Indian Army Discussion

rkhanna · Post by **rkhanna** » 20 Jul 2009 22:51

And I also hope that this elusive "modern carbine" referred to in the article turns out to be MINSAS! That would make a lot of things easier!!

AFAI remmeber reading the Army has already junked the MINSAS in its trials.. could be wrong though.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 20 Jul 2009 23:18

rkhanna wrote: AFAI remmeber reading the Army has already junked the MINSAS in its trials.. could be wrong though.

Yes, I have read that too. I too was not sure, but if you also remember reading this, then memory must have served me right and minsas was indeed disqualified.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Jul 2009 04:25

Pak bunkers worry India

The ceasefire may be in force along the India-Pakistan border in Jammu and Kashmir, but that hasn’t prevented the Pakistani Army from building bunkers close to the border. The Indian Army, consequently, remains in a state of high alert. BSF officials said the issue was earlier taken up with the Pakistani Rangers but to no effect. Over 200 new bunkers were constructed by Pakistani Rangers in 2007; the number is only increasing thereafter. The activity, in fact, has picked up quite a pace after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Even as the infiltration from across the border has shown a decline and no major violation of ceasefire has been reported along the border, the bunkers remain a source of constant worry for the BSF.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 23 Jul 2009 22:14

The INSAS rifle was developed by Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) based on Army’s Qualitative Requirements. It was inducted into the Army after extensive trials in the years 1996-97. Since inception, design of rifle, has undergone five modifications as per user’s requirement to make it more user-friendly. The Ordnance Factory Board is supplying INSAS rifles duly proved and accepted by the Director General Quality Assurance (DGQA), an agency designated by the Defence Forces. The rifle is tested for its quality, safety and strength, operational requirements and other rigorous tests as per the stipulated standards laid down by DGQA.

With the change in the operational environment to keep pace with new technology, Qualitative Requirements for a New Generation Assault Rifle of current technology have been spelt out by the Army.
This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Janeshwar Mishra and Others in Rajya Sabha today.

http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=50820

caesar · Post by **caesar** » 24 Jul 2009 09:44

dunno if i should raise this topic here?

DOES INDIA HAVE AN EMP WEAPON??

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 24 Jul 2009 10:16

caesar wrote:dunno if i should raise this topic here?

DOES INDIA HAVE AN EMP WEAPON??

Even if India has, it would be in the classified ifnormation zone and would be known on a need to know basis.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 25 Jul 2009 21:24

Indian Army celebrates 268th anniversary of Colachal battle
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - The Indian Army Saturday celebrated the 268th anniversary of the victory of the Travancore kingdom’s forces over the Dutch in the mid-18th century.

The forces of King Marthanda Varma defeated the Dutch in an amphibious battle July 31, 1741, earning Travancore the distinction of being among the few Asian forces to have defeated a leading European sea power at sea and land.

The king recorded this victory with a majestic pillar erected at Colachal beach, in what is now Tamil Nadu.

The ex-king of erstwhile Travancore state Uthradam Thirunal Marthanda Varma was the chief guest of the function at the small picturesque costal township, 68 km south of Chennai. Maj. Gen. (retd) V.D.I. Devavaram, Pangode station commander Brig. Cherish Mathson, and Col. R.K. Chaudhary, the commanding officer of 16 Madras and other dignitaries were also present.

Floral wreaths were laid at the memorial.

The victory pillar, earlier with the customs department, was handed over to the Archaeological Survey of India on the request of Varma.

http://blog.taragana.com/n/indian-army- ... le-120562/

Communist historians of India have made a tradition of teaching Hindus their "histoy of defeats." It is now time we came out of their trap and started celebrating our victories.

Will some Bollywood director pay his debt to the salt of the land by making a movie on this battle? If this episode of history belonged to the Americans, they would have made at least five Hollywood movies on it by now and wrote chapters about it in school history books.

Jamal K. Malik · Post by **Jamal K. Malik** » 25 Jul 2009 23:40

Strategic Andaman&Nicobar military command floundering with low force-levels

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... 812910.cms

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 26 Jul 2009 02:33

just heard from my father:

Brig Khetrapal [father of martyr Arun Khetrapal (PVC)] passed away recently.
May his soul rest in peace.

munna · Post by **munna** » 26 Jul 2009 02:49

AdityaM wrote:just heard from my father:

Brig Khetrapal [father of martyr Arun Khetrapal (PVC)] passed away recently.
May his soul rest in peace.

Salutations and regards to a brave officer who gave us the legendary martyr A Khetrapal.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 26 Jul 2009 03:16

do read on wikipedia as to how he met his sons killer

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 26 Jul 2009 09:57

HAL Cheetal for Air Force

New lightweight engine enables increased range, endurance

BANGALORE: Hindustan Aeronautics Limited handed over the first batch of four Cheetal helicopters to the Indian Air Force at HAL’s Barrackpore Division near Kolkata on Saturday.

N. C. Agarwal, Director (Design and Development), handed over the helicopters to Air Vice-Marshal (AVM) M. Bahadur, Assistant Chief of Air Staff.

“The IAF had placed an order for 10 Cheetals, of which the first batch of four has been delivered. The remaining six are expected to be handed over by September. We expect the IAF’s order to be followed up by the Army and also the government, which is looking at procuring helicopters for various roles, especially for internal security,” said R. Srinivasan, Managing Director (Helicopter Complex), HAL.

AVM Bahadur said: “The re-engined Cheetals will increase our operational capabilities, especially for high altitude operations.”

The Cheetal is the re-engined Cheetah helicopter, with the replacement of Artouste IIIB with the TM 333-2M2 engine. The reduced weight of the TM 333-2M2 engine, with better specific fuel consumption, facilitates increased range, endurance and payload, making the helicopter more versatile in various roles. The Cheetal has been designed to incorporate upgraded features such as lightweight modern technology cockpit instruments like the electrically driven Artificial Horizon, Directional Gyro, and lightweight modern avionics — accurate navigation and homing through GPS, VHF HOMER, Flight Monitoring System (FMS), Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Emergency Locator Transmitter.

“It is a proud moment for HAL Barrackpore,” Mr. Agarwal said.

The Cheetal landed at 23,220-ft (7070m) pressure altitude equivalent to 25,150-ft (7670m) density altitude at Saser Kangri of the Ladakh region in the Himalayas in November 2004, setting a world record in high altitude landing.

In 2004 my brother chose the landing spot for this Cheetal test flight and escorted it during this operation.

IIRC Cheetal increased the chopper payload to "Sonam" from 35 kg to a mighty 80-90 kg. Almost double of current Cheetha. Am curious to know what the new re-engined ALH-Dhruv's payload is to Sonam?

Air Vice Marshal Bahadur was earlier CO of 114HU at Leh from 14 Nov 94 to 22 Apr 97. 114HU has always flown Cheetah since inception. Here is an article written by Wing Commander M. Bahadur: SIACHEN GLACIER OPERATIONS. THE BUILDUP TO OPERATION MEGHDOOT

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 26 Jul 2009 11:54

AdityaM wrote:do read on wikipedia as to how he met his sons killer

AdityaM: thanks so much for that tip. I read the Epilogue piece - it brought tears to my eyes. Arun Khetarpal was 21 when he died for us. I just cant imagine the kind of bravery one needs to stay put in a burning tank against your superior's orders and keep firing knowing fully well that sure, painful death awaits you.

Bhaskar · Post by **Bhaskar** » 26 Jul 2009 23:48

Indian Army struggles to stay fighting fit.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indian-army- ... -3-p0.html

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 26 Jul 2009 23:49

Indian Army struggles to stay fighting fit
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indian-army- ... ingle.html

Soldiers complain their bulletproof jackets are heavy, cumbersome and sag towards the front, thus leaving upper parts of the chest, shoulder and neck exposed.

Even with the protective gear the Army says it has suffered fatal casualties: 28 per cent of its men died taking shots in the chest region, 11 per cent in the head and almost 14 per cent died because their face and neck region was exposed.

Most bulletproof jackets used by the Army are more than 15 years old and weigh about 10 kg. The market has jackets that weigh just about 6 kg and give high levels of protection.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 27 Jul 2009 00:05

I remember a while back RayC making a good argument for not having BP jackets while manning a checkpost ..... but I think we need them for COIN ops and patrols along the border lighter the better.... seeing the F-Insas design itself makes me wonder do we need so much hardware for an infantry soldier

.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 27 Jul 2009 10:58

sanjaychoudhry wrote:Indian Army struggles to stay fighting fit
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indian-army- ... ingle.html

Soldiers complain their bulletproof jackets are heavy, cumbersome and sag towards the front, thus leaving upper parts of the chest, shoulder and neck exposed.

Even with the protective gear the Army says it has suffered fatal casualties: 28 per cent of its men died taking shots in the chest region, 11 per cent in the head and almost 14 per cent died because their face and neck region was exposed.

Most bulletproof jackets used by the Army are more than 15 years old and weigh about 10 kg. The market has jackets that weigh just about 6 kg and give high levels of protection.

The point is how many lives BP DID save, even if they failed in some instances? Though I agree that quality and quantity of BPs need to be improved and we need to give out troops the world best BPs

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Jul 2009 02:01

Soldiers won’t be put on menial jobs: Antony

Defence Minister AK Antony today told Parliament that he has issued instructions that soldiers who are “sahayaks” - known as batmen - to Army officers will not be put for “demeaning and humiliating” tasks.

He further said the sahayaks would not be employed in menial house-hold work and issued elaborate instructions to ensure “strict checks” to prevent their misuse. Sahayaks would be attached to regular Army units and provided proper living accommodation and messing facilities.

“The officer to whom Sahayaks are provided will ensure such facilities are arranged,” Antony said.

“It is the duty of all officers and junior commissioned officers (JCOs) and commanders in the chain to ensure that strict checks are instituted to prevent misuse of Sahayaks and that any violation of existing instructions and guidelines should be dealt with immediately,” Defence Minister AK Antony told the House in a statement.
...
...

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 28 Jul 2009 05:30

T-72 tanks moved to remote Sikkim area after China tests Indian defences

Chinese moves to test Indian control of the strategic Finger Area in North Sikkim last year have prompted the Army to deploy heavy tanks and armoured personnel carriers in the region and strengthen defensive positions.

In fact, the highest gallantry award to a Border Roads Organisation (BRO) personnel was conferred to a dozer operator, Zalim Singh, who cleared a strategic road near Theing village — he was decorated with a Bar to Shaurya Chakra — for a column of advancing tanks.

While the Army brought armoured vehicles to the North Sikkim plateau in the late 1980s, the small detachment has now been replaced by the heavier and more powerful T-72 Main Battle Tanks and modern BMP troop carriers.

Sources said the mobilisation took place after repeated Chinese transgressions last year in the Finger Area, a one kilometre stretch of land in the northern tip of Sikkim that overlooks a valley called the Sora Funnel and is considered a strong defensive position.
...
...
Sources said that while China too has tanks on its side of the border, they are deployed well inside its territory. “China does not need to deploy tanks on the border because the terrain and roads on its side makes it easy to bring them at short notice. India, on the other hand, has no option but to keep them on the border as it would take days to get the tanks up from the plains,” an expert pointed out.

...
The Finger Area entered controversy last year after the Chinese increased patrolling and even planned to built a road through it. While the area was always under Indian control, the Army used to send in regular patrols and held only a few traditional defensive positions.

India decided to strengthen defences after increased Chinese transgressions and the discovery last year that the alignment of a new East-West road being built by Beijing would pass thorough the Finger Area. Construction was put to a stop after New Delhi lodged a diplomatic complaint.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 29 Jul 2009 03:46

India abolishes the army batman as 'abhorrent' relic of British Raj
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 731047.ece

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 29 Jul 2009 08:29

Stan_Savljevic wrote:India abolishes the army batman as 'abhorrent' relic of British Raj

Good. Even though I can agree with the claim that a bat-man is a "comrade-in-arms" for an officer, I do not see any reason to use them as domestic servants. Let the "mem sahebs" find time to buy their groceries and other stuff, do not see why an Army man has to be asked to do these tasks.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jul 2009 09:18

This is nothing new, and this article is mostly just motivated propaganda, floated post 6th pay commission frictions between civilian and defence government officers. Youll note that no mention of it had ever been made earlier.

The sahayak (batman is an incorrect, and offensive term), was never meant for menial duties, and the army had already issued instructions to this end, clarifying what he can and cannot do, long ago. The sahayak WAS however meant to provide support services to his officer, in the field, and at home. This includes making tea, keeping his uniform in an orderly fashion (and yes, this includes polishing boots, whether anyone likes it, or not), acting as his personal bodyguard in war and peace, and generally being there for him, when he needs it most. Misuse of sahayaks is condemnable, but it is definitely not as widespread as has been made out.

The air force, at least, I know, has a system of 'civilian orderlies', known as non-combatants (enrolled). This system works, because unlike the army, the air force is not posted in the field, and mostly operates out of prepared and pukka bases. It is difficult to find a civilian who will accept living in a tent in the heart of the nagaland jungle for weeks on end, to serve his officer, isnt it? The individual soldier signs on with the army, to perform whatsoever duty is essential to the mission. And these duties are essential too. Indeed, the post of sahayak is a coveted one, in many cases.

All the rest of this chit chat is just hot air, floated by certain disgruntled and petty elements in civilian services who are a) envious, and b) trying to hide the fact that they continue to use not one, but SEVERAL government staff as menials, including for escorting their children to school, cleaning their toilets, and cooking their dinners, in a completely unauthorised fashion. Government employees, policemen, and peons are used to sweep floors and serve dinner in civil servants and police officers homes. They live in servant quarters in their houses. I can think of no greater humiliation. By the way, despite what the article says, ALL sahayaks are always attached to unit lines for housing, and eat in unit messes. And they have been, for the last 60 years.

Meanwhile, the government continues to employ an army of group D personnel (servants, by another name), to man the gates, water the plants, make nimbu paani, and clean up "baby's" potty, for the civilian services. Its just that these are not 'authorised' perks, and so they are not criticised!

Indeed, Ive even seen RETIRED civil servants enjoying these perks. When will government crack down on these?

I am curious to know why Mrs. District Magistrate, and Mrs. Superintendent of Police cannot buy THEIR groceries themselves? I dont see that it is a policeman or peon's job to do all this either?

Dont always believe the propaganda you read in the news. I thought people at BR knew better than that.

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 29 Jul 2009 10:05

ASPuar wrote:This includes making tea, keeping his uniform in an orderly fashion, acting as his personal bodyguard in war and peace, and generally being there for him, when he needs it most.

I can understand the part of being a body guard etc., but am I to believe that the an officer is so busy that he cannot make his own tea, or keep his uniform in order

. Then how are officers in Navy and Air Force surviving? Please note, I do understand the role of sahayak in war time (or may be even in field postings)

.

Meanwhile, the government continues to employ an army of group D personnel (servants, by another name), to man the gates, water the plants, make nimbu paani...

Group D personnel are recruited specifically for such posts. I don't think Army recruits any one for the specific role of a sahayak.

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jul 2009 10:30

Sachin wrote:
ASPuar wrote:This includes making tea, keeping his uniform in an orderly fashion, acting as his personal bodyguard in war and peace, and generally being there for him, when he needs it most.
I can understand the part of being a body guard etc., but am I to believe that the an officer is so busy that he cannot make his own tea, or keep his uniform in order . Then how are officers in Navy and Air Force surviving? Please note, I do understand the role of sahayak in war time (or may be even in field postings) .

Meanwhile, the government continues to employ an army of group D personnel (servants, by another name), to man the gates, water the plants, make nimbu paani...
Group D personnel are recruited specifically for such posts. I don't think Army recruits any one for the specific role of a sahayak.

I think you are mistaken. Group D personnel are certainly not (in theory) recruited to be servants in the homes of officials. They can be recruited to be attached to an office for a purpose, for eg, a chaparasi for a DC's office (perfectly reasonable). But then they end up (in practice) being used as servants in the homes of the big shots of that office (absolutely not reasonable).

But even all this detracts from the main idea, which is why is the public exchequer paying for such servants for civil government officials household work in the first place?

You contend that a sahayak might be ok in wartime, or field areas.

What war is the deputy commissioner of a district facing, what is making him so busy that he cannot make HIS own tea, and change HIS own kids diapers, for which we, the taxpayer, must pay for an army of menials to do? Do I take it, (using your analogy of wartime and field areas) that it is only in times of natural disaster that such a service is ok to provide for civil servants, or perhaps when they are on tour, in areas where no accomodation is available?

Perhaps you feel that civil servants are busy with their day to day duties, and so must not be bothered with all this miscellany. Well, so are army officers busy, with training, administration, and the day to day work, that they cannot be asked to do all these things. And that is just in peacetime! There is this extraordinary misconception created, that the army in peace time does nothing. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is because of a well trained and administered army that there is peace. Its job is to create this peace.

In any case, what of the police personnel who are used as servants? Is that justifiable? Did they join the police to become flowerpot shifters, and lawn decorators, and domestic servants? I dont believe the Police recruits cops to be servants either. A picture comes to mind of the ahmedabad police commissioner being carried on the back of a constable during floods, because he didnt want to get his feet wet. Can you imagine any army officer behaving in such a manner?

As to your point about Air Force and Navy personnel, I have already explained the difference in service conditions between the three services. Furthermore, the Air Force and Navy have lascars and Non Combatants hired especially for these purposes. The reason that the army uses sahayaks, is that the duties of the sahayak are essentially military in nature, and must be performed, whether at peace, or at war, which a civil enrolled non combatant is not capable of.

All through, however, please note that I have said that the institution of sahayak is for military duties, and not "household" ones. I have agreed with this assertion. But so had the army, even back in 1947, and had specified what a sahayak should and should not do.

What I should like to know is, why, using the same logic, are we persisting with, and condoning bad practices like misuse of government staff in the civil government sector?

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 29 Jul 2009 12:13

ASPuar wrote:But even all this detracts from the main idea, which is why is the public exchequer paying for such servants for civil government officials household work in the first place?

To put it on record, I am not supporting civil service officers using Group D personnel to do their household work. That has to be stopped too.

What war is the deputy commissioner of a district facing, what is making him so busy that he cannot make HIS own tea, and change HIS own kids diapers, for which we, the taxpayer, must pay for an army of menials to do?

I am not supporting this move. I am all in favour of bringing in strict measures to curb mis-use of Group D office staff by civilian officials.

Perhaps you feel that civil servants are busy with their day to day duties, and so must not be bothered with all this miscellany.

No

. I don't think any officer (civil or military) is so busy that he cannot make a cup of tea or get his drinks.

A picture comes to mind of the ahmedabad police commissioner being carried on the back of a constable during floods, because he didnt want to get his feet wet. Can you imagine any army officer behaving in such a manner?

True, that showed the police in poor light. But can any one surely say that the sahayak post is not misused by even an single army officer?

Furthermore, the Air Force and Navy have lascars and Non Combatants hired especially for these purposes.

Any specific reason why this was not tried in the Army? Atleast in peace stations?

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 29 Jul 2009 15:18

To put it on record, I am not supporting civil service officers using Group D personnel to do their household work. That has to be stopped too.

I am not supporting this move. I am all in favour of bringing in strict measures to curb mis-use of Group D office staff by civilian officials.

So am I. Nothing smacks of colonialism more than the non-inclusive and non representative system of district administration we presently have. Let us at least not have to pay through our noses to sustain it as well.

No . I don't think any officer (civil or military) is so busy that he cannot make a cup of tea or get his drinks.

Quite possibly you are correct. Especially those engaged in office based jobs. Heck, in an office environment, today, there are easily available tea/coffee machines, which produce the brew at the click of a button. Why do we need sarkari chaiwallahs?

True, that showed the police in poor light. But can any one surely say that the sahayak post is not misused by even an single army officer?

No. One cannot. I merely say that it is less widespread, and less of a problem than the media is making it out to be. I have mostly seen the sahayaks treated with respect, and being happy with their work. We, as civilians tend to forget that ALL of a soldiers work is not being rambo, and doing "soldier stuff". Much of it is tedium, chores, duties, and hard, hard work! The duties of a sahayak are light, in comparison.

Furthermore, the Air Force and Navy have lascars and Non Combatants hired especially for these purposes.

Any specific reason why this was not tried in the Army? Atleast in peace stations?

[/quote]

I would imagine it would be difficult to change over from one system to the other from posting to posting. As I said, it is difficult to coerce a civilian to enter a warzone/hard area/field area, besides it being dangerous both for the civilian himself, and the troops, to have an untrained person in the zone. The army officers sahayak is intended to be able to share the hardships and dangers of his life. If one trains the Non Combatant to be able to do this (when moving to the field), isnt he a soldier then? And wont he want the status of one too?

We, as civilians have the luxury of holding opinions which are formed by seeing sahayaks and their officers in the comfort of reasonably safe areas. I just feel that we generally have not seen the whole story, before condemning the system, and most of the clowns who are clamouring for it to end in the media, and parliament, have probably never even seen a soldier.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 29 Jul 2009 16:23

ASPaur..with due respect, the sahayak concept is a very colonial. I am curious to know does the present day british or any western army have this concept. The gora sahib could have n sahayaks .. so the brown sahib many have atleast 1. I used to stay in DSOE ( Dhaula Kuan, New Delhi) and there was a army officer above our house. the wife of the army officer used to run a school for small kids in the house! one day we heard a lady screaming ( which is a sacrilege in a place like DSOE, with all senior defence officers staying). When we went out, we learnt that the lady in question had come to pick her child early and found the sahayak teaching the kids instead of the army officers wife

)

now my dad was in the air force and we were on the ground floor. one day the sahayak comes and tells my dad 'sir.. aap to kitchen garden nahi maintain karte hain.. hamare saheb bol rahe the ki hum maintain kar dete hain ' .. my father got mad and asked him to get lost. for the next 1 month me and my father toiled in the evenings and we made a functional kitchen garden just to show the officer upstairs that we can as well do it without any sahayak !!!

in the airforce and the army as well, there has been a reduction in no of uniforms for various occassions.. i distinctly remember as a child , my father trying to fit in a uniform which required collective efforts of the family to dress him and also dress him down!! i understand that the offending uniform has been discontinued.. the gora sahib has a retinue of servants etc to get him dressed and undress.. we gotta move on with changing times... many of things in the defence forces have a very colonial background to them.. and it is wise to jettison what is not in tune with times.

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 29 Jul 2009 16:52

ASPuar wrote:I have mostly seen the sahayaks treated with respect, and being happy with their work.

And there are also stories floating around of sahayaks being mistreated by the wives of the officers. This seems to be the most irritating part. This blog certainly is not God's words, but some people have also jotted their experiences about sahayaks being asked to household chores.
Blog
Comment from the blog.....
Manas it's a delicate and a sensitive subject you have chosen and have done well to put the message across. The resulting comments bears testimony to the subject's sensitivity. I realise as a civilian I am not appropriately qualified or rather in the position to comment on the appropriateness or the lack of it in the continued practise of keeping batmen. Many of my cousins and friends are in the armed forces and enjoy the previlege. I have personally experienced witnessing a hulk of a personality neatly folding washed and dried linen while the entire family of the officer including me engaged in social chit chat. And very recently while boarding a train at Chandigarh, two army officers wives made the sahayak's carry their luggage from outside the station to platform number four. When the entire luggage had been shifted, they casually berrated them for not hiring a coolie. How dear ladies could the two sahayaks had taken that decision when you yourself wanted them to carry your burden. There is no doubt that exploitation of the most sophisticated manner actually takes place, Sophisticated because, the sahayak is well looked after, and addressed to with respect and he too has a uniform to protect. This makes the entire charade and hypocricy more pardonable. The entire country is doing it so why not the men in uniform after all they are risking their lives for us. Let's keep them fit, well uniformed and 'in company'. Jaihind

I would imagine it would be difficult to change over from one system to the other from posting to posting.

I agree with that part. I can also accept that Army as an instituition is trying hard to curb the misuse of the sahayak facility. I am getting a feeling that the misuse primarily happens because the sahayak is supposed to work in the officer's living quarters as well. Let the sahayak help the officer in all tasks at his office, or if it is a field area even in the officer's living area. But if the officer is living in a peace area and in a quarters with the family, the sahayak facility should be not provided. An officer may have the right attitude to his sahayak, but I dont think his wife (and other relatives) would be in the same position.

VikB · Post by **VikB** » 29 Jul 2009 17:41

I was in an Army School. I have personally seen not only wives of Officers treat the Sahayak's casually (mistreat?) but even the Officer's kids treating the Sahayak with disdain - outright insult at times.

I spoke to one Sahayak at a friend's place in Dhaula Kuan. He mentioned about the 'Memsahab' getting him to do errands that he is not supposed to do. He was however more positive in his opinion of the Officer. He also mentioned that a lot depended on which Officer he gets to work with and fondly remembered the family he had served some years ago. Some Officer (and their families) are good, some are not. Soon after this chat my friend came and rudely asked the Sahayak to go away.

Having someone to call on you almost 24/7 is bound to get to the head sooner or later. The system surely needs a re-think.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 29 Jul 2009 22:47

Army moves into North Cachar Hills
http://www.hindu.com/2009/07/29/stories ... 601200.htm

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Jul 2009 22:55

I can understand the need for a sahayak in a field posting, away from family and all homely amenities but in peace postings it is bound to be misused, however small or large that % is in proportion to the total no of such men employed.
even one such case will generate much bitterness and negative publicity.

Ray Sir, any inputs.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 29 Jul 2009 23:26

Rahul M wrote:I can understand the need for a sahayak in a field posting, away from family and all homely amenities but in peace postings it is bound to be misused, however small or large that % is in proportion to the total no of such men employed.
even one such case will generate much bitterness and negative publicity.

Ray Sir, any inputs.

You people write a lot about what camouflage dress looks great and how we are nowhere there etc.

You are enthralled by the furniture and looks of weapons.

You are enthralled by the smart display at the Republic Day Parade.

In other words, the outward appearance matters to instil pride in oneself and pride amongst the citizens.

Now, if one is to look after his uniform and make it spotless and smart, then he requires time. And let me tell you getting a uniform ready takes a good part of an hour and a half, if one is to shine his pips and his shoes (this is where it takes time). At least, that is what I have experienced because many a time I had to do it myself. Let me also assure you that in a Durbar of mine as a CO, I found a chap with dirty boots. I asked him why is his boot dirty? He said he did not find the time. I got him up to the dais and shone his boots. It was to show dignity of labour. I told the Durbar, that I had not demeaned myself. I knew that I was CO and the world knew that I was a CO and therefore, whatever I did was only for the betterment of the image of the Army and in no way, did I degrade myself! Of course, there can be many views on my action, but I have no regrets or shame. In fact, it was well received in my unit!

I think people who are not confident of themselves or feel deprived feel that the Army having sahayak is incorrect.

Now, if I have to go to the dhobi to pick up my uniform, that will also take time because a dhobi is not sitting in your home, but is far away at the unit lines!

So, if I have to be smart, and it is important for an officer to be smart, since a shabbily turned out officer would not instil confidence, it will take a huge amount of time. When will I then devotete some time for the office work (and the phones ring throughout the day and night) and don't you think a hour or so, should also be devoted to the family?

Therefore, a sahayak is essential to take this load off, both in war and peace.

In war, he is your protection, while you recce!

The relationship with one's sahayak is not a master servant equation, unlike what one sees in the police and the IAS. It is a bond for life! He is loved by not only the officer, but the family. In the olden days, when the officer retired, his sahayak retired and came with him. That is the equation! Today, with the measly pension, such show of bond is not feasible.

I would concede that there have been misuses. But they are not the rule, but the exception.

I hope that the same would be applied to the IPS and the IAS.

Go to a DC's house or an SP's house. I marvel at their Raj mentality!

This is another nail in the coffin to put the Army one peg down from their already low status in the instruments of the govt.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 Jul 2009 23:59

Ray Sir, as an alternative idea, can the function be carried out by civilians employed by the army for this very purpose during peacetime postings ?

I've followed both yours and other officers' comments on the requirement as well as the officer-sahayak relation in field and it does look like a necessity.

BUt in peace postings, is an alternative possible ? the requirement of neat and clean attire is not unique to the Indian Army.
do they have an equivalent ? if they don't use a similar concept how do the other forces manage, how do the foreign armies manage ? can we learn from that.

I would really like to know more about this.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 30 Jul 2009 06:49

Rahul M wrote:Ray Sir, as an alternative idea, can the function be carried out by civilians employed by the army for this very purpose during peacetime postings ?

I've followed both yours and other officers' comments on the requirement as well as the officer-sahayak relation in field and it does look like a necessity.

BUt in peace postings, is an alternative possible ? the requirement of neat and clean attire is not unique to the Indian Army.
do they have an equivalent ? if they don't use a similar concept how do the other forces manage, how do the foreign armies manage ? can we learn from that.

I would really like to know more about this.

In schools of instructions, there are civilian sahayaks, paid for by the officers themselves.

However, in schools of instructions, the work is on a schedule and hence manageable.

Even in peacetime, the unit life is hectic. Unlike some of the perceptions of some of my friends, wherein they feel that the army works only in war and in peace they are resting, it is not so.

The whole day is taken up with training with breaks for meals. And the day starts at 0600 hours, except on Sundays (and even on Sundays, there is the mandatory Mandir Parade at 0800 hours where you attend with your family). After training hours in the morning, the officers have to undertake administrative work. Then there are conferences, Officers training etc etc.

Games in not for recreation and physical fitness alone. It is a parade. None can miss it.

After Games, one should go around the lines and see that all is well and the routine and facilities and food of the troops is ticketyboo . This is the ideal time when troops are relaxed, to have chat up with some of the boys to 'feel the pulse' and has to be done without coming in their way. Thereafter, in the evening there could be a Dinner night (again a parade), Guest Night etc etc.

Thereafter, ideally, one should spend one hour reading professional literature so that one is updated (most don't since the day is hectic and one is too tired).

And then when it all done, you hit the sack.

I might add that the shayak does training also and is not totally at the disposal of the officer throughout the day. He has to go through his promotion cadres and soldier's proficiency tests. I am sure there are cases where a sahayak is there throughtout the day, but then the CO is doing harm to his unit's efficiency.

The next point is that how is a bond built up? By long term association. That is why one should not change a sahayak rapidly, though that too has its advantages. An analogy could be friends for life for a school child who changes school every year!

This daily routine may appear rather easy, but in actuality it is too complicated.

Then there are numerous 'Station duties' and these have to be done 'in your own time' and not during training and office time! Easier said than done. This adds on to backlog of administrative work required to run one's command, which includes jawan's documentation, office work, checking the lines, the food, the rations etc.

One has to see it oneself, to realise it.

It is like Army officers not understanding the hustle bustle, heartbreaks and all of the Corporate world. Quite a few feel that the Corporate world is one big jamboree - big pay, swanky cars, good accommodation, high society life, holidays every year abroad etc. But that is obviously not the case and it, too, is a huge grind with immense complications and technicalities, even if the payoffs look good! They fail to realise that the pink slip is a huge deterrent to happiness! I am not too sure if in the Corporagte world there is pension.

In other Armies, I presume there dress is simpler and they have patent leather shoes and boots that require no polishing. And possibly they have no dinner nights and other stuff where the dress is different from what they wear to office. There stars etc are anodised.

I have seen photos of US officers in the GI vests with a Jap cap which has the rank in the centre! We can't wear a vest and a cap alone.

But that is their way and we have our way!

ASPuar · Post by **ASPuar** » 30 Jul 2009 09:43

@RayC:

I had an uncle in a ground duty branch of the IAF. He left the IAF a few years ago, for the private sector, after completing his 20 years. Being a ground duties officer, and anyway well connected to the corporate world, he was at least somewhat acquainted with life in the private sector.

But even so, he marvelled at the fact that he was coming home at 10PM, and that the company he worked for, squeezed every penny he earned out of him!

But that wasnt the least of it. He took one of those release courses for defence officers at one of the premier MBA institutes. He said that officers who hadnt the slightest clue of the civil sector were leaving for it, colonels and group captains, who had had things running to the beat of their drums for the last 25 years, and they were experiencing rude shocks daily in the corporate world.

And, as you say, the threat of a pink slip, was something most of them had never even dreamy could be possible.

To most of the posters here, I would say, on the sahayak issue, we should take a hands off policy. There are stringent rules (made stronger recently) on misuse of sahayaks in the army, and those should be sufficient to satisfy us, that all is well. Let us not raise words like "mistreatment" and "abuse", on the basis of one blog entry.

Furthermore, the army is not like the civilian world. It is, not to put too fine point on it, not a democracy. Where we, as civilians, would find some things unbearable, and too much for our fragile bodies and egos, in the army, the only answer is to do it, and do it like it should have been done yesterday. Dont spend too much time reading bleeding hearts whines about the military, based on inputs from motivated sources. The soldiers dont need such self appointed advocates, because the fauj is one of the few govt institutions where the non officer staff actually gets a hearing in a formalised fashion.

Manjgu, I appreciate your point about your kitchen garden, but please dont forget that the army, unlike the airforce, does not work out of well maintained and sylvan Air Force Stations, but rather out of tents, bunkers and trenches, with open air toilets. In such a scenario, the sahayak become essential.

All these people who are out to criticise the army know very well that the less inducements there are to join, the less attractive, in real terms, the service becomes. 11000 officers short. Who will defend us, when the crunch comes? The chaps who said "Lower the army's pay", "Remove their "batmen"!", "Reduce their accomodation entitlement", "Shut down the cantonments"? Or the chaps who had to bear the brunt of this humiliation?

Answer that one question, and you will know whether we do enough for our soldiers, or not.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 30 Jul 2009 10:13

On the lighter side of the Army, here is an example of some oddities.

In the Unit run cinema, where the troops not on duty with their families, JCOs and their families, the Officers and their familiies attend to see the film.

However, it is very disturbing and distracting experience.

Whenever there is some comic scene, there is a lot of laughter. But that is also regulated! The BHM will blow a whistle to indicate, no more laughter and would you believe it, the laughter stops?

It was a horrendous experience to have watched Padosan!

It was more of whistles than dialogue!!

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 30 Jul 2009 12:45

The case of the Sahayak or Batman is really not as black and white as it seems. Being son of an Army officer and having spent a great part of my life in Cantonments, I surely can put across the picture better.

To begin with, the Batman term is not used these days. I remember the term getting used in IA when I was a kid but got phased out completely. As for the use of Sahayak in homes of IA, it is no secret that they do get used for doing household chores. Right from dropping children at bus stop, buying vegetables to dropping clothes at the laundry for ironing apart from “making” the uniform of the officer. But does this make the status of a Sahayak as a servant? I do not think so. Yes, they are cases of Officer’s Wives not behaving properly with the Sahayak, but this is not the norm. Mind you, there are very strict instructions with respect to behaving with Sahayak. There are even guidelines for women as how they should dress when Sahayak are at home from AWWA. I remember the thrust towards defining Officer Family -Sahayak relationship got underway in mid 90s. Please remember that I especially mentioned Officer Family and not officer. There is no doubt in the mind of Sahayak or officer in terms of their relationship. The grey area is their employment with the families.
This debate came to fore due to the changing profile of the PBOR recruits. They were comparatively more educated as compared to their predecessors and some of them objected to doing household chores. This is more so in Corps given the technical profile of their recruits as compared to Infantry units.

As RayC sir has pointed, an officer’s family can form a lifelong bond with the Sahayak. This is more so in case of arms like Infantry where the entire unit moves from one location to another than Corps. This is because the families and Sahayak are together in an Infantry/Armored/Artillery/Engineer unit while in Corps officers get posted from one unit to another. I have a case of a cousin not joining his Dad’s unit because, in his word,” troops have seen me grow from a child to being an officer. Some of troops I used to play with are senior JCOs and it will be quite awkward to be giving orders to them”.

The employment of men in Sahayak roles should be best left to the IA as they understand the nuances of the situation better than anyone else.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 30 Jul 2009 16:27

@RayC sir,
I get that there is a lot of workload during peacetime too, but why cannot the work of a sahayak be performed by a paid civilian in peace areas?

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 30 Jul 2009 17:39

since i have nothing to add to this topic, let me paste a hitjob link here:
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.co ... -army-be-a

The authors trying to be funny, 'coz no ill shall befall him in india

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 30 Jul 2009 18:10

Lets not bring Army officer shortage into this.

It would seriously look pathetic if the inducement for joining the Army was a sahayak.

There are lots of other things that we need to do for our soldiers (Officers and ORs) and it would clutter the argument by lumping this into the wider argument