PDA

View Full Version : India Rejects Arjun Main Battle Tanks



Bluezoo
08-26-2005, 03:08 PM
This was just released. Please feel free to post additional details if there are any further developments.


India Rejects Arjun Main Battle Tanks
Indian Ministry of Defence
Fri, 26 Aug 2005, 09:40


NEW DELHI: The first batch of five production version of Arjun tanks, was scheduled to go through comparative trials in June 2005 by Army.

During the preparatory stage, certain units did not pass acceptance criteria. These are being rectified for the trials.

This information was given by the Defence Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee in a written reply to Shri Lalit Suri in Rajya Sabha today.
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_003166.php

Hellfish
08-26-2005, 03:17 PM
These tanks are practically cursed. They were supposed to be fielded in 1995, IIRC. Maybe Rajkhalsa has some insight as to what's going on with them? Is it just a complicated design? Insufficient experience making tanks? Corrupt officials?

rajkhalsa
08-26-2005, 04:38 PM
What a bunch of bull****.

Just an FYI. This "DefenceTalk" is run by the same people as "PakistaniDefenseForum", who structured their website to fool people into thinking they are the reputable military news and media website, Defence News (http://defensenews.com).

The ACTUAL press release, gives the title as
"INDUCTION OF ARJUN MAIN BATTLE TANKS" (http://mod.nic.in/pressreleases/content.asp?id=1161)

All it is, is a formal statement issued from a direct question on the subject in a letter by a Member of Parliament to the Defense Minister.

All it says is that the Arjun trials were orignally scheduled for June. Because of some problems, the tanks are currently being "rectified", and the trials will be be underway once they have corrected whatever problem came up.

This is hardly an unusual occurance to happen in any trial program of a developing, untested platform and technology, and has happened in trials of Russian, American and European tanks.

In other words, this is a NON-ISSUE. Its NOT news. And its not even new not-news. This info has been known about since before June!


What that PAKISTANI website, Defense Talk, did, is make up a news headline that suggested that
a. The trials were held - even though they have not
b. A decision was made - even though it has not

Moreover, the headline, aside from being completely false has literally nothing, no relation, no logical derivation from what the actual text of the story is!

And, of course, the Pakistani forums are going ape**** in celebration over the "news". Expect some of them to post this "news" in reputable forum, and, when are again once again proven to be propagandists of the stupidist nature, will walk away, "honor and dignity" again in tatters, and egg all over their already soiled faces.

:fork:

Its one thing to be a propagandist. But to be a stupid propagandist?

-Raj

ElHombre
08-26-2005, 05:08 PM
Its one thing to be a propagandist. But to be a stupid propagandist?

-Raj

now you know how many people feel about fox news. ;)

Ravenclaw
08-27-2005, 03:10 AM
I was pretty intrigued by Defencetalk.com

Seems like an Aussie-Pakistani collaboration of moderators. A bizzare mix to say the least. They offer almost no background info on themselves.

Do you have any idea as to who owns these forums and who runs them? Are they (part/defence section) of GlobalTalkNetworks(GTN)?

Anyway, the running Best SF threads etc are an amusing read. rofl

AOCBravo2004
08-27-2005, 03:21 AM
Its one thing to be a propagandist. But to be a stupid propagandist?

-Raj

now you know how many people feel about fox news. ;)

and CNN and ABC, and CBS ;)

msnger
08-27-2005, 04:12 AM
I like ABC :| World News With That Brian Guy

Bluezoo
08-27-2005, 10:43 AM
Hey Raj, no malice was intended here. That is why I was asking around what was really going on. Thanks for your warning and information though.

Regards. ;)

rajkhalsa
08-27-2005, 11:43 AM
Hi Bluezoo

Don't worry, none was taken. :) My apologies it ti seemed that way. Any ire was directed at them.


Ravenclaw,

I'm not really sure. The first time I heard of them was when the PAkistani Defense forum and Defense talk "warred' all over AFM. Hilarious to say the least. Apparently, the mods of the latter came from the former of whatever. All I know is that DT is the foremost disinformation thing for anythign about the Pakistani (pro- articles) and Indian (anti- articles) military, as Pak and Chinese kiddos are too stupid to actually read the articles past the headlines.

DT hasalso plagarized a lot of photos and text off of BR and acig.


For an example of what I mean about stupidity building upon stupidity, take a gander at this thread

http://pakistanidefenceforum.com/index.php?showtopic=48180

Fricking. Hilarious. But I really can't stomach so much idiocy past one thread. Which is why I only read this forum and acig :)

rajkhalsa
08-27-2005, 11:48 AM
Ravenclaw,

Sorry, missed that part of your post. I never heard of GTN. But I went to globaltalknetworks.com (i assume to be the website) and they do have a link to DT.

AmericanImperialist
08-27-2005, 10:02 PM
Registrant:
PakistaniDefence.com
PO BOX 6626
Chicago, IL 60645
US

Registrar: NAMESDIRECT
Domain Name: PAKISTANIDEFENCEFORUM.COM
Created on: 13-OCT-02
Expires on: 13-OCT-06
Last Updated on: 10-MAY-05

Administrative, Technical Contact:
Haleem, Obaid webmaster@pakistanidefence.com
PakistaniDefence.com
PO BOX 6626
Chicago, IL 60645
US
630-631-8404


Domain servers in listed order:
NS.LIQUIDWEB.COM
NS1.LIQUIDWEB.COM




-------------------------------------------------



Registration Service Provided By: NameCheap.com
Contact: support@NameCheap.com
Visit: http://www.namecheap.com/

Domain name: defencetalk.com

Registrant Contact:
WhoisGuard
WhoisGuard Protected (bq7w3pgxyi.protect@whoisguard.com)
+1.6613102107
Fax: +1.6613102107
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
Westchester, CA 90045
US

Administrative Contact:
WhoisGuard
WhoisGuard Protected (bq7w3pgxyi.protect@whoisguard.com)
+1.6613102107
Fax: +1.6613102107
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
Westchester, CA 90045
US

Technical Contact:
WhoisGuard
WhoisGuard Protected (bq7w3pgxyi.protect@whoisguard.com)
+1.6613102107
Fax: +1.6613102107
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
Westchester, CA 90045
US

Billing Contact:
WhoisGuard
WhoisGuard Protected (bq7w3pgxyi.protect@whoisguard.com)
+1.6613102107
Fax: +1.6613102107
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
8939 S. Sepulveda Blvd
Westchester, CA 90045
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
NS1.24HOSTINGNOW.COM
NS2.24HOSTINGNOW.COM

Creation date: 27 Mar 2003 14:45:02
Expiration date: 27 Mar 2006 14:45:02



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Doesn't look like they're run by the same people at all.

dedgod
08-28-2005, 12:30 AM
:lol: Wow talk about living in a fantasy land...Making up stories and then spend all that time debating them, and how this was all expected...

Wot a bunch of dolts...
Thanks for the warning RajKhalsa...

rajkhalsa
08-28-2005, 07:55 AM
Doesn't look like they're run by the same people at all.

They are not the same webmaster, but the mods all came up out of that pakistanidefense (apparently they had a very public falling out with hilarious consequences :lol: ), and the articles posted are always skewed/made up towards pro-Pakistani. DT has a huuuuge Paki following (just chcek out their forums), and all the Paki message boards follow their lead.

AmericanImperialist
08-28-2005, 03:11 PM
Doesn't look like they're run by the same people at all.

They are not the same webmaster, but the mods all came up out of that pakistanidefense (apparently they had a very public falling out with hilarious consequences :lol: ), and the articles posted are always skewed/made up towards pro-Pakistani. DT has a huuuuge Paki following (just chcek out their forums), and all the Paki message boards follow their lead.
Ahh

I was too lazy to do anything beyond a whois.

Ravenclaw
09-01-2005, 10:32 AM
Yeah, On more than one forum, the Webmaster will be more closely linked to the host site whereas the day-to-day running of the forum will be managed by whoever manages to be appointed moderator.

The political views of the moderator are then enforced more strongly and the whole forum begins to reflect the views of the moderator group.

Chucky
10-07-2005, 09:43 AM
Rajkhalasa, were you some Indian who was banned on DefenceTalk because of your stupid behavior? Maybe that is why you are spreading bull**** lies and distorted information about DT.

DT and Pakistanidefence are two different websites managed by very different set of individuals. They are in no way related. DT is an international site based in the USA whereas Pakistanidefence is an "pakistani defence."

You are not the only indian spreading lies and misinformation, whoever gets banned on DT takes his frustration with him onto other forums.

The above quoted news from DT is a PRESS RELEASE from INDIAN DEFENCE MINISTRY. Have you ever heard of them? Learn to handle the painful truth... atleast from YOUR OWN sources. :roll:

Even your pals at DefenseNews.com said the same, it's a failed tank and rejected one.

As far charge about copying pictures from BR and ACIG - one of the members "BRAHMOS" ( I assume he is related to or member of BR) uploaded indian military pictures. If anyone owns them and thinks they should be taken off, they need to contact the administration rather than moan about it on other forums.

saigonsmuggler
10-07-2005, 10:17 AM
Defence Talk has spoken.. :)

Chulo
10-07-2005, 11:33 AM
Rajkhalasa, were you some Indian who was banned on DefenceTalk because of your stupid behavior? Maybe that is why you are spreading bull**** lies and distorted information about DT.

DT and Pakistanidefence are two different websites managed by very different set of individuals. They are in no way related. DT is an international site based in the USA whereas Pakistanidefence is an "pakistani defence."

You are not the only indian spreading lies and misinformation, whoever gets banned on DT takes his frustration with him onto other forums.

The above quoted news from DT is a PRESS RELEASE from INDIAN DEFENCE MINISTRY. Have you ever heard of them? Learn to handle the painful truth... atleast from YOUR OWN sources. :roll:

Even your pals at DefenseNews.com said the same, it's a failed tank and rejected one.

As far charge about copying pictures from BR and ACIG - one of the members "BRAHMOS" ( I assume he is related to or member of BR) uploaded indian military pictures. If anyone owns them and thinks they should be taken off, they need to contact the administration rather than moan about it on other forums.
lol.. hummm.. misinformation.. yea.. the press relase did have something to do with the tank. but what did that have to do with rejection? didnt you make up the title?
as rajkhalsa said
The ACTUAL press release, gives the title as
"INDUCTION OF ARJUN MAIN BATTLE TANKS" (http://mod.nic.in/pressreleases/content.asp?id=1161)
and that press relase said nothing about the tank being rejected.. i think u guys made up the title, based on some totaly irrlevent information.
THe painful truth is that they rejected some parts of the tank...

Its one thing to be a propagandist. But to be a stupid propagandist?
maybe u guys should read the story first, instead of making up your own fantasy.
its like the string used in a football was not strong enough, and so you think / report that the NFL seasion is cancelled

Chucky
10-07-2005, 12:29 PM
The tank is a failure and it wasn't just defencetalk that labeled it that way, do a search on google:


Defense News's India corespondent (indian):

After 30-Year Wait, India Rejects Arjun for Combat
http://madisongov.net/main/subframes/NEWS/news_articles.asp?article_type=2&article_link=082404_wordd.txt&year=2004

Instead of attacking the "messenger" look how these readers responded to the same story:
http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/72-15300.asp

The tank cannot operate in areas like punjab and sindh(thar desert) along pakistani border, it's too heavy to go over many bridges in India - that alone puts it in the failure category plus it's been freaking 30 years and that damn thing is still facing failures and issues. How many DRDO's does it take to make a tank?

Instead of whinning and moaning about DT, look at the other side - the real side of the story. Obviously, press release from indian defence ministry isn't going to say Arjun is rejected/failure - they will say some parts failed and we are trying yeah you are damn right you are trying for past 30 years.

Chulo
10-07-2005, 01:27 PM
never said the tank was the best .. i do agree. its taken too long and its not done much good so far.
how ever, im not shooting the messenger for the bad message, i would shoot them if they didnt give me the right message and the right facts.

lets face it, u skewer the facts and made the title more dramatic than what the facts were.

p.s quoting your own stories as facts and sources just kinda makes it lame too..

dedgod
10-07-2005, 01:38 PM
If you think the tank is a failure , why not write a story about that instead?
Why make up stories and titles...

Thats pretty sad...

:bash:

Chulo
10-07-2005, 01:50 PM
ahh.. pakistan.. land where yellow attack drones scare away their army.
hum the chinese connection

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/afp/20050913/capt.sge.hnl93.130905190747.photo00.photo.default-380x241.jpg

[/img]
Unravelling the spin on a toy plane
By Jannat Jalil
BBC News, Islamabad



The army puts the "spy plane" on display
The Pakistani army recently announced it had destroyed an al-Qaeda base in the remote north-western tribal region bordering Afghanistan, where it is thought Osama Bin Laden might be hiding.
The army took journalists to North Waziristan to show them the results of its military offensive - but, our correspondent says, the media offensive was not a complete success.

It was a display designed to impress.

On the manicured lawn at the army camp in Peshawar, our first stop, piles of weaponry were neatly lined up on a long white-clothed table.

Anti-aircraft guns, rocket launchers, Kalashnikovs.

Just some of the huge amount of weapons, the army said, it had seized during its offensive in North Waziristan.

There were mortars, ammunition - and a bright yellow model plane.

Explosives

Had some child left his toy here by mistake? Apparently not.



Initial claims of the al-Qaeda raid later proved unimpressive

This, said the commander, was a Chinese-made, remote-controlled spy plane which had been used by militants to spy on army positions.

It is bright yellow I said. Their reply, that does not matter if it is used at night.

Several journalists asked how such a flimsy looking thing could carry a camera?

Not just a camera was the response from one general.

This plane could be used to drop up to one kilogram of explosives.

The plane itself looked like it weighed less than that.

Stink bombs I could believe, but not explosives.

Pressure

But the Pakistani army bristles when anyone tries to question what it is doing.




As the army flew us by helicopter to North Waziristan, we could get a sense of just how difficult its job is.

We passed mountain after mountain, some covered in large forests

The task of locating al-Qaeda and Taleban suspects in this vast region is made all the harder by the fact that many locals strongly resent the army presence.

Until three years ago, Pakistani soldiers had never ventured into the semi-autonomous tribal regions.

But under pressure from the US and Afghanistan to root out al-Qaeda and Taleban fighters, they have carried out a number of military operations, especially in South Waziristan, which have resulted in heavy casualties.

Journalists - even Pakistani ones - are not allowed into this remote area, except on occasions like this, when the military wants to trumpet another success against al-Qaeda.


Initial claims of the al-Qaeda raid later proved unimpressive. The captured fighters, described as important figures and foreigners, turned out to be Afghans.

The army could not even tell us if they were Taleban and did not produce them for us to see.

And the al-Qaeda base that had been destroyed turned out to be the compound of a madrassa or religious school that has been raided several times.


'Misconceptions'

Journalists asked the commander of the operation, Lt-Gen Safdar Hussein, if its timing had anything to do with the fact that President Pervez Musharraf was attending the UN summit in New York.



The al-Qaeda base raided turned out to be a madrassa

Safdar Hussein is a bluff, no-nonsense general.

He is as proud of his troops as he is suspicious of the media, which he accuses of creating misconceptions about Pakistan.

He said when he announced this operation he had not even known what date Gen Musharraf was flying to the US.

Nevertheless, there is no doubt the Pakistani army has been coming under intense pressure to show it is committed to combating Islamic militancy.

Especially from its neighbour, Afghanistan, which accuses Pakistan of providing a refuge for Taleban fighters.

Here, in briefing after briefing, general after general bombards us with figures about how many troops are patrolling the border, how many militants have been killed or captured, how many more border posts Pakistan has than Afghanistan.

They point out that more than 250 Pakistani troops have died in counter-terrorism operations since 2001.

But all this still does not satisfy the Afghans.

So in frustration, Pakistan has now proposed building a fence along parts of the border - a border that cuts through some of the world's most imposing mountain ranges, and parts of which are still disputed by Afghanistan.

This idea may seem as likely as a bright yellow toy plane being used to spy on army positions, but the Pakistanis say they are deadly serious.

Upon my return to Islamabad I went to a toy shop.

There was the exact same plane, the same model - even the same, bright yellow colour. The price about $55. Who would have thought a spy plane could be so cheap.


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40799000/jpg/_40799998_dronyap.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4278554.stm

Chucky
10-07-2005, 01:56 PM
Looks like we have quite few banned Indians from DT. :cantbeli:

It's sad.

DefenceTalk didn't do anything different than what many other defense sites did. I don't see anyone pointing fingers to them... very unfortunate.

I guess, DT has become another boogieman for Indians like ISI. rofl

Your frustration and anger is visible, painful truth is hard to swallow. I guess, especially if you are banned Indian from DT.

What does article that you posted have anything to do with the topic that we are discussing? Are you trying to make me mad? :roll:

Read and weep, from your own sources:

After 30-Year Wait, India Rejects Arjun for Combat
By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI, NEW DELHI

After waiting 30 years for its indigenously designed Arjun main battle tank, the Indian Army has decided the tank is too heavy for combat.

ďIt has been decided to use the Arjun main battle tank only for training purposes and not for combat purposes,Ē said a senior Indian Army official. He added that the Arjunís weight makes the tank difficult to transport and inhibits maneuverability.

The Arjun order also has been trimmed from 124 to 80 since it will be used only for training, said the Army official. The first batch of five Arjuns were delivered Aug. 7 to the Army by the Heavy Vehicles Factory at Avadi in Chennai.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=3131494&C=asiapac

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/News/2002/02-Mar.html < search for "rejected" (CTRL+F )

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?prod=62201&session=dae.15955356.1128709104.Q0a78MOa9dUAABiFvq0&modele=release_ar < search for Arjun

You may need subscription to see the story.

http://www.hindu.com/2005/07/28/stories/2005072815591200.htm

*Ignore: Keep moaning about how DT (the site which banned your sorry ass and for good reason) misled the world on Arjun* :lol:

I just posted to defend DT and expose how some banned indian members were posting lies when their own sources say the same. DT has some great Indian members and much civilized than these few here who were at some point members at DT but were banned for being extremists that they are that anything they think is pakistani (which DT isn't), they attack.

defensetalk is owned and run by an american and DT is an international site with no collaboration with any country what so ever.

peace!

rajkhalsa
10-07-2005, 04:36 PM
Mr. "Defensetalk" :|

1. No I am not banned on that website. Nor do I visit it. I had posted images there a long time ago, before I found MP and before I realized what defensetalk was. This is the only forum I post in.

2. We can debate the Arjun tank all day. We have done so in other threads here. Fact is, you took a press release, and intentionally put a misleading title on it that had nothing to do with the story. You attempted to pass off a compelte non-issue as damning fact. That, kiddo, is a no no. And I'm sure this isn't the first. Its the only article "written" by DT that I ever bothered looking at rather than virtually wiping my ass with. I'm sure if I cared enough to look through your "news" (I use the term liberally) archives, I can find more such misinformation.

As much as you play 'defense reporter' on the internet, you aren't one. Your website isn't credible. And you intentionally twist and plagarize articles in an attempt to win crediblity amongst your target demographic. And we all know who that is.

3. Your whining and flailing about here shows exactly what you and your website are: a bunch of 13 year old Pakistani armchair generals with chip on your shoulder and a willfull intention to twist truth and decieve.

Conspiracy theories that all the teeming masses of Indians here (there are three others NONE OF WHOM except me have posted in this thread -- hey saigonsmuggler, chulo_allen, dedgod you haven't turned Indian overnight have you? rofl rofl ) who are all banned members from your awesome-and-completely-factual-and-not-at-all-un-credible-forum-that-is-also-not-at-all-populated-by-prepubescents and who are all evily out do demean Pakistan has pretty much shown your mentality and immaturity to all of us here.


PS: all those articles show legitimate concerns about the Arjun, yet none of them come even close to your claim "India Rejects Arjun Main Battle Tanks". You lied. And you look more like a jag trying to deny it.

Moron.

rajkhalsa
10-07-2005, 04:43 PM
For posterity's sake, here is my defensetalk.com forum profile (http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2717).

I had apparently last logged in June 2nd, 2005 at 12:47 PM, in which I posted a thread of military photos from my old thread here. In fact, all my posts there seem to be photo posts in your forum.

You will see that I am quite not banned. Though I do suspect *shrudder*horror* that you will ban me now. :(

Cheers,
Raj

rajkhalsa
10-07-2005, 04:55 PM
My last post to you kiddo.

If DT isn't formed from a bunch of expats from Pakistani forums, how come the url www.pakistanidefenseforum.com (http://pakistanidefenseforum.com) (note the remarkable-and-not-at-all-intentional similarity to url www.pakistanidefenceforum.com (http://pakistanidefenceforum.com), the Paki forum) redirects to defensetalk's forums?

Wowee! What a coincidence!

What another coincidence that 1/2 the membership in that forum and 1/2 the threads there seem to magically relate to Pakistan?

Hooo-wee! Coincidences galore! rofl

Chulo
10-07-2005, 04:56 PM
Looks like we have quite few banned Indians from DT. :cantbeli:
u.com/2005/07/28/stories/2005072815591200.htm

*Ignore: Keep moaning about how DT (the site which banned your sorry ass and for good reason) misled the world on Arjun* :lol:

I just posted to defend DT and expose how some banned indian members were posting lies when their own sources say the same. DT has some great Indian members and much civilized than these few here who were at some point members at DT but were banned for being extremists that they are that anything they think is pakistani (which DT isn't), they attack.

defensetalk is owned and run by an american and DT is an international site with no collaboration with any country what so ever.

peace!

lol. humm u miss the point.. i have never been to DT and i dont know why u think im a "banned indian" my only issue is that the story title. and like i said.. the Arjun tank isnt the best in the world, and im personaly happy that they arent goin to use it as an MBT.
like i said, i dont shoot the messenger for the message, how ever i would shoot the messerger for changing the message to suit their needs.

rajkhalsa
10-07-2005, 05:04 PM
OK OK, I lied. THIS is my last post. I have to post this because its so damned funny.

Here we have, after a 2 minute google search, an archived thread from Air Forces Monthly (Keymags) forum (http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=31446&highlight=defencetalk), one of the most popular military aviation forums

In it, we catch an archived glance at what I was talking about earlier. A hilarious intra-Pakistani-defense forum spat.

One of the reputable Pakistani (not Indian! *gaspx2*) forumers there has this to say about DT:

Defencetalk is basically a site which has stollen material from alot of other sites including Pakdef. They have been repeatly told by people to remove but alas.....

Apparently there was quite the flame war between Pakistani forumers there. DT and Pakdef.info in particular got into a nice little catfight, and flooded the Keymags forum with drivel, much like "Defensetalk" did this thread, leading to mass thread deletions and bannings

rofl


edit-- have to add this as well :lol:

This is from a thread in another forum, the Pakistanidefenseforum, (http://pakistanidefenceforum.com/index.php?showtopic=32092&hl=) again, said by a Pakistani.

wait a min another defence FORUM on pakistan? WTF!!! Pakdef, p a k m i l (mullah infested), PDF, pakarmedforces.... whats next? Defensetalk is almost paki too... with an international look!!! laugh.gif lolani.gif banana.gif banana.gif hitthewall.gif


Using the search feature (http://pakistanidefenceforum.com/index.php?s=&act=Search&mode=adv&f=12) on that forum gives you a hundred such references to DT being another Paki forum.

:cantbeli: rofl

-Raj

saigonsmuggler
10-07-2005, 05:51 PM
I have Indian friends, even though I haven't checked whether they are banned from DT.com. :lol:

gf0012-aust
10-08-2005, 06:58 AM
What a bunch of bull****.

Just an FYI. This "DefenceTalk" is run by the same people as "PakistaniDefenseForum", who structured their website to fool people into thinking they are the reputable military news and media website, Defence News (http://defensenews.com).

Actually, DefenceTalk has nothing to do with PakistaniDefenseForum. They're completely separate entities.


I was pretty intrigued by Defencetalk.com

Seems like an Aussie-Pakistani collaboration of moderators. A bizzare mix to say the least. They offer almost no background info on themselves.

It's actually now an International forum. I'm the only Australian Moderator. There are of course other Australians who have been joining up as members. It also has an American moderator

As for no info on the moderators, well, all you need to do is ask. To save you the time I'll give you a brief synopsis on my background.

I've spent over 24 years in the Aust Federal Govt. The bulk of that was in military areas. I now have my own Defence Consultancy company. Primarily I consult on Project Definition, Project Management and Project Recovery. I'm also used to engage in Proof of Concept work for developing weapons systems. Primarily my background is principally Acoustic and Electronic Warfare Solutions. The focus is on Submarine technology and with a semi-related focus on Ballistic Acoustic Detection systems for sub 65mm weapons. That means low cal artillery, mortars and personal weapons systems. I've worked on the following projects: Collins Class Submarine, Perenti LR Patrol Vehicle Contract (SAS vehicles). The Orion AP3C upgrade project, Raven Communications Project. I've been involved in Kinetic weapons projects and a recoil management project for low calibre weapons. I was also the Security Manager for Parliament House for 4 Federal Ministers for approx 4 years. I ran the largest network in the Southern Hemisphere. It had over 25,000 workstations and some 600+ servers in a Class 100 rated hotswap site.

I also currently consult to different countries, none of which I can state publicly. I spend approx half my year travelling and attending International Conferences - usually on Underwater Defence Technologies.

I'm a lifetime member of the USNI, a registered member of the Naval Submarine League, AIDN, AOPA and the AOC.


Doesn't look like they're run by the same people at all.

They're not. There is no link at all between the current moderators and PDF


but the mods all came up out of that pakistanidefense (apparently they had a very public falling out with hilarious consequences :lol: ),

Not at all. In fact I was initially barred from registering with PDF a few years back as they didn't like my opinions at all. In a twist of fate, I was able to register at PDF the other day. The reason I registered was to correct some idiotic statements about technology that were being delivered using my "comments" as some form of imprimatur - which were utterly false and needed correcting. I've posted only the once on PDF. BTW I'm also registered on Proton River and am a frequent contributor (when I'm avail). I use the same handle on whatever website I register at so people know exactly who I am.



and the articles posted are always skewed/made up towards pro-Pakistani. DT has a huuuuge Paki following (just chcek out their forums), and all the Paki message boards follow their lead.

Well, the majority of posters are Pakistani. However in the last 12 months there has been a demonstrable increase in the number of internationals. The bulk of those people are actually highly regarded in their military disciplines, and some are current.

To give you an idea. There are Americans registered who've spent over 20 years on nuclear subs, one has been on aircraft carriers for over 25 years, one worked on classified aircraft starting with an F-2nn prefix. ;), One has been involved in weapons design. The australians who have registered are generally operators. ie, they've served under combat conditions where bullets actually leave the other sides guns in anger. One of them has been part of Joint Operations Command. For those who don't know - JOC plans how we go to war, who we go to war with and is part of the integration process of planning full shooting training exercises with all of our allies. there are new Zealanders registered with the same skillsets. We also have Turks, Greeks, poms, germans, chinese and french. The French poster also is "current" and works on military projects (including rafale). There is also an Israeli poster.

Like all forums there is a healthy bunch of enthusiastic kids who are patriotic to the point of being irrational - anyone who has recently visited DT would have noticed that we sin bin or ban anyone who gets carried away with rubbish and denigrating comments. People get 3 warnings - and then they're binned until they behave. There is an equal number of Pakistani kids as well as Indian kids who get shunted off to purgatory for playing up. We've had our share of americans, australians and new zealanders who've failed the participation test. It's an egalitarian society.

What I'd suggest is that rather than make blanket statements about any site that people calm down a bit. I personally get a little irritated by the whole Indian Pakistani ***** fight. It contributes nothing to any attempt to engage in serious debate.

As for impartiality, anyone who wants to check on me can get feedback on places like Defence India (haven't posted there for ages) or Proton River. Then there is StrategyPage and finally the Australian dominated military web site "The Fifth Column"

I'd challenge anyone to argue that I demonstrate bias against any culture or nationality. I might be withering in demolishing some of the nonsense that some people try to pass off as fact (and you'd be surporised at how common that is) - but I won't get into the "your country sucks etc..." ripostes.

If you want to discuss technology or weapons issues then I'm happy to do so, if you want to engage in some kind of continuing slap fight with each other - then you'll be wasting your time trying to get my attention.

I have no time for it.

I hope this clears up a few misconceptions so that we can get down to the serious issues of military power and military systems. Let's leave the other stuff in the schoolyard where it belongs.

Chulo
10-08-2005, 02:12 PM
so.. did u with all that said, did you write that article and do u think it was a logical conclusion to the press statement, or are u just defending your forum? Cause i dont think we have any issue with the forum, but rather the propagandist slant, and i think that was the question.

gf0012-aust
10-08-2005, 10:10 PM
so.. did u with all that said, did you write that article
No




and do u think it was a logical conclusion to the press statement, I've had exactly the same comemnts made to me by Officers in the Indian Army at various LandWarfare Conferences. I actually don't bother with general public write ups as they are notoriously innaccurate. There is a clear paucity of technological comprehension by your average Journo. As I've said to posters on the DT Forum - wait until you get the official govt response before you put faith in comments made by people who generally don't know the difference between a frigate and a battleship, artillery and howitzers, training aircraft and fighters... etc...
The last time I was in Mumbai both the Hindustan Times and the Times of India (pink coloured newspaper) were waxing lyrical about project blowout.

The Indian equivalent of the GAO has made it pointedly clear that there are inefficiencies in the Indian platform evaluation and development process - that isn't news to anyone. They've passed comment on various platform projects - Arjun hasn't been "spared the rod" from them either.




or are u just defending your forum? No, I was providing some clear comment on the fact that basis of some posters responses were either clearly misinformed or were transparent in accuracy. Basing vehicles of response on innaccurate and misrepresented core info is a cardinal sin if accuracy of comment is what people seek. If its not, then you're condoning the use of bait threads. There are already enough kids military leveraged forums to keep those kinds of people happy. We don't need anymore.



Cause i dont think we have any issue with the forum, but rather the propagandist slant, and i think that was the question.I don't have any difficulty in people disagreeing with whats posted by others - but the vehicle of response needs to be reasonably aligned with accurate and relevant info. Some of the comments provided may have been relevant 2 years ago - but bear no accurate portrayal as to what exists now. Go back over the body of responses and you'll find that a solid portion of the return comment was based on opinion deficient or devoid of fact.

Everyone needs to develop the capability to sort the "chaff from the wheat" If you look at most forums, you'll find that the comments about how "X is better than Y" or that "X can blow Y into the next kingdom" usually come from kids or enthusiasts who've never been seriously exposed to anything in the military. Professionals never ever take that approach. There are some posters who I will ignore automatically as its become blatantly apparent that they have no idea, are pretenders and wannabe's or plainly make things up to get attention. Those kinds of posters are easy to nail - you just make them provide references or links to reputable sources. Any Forum is never going to be able to totally eliminate patriotic misfits, but DT certainly makes the effort to get it right, as I assume that this forum does as well.

rajkhalsa
10-09-2005, 09:47 PM
Actually, DefenceTalk has nothing to do with PakistaniDefenseForum. They're completely separate entities.
Seperate entities, yes. Having moderators and nearly half the membership coming from the aforementioned forum, with incumbant biases of which this 'article' is the latest ramification of, surely.

Now I don't doubt you, your intentions, nor your background. However, a diamond covered in mud is still going to look like mud. When you appoint morons (and I do not use the term lightly) so thunderingly unqualified and borderline bat**** insane, ranting conspiracy theories of banned Indians or whatever like "Defencetalk" here, you are going to have problems. Especially when such people have editorial control over sections of your website, including the publishi... er, "retitling" of articles. Credibility problems at the utmost.

Actions and rants like "Defencetalk"'s are not only examples of a fundamental dishonesty by at least one senior moderator of equal editorial power as yourself, but the whitewashing of his actions unfortunately reflects negatively on the entire website.

I'm sure how it all played out was that "Defencetalk" here somehow found this thread, refused the mea culpa for the intentional misinformation he tried to spread by that article he 'published', and instead attempted to 'indimidate' me and the others here by some jeuvenile, paranoid, concieted rant about how we're all evil Indian ex-DT forumers, etc.; had his bull**** subsequently called; then ran back to DT and begged you to clean up his mess by reproducing your resume and interjecting the first example of reasonableness coming from your side... all the while, while you're refusing to acknowlage or retract your published news article which is at its core a steaming pile of poo?

If you want to project yourself as a reputable website leveraging those considerable and impressive credentials of yours then the first thing you should do is distance yourself from the absurd. Quite frankly, I really does not matter to me the status and demographics of some minor message board, but really now, after all that BS that has been 'published', after the self admission of you that the majority of your membership are teenage Pakistanis, a curious internet demographic oddity in and of itself, after all the posts by your moderator pal here shrieking like a schoolgirl about Indians out to get him... after all this you seriously expect us to swallow that your take on Indian-related defense news is going to be balanced?

The emoticons don't seem to have been installed yet, but here's the part where I'd insert *rolleyes* *rolleyes* *rolleyes*



They're not. There is no link at all between the current moderators and PDF
LOL I'd say there's a pretty damned clear ideological link between at least one of your current moderators and the cyber-jehadis at PDF. Dude, come on now. You know as I do that the DT-Pakistani crowd (i.e. clear majority of DT posters) make both forums home, cross posting DT-published articles in the only website where you have some cred and articles like your 'failed' Arjun one elict at least 90 posts of "omglol! dum yindoos!" And you know as well as I do -- someone who neither frequents DT nor PDF, but have seen the public spats on Air Forces Monthly -- the falling out between your senior (Paki) members and the PDF moderators.

Come on, man. You seriously don't see a correlation between a website that is majority Pakistani, a moderator that is both Pakistani and a moron, and an news article intentionally mislabeled and skewed to be anti-Indian mysteriously appearing on your website?

I'm the first to admit I'm not a terribly smart guy, but I'm not the dumbass you take me for, either.


What I'd suggest is that rather than make blanket statements about any site that people calm down a bit. I personally get a little irritated by the whole Indian Pakistani ***** fight. It contributes nothing to any attempt to engage in serious debate.
I don't find any debate where your moderator friend intentionally changes articles for propaganda value, refuses to admit such when it is obvious to all what he did, then comes here and has the gall to defend his actions by posting a slew of outdated and irrelevant links that have nothing at all to do with his story, then on top of it accuses anyone who disagrees with him (i.e. anyone who has the most basic capability for reason) as a jealous, banned Indian ex-DT member, etc.... I don't find any of this "debate" as you call it to be at all serious. From my view it looks like a DT PR clusterfudge that you unfortunately and by none of your actions have been dragged into.

I hate nationalistic spats as much as you do. But this is absurd.


As for impartiality, anyone who wants to check on me can get feedback on places like Defence India (haven't posted there for ages) or Proton River. Then there is StrategyPage and finally the Australian dominated military web site "The Fifth Column"
Quite frankly, I haven't heard of any of those website. However I do not dispute your impartiality. It is the impartiality of that ubernationalistic jagdork you call your co-moderator I'm questioning. I'd really like for him to post his resume and accolades ;)


I hope this clears up a few misconceptions so that we can get down to the serious issues of military power and military systems. Let's leave the other stuff in the schoolyard where it belongs.
Eh? Honestly, what has this cleared up? That you aren't a thirteen year old Pakistani nationalist who doesn't make up news stories?

Ok buddy, I agree, you're not. But what about the majority of your website and your moderator friend?

Your whole posting is a very long and very irrelevant red herring in a thread discussing the merits of a bogusly labeled news article about the Arjun tank from your website.

-Raj

rajkhalsa
10-09-2005, 10:12 PM
I've had exactly the same comemnts made to me by Officers in the Indian Army at various LandWarfare Conferences. I actually don't bother with general public write ups as they are notoriously innaccurate.

You have had officers who make policy tell you "India Rejects Arjun Main Battle Tanks"?

So, I guess, in the same vein as the article your DT friend mislabelled, these officers told you this, and then backed up that statement by saying something completely to the opposite?

The fact is, no, the Arjun has not been rejected. Has it had its share of problems? Yes. Has it been delayed? Yes. Has it been rejected? No. It is in limited induction, and is continuing to be in development.

As I said before, the necessity for a Western Heavy-like tank has evaporated in the India scenario. Especially one so realtively expensive, one still not perfected, and one that would require considerable investment in infrastructure and logistics to support. Money that would be thrown at fullscale production is instead being used in other ways, namely infantry modernization.

However, the program continues on, accelerating really, in the development of this platform and related technologies for future induction in a more capable form, perhaps making its formal induction some years down the line, when it either becomes a necessity, or when India can afford to induct it with no operational or budgetry penalty.

The tank has absolutely not been rejected, is my point.


There is a clear paucity of technological comprehension by your average Journo. As I've said to posters on the DT Forum - wait until you get the official govt response
Regarding Indian defense matters, this is especially true. This whole example of your website's article is an example of this. That is why, apart from official ****ouncements from government or military spokesmen, only a certain few Indian defense journalists, who sport impeccable records of reporting, an understanding of the issue and the ground realities, and, necessary for any good reporter, an impressive bunch of sources, are taken as fiat by Indian defense watchers.


The last time I was in Mumbai both the Hindustan Times and the Times of India (pink coloured newspaper) were waxing lyrical about project blowout.
Perhaps you can take to heart this advice that I heard once that "there is a clear paucity of technological comprehension by your average Journo." The fact that some idiot journo has to wax anything rather than state fact is a clear example of histrionics trumping analysis.


The Indian equivalent of the GAO has made it pointedly clear that there are inefficiencies in the Indian platform evaluation and development process - that isn't news to anyone. They've passed comment on various platform projects - Arjun hasn't been "spared the rod" from them either.
Correct. However, the Arjun has not been rejected, as is the thrust and bloody point of this discussion, now has it?


No, I was providing some clear comment on the fact that basis of some posters responses were either clearly misinformed or were transparent in accuracy.
...

But your article wasn't. Eh? *rollseyes*


Those kinds of posters are easy to nail - you just make them provide references or links to reputable sources. Any Forum is never going to be able to totally eliminate patriotic misfits, but DT certainly makes the effort to get it right, as I assume that this forum does as well.
If you or anyone would like to engage in debate about the Arjun, then I am all for it.

However this thread and this particular discussion was based upon a fallacy. A fallacy of a DT article. A fallacy that brought up from the e-depths the publisher and re-titler of that article, the patriotic misfit that is your fellow moderator.

The people here clearly have the ability to seperate the wheat from the chaff, and they have done so by rubbishing a rubbish article. I think we've all pretty much established that much.

Quite frankly, I really don't see where this argument is going -- I come here to post/learn about defense matters, not defense websites populated by Pakistanis. As such, I'll drop this discussion here.

Now if DT and the like can come out of time out like a good boy and attempt to carry the trappings of a normal discussion about the Arjun tank program with me, as it is quite clear he is misinformed, than I will be more than willing to do so, posting sources (omglol!) and all.

Till then, good day.
-Raj

gf0012-aust
10-10-2005, 12:08 AM
Seperate entities, yes. Having moderators and nearly half the membership coming from the aforementioned forum, with incumbant biases of which this 'article' is the latest ramification of, surely.I actually have no idea where the membership comes from. The international cohort of anglos, euros, asia, sth east asia are certainly not PDF Ė in fact Iíd say that the bulk of posts by people who arenít Indians or Pakistanis is in their favour.


after all this you seriously expect us to swallow that your take on Indian-related defense news is going to be balanced?Which is why I suggest you look at the larger Indian websites like ProtonRiver (now FrontierIndia). If anyone if going to have a view as to my balance and opinion Ė it will be Indian Moderators on Indian sites. Considering the fact that I was asked to join seems to indicate that Iím not seen as biased.


You have had officers who make policy tell you "India Rejects Arjun Main Battle Tanks"? Yes, and itís not hard to check up. There are very few Indians that get official invites to the LandWarfare Conference. There is only one Indian Military Attacheí and the last one was a Captain in the Navy. New Delhi recalled him Feb this year. He has been replaced by another Naval Officer. They attended the sessions on Project management and contributed to the discussions on how poor project definition and a failure to follow proper process can impact upon project delivery. The example used by them was the Arjun. According to them the Army has been changing parameters along the whole development lifecycle without those requests going through proper definitions. As such the project has cycled out of proper sign offs and has not had each cycle sanity checked before moving on. Itís a classic failure of project development that all countries fall victim to. There are 3 Indian officers currently attending this years Land Warfare Conf in Brisbane this month. I suspect that Iíll see the same ones again, and weíll have similar conversations again.


The tank has absolutely not been rejected, is my point. I agree, what wasnít clearly stated was that it was rejected at a sign off point.

Btw, I do have some relevant experience re Indian projects. Iíve been involved with both IAF and IN as a consultant on different weapons platforms.