Engineering Conundrum
III
- Paradoxes
A flashback into my early Marut squadron days is nostalgic. One or two
engineers in the squadron - we were the common denominators receiving everyone’s
affection. We admired pilots for their combat role that was beyond our
capability. A trainer sortie each in early days with my Flight Commander and
Squadron Commander turned my admiration into adoration for my squadron mates.
In comparison with Army and Navy, the Air Force is unique where few go
to war. Air Force requires thousands in the support role - engineers and
technicians being the closest - to empower those few to go to war to win. The
fact that all support men are also generously called air warriors is an
indication of the exemplary character of the Air Force.
Air Force is also unique because its fighting men
and women, the pilots depend far more on individual skills compared to the other
fighting arms. Pilots like professional sportspersons are constantly engaged in
training and honing their skills - that needs dedicated time and focus.
Therefore, right in the beginning of the Air Force, the techie became the
pilot’s buddy to carry out all the support work – he got on the aircraft ladder as the pilot got off it. As such, the
job undertaken by the air force techie is well beyond something that can be
confined within the traditional boundaries of maintenance. Accordingly, the seniors
have always motivated young engineers towards the goal of being worthy buddies
for those who took to air.
Engineers have carried out the buddy role
diligently and accepted command & control of the fighting men even in
ground based hi-tech fields. In the 21st century, however, the air
force has changed immensely with disruptive changes brought in by IT and
Communication Technologies (ICT). Warfare has transformed a great deal to replace
face-to-face confrontation with remote actions and visible with the unseen.
The leadership can no longer fly and command
without practicing and understanding engineering. Engineering acumen can’t be
traded-off for thicker flying log books anymore. Therefore, pilots and
engineers who are trained to perform each other’s role can together make an excellent
technology savvy vertical of combatants qualified for hi-tech operational leadership.
Organisations are collections of paradoxes. Identification and
management of paradoxes is an art which few are capable of grasping. A disregard
to the existence of paradoxes is sure to lead to lack of synergy. Going by the
rule, “we have always done it like this”
can be disastrous.
“The curious paradox is
when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change.” - Carl Rogers
Strength or Weakness. The history is full of
inspirational stories of our pilots. Marshal of the IAF Arjan Singh will remain
the ultimate motivational icon for ever. Harjinder Singh’s biography has many
inspirational anecdotes about pilots who made the IAF. Even today Jumbo
Majumdar’s examples infuse air warriors with devotion to duty besides
daredevilry. Let no one mistake - we are a potent Air Force primarily because
of our pilots. Wars through the last five decades stand testimony to their
brilliance in offsetting the superiority of adversary’s weapons. Pilots are our
biggest strength!
- A combat force must be headed by a combatant who leads
from the front to face the enemy - pilots must have more senior
management level vacancies than others.
- However, leaders have to be separated from the
routine fliers early. Stagnating engineers to be commanded by fliers with
little subject acumen in intense technical fields is a disappointing situation.
The more you
do the less you are valued. The LDMC Honours Board in CDM
proudly displays the name of Gp Capt VA Patkar (now Veteran Air Mshl) for
having topped the course. One is given to understand that his exemplary
dissertation formed the basis for accreditation to CDM courses by Osmania University. And yet, whereas Army and Navy also depute their
engineers as CDM Commandants and Deputies, Patkar would never qualify for those
appointments. Engineers toil the most and yet have little say in organisational
matters. Engineering needs are assessed based on the cockpit view to make
decisions about engineering/ logistics organisations and personnel policies.
Engineering -
a Core Function? We are unable to decide whether engineering
is a core function of the Air Force or not. A new debate is triggered every few
years about the need for Maintenance Command and in-house depot overhauls and
supply chain management. The maintenance management gets regularly thrown out
of gear by the structural imbalance. We wish to run one of the biggest and
sophisticated industries (the IAF) without acknowledging engineers and engineering!
Engineers tagged as Maintenance (only) Men. Today, the Air Force operational scope has a much larger canvass than
covered merely by flying. We are in an engineering world. Engineers are in
overwhelming majority among the top management of leading enterprises in the
world. However, AF engineers labelled as ‘Maintenance Men’ are considered
unworthy for top level appointments in defence industry/ R&D. In contrast,
pilots are found suitable for such recommendations.
You get what
you deserve. Mike Edwards in “Spitfire Singh” refers to the
memoir - a pilot commissioned in the first lot of IAF had not qualified for
admission when Harjinder Singh joined Maclaghan College of Engineering Lahore. Best
engineering graduates continued to join AF for four or five decades. The top
engineering college students have been little attracted to the Air Force after
that. Our lack of conviction in getting
approval for Air Force Engineering College adds to the predicament of poor intake. Do we want good
engineers?
Engineering
Practice. The Navy having gone its own way after an
unsuccessful call to sister services, now the Air Force plans to graduate
everyone post NDA as an engineer – that is great! However, that alone will not
be a solution to the engineering puzzle. If we believe
that the cyber and space commands require pilots with thick log books, we would
be constraining our potential. An engineer
is not by the degree but by practice and acumen gathered through hard work. Leaders will have to go through the rigours of
work on ground to make a difference.
…….To be continued
Very balanced analysis of the prevailing ecosystem.
ReplyDeleteA grim narrative or an intellectual satire? to me the narrative is exciting and reverent though paradoxically iconoclastic.the yin and yang of repair and reconstruction towards a better IAF written boldly and with a forceful imagination.It has to be read in the in-betweens just like the one-liner quotes that dot and arrest the mind's eye.
ReplyDeleteIt is felt that much more is yet to be said on an extremely important subject, the fact remains that there is no in lieu of professional competence, practice and sustained efforts. leadership comes from knowledge, waiting for further extension.
ReplyDeleteIP
Dear Sir,
ReplyDeleteRightly quizzed,"Engineers in IAF do they form the Core or not", I. Feel in Maintenance Command environment, the answer is "Yes" while in Operation Commands it is "No". When we consider the Training Command, all branches should be equal with Instructors becoming the Core. As known in our existing work philosophy, the Engineers are taken for Maintenance activities and the pilots for their main profession of flying and parallely giving opportunities to hone their HR and leadership skills by assigning Commanding and leadership roles during war and peace. We, Engineers have been satisfied with the role as a Maintenance Engineer and made room for being Commanded and Lead by Core ...Pilots, to have amicable relationship and with ulterior motives. Unlike, in Navy the Engineers have both Maintenance and Design roles with existence of Naval Yard and Design depots / departments. Design departments have important contribution towards Indigenisation /retrofitments of ships and submarines. We may have to elevate our engineers in a similar way and make them understand at the entry that they are not only maintenance engineers but also have the option to design and develop aerospace vehicles and systems. Also create more leadership and commanding roles to uplift their spirit of leadership and prove their competency as leaders to hold any core responsibility of steering war operations effectively. Adequate experience of maintenance, engineering and leadership roles should make an IAF engineer fit to assume any important role, even lead a war digitally (Cyber and Communication warfares)...
Very absorbing fact analysis and presentation of ground realities prevailing in Airforce currently. No doubt Pilots do deserve all the credit , recognition and career advancement in a combat force like ours. At the same time with changing times more and more induction of highly sophisticated tech equipment in every sphere of operation only highlights the growing importance and dependence on able Technical team. As rightly pointed out it is high time to give the IAF Engineers their due recognition in true spirit to attract the young talented engineers from colleges once again vying to join IAF with pride and promised career growth
ReplyDeletewhich is lacking now.
Nunna Ramesh Kumar
I feel you have absorbed( like PK absorbed Bhojpuri ) my musings ! So lucid .
ReplyDeleteBTW : today Times of india has an ad; indicating Avani Chaturvedi , is a B Tech . Is this a harbinger of change or just an exception ? BW
There iss no doubt that TECNOLOGICAL ADVAVCEMENTS will rule future generations of ac and systems. Leaders will have to be competent to ask for desired productivity. Challenge is for entire IAF to match desired standards. To my mind, role of engineers to meet demand for higher maintainability has remained and shall remain so. It is a continuous process and we need to focus on getting the due in the organisation.
ReplyDeleteSir very well thought of starting this forum. We can probably cover one issue and evolve workable solutions, which could be presented appropriately. Warm regards. Rajiv Gandotra
Sir your views are well focused and certainly motivates colleagues and well wishers at large. Perfect harmony amongst the pilots and engineers cannot be overlooked. Time is the testimony and so it will be in future when it's technological warfare will require professionals from all the streams to work as a team and will not be restricted to few chosen ones. These series of thought provoking blogs are becoming very informative and more interactive. Waiting for next conundrum.
ReplyDelete