The Trash Thread in the Trash Can (Use 4545 to Merge Posts)

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 24 May 2010 23:22

Buddha is *not* an avatar of Vishnu. Shri Vishnu advocated the importance of duty or dharma, Buddha was someone who ran away from his troubles. He deserted his wife & infant child & is therefore not looked upon too well in Hinduism and is not worthy of emulation.
Secondly, I would like to know from the PRC drone who seems to be so very convinced about the glory of buddhism, why has it disappeared from china? Why is the common chinese spiritually bankrupt? Why has the chinese society returned back to its feral state where the ethnic han preys upon other hans and they together prey upon the ethnic minorities like the Tibetans?

Fact is that the chinese were barbarians before buddhism came to their land. They could the not come up with any indigenous religion/spiritual system (confucianism is a steaming pile of dung & hence does not count) and had to wait for buddhism to civilize them, now that buddhism has been crushed in china, the chinese are again back to being the barbarians that they truly are.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 24 May 2010 23:54

Birather is from Thailand

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 25 May 2010 00:04

^^^Is he taking a break from ahimsa-laced riots?

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 25 May 2010 00:29

dear benis biraders please be carefool and not to get involved in the secondary blast when some bredator decides to send this fakecheeni drone to pakistan. use the warning button liberally, register your protest politely and send copious amount of dossiers demanding action. That is the indic way-ya.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 06 Jun 2010 23:48

nitinm wrote:So, kartik you are too old to be wrong! My grandmother thinks the same too, only she is not literate!

For every $10,000, you can educate a couple, make them employable and buy them a small house in a small town! And know what, they will starting paying taxes after that which will be used for the development of this country! This is 100,000 families per $1bn. When we are spending $45bn every year on defense and you say that fleet is fragmented because A, B & C were not happening in the same timeframe, it is SHAMEFUL to put it mildly!

Everyone in the Govt, armed forces, etc is responsible for ever rupee spent of taxpayers money, like a manger of a firm is to its shareholders. A honest salary earner or businessman is at least as patriotic as someone in the armed forces. I don't know what you do, but if see how well a $10m technology firm is managed, you will understand what I am talking about! For its size, the IAF is vastly lagging the private firms that can actually look ahead and plan (and incredibly brilliantly). If the planners of Indian Armed Forces can't plan their fleet, we should kick they ass and hand them over to Pakistan so that they can be made PoW.

I somehow smell the same IAF/GoI mindset in you where one can't accept reality beyond what has been poured into ones brain through Russian "technology transfers". You see, you actually need 'imagination' to look beyond the current constrains, which I admit clearly exist! But then you need to look beyond them to find a better way of doing things! Outright rejection or ridiculing someone's opinion is a clear sigh of weakness.

As for the competence of the IAF, I am sure these guys pull the sticks and triggers well, but technology management is not their core strength. Especially if the reasons they do what and how they do it are what you have mentioned. I have irrefutably a upper hand on this, being a soon to be PhD from a world leading university in Technology Strategy.

Besides, I am free to express my opinion irrespective of how lame it might be! You don't like it, simply ignore it or just say that they facts are not correct. If you want to vent your life's frustration, show off your knowledge/experience or if simply your ego hurts too much, thats not my problem!

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 07 Jun 2010 01:35

[deleted]...
ramana

negi · Post by **negi** » 07 Jun 2010 02:05

[deleted]...
ramana

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:12

Dear Dileep, regarding your post of 29 May 2010 17:06;

I don’t smoke.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:13

Dear vina, regarding your post of 29 May 2010 20:51;

… So when these poodles go yip, yip, what you do is kick 'em.

Start with me.

I dare you.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:13

Dear sanjaykumar, regarding your post of 29 May 2010 21:29;

… almost brings a tear to the eye…

Then go get a tissue and kindly refrain from posting OT.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:13

Dear lsunil, regarding your post of 29 May 2010 22:04;

U R OT

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:14

Dear enqyoob, regarding your post of 30 May 2010 04:21;

With reference to the name of this, the ‘Strategic Issues and International Relations Forum’…

Let me explain something very important to you:

The central purpose of strategy in international relations is to gather and guide your friends, and divide and destroy your enemies.

Your foul-worded post does the exact opposite. Please don’t take unnecessary umbrage at this correction of your position, because you know it’s true.

PS: I’m glad your back to posting here on BRF, although it’s too bad that it took a plane crash and a ‘visa flap’ to bring you out of the ether.

PPS: I think you must know by now that the recalled ‘Brigadier-General Daniel Menard, Canada's top commander in Afghanistan’ was having an affair with a female soldier under his command – not a male soldier, as you implied. Yes, that’s right – Canada has female soldiers in Afghanistan.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:14

Dear lsunil, regarding your post of 30 May 2010 11:25;

India should translate roots in hindi, marathi, tamil and telugu and air it on every major regional channel. Lets show our stock what the civilized people of the western world did to become successful.

I tend to agree, but I would suggest you post this in the ‘Entertainment’ thread because it is OT here, IMO.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:15

Dear Prem Kumar, regarding your post of 30 May 2010 12:00;

… Its the inferiority complex at play again. Once the gora master has condescended to address our grievances, we bow with gratitude that the poor slave's voice has been heard. Lets go back to our huts now….

I don’t see these events like this at all, and I doubt very much that anyone else in Canada does either. Your remarks speak more to your apparent mindset of victimhood, than it does in any way reflect upon the dignity of the GoI – which from where I sit is entirely untarnished by the ‘visa flap’.

Anything less than a tit-for-tat visa denial to Canadians (prominent ones) or sacking of embassy staff (as enqyoob suggests) is shameful.

‘Cui Bono?’ (To whose benefit?)

Are your feelings really so hurt that all you can think of is appeasing your feelings?

In strategic terms, your feelings are entirely irrelevant.

(Sorry if I hurt your feelings with that – but it’s the truth, and you know it.)

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:15

Dear Singha, regarding your post of 30 May 2010 12:10;

…even small countries like canada can kick sand in our faces and get away.

I respectfully suggest that you re-read the abject apology offered-up by the Canadian minister who addressed this issue. If you cannot accept this apology and the pledge to ensure that this kind of thing does not recur, then I’m afraid you’re going to be disappointed about this whole thing, and needlessly so.

Don’t get caught-up in that mentality of victimhood. It is self-defeating.

Re-read the apology and try to find it in your heart to accept it, along with the pledge of remedial action.

MORE IMPORTANTLY: Don’t you think it would be better to win a firm commitment of support for India’s spot on the UNSC?

At least try to think strategically.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:16

Dear Gagan, regarding your post of 30 May 2010 13:17;

I may not agree with everything you’ve written in this particular post, but at least you are thinking strategically, which is painfully unique in this thread since the ‘visa flap’, IMO.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:16

Dear vina, regarding your post of 31 May 2010 09:17;

… it is difficult to agree with Pat Buchanan on anything, but he was right on the money on "Soviet Canuckistan"…

This and most Canadians I know take comfort in the fact that Buchanan doesn’t have a favourable opinion of Canada.

As for your opinion….

Pffft

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:16

Dear Tanaji, regarding your post of 31 May 2010 13:30;

It looks as if Mr. Ravi K hasnt found time from his hectic work play schedule to grace us unwashed savages yet...

Although I have been very busy lately….

If you cannot recognize a tactical retreat when you see one; you have no business reading a thread named ‘Strategic Issues’.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:17

Dear lsunil, regarding your post of 01 Jun 2010 13:33;

… You actually telling me, canada is oblivious to this simple complexity?...

Yup.

(Although I’m not entirely sure what a “simple complexity” is.)

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:17

Dear Karan Dixit, regarding your post of 02 Jun 2010 11:13;

My suggestion would be to keep Sikh grievances out of this thread… No one can go back in time and change those unfortunate events but what we can do is keep our head cool and think like a unified force .

I wholeheartedly agree – this is very, very important.

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 07 Jun 2010 06:23

Yaaawn.....please post this in Canada Rakshak forum too. Canada has no business judging my Armed forces of my Country.

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 06:37

^^^^^
Gee, that was thoughtful.
And you're such a quick reader too!

Your mother must be proud!

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 07 Jun 2010 06:44

Ravi Karumanchiri wrote:^^^^^
Gee, that was thoughtful.
And you're such a quick reader too!

Your mother must be proud!

You worry about your mother , while I take care of mine.
While your country is doesn't hesitate to accuse armed forces of my country with human rights violation, it has given shelter to Khalistani Terrorists who blew up a plane full of innocent Indians.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 07 Jun 2010 07:10

Whoa!! New takneeki oph knadian vija shtambing by fridin sermons!! AoA!!

Ravi Karumanchiri · Post by **Ravi Karumanchiri** » 07 Jun 2010 07:13

^^^
That's right -- 31 posts in a row!

They are not all flames.

Some may even be enlightenning, if I may say so.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 07 Jun 2010 07:31

Slow nooz day? Mindless verbgiage.

naren · Post by **naren** » 07 Jun 2010 07:32

*** Cuidado, Piso Mojado ***

IB4CFC

(In pephore klojed phor kileaning)

Nayak · Post by **Nayak** » 07 Jun 2010 08:54

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 15 Jun 2010 14:34

chackojoseph wrote: Talking about IAF's ASR skills. <SNIP>.

And how is that again, related to the timeline required for development of LCA? Or by giving that example (SU-30MKI & ASR), you mean to imply that LCA took the time it took because IAF screwed up on the ASR part?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 15:10

rohitvats wrote:
chackojoseph wrote: Talking about IAF's ASR skills. <SNIP>.
And how is that again, related to the timeline required for development of LCA? Or by giving that example (SU-30MKI & ASR), you mean to imply that LCA took the time it took because IAF screwed up on the ASR part?

em true

, I was just IAF bashing.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 15 Jun 2010 15:14

chackojoseph wrote:
rohitvats wrote:"chackojoseph">:lol: Talking about IAF's ASR skills. <SNIP>.

And how is that again, related to the timeline required for development of LCA? Or by giving that example (SU-30MKI & ASR), you mean to imply that LCA took the time it took because IAF screwed up on the ASR part?
em true , I was just IAF bashing.

Do you realize what it does for your credibility and also for quality of discussion on the forum? And that is not the only post. You and some others seem to have turned this into a game on BRF with every second post on same lines?

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 15 Jun 2010 16:09

Most of us discuss the reasons for the delay(And justify it).But i felt the discussion should be on how to solve it.lot of times the user(IAF) doesn't know what he can get out of technology and the designer doesn't know what user wants . The other issue is the defense research is so closed that there is little place of innovation.My 2 cents.

Cheers

Prabhu.G

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 16:19

prabhug wrote:Most of us discuss the reasons for the delay(And justify it).But i felt the discussion should be on how to solve it.lot of times the user(IAF) doesn't know what he can get out of technology and the designer doesn't know what user wants . The other issue is the defense research is so closed that there is little place of innovation.My 2 cents.

Cheers

Prabhu.G

You are dead right about IAF and other users taking time to figure out. Same case with MKI, LCA, AWACS etc. But, blaming the delivery guys is not right. The air marshals pot shot has not gone down well with me. They have been very irresponsible. They wanted to see the proof of concept first. It was delivered. The engine, even if Kaveri succeed, would have to be different. The weapons load is now different etc. Its understandable from IAF's PoV, but, its not pizza that can be delivered in 30 mins or money back.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 15 Jun 2010 16:22

chackojoseph wrote:Who, anyone in particular?

nope, routine patrol onlee.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 16:34

Rahul M wrote:
chackojoseph wrote:Who, anyone in particular?
nope, routine patrol onlee.

Actually, later on, I did un ignore Sanku for a while to see whats written. He is on my ignore list from the first post he wrote addressing me. He said that I am not credible, so I reciprocated by ignoring him. There is nothing new about it. If he thinks I am not credible, he is welcome. After all its democracy.

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 15 Jun 2010 16:37

The air marshals pot shot has not gone down well with me

Is it not common ,defense people making sharp comments and without realizing the consequences ?

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 15 Jun 2010 16:43

chackojoseph wrote:

rohitvats,

If you remember the DRDO AWACS story, it was the first time that DRDO was specific that it was late due to IAF (ASR capability). Also, we heard that it was due to the experience with IAF on LCA that DRDO was specific about it. I was also specific in my story

Logically the IAF has asked for 7 extra executive chairs for additional 5 operators and 2 pilots. Hence there has been 3 years delay in the signing of Embraer platform.

CJ, if I take your method of argument, I can use the entire book by AM Rajkumar and start pointing fingers or rather, "DRDO bashing"........

As for the above quote, the way you've quoted the section of your own report, it seems that the purchase was held up due to IAF not able to decide on the number of chairs for it's operators and Pilots. Now, this is what your reports says (dated 2008):

The aircraft is estimated to have an endurance of 5 hours from take off to landing. 5 hours total endurance means an operational endurance of 3 -3.5 hours of the AEW&C. 1-2 hours are reserved for taking off in and reaching the particular spot and then coming back. Initially the IAF wanted total endurance of 5-6 hours.In last 3 years, IAF has introduced new elements like IFR probe, communication support measures, SATCOM etc. A fuel to weight study found that the new systems will give an endurance of 5 hours. The introduction of the IFR will give the AEW&C an extended endurance of another 5 hours. Logically the IAF has asked for 7 extra executive chairs for additional 5 operators and 2 pilots. Hence, there has been 3 years delay in the signing of Embraer platform

--So, IAF added new requirements between 2005 and 2008 which warranted this new requirement - Question is, has this aspect (signing of EM-145 and their delivery) delayed the domestic AWACS programme?

--Another point - were these requirements added in a piecemeal manner which led to delay of 3 years? And had these requirements not been added, the deal could have signed in 2005 and the domestic AWACS been in testing phase now?

--Finally, are there similar instances of IAF adding incremental requirements which led to delay in the LCA development?

I'll await your answers to the same.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 16:44

prabhug wrote:
The air marshals pot shot has not gone down well with me
Is it not common ,defense people making sharp comments and without realizing the consequences ?

See, blame game and hand wringing happens in all departments. DRDO has taken the brunt of it since its inception. Look at LCA project. They did it even after user hostility/apathy, sanctions, internet troubles, bureaucracy, funding issues etc. From users side one or two gems helped the project. In hindi they say der aye durust aye (came late but came well).

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 15 Jun 2010 16:59

rohitvats,

yes, the IAF's new requirement delayed the program. I specifically asked them. There was a redesign in the layout. Had the platform not sufficed, new platform would have been taken.

the deal could have signed in 2005 and the domestic AWACS been in testing phase now?

I asked CABS and they said yes. The main radar had been achieved and fabrication was left. Bulk of the sub systems too were COTS.

Finally, are there similar instances of IAF adding incremental requirements which led to delay in the LCA development?

Yes, then the folks called it mark 2.

Fortunately, both LCA specs and AWACS specs hardened in same time and folks got wiser.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 15 Jun 2010 17:04

There are two approaches that DRDO can take in face of criticism.

1) They can do a lets blame others
2) They can introspect and improve.

Clearly one will lead to overall betterment and one will lead to bad blood.

It is DRDOs choice frankly, because in the end, the forces will get what they want. If DRDO misses the bus, they will only have themselves to blame.

To use Shiv's analogy of Doctor and patient, thankfully this patient has option of a second opinion, may not be a best second opinion (too expensive in a different city what not), but a second opinion never the less.

The armed forces are DRDOs end users, if a ex Air Chief Marshal feels that the LCA programme has become a joke, that is something for DRDO to ponder about seriously.