Well i like this ad because of the name suggested by one of his friends “Ghatotkatch”
He was a charecter from the mahabharat …he was the son of bheem and the a asur (demon)
So i am guessing that the friend really hates the new mom
Monthly Archive for November, 2008
Page 2 of 6
As a BBC report notes, at least some of the Mumbai attackers were not Indian and certainly not Muslim.
Pappu Mishra, a cafe proprietor at the gothic Victorian Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus railway station, described “two sprightly young men dressed in black” with AK47s who were “foreign looking, fair skinned.”
Gaffar Abdul Amir, an Iraqi tourist from Baghdad, saw at least two men who started the firing outside the Leopold Cafe. “They did not look Indian, they looked foreign. One of them, I thought, had blonde hair. The other had a punkish hairstyle. They were neatly dressed,” Amir told the BBC.
Other “men walked into the cafe, drank beer, settled their bills and walked out. Then they fished out guns from their bags and began firing.” Muslims do not drink alcohol, that is unless they are Muslims like Marwan Al-Shehhi and Mohamed Atta, who reportedly not only liked to drink but enjoyed lap dances by topless dancers as well before they supposedly hijacked planes and flew them into buildings.
Well so much as i want to believe that these are some misguided communist propagada influenced youth i cannot help to think how did they get their hands on a Ak 47 and hand grenades
Mis guided youth youth
A final word, from India, on ‘YouTube Terry’
I hope this is my last post on Col Terrence Fornof’s YouTube indiscretions. Much has been written throughout the blogosphere and the press since I posted the infamous video here a couple of weeks ago.
But I didn’t want to let it go without a firm rebuttal from the Indian side. The Indian Air Force has declined comment, but I can present a response by Vayu Aerospace Review Editor Pushpindar Singh.
He writes:
Being aware of the IAF’s views on the subject, and while fully respecting the IAF Vice Chief’s statement that the ‘leaked’ video and its content was ‘too demeaning for reaction’, I have decided to share the facts with readers, not those fancily conjured up by Colonel Terrence Fornof.
YouTube rebuttal:
Being aware of the IAF’s views on the subject, and while fully respecting the IAF Vice Chief’s statement that the ‘leaked’ video and its content was ‘too demeaning for reaction’, I have decided to share the facts with readers, not those fancily conjured up by Colonel Terrence Fornof, an F-15 fighter jockey and now Director of the Requirements and Testing Office at the USAF Air Warfare Centre at Nellis AFB. The USAF later issued a statement to say that Fornof’s was a private briefing to the ‘Daedalians’, a group of retired military pilots. “Colonel Fornof did not mean to offend any U.S. allied forces, as he knows firsthand the importance of training with allied forces and the awesome firepower they bring to the fight. His comments during this briefing were his personal opinions and not those of USAF Warfare Centre or of the Air Force”.
Still, to get the record straight, the facts are :
Ø The IAF did not undertake any IvIs at Nellis during Red Flag, nor did they engage thrust vectoring during the Exercise. IvIs were flown only at Mountain Home AFB. In none of the IvIs were the Su-30MKIs ever vulnerable, let alone shot down. As all exercises were flown with ACMI, the situations are recorded and available to substantiate this aspect. Additionally, the MKI’s behaviour with thrust vectoring is dramatically different from that described by the Colonel. F-15 and F-16 aircrew were well appreciative of IAF manoeuvres with thrust vectoring.
Ø Colonel Fornof’s statement on Su-30MKI rates of turn with thrust vectoring (20o/ sec) is grossly ‘out’ but apparently gives away actual F-22 performance (28o/sec) Pitch of the talk seemed as to whether thrust vectoring was important or not. As all sorties were with ACMI, entire profiles are recorded, can be analysed and surely would have been replayed to drive the point home and make the ‘chest thumping’ sound more real. Apparently this was not done. Perhaps, as the Colonel is aware of F-22 data, he has tried to down play the Su-30MKI in comparison. Surprisingly, while there was no systems / avionics / comparison between the two types or with any other type of ‘legacy’ aircraft, the speaker does admit that radar of the MKI is ‘superior’ to that of the F-15 and F-16, however ‘inferior’ to AESA of the F-22 (a correct assessment). However, the IAF used the Su-30′s radar in the training mode, with downgraded performance vis-à-vis operational mo! de, as they could hardly participate without this primary sensor
Ø The ‘Bison’ radar : the USAF should be aware that the ‘Bison’ does not have an Israeli radar, it is Russian. Nor does the Su-30MKI have Tumansky engines (but the NPO-Saturn). Surprisingly the Colonel seems oblivious of such facts, yet tries to convey that he is an authority on the matter.
Ø Fratricide by IAF fighters : this is correct, the IAF did ‘shoot down’ some ‘friendlies’ and that was assessed and attributed to the IAF not being networked. However, what the Colonel did not bring out were the two essential reasons for this. Firstly, this occurred mainly when the AWACS was not available (unserviceable) and controlling was done by GCI. More significantly it happened during extremely poor controlling by their operators, this fact being acknowledged during debriefs and the controllers being admonished accordingly. ‘Accents’ were perhaps the main culprit here, which very often led to American controllers not being able to understand Indian calls.
Ø Now hear this : the F-15C and other USAF fighters had the same number of fratricides as the IAF ! Considering they are well networked, yet their pilots shot down the same number of ‘friendlies’. This was not only a major concern but also turned out to be a major source of embarrassment as the USAF had everything — Link 16, IFF Mode 4 etc and the IAF had nothing. Under the Rules of Engagement, they did not even permit the IAF to use data link within themselves. All cases of USAF fratricide were covered in the next day’s mass briefing as lessons learnt by concerned aircrew. In the IAF, the incidents were covered by concerned controllers, and attributed to lack of adequate integration, excessive R/T congestion and poor controlling. Gloating on cases of IAF fratricide is frivolous and unprofessional.
Ø However, Colonel Fornof did appreciate IAF ‘professionalism’ and that the IAF were able to dovetail with USAF procedures within short time. There was not a single training rule / airspace violation. This is a most important aspect.
Ø Since the Colonel could hardly tell his audience that the IAF had given the USAF good run for their money, they downplayed the Su-30′s capability. It is correct that the IAF aircrew included some very young pilots — nearly 70 percent – but they adapted rapidly to the environment (totally alien), training rules (significantly different), airspace regulations etc but to say that they were unable to handle the Su-30 in its envelope (something that they have been practicing to do for four to five years) is just not credible ! If young pilots can adapt to new rules and environment within a short span of two weeks, it is because they are extremely comfortable and confident of their aircraft.
Ø The IAF’s all round performance was publicly acknowledged during, and at end of the Exercise, specifically by those involved. Not a single TR / airspace violation was acknowledged. Mission achievement rate was in excess of 90%. The drop out / mission success rates of all others, inclusive of USAF, were significantly lower. This is of major significance considering the fact that IAF was sustaining operations 20,000 km away from home base while the USAF were at home base. (The 8 Su-30s flew some 850 hrs during the deployment, which is equivalent to four months of flying task in India over 75 days). IAF’s performance at Mountain Home AFB was even better that that at Nellis AFB.
Ø FOD : At Mountain Home, IAF had reduced departure intervals from the very beginning (30″ seconds) considering that operating surfaces were very clean. However, a few minor nicks were encountered and it was decided to revert to 60 seconds rather than undertake engine changes. This was communicated by the IAF at the very start (IPC itself).
Ø There is no need to go in for ‘kill ratios’ as that would be demeaning. However, the IAF had significant edge throughout and retained it. In fact the true lesson for the USAF should be : ‘do not field low value legacy equipment against the Su-30MKI’ !.
(demeaning or otherwise, it is understood that the kill ratio (at Mountain Home AFB) was 21 : 1, in favour of the Su-30MKIs).
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/11/a-final-word-from-india-on-you.html
Here is the true story behind the Red Flag from NDTV news editor Vishnu Som, who covered the whole RF at Nellis AFB. He posted this in BR and will soon make a article on this point on NDTV.
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mssPQb4TMSU…feature=related
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkClGCHJcr4…feature=related
You can also dl the video…
http://rapidshare.com/files/152059857/redflag1.FLV
(43 MB)
The IAF at Red Flag 2008: The True Story
Hi … for all of you who are out there in the internet world and who have an interest in the performance of the Indian Air Force at Red Flag 2008 .. I have a few remarks. As the only Indian journalist who spent a lengthy period of time at Nellis after being granted permission by both the Indian Air Force and the US Air Force, I was granted access to impeccable sources in both forces. Whats more, I was able to independently corroborate this information with reliable, alternative sources.
Several of the points I present here in the form of this post on the Bharat Rakshak forum will be compiled into an article which I will post on my company website ndtv.com. For those of you not familiar with the Indian media … New Delhi Television (NDTV) is India’s largest 24 hour news network and our website is one of the most viewed among news websites in the country. For the moment, I have decided not to do a television news report on this since I believe the contents of this post are too technical for a larger audience.
For starters … and this cannot be stressed enough … the Red Flag exercises were a brilliant learning experience for all the participants, not least of all the Indian Air Force which, over a period of time, has earned the reputation of being one of the world’s finest operational air forces.
This was a reputation which was reinforced at Red Flag 2008, the world’s most advanced air combat exercises where the Indian Air Force fielded a number of state of the art Sukhoi 30 MKI jets in addition to IL-76 transports and IL-78 mid air refuellers.
For other participants at the Red Flag exercises … namely the South Korean Air Force, French and US Air Force … the opportunity to train with a platform such as the Sukhoi 30 MKI was an opportunity which just couldn’t be missed. This has a lot to do not just with the jet but also with the air force operating the fighter, a force which has made a mark as an innovative operator of fast jets.
The US Air Force … the host of these exercises … was singularly gracious in its appreciation for the Indian Air Force contingent which came into Red Flag having trained extensively for the exercises not only back home but also at the Mountain Home Air Force base in the US.
Contrary to unsolicited remarks by certain serving US personnel not directly linked to day to day operations at the exercises … the Indian Air Force and its Su-30s more than made a mark during their stint in the United States.
For starters … not a single Sukhoi 30 MKI fighter was `shot down’ in close air combat missions at the Mountain Home air base. In fact, none of the Sukhois were even close to being shot down in the 10 odd one on one sorties which were planned for the first two days of the exercises at Mountain Home. These one on one engagements featured USAF jets such as the F-15 and F-16 in close air engagements against the Su-30 MKI. The majority of the kills claimed in these engagements were granted to the Indian Air Force with the remainder of these being no-results. Indian Air Force Sukhois did use their famed thrust vectoring in these one on one engagements. Contrary to what may have been reported elsewhere … the Su-30 has a rate of turn of more than 35 degrees when operating in the thrust vector mode. In certain circumstances, this goes up substantially.
By the time the exercises at Mountain Home had matured … the Indian Air Force had graduated to large formation exercises which featured dozens of jets in the sky. In one of these exercises … the blue forces, of which the Indian Air Force was a part … shot down more than 21 of the enemy jets. Most of these `kills’ have been credited to the Indian Air Force.
By the time the Indian Air Force was ready for Red Flag, the contingent had successfully worked up using the crawl, walk, run principle. At Red Flag though, they found themselves at a substantial disadvantage vis a vis the other participants since they were not networked with AWACS and other platforms in the same manner in which USAF or other participating jets were. In fact, Indian Air Force Sukhois were not even linked to one another using their Russian built data links since American authorities had asked for specifics of the system before it was cleared to operate in US airspace. The IAF, quite naturally, felt that this would compromise a classified system onboard and decided to go on with the missions without the use of data links between the Sukhois.
Neither was the Indian Air Force allowed to use chaff or flares, essential decoys to escape incoming missiles which had been fired by enemy jets. This was because the US FAA had visibility and pollution related concerns in the event that these were used in what is dense, busy air space in the Las Vegas region.
The Red Flag exercises themselves were based on large force engagements and did not see the Indian Air Force deploy thrust vectoring at all on any of the Sukhoi 30 jets not that this was required since the engagements were at long ranges.
Though it is true that there were 4-5 incidents of fratricides involving the Indian Air Force at Red Flag … it is important to point out the following:
In the debriefs that followed the exercises … responsibility for the fratricides were always put on the fighter controllers not the pilots. Its also important to point that unlike in Mountain Home, none of the Indian Air Force’s own fighter controllers were allowed to participate since there was classified equipment at Nellis used for monitoring the exercises. The lack of adequate controlling and the fact that Nellis fighter controllers often had problems understanding Indian accents (they had problems understanding French accents as well) resulted in a lack of adequate controlling in situations. Whats more … given the fact that the availability of AWACS was often low … the bulk of fratricides took place on days when the AWACS jet was not deployed. Whats important to remember though is that US participants in these exercises had a similar number of fratricides despite being fully linked in with data links and the latest IFF systems.
So was the Indian Air Force invincible at Red Flag. In a word … no. So yes, there were certainly days in which several Sukhoi jets were shot down. And there were others when they shot down many opposing jets. Ultimately though … the success of the Indian Air Force at Red Flag lay in the fact that they could meet their mission objectives as well, if not better, than any other participant. Despite the hot weather conditions, the IAF had a 95 per cent mission launch ratio, far better than some of the participants.
And no one went into the exercises thinking the score line would be a perfect one in favour of the IAF. In fact … the IAF went into these exercises with an open mind and with full admiration of the world beating range at Nellis with an unmatched system of calibrating engagement results.
Perhaps the most encouraging part of these exercises comes from the fact that the Indian Air Force’s young pilots … learnt from their mistakes, analysed, appreciated and came back strong. Mistakes were not repeated. In fact … the missions where the IAF did not fare well turned out to be immense learning experiences.
At the end of the exercises … its more than clear that the IAF’s Su-30s were more than a match for the variants of the jets participating at the Red Flag exercises. Considering the fact that the central sensor of the Sukhoi, its radar … held up just fine in training mode …despite the barrage of electronic jamming augurs well for the Indian Air Force.
As for its young pilots … these are skills and experiences that they will take back to their squadrons … experiences which will be passed on to a whole new set of pilots who will come into the next set of exercises that much wiser.
Vishnu Som
Associate Editor and Senior Anchor
NDTV
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081110/ap_on_…6HhzjPN83wQr7sF
By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV, Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW – India’s navy was supposed to lease the brand-new Russian nuclear submarine that suffered an accident over the weekend which killed 20 people, news reports said Monday.
An Indian naval spokesman would not comment Monday on leasing this or any submarine from Russia — but his boss has said previously that India was interested.
The Akula-class sub was undergoing trials in the Sea of Japan when its fire-extinguishing system activated in error, spewing Freon gas that suffocated the victims and injured 21 others.
Russia’s navy said the submarine itself was not damaged in Saturday’s accident and returned to its Pacific coast port Sunday under its own power.
Russia’s top business dailies Kommersant and Vedomosti reported Monday that the Nerpa was to be handed over to India’s navy next year under a 10-year, $650-million lease.
India previously leased a nuclear-powered submarine from the Soviet Union in 1988-1991, and India’s navy chief, Adm. Sureesh Mehta, was quoted as saying that India was negotiating with Moscow to lease two Russian nuclear submarines, the first of which could arrive next year.
Armed with cruise missiles capable of hitting targets 3,000 kilometers (1,860 miles) away, Akula-class subs are considered the quietest and deadliest of Russian attack submarines. A sub of that class could unsettle the military balance of power in Asia, dramatically bolstering India’s navy capability as it jockeys with China for influence over energy supply routes in the Indian Ocean.
Phone calls to China’s defense and foreign ministries seeking comment rang unanswered Monday night.
Vedomosti quoted an unidentified shipping industries official as saying the sub was intended for India’s navy, which has already named it the Chakra.
Indian naval spokesman Cmdr. Nirad Sinha would not confirm whether the Nerpa was to be leased and said no Indians were on board the submarine when the accident occurred.
“It’s a Russian submarine, and any concerns are Russian concerns,” Sinha told The Associated Press.
Indian news reports said Monday the submarine was to join the southern Asian country’s navy in August. The Indian Express newspaper also reported that Indian sailors had been scheduled to head to Russia later this month for on-board training.
Kommersant, meanwhile, quoted an unnamed shipyard official as saying the delivery of the submarine to India, originally set for August 2007, had been postponed twice already.
As investigators tried to determine what activated the firefighting system, Russian naval experts said overcrowding and human errors may have contributed to the accident.
The Nerpa had 208 people aboard when the accident occurred, including 81 seamen, according to the navy. Akula-class subs normally carry a crew of 73.
Retired submarine Capt. Alexander Pokrovsky said in a commentary that sea trials often pose increased safety risks.
Pokrovsky also criticized Freon-based fire-extinguishing systems, saying they are dangerous for the crew and need to be replaced with safer equipment.
Individual breathing kits should have saved the crew, but some former submariners said civilian shipyard workers usually have little experience in using them. Seventeen of those killed in the accident were civilians, the Russian navy said.
“Civilians were supposed to undergo training, but it usually is pretty informal,” said Igor Kurdin, who heads an association of former submariners. He speculated the fire system could have been triggered by something as simple as someone smoking a cigarette near a safety gauge.
Some commentators also speculated there might not have been enough individual breathing kits for all those aboard during the test.
Recent Comments