been shot and that too a spinal injury. They couldn't move him at all. What was running through their mind at that time was that the shooters would converge on the helo in next few mins and had to take cover in the jungle asap. They made a collective snap decision to leave him and take cover - the injured understood very well the rest of crew's predicament. Now, we can argue about this decision forever. There will be takers for both sides - don't leave him side and don't get captured side! A gut decision was taken by them - right or wrong! In the end that snap decision turned out right since it all ended nicely. Saved the helo. Evaded capture by maoists. Got help for the injured in time. But now, by this home ministry - defence ministry politics, we are creating a issue out of something which ended in the most favourable way to us.

Story doesn't end there. After the evacation of helo and taking cover in the nearby jungle, they had to decide to what to do next. In their maps, they saw the CRPF camp is the closest to them. It was getting dark and they weren't prepared for a jungle trek. They were fearful of maoist out there, so normal roads are out of question. One more ambush was not needed for the day. So, they decided to take the jungle route. Now that is mined by maoists and probably CRPF as well. So, they had to make their way slowly. With darkness around them and creepy crawlers around them, they made their way very slowly towards the camp. Took almost 3-4 hours for less than 3 kms, without water or any other ration. There were lot of incidents during this journey which would sound like straight out of a hollywood movie. Anyway, they reached CRPF camp, but couldn't approach that just like that. They would be shot dead by the CRPF guys on sight. They are not expecting any IAF guys to come walking in the night towards them. Anyway, they got their attention and got inside the camp - completely exhausted.

Now for me, their conduct had been very professional and expected of their training. It would be a shame if we lost such damn good pilots for politics. No training can provide that learning experience. A lot of money has been spent in training them and to lose\demoralise such personnel for this "leaving behind" issue would be a great loss to India. I'm in full support of the IAF chief, the matter ended in our favour and the matter is closed for public consumption. There will be some lapses observed in their internal review and consequently procedures changed, trainings improved etc. But that is internal to the system.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 12 Feb 2013 14:50

Atreya-ji, how did the CRPF Cobra team know the location of the crash site if the IAF team did not guide them? They did not fan out of their camp in all directions. And another IAF helicopter did airlift Sahu from the CRPF camp after his medical condition was assessed.

We're reading too much into it. Lets wait for the CoI report.

As I said earlier, for a fleet of ships under air & submarine attack, warships are expressly prohibited from rendering assistance to those disabled or sunk to avoid becoming targets themselves.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Feb 2013 16:18

vinod wrote:Many forget that Pilots main job is to fly aircrafts and not fight like an ordinary soldier. IAF pilots are trained to fly into combat zones. In this situation, they were doing a rescue job in a supposedly safe zone. After they were shot they did a very damn good job landing the helo in next few seconds and fortunately away from the view of the shooters. The pilots were not shot because of the armoured plates.

<SNIP>

+1.

The bold part is what made me change my opinion on the subject. Plus, the injured person had spinal injury and any movement of the said person might well have resulted in either death or paralysis.

Vinod - I see you registered just to post this information. Thank you for doing so. Regards.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 12 Feb 2013 18:38

1. i have not read of spinal injury - Didn't someone say that the radio operator was recovering and sitting up when they went to see him (maybe CAS) - but lets assume that true

2. The Garuds could have been left behind ? thats my gripe

what if the naxals had reached the guy
???

There will be some lapses observed in their internal review and consequently procedures changed, trainings improved etc. But that is internal to the system.

thats all we want

posted later
read tsarkars post

no disagreement and I do not think this was intentional

thanks

I will close on this topic - no more time to move on

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 12 Feb 2013 18:52

Questions I have:

1) Was the operator left inside the helo?
2) If so, wouldnt that have been a danger, given fuel leakage and possibility of fire.
3) If he couldn't be moved at all, was he suitably immobilized and given first aid by the others there? (some basic medical training is taught after all)
4) Given that both Garuds were blinded by the chemical burns, etc, its fair that they couldn't have helped in the situation anyway. However, why didnt atleast one of them stay with the chopper? Garuds are still not as valuable as pilots in terms of hostages (no offense to anyone), and in case of any fire etc, that garud would've been able to move Sahu. What is the exact sequence of events after the plane was put down till when they left to go to the camp?
5) Why didn't they take the service pistol with them? What were the weapons the IAF party had with them? Did they give Sahu any weapon to defend himself with?
6) How far were the Maoists estimated to be from the emergency landing area?

I'm not judging anyone. But leaving an injured soldier when hostile forces are near is never done. No matter how valuable anyone's life is. So some questions do need answers if we should judge whether this indeed happened, and if anyone is blame-worthy.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 12 Feb 2013 18:55

Surya wrote:1. i have not read of spinal injury - Didn't someone say that the radio operator was recovering and sitting up when they went to see him (maybe CAS) - but lets assume that true

2. The Garuds could have been left behind ? thats my gripe

what if the naxals had reached the guy
???

1. Yes, CAS said that he was recovering well.
2. That is my point also. But counter argument is they were burnt themselves due to all the hot burst of fuel leaked into the chopper. How much they got burnt, were they incapacitated to use their guns or was their job only to protect IAF personnel is unknown.
3. All's well that ends well

. Its the job of IAF/CRPF personnel to to work out on these extreme situations and the necessary steps one need to take in these situations.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 12 Feb 2013 19:07

k prasad wrote:Questions I have:

1) Was the operator left inside the helo?Yes, since the argument is that he could not be moved due to spinal bullet injury
2) If so, wouldnt that have been a danger, given fuel leakage and possibility of fire.By theory above, he was in every danger of being caught in fire if it had broken out
3) If he couldn't be moved at all, was he suitably immobilized and given first aid by the others there? (some basic medical training is taught after all)Going by news reports NO
4) Given that both Garuds were blinded by the chemical burns, etc, its fair that they couldn't have helped in the situation anyway. However, why didnt atleast one of them stay with the chopper? Garuds are still not as valuable as pilots in terms of hostages (no offense to anyone), and in case of any fire etc, that garud would've been able to move Sahu. What is the exact sequence of events after the plane was put down till when they left to go to the camp?I don't endorse your point that IAF pilots believe themselves HVT for maoists/naxals over others.
5) Why didn't they take the service pistol with them? What were the weapons the IAF party had with them? Did they give Sahu any weapon to defend himself with?No weapons were carried by IAF party. They left every weapon available with them at the crash sight for Sahu to defend himself with a weapon of his choice.
6) How far were the Maoists estimated to be from the emergency landing area?Farther than the CoBra base camp.

I'm not judging anyone. But leaving an injured soldier when hostile forces are near is never done. No matter how valuable anyone's life is.
+1
So some questions do need answers if we should judge whether this indeed happened, and if anyone is blame-worthy.
As I said again and again it was a mistake though a situational one maybe. Admit it, hide it but do not repeat it.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 12 Feb 2013 19:14

k prasad ji,

The understanding is not just the injured but the dead are also to be picked up.

But I have had Retd. Lt. Gen. confess how he in his immaturity lead to death of 3 brave soldiers all of whom volunteered despite seeing the odds against them. And the then rookie officer was trying to retrieve the dead soldier/s (never said anything about injured/death). The Pakis had snipers. This was 65.

War is a dirty business. And second guessing is not a tactic. The person/s in command had options without intel. So at this time he/they had to take a decision even if imperfect, but in keeping with an officer's roll. Saving the injured is a goal. Not risking more men in a fool hardy venture is another. Deciding without the benefit of intel is a part of the job and accepting the consequences of it comes with the job too.

The lapses can only be understood in internal inquiries. But at this time and with the evidence or even narrative available it is just not enough.

This may look like moral ambivalence but only the man/men at the center of action can decide and basically the rest have to live with it.

I am willing to learn if shown otherwise. Its not like I know the code here. I had one factoid that had a bearing.

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 12 Feb 2013 19:38

I am shocked to hear atreya ji remark that the crew didn't went to the base camp. Then where did they go then

I didn't say that saab ji! tsarkar said that the IAF men returned with the CRPF later on to rescue Sahu. I said that they did not return for the rescue, CoBRA did that alone! Or, rather, no news reports mention them returning with the rescue party. Maybe they gave them the rough location (since it was only 2-3 kms away) or coordinates. Or maybe they did return and if that is so, it should be mentioned in the media

My quote

Minor, but important nitpick tsarkar ji: IAF did not return with a rescue team, CoBRA found them on their own. I think they are being conferred with awards too, by the state government

Ah, as I post this, I know what misled you. I said 'CoBRA found THEM'. Should be "him" (injured Sahu). Honest mistake!

vinod · Post by **vinod** » 12 Feb 2013 19:42

I will try and answer them...

k prasad wrote:Questions I have:

1) Was the operator left inside the helo?Yes
2) If so, wouldnt that have been a danger, given fuel leakage and possibility of fire.Yes. He couldn't be moved. So what other option?
3) If he couldn't be moved at all, was he suitably immobilized and given first aid by the others there? (some basic medical training is taught after all)They hardly spent few seconds in the helo after crash. Just basic first aid enough to stop bleeding.
4) Given that both Garuds were blinded by the chemical burns, etc, its fair that they couldn't have helped in the situation anyway. However, why didnt atleast one of them stay with the chopper? Garuds are still not as valuable as pilots in terms of hostages (no offense to anyone), and in case of any fire etc, that garud would've been able to move Sahu. What is the exact sequence of events after the plane was put down till when they left to go to the camp? They were all covered in the fluid. You expect too much from 2 Garuds. We hardly know about them - what level of training they had, what their experience is etc.. 2 men however highly trained against possible number of maoists is no match unless of course you go by the name of "Rajnikant". Remember, they were shot a number of times from all directions. No way to gauge the number of maoists attacking them.
5) Why didn't they take the service pistol with them?I think they had their basic weapons them and probably the additional ones were left behind in the panic. Not sure. What were the weapons the IAF party had with them?Not much, basic revolver and lmg Did they give Sahu any weapon to defend himself with?Don't think so. Not that it would have helped in his situation!
6) How far were the Maoists estimated to be from the emergency landing area?Not more than 5 mins away had they known the helo had landed nearby. The helo landed few meters away from the original landing position.

I'm not judging anyone. But leaving an injured soldier when hostile forces are near is never done. No matter how valuable anyone's life is. So some questions do need answers if we should judge whether this indeed happened, and if anyone is blame-worthy.

SagarAg · Post by **SagarAg** » 12 Feb 2013 20:49

atreya wrote:
I am shocked to hear atreya ji remark that the crew didn't went to the base camp. Then where did they go then
I didn't say that saab ji! tsarkar said that the IAF men returned with the CRPF later on to rescue Sahu. I said that they did not return for the rescue, CoBRA did that alone! Or, rather, no news reports mention them returning with the rescue party. Maybe they gave them the rough location (since it was only 2-3 kms away) or coordinates. Or maybe they did return and if that is so, it should be mentioned in the media

My quote

Minor, but important nitpick tsarkar ji: IAF did not return with a rescue team, CoBRA found them on their own. I think they are being conferred with awards too, by the state government
Ah, as I post this, I know what misled you. I said 'CoBRA found THEM'. Should be "him" (injured Sahu). Honest mistake!

I was literally shocked to interpret it like that way. Thanks Atreya ji for clarifying my mistake

.If they knew the coordinates of the base camp then I am sure they had a device to tell them the coordinates of their crash land location which they told to CoBra team on reaching base camp.

PS: I am still awaiting the names of the IAF crew members involved in this incident. No names have been revealed except radio operator Sahu as of now.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 12 Feb 2013 21:11

A pilot & crew are responsible for their aircraft if it is not completely destroyed completely or they're not completely incapacitated. They’ll lose their jobs, if at first light, when the other IAF helicopter landed & found the IAF pilots having chai at CRPF camp.

As per Vinod’s account, the IAF folks used traditional maps. Hence, they had to return with the CRPF team – one cannot tell someone to go to X location on a map. Only a person who has traversed the route will know the waypoints and approach.

Having said that, it was very brave of the CRPF 150 Battalion to mount an operation to secure Sahu & the helicopter in the middle of the night with minimum planning & no intel. The naxals would have had all the time to mount an ambush.

Where I’m surprised is
1. Motivation of the Naxals, who’re not deterred by helicopters or air power.
2. Coordination in firing on the helicopters – that too without any radio net coordinating their actions.
3. Indian civilian rifles or country made guns or ammunition cannot cause damage shown in MAK’s blog. They were using better weapons.
4. Ability to adapt to captured weapons like SLR, AK-47 & INSAS, or they’ve got weapons suppliers.
5. Where do they get bullets? Assuming they’ve captured the guns but unless they’ve astonishing marksmanship, why don’t they run out of bullets? All three guns have different caliber bullets.

vinod · Post by **vinod** » 12 Feb 2013 21:23

tsarkar wrote: As per Vinod’s account, the IAF folks used traditional maps. Hence, they had to return with the CRPF team – one cannot tell someone to go to X location on a map. Only a person who has traversed the route will know the waypoints and approach.

Apologies, if my account gave the "traditional map" impression. In this modern era, they had GPS! I don't think they went back, just called up nearby CRPF team to secure the area and helo. They did however visit the guy in hospital next day!