Chimgathar
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2018
- Messages
- 253
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Guys This is JF-17 Thunder forum lets please stick to the topic
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Actually, many civilian scientists and engineers are more capable than their military counterparts. So they should be in charge.
Neither does ranks or brass. Some of thr retired brass appointed to these positions have run departments into the ground and continue to do so.Actually, that is totally wrong. Nobody should be given administrative positions just because they are better engineers and scientists. A better engineer/scientist DOES NOT make a better administrative. And you haven't really addressed any of my points.
Neither does ranks or brass. Some of thr retired brass appointed to these positions have run departments into the ground and continue to do so.
Military leadership is a very overbloated merit since in the military leadership is expected regardless of whether it is good or not.
Your points about in service on the border or experience in the military are irrelevant to whether true leadership and administrative capacity exists. Just because you are part of an organization where leadership is a requirement, does not mean you have those qualities; in fact the ISSB is severely flawed in its administration of true EQ capacity for military service.
An example of poor military administration is the special projects division for Pakistan. A paranoid mindset along with a sense of superiority has left many of its mod level retired or transfer military appointments heading deparments they have no actual knowledge or even administrative capacity for. They are approving ridiculous purchases or projects either on buttering or conniving for profit. In other cases these ill informed personnel end up creating hurdles because they have no idea of the project at hand.
The military itself has its share of administrative burdens too, where bad appointments end up setting back units or departments by months or years.
That is not to say that the civilians do not have bad leadership as well, but the ratio is much less as civillians can be fired and especially in today’s Pakistan are more bound by merit than any military official is. You cannot fire an officer from armored whom you deem incompetent not to give command of a battalion, but you can post him to what is perceived to be a unimportant department; be it MeS where he may end up doing okay or really OK by corruption, or places like the ISI(yes, it is a dumping ground for the mediocre as well) or SPD where they usually cause much more havoc than good.
It's interesting. When my dad retired from the PAF and QEAF, he joined the Western defence industry (won't be giving specific org names for obvious reasons) and mentioned how he'd been waking up at the same time as he was at the peak of his PAF career, yet coming home/sleeping much, much later.Neither does ranks or brass. Some of thr retired brass appointed to these positions have run departments into the ground and continue to do so.
Military leadership is a very overbloated merit since in the military leadership is expected regardless of whether it is good or not.
Your points about in service on the border or experience in the military are irrelevant to whether true leadership and administrative capacity exists. Just because you are part of an organization where leadership is a requirement, does not mean you have those qualities; in fact the ISSB is severely flawed in its administration of true EQ capacity for military service.
An example of poor military administration is the special projects division for Pakistan. A paranoid mindset along with a sense of superiority has left many of its mod level retired or transfer military appointments heading deparments they have no actual knowledge or even administrative capacity for. They are approving ridiculous purchases or projects either on buttering or conniving for profit. In other cases these ill informed personnel end up creating hurdles because they have no idea of the project at hand.
The military itself has its share of administrative burdens too, where bad appointments end up setting back units or departments by months or years.
That is not to say that the civilians do not have bad leadership as well, but the ratio is much less as civillians can be fired and especially in today’s Pakistan are more bound by merit than any military official is. You cannot fire an officer from armored whom you deem incompetent not to give command of a battalion, but you can post him to what is perceived to be a unimportant department; be it MeS where he may end up doing okay or really OK by corruption, or places like the ISI(yes, it is a dumping ground for the mediocre as well) or SPD where they usually cause much more havoc than good.
Absolutely, given this was available right at the time Altas's engineers were helping your folks on the Mirage programs with various capacities. It would have been a fait accompli but this is what I continue to lament about - lack of foresight in every aspect in the Mirage program.It's interesting. When my dad retired from the PAF and QEAF, he joined the Western defence industry (won't be giving specific org names for obvious reasons) and mentioned how he'd been waking up at the same time as he was at the peak of his PAF career, yet coming home/sleeping much, much later.
He'd say, "in the PAF, you had a job, and if you did that job well then the job was done, though some of us would try to push the boundary and get more out of the task... in the industry, pushing the boundary was part of the job."
Returning to the JF-17. We all bemoaned about how difficult it is to get a HMD/S due to the control the Israelis have on the market. Yet between now and 2006, no one made HMD/S a real project on our end, despite its necessity and inherent scale (hundreds of fighters).
aeroplane aunty!thankyou.
It's interesting. When my dad retired from the PAF and QEAF, he joined the Western defence industry (won't be giving specific org names for obvious reasons) and mentioned how he'd been waking up at the same time as he was at the peak of his PAF career, yet coming home/sleeping much, much later.
He'd say, "in the PAF, you had a job, and if you did that job well then the job was done, though some of us would try to push the boundary and get more out of the task... in the industry, pushing the boundary was part of the job."
Returning to the JF-17. We all bemoaned about how difficult it is to get a HMD/S due to the control the Israelis have on the market. Yet between now and 2006, no one made HMD/S a real project on our end, despite its necessity and inherent scale (hundreds of fighters).