Showing posts with label General. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General. Show all posts

Saturday, 22 August 2026

The Dying Tube Light’s Last Gasp

The Dying Tube Light’s Last Gasp — Ballasts, Starters, and a Vanishing Household Jugaad

The Dying Tube Light’s Last Gasp

Ballasts, Starters, and a Vanishing Household Jugaad

By Dhinakar Rajaram

An essay on the physics behind an old Indian household trick

Foreword

There was a time when the flickering of a fluorescent tube was almost a household language.

A tube would blink twice, glow faintly at its ends, go dark, and then, after another attempt, burst reluctantly into light. Someone would tap the starter. Someone else would switch the light off and on again. And, in many Indian homes, there was always that one person who knew an even more desperate remedy: remove the little starter, bridge its two contacts momentarily with a piece of wire, withdraw the wire sharply, and hope.

Sometimes, astonishingly, the dying tube would come alive.

It was a tiny act of household jugaad, but behind it was no magic. It was a remarkably simple application of electromagnetic induction, gas discharge, thermionic emission and the behaviour of an ageing fluorescent lamp.

This modest trick has now largely disappeared with the arrival of LED lighting. Yet it is worth remembering because it illustrates something I have always found fascinating about ordinary household objects: there can be rather sophisticated physics hiding inside something as mundane as a tube light.

This article is therefore not merely about an obsolete electrical trick. It is about understanding the little pieces of science that once lived quietly above our heads.

Our Constitutional Scientific Temper

I have written this essay in the spirit of Article 51A(h) of the Constitution of India, which calls upon every citizen: “to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.”

To me, scientific temper does not mean merely memorising formulae. It also means looking at something familiar and asking: “Why did it do that?”

The old fluorescent tube is a perfect example. What looked like a temperamental household appliance was actually following the laws of electricity and physics with remarkable consistency.

Preface — Before the LED Took Over

For decades, the long fluorescent tube was one of the most familiar objects in an Indian household.

It hung from ceilings in houses, shops, offices, classrooms, railway stations and workshops. Its characteristic white light became so ordinary that few of us stopped to ask what was actually happening inside that glass tube.

And the fluorescent tube had companions.

There was the heavy choke, usually hidden inside the metal fitting.

There was the small cylindrical starter, almost comically tiny compared with the tube itself.

And there was often a capacitor somewhere inside the fitting, associated with power-factor correction in many conventional installations.

Together, the components of a conventional preheat fluorescent fitting performed a carefully choreographed electrical sequence every time the switch was turned on.

The starter closed. The electrodes warmed. The starter opened. The choke produced its voltage pulse. The gas discharge began. The ballast then limited the operating current.

Until, after years of service, something began to fail.

That was when household ingenuity entered the picture.

1. First, the Vocabulary

Ballast

A fluorescent lamp cannot simply be connected directly across the mains. Once the gas discharge is established, the lamp requires external current control. A ballast provides the electrical conditions required for starting and operation and limits current during normal operation. The U.S. Department of Energy similarly defines a fluorescent ballast as a device that provides starting voltage and current and limits current during normal operation. [1]

The Illuminating Engineering Society defines a ballast as a device used with an electric-discharge lamp to provide the necessary circuit conditions for starting and operating it. [2]

Choke — the Electromagnetic Ballast

The traditional ballast found in older household fluorescent fittings was generally a coil of copper wire wound around a magnetic core. In everyday Indian speech it was commonly called a choke.

Electrically, it is an inductor.

An inductor opposes rapid changes in current. When current through the coil is interrupted, the magnetic field associated with that current collapses and a voltage is induced across the coil.

In simplified form:

V = L × dI/dt

The faster the current changes, the greater the induced voltage can be. That behaviour is crucial to the starting sequence of the traditional fluorescent fitting.

Starter

The small cylindrical starter used in conventional preheat fluorescent fittings contained a glow-switch mechanism, typically involving a gas-filled envelope and a bimetallic contact.

Its purpose was to participate in the starting sequence by allowing the lamp electrodes to be preheated and then interrupting the circuit.

The Illuminating Engineering Society simply defines a starter as a device used in conjunction with a ballast to start an electric-discharge lamp. [3]

Fluorescent Tube

A fluorescent lamp is a low-pressure mercury electric-discharge lamp. Its phosphor coating converts some of the ultraviolet radiation generated by the discharge into visible light. [4]

At the ends of a conventional tube are electrode assemblies containing tungsten filaments coated with an electron-emissive material. During starting, these electrodes are heated so that thermionic emission can assist the establishment of the discharge.

Electronic Ballast

Electronic ballasts replaced the large low-frequency magnetic ballast in many fluorescent installations. Semiconductor switching circuitry operates the lamp at a higher frequency and controls the starting and running conditions electronically.

Fluorescent ballasts are broadly divided into magnetic and electronic types, with electronic ballasts generally operating lamps at higher frequencies. [1]

Depending on the starting design, an electronic ballast may preheat the electrodes, apply a starting voltage or use another controlled starting method. Consequently, the familiar external starter of the old preheat circuit is normally absent.

2. What Actually Happens When a Good Tube Is Switched On?

Let us follow the sequence in a conventional preheat, or switch-start, fluorescent fitting.

Step 1 — The Starter Conducts

When the fitting is switched on, the voltage across the starter produces a small glow discharge inside it. This heats the bimetallic element.

Step 2 — The Starter Closes

The heated bimetallic contact bends until the contacts touch. The starter now provides a conducting path through the lamp circuit.

Step 3 — The Electrodes Warm

Current flows through the tube's electrode filaments, warming them and encouraging electron emission.

Step 4 — The Starter Opens

Once the starter contacts have closed, the glow discharge inside the starter disappears. The bimetallic element cools and the contacts separate.

Step 5 — The Choke Produces the Starting Pulse

The opening of the starter interrupts the current through the ballast. The inductive behaviour of the choke produces a voltage pulse.

Step 6 — The Lamp Strikes

The resulting electrical conditions can establish the discharge through the tube. Once the lamp is operating, the ballast limits the current.

This basic principle is consistent with the technical definition of a ballast as a component that provides starting conditions and subsequently limits lamp current. [1][2]

3. Why Does an Old Tube Blacken at the Ends?

Almost everyone who lived with fluorescent lighting remembers it: a once-clean tube gradually acquired dark grey or blackened areas near its ends.

Those marks were not simply accumulated household dust.

The lamp electrodes undergo considerable electrical and thermal stress. Their emissive material gradually deteriorates, and electrode material can be deposited on the glass near the ends.

Repeated starting is particularly demanding upon the electrodes. As the lamp ages, starting becomes progressively more difficult and the dark deposits become a familiar visual indication of its history.

The blackening therefore became something of an electrical fingerprint:

“This lamp has started many, many times.”

4. Why Does an Old Tube Flicker?

Several things can go wrong as a fluorescent lamp ages.

  • The electrode emissive material can deteriorate.
  • The lamp can require more demanding starting conditions.
  • The starter itself can become unreliable.
  • The discharge may fail to establish itself properly.
  • The starting sequence may repeatedly begin again.

The result is the familiar household performance:

blink — flicker — glow — darkness — blink — flicker.

Sometimes only the ends glow. Sometimes the tube flashes repeatedly without remaining illuminated. Sometimes the starter repeatedly clicks.

And sometimes an ageing tube could still be persuaded into one last performance.

5. The Jugaad — Manually Recreating the Starter's Function

This is the part many older households will remember.

When the starter seemed unable to get an ageing tube going, some people removed it and briefly bridged its two contacts with a piece of wire, then withdrew the wire.

Electrically, the idea was straightforward: the wire temporarily reproduced the closing function of the starter, allowing current to flow through the circuit and warm the lamp electrodes.

When the wire was removed, the current path was interrupted.

The choke then responded to that sudden change in current by producing its inductive voltage pulse.

In that very limited sense, the person holding the wire had temporarily substituted a manual switching action for the starter.

The important point is that the wire did not repair the tube. It merely altered the starting sequence.

6. Why Did the Sudden Withdrawal Matter?

It was not simply a matter of connecting the two contacts.

The important event was the interruption of current through the inductive ballast.

An inductor stores energy in its magnetic field and resists an abrupt change in current. When the current is interrupted, the collapsing magnetic field produces a voltage across the coil.

V = L × dI/dt

Thus the old manual sequence could be represented conceptually as:

close → warm → interrupt → voltage pulse → attempt ignition

The physics was elegant even though the household implementation was decidedly improvised.

7. Why Could It Sometimes Bring a Dying Tube Back?

An ageing tube may still contain enough functioning electrode material and the appropriate gas mixture to establish a discharge, but its starting conditions may have become increasingly difficult to achieve.

A manual interruption could provide another starting attempt under favourable circumstances.

If the lamp was not completely exhausted, it might strike.

Suddenly, the supposedly dead tube would glow again.

One might almost hear an old electrician saying:

“It still has some life left in it.”

That was not entirely wrong.

But the wire had not rejuvenated the lamp. It had merely helped it make another starting attempt.

8. The Tube Was Not Really “Recharged”

This distinction is important.

The trick did not restore the electrode coating. It did not replace depleted materials, repair a damaged electrode or reverse the ageing process.

It simply created another opportunity for the lamp to establish its discharge.

If the tube had genuinely reached the end of its useful life, no clever piece of wire could make it young again.

At best, the trick bought it some additional service.

It was borrowed time.

9. Why the Jugaad Belonged to the Age of the Choke

The old method depended upon a conventional electromagnetic ballast and a starting circuit in which a switch-start device interrupted current.

That physical arrangement provided the very thing the manual trick was exploiting: an inductor capable of generating a voltage pulse when its current was abruptly interrupted.

Electronic ballasts changed the arrangement fundamentally.

They use semiconductor switching circuitry and controlled starting methods rather than relying upon the old low-frequency choke-and-starter combination. Modern fluorescent ballast designs include rapid-start, programmed-start and instant-start approaches. [5]

Therefore, the old external starter socket disappeared from many installations.

The old jugaad did not become obsolete because electromagnetic induction stopped working.

It became obsolete because the hardware that made the trick possible disappeared.

10. A Small Piece of Household Physics

What I find most delightful about this story is how much physics is compressed into such a tiny action.

A person touches two contacts with a piece of wire.

The wire is withdrawn.

A tube suddenly comes alive.

Behind that apparently trivial gesture are:

  • electric current;
  • inductance;
  • magnetic fields;
  • electromagnetic induction;
  • voltage transients;
  • gas ionisation;
  • thermionic emission;
  • mercury-vapour discharge;
  • ultraviolet radiation;
  • phosphor fluorescence; and
  • the ageing of materials.

This is why ordinary objects are often better teachers than textbooks.

The ceiling above us was once full of experiments in applied physics.

We simply called them tube lights.

11. Did You Know? — The Choke Was Doing Two Jobs

The old electromagnetic ballast had a rather interesting dual role.

During starting, its inductive behaviour contributed to the voltage conditions required for ignition. During normal operation, it limited the current through the discharge lamp.

The ballast was therefore both an accomplice in getting the lamp started and the policeman preventing excessive current afterwards.

12. Did You Know? — The Starter Was a Tiny Automatic Switch

The glow-switch starter was essentially a miniature automatic switching mechanism.

Its glow discharge heated a bimetallic element. The element moved, closing the contacts. The resulting current warmed the lamp electrodes. The starter then cooled, opened its contacts and initiated the next part of the starting sequence.

It was a wonderfully compact combination of electrical, thermal and mechanical principles.

13. Did You Know? — The Tube Did Not Produce Its White Light Directly

A conventional fluorescent tube is fundamentally a low-pressure mercury discharge lamp with a phosphor coating.

The electrical discharge produces ultraviolet radiation. The phosphor coating converts part of that ultraviolet energy into visible light. [4]

So the familiar white tube light was, in effect, a light-conversion machine:

electricity → gas discharge → ultraviolet radiation → phosphor → visible light

14. The Starter That Kept Clicking

There was another characteristic sound associated with an ageing fluorescent lamp.

Click. Pause. Click. Pause. Click.

The starter was repeatedly attempting the starting sequence.

It would close. The electrodes would warm. It would open. The lamp would fail to establish a stable discharge. The cycle would begin again.

Sometimes the tube eventually lit.

Sometimes it continued indefinitely.

And sometimes the repeated flashing was the clearest possible message:

Replace the tube.

15. Why LEDs Finally Ended the Ritual

LED lighting changed household illumination almost completely.

An LED lamp does not require the fluorescent tube's low-pressure mercury discharge, starter or conventional electromagnetic choke.

LED lamps do, of course, contain electronics in their driver circuits, but their light-producing mechanism is fundamentally different.

The old fluorescent fitting therefore gradually disappeared.

The heavy choke went into the scrap box.

The little starter disappeared from electrical shops.

The long glass tube was replaced.

And with them disappeared one of those tiny household rituals belonging to an earlier technological generation.

16. Another Forgotten Character — Fluorescent Flicker

The old magnetic ballast had another characteristic: fluorescent lamps operated with magnetic ballasts could exhibit noticeable periodic modulation of light output. Modern electronic ballasts generally operate at much higher frequencies and can greatly reduce the perceptible flicker associated with the old magnetic arrangement. [6]

Thus even the light itself carried a signature of the technology being used.

The old tube did not merely look different from an LED lamp. Electrically, it behaved differently as well.

17. The Vanishing Household Jugaad

Today, many younger people may never have seen a fluorescent starter.

They may never have heard the characteristic hum of an ageing choke.

They may never have watched a tube flicker at its ends before reluctantly lighting.

And they certainly may never have stood beneath a fluorescent fitting holding a piece of wire while someone shouted:

“Switch it on!”

The technology has gone.

The memory remains.

There is something strangely satisfying about such pieces of forgotten household knowledge. They remind us that technological literacy was once often acquired informally.

People learnt by watching.

They listened to the hum. They recognised the flicker. They noticed the blackening at the ends. They knew which starter to replace and when a tube had finally reached the end of its useful life.

And occasionally, they knew one more trick.

It was not textbook engineering.

But it was not superstition either.

It was applied physics remembered as household jugaad.

18. A Caution Worth Remembering

There is, however, one part of this story that should not be romanticised.

The manual starter trick involved exposed electrical contacts connected to mains-voltage circuitry. That presents a genuine electric-shock hazard. Electrical-energy exposure is a recognised safety hazard, and appropriate isolation and safe working practices are essential when dealing with electrical equipment. [7]

The correct lesson today is therefore not:

“Try this yourself.”

It is:

“Now we understand why it worked.”

Fluorescent lamps also contain mercury, so spent tubes should be handled and disposed of responsibly rather than broken casually.

The safest place for this particular piece of household ingenuity is now where it belongs:

in memory.

19. What the Old Tube Taught Us

Looking back, the old fluorescent fitting was almost a miniature laboratory.

The choke demonstrated inductance.

The starter demonstrated thermal switching.

The tube demonstrated gas discharge.

The phosphor demonstrated fluorescence.

The blackened ends demonstrated material degradation.

The flickering lamp demonstrated the consequences of an unsuccessful starting cycle.

And the old wire trick demonstrated, rather dramatically, what happens when an inductor's current is suddenly interrupted.

All of this was happening in ordinary homes, long before most of us thought of these phenomena as lessons in physics.

20. My Humble Opine

I find these old household tricks fascinating because they reveal a different relationship between people and technology.

Today, if an LED lamp fails, we generally replace it. There is little to see and little to understand from the outside.

But the old fluorescent tube announced its troubles quite openly.

It flickered.

It hummed.

It blackened.

The starter clicked.

The choke warmed.

And somebody in the house usually knew what those symptoms meant.

The piece of wire was not a miracle cure. It was simply a crude manual substitute for part of a tiny automatic mechanism.

Yet that little act of ingenuity contained a lesson that is still worth preserving:

Understanding how something works often turns an apparent mystery into something wonderfully ordinary.

The dying tube was not performing magic.

It was obeying electromagnetic theory, gas-discharge physics and the behaviour of ageing materials — even if the person holding the wire had never heard of any of them.

That, perhaps, is the real charm of household jugaad.

It is often science remembered by the hands before it is understood by the head.

My humble opine.

Glossary

Ballast
A device used with an electric-discharge lamp to provide the electrical conditions required for starting and operation and to limit current.
```
Choke
The common household name for an electromagnetic ballast based principally on an inductor and magnetic core.
Electromagnetic Ballast
A traditional ballast using magnetic and inductive principles to control a fluorescent lamp.
Electronic Ballast
A semiconductor-based circuit that controls a fluorescent lamp, generally using higher-frequency electrical operation.
Starter
A starting device used with a ballast to initiate an electric-discharge lamp.
Bimetallic Strip
A component made from two bonded metals with different thermal expansion characteristics, allowing it to bend when heated.
Inductor
An electrical component that stores energy in a magnetic field and opposes rapid changes in current.
Inductive Voltage Pulse
A voltage generated when the current through an inductive component changes rapidly, particularly when interrupted.
Thermionic Emission
The emission of electrons from a material when it is heated sufficiently.
Ionisation
The process by which atoms or molecules acquire or lose electrons and become electrically charged.
Gas Discharge
The flow of electric current through an ionised gas.
Phosphor
A material that emits visible light after absorbing energy, in a fluorescent lamp principally from ultraviolet radiation.
Jugaad
An improvised or ingenious practical solution, particularly associated with making something work with limited resources.
```

References & Further Reading

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts — technical description of ballast functions, including starting and current limitation.
  2. Illuminating Engineering Society, Ballast — definition of ballast and its role in electric-discharge lighting.
  3. Illuminating Engineering Society, Starter — definition and function of a fluorescent-lamp starter.
  4. Illuminating Engineering Society, Fluorescent Lamp — definition of the low-pressure mercury fluorescent lamp and the role of its phosphor coating.
  5. U.S. Department of Energy, Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Technical Support Documentation — discussion of magnetic and electronic ballasts and fluorescent starting methods.
  6. U.S. Department of Energy, Flicker Basics — discussion of light-output modulation from fluorescent lamps and the effect of magnetic versus high-frequency electronic ballasts.
  7. U.S. Department of Energy, Unexpected Exposure to Electrical Energy — electrical safety principles relevant to work around energised electrical equipment.

The technical explanations in this essay have been checked against established lighting-engineering references, particularly the Illuminating Engineering Society and U.S. Department of Energy material on fluorescent lamps, starters and ballasts.

About the Author

I am Dhinakar Rajaram, an independent writer with a long-standing fascination for science, technology, astronomy, music and the seemingly ordinary objects that quietly shape our everyday lives.

Much of what I write begins with a simple question:

“How did that actually work?”

Sometimes the answer is found in a textbook. Sometimes in an old circuit. Sometimes in an observation made many years ago. And occasionally, as with the dying tube light, it is found in a childhood or household memory.

I write these articles because I believe scientific curiosity does not belong exclusively to laboratories, universities and research institutions. It belongs in our homes, workshops, gardens, skies and everyday conversations.

My intention is not merely to preserve memories of old technology, but to understand the science behind them — and, wherever possible, to share that understanding in language accessible to the ordinary reader.

In that spirit, I offer this little essay about an old tube light, an old choke, a tiny starter and a piece of household jugaad.

Integrated Hashtags

#DhinakarRajaram #Science #EverydayScience #FluorescentTube #TubeLight #Ballast #Choke #Starter #ElectromagneticInduction #Electricity #Physics #HouseholdScience #Jugaad #IndianJugaad #ScienceExplained #OldTechnology #Technology #LED #FluorescentLamp #ScientificTemper #Curiosity #ForgottenTechnology

Why “Recharging” Batteries in the Sun and Tapping Remotes Actually Work

Why “Recharging” Batteries in the Sun and Tapping Remotes Actually Work

Why “Recharging” Batteries in the Sun and Tapping Remotes Actually Work

A Note on Two Popular Household Myths

Foreword

There are some pieces of household wisdom which survive not because they are entirely correct, but because something observable really does happen.

A tired torch sometimes comes alive after its batteries have been left in the warmth of the Sun. A remote control that refuses to operate may suddenly spring into action after somebody gives it a firm tap. To the uninitiated, these incidents can look almost magical.

Yet neither event requires magic.

The battery has not necessarily acquired new chemical energy from the Sun, and the remote has not suddenly become more obedient because it was scolded. Both phenomena can be understood through ordinary electrochemistry and electrical engineering.

This article examines these two familiar practices, separates what is true from what is folklore, and considers why such household observations can sometimes lead us towards surprisingly elegant science.

In keeping with the spirit of Article 51A(h) of the Constitution of India, this article seeks to encourage “the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.”

Translation: This article may be read using the translation facility available on the blog. Machine-translated versions may contain inaccuracies.

Preface — When Household Wisdom Meets Physics

Many of us grew up seeing batteries treated almost as though they possessed a second life.

A weak battery might be placed in the sunlight. A television remote might be tapped against the palm. Two batteries might be swapped around in a torch. An apparently exhausted cell might be left alone for a while and then tried again.

And, occasionally, it worked.

That success is precisely what makes these habits interesting.

If the battery really had been recharged by the Sun, then sunlight would appear to be a rather convenient charger. If tapping a remote genuinely restored a battery, then household electronics would have discovered percussion as a power source.

Of course, neither proposition is correct.

But there is a subtle truth underneath both observations.

A battery can temporarily become better at delivering the energy it still possesses, and an electrical contact can sometimes be restored by mechanical movement.

That distinction between energy stored, energy available under a particular load, and electrical contact is the key to understanding the two myths.

1. The “Dead” Battery That Comes Back to Life

Consider the familiar situation.

A torch begins to grow dim. Eventually the bulb or LED stops working. The batteries are removed and placed on a sunny windowsill.

An hour later they are warm.

Put them back into the torch and — astonishingly — the light may return.

It is tempting to conclude:

“The Sun has recharged the battery.”

It has not.

Ordinary alkaline and zinc-carbon cells are primary batteries. They are intended to be used and then replaced or appropriately recycled. They are not designed for routine recharging.

Attempting to recharge an ordinary non-rechargeable battery can result in leakage, rupture and other hazards.

2. A Battery Is Not Simply a Tank of Electricity

The word battery sometimes encourages a misleading mental picture.

We imagine a battery as a container filled with a fixed quantity of electricity, rather like a water tank. Once the water is gone, the tank is empty.

Electrochemically, a battery is considerably more complicated.

An alkaline cell contains, among other components, zinc, manganese dioxide and an alkaline electrolyte. During discharge, chemical reactions occur at the electrodes and within the electrolyte. The electrical energy delivered to the external circuit ultimately comes from these chemical reactions.

As the cell is used, its ability to deliver current changes.

One important factor is internal resistance.

A battery may still contain chemically usable material while its internal resistance has increased sufficiently for the voltage to fall sharply when a device demands current.

3. Why the Voltage Falls Under Load

Imagine a battery as a source of voltage with a small resistor hidden inside it.

When the device draws current, some voltage is lost across that internal resistance.

Terminal voltage ≈ Open-circuit voltage − (Current × Internal resistance)

This is a simplified model rather than a complete description of real electrochemistry, but it is extremely useful for understanding the household phenomenon.

Suppose a battery has become depleted and its internal resistance has risen. A torch demands current. The voltage at the battery terminals falls. The torch therefore becomes dim or stops working.

The important point is:

“ The device stopped working ” does not necessarily mean “ every last bit of chemical energy has disappeared. ”

4. The Battery Can Recover — But It Has Not Recharged

Now remove the load.

The electrochemical system is no longer being forced to deliver current. Over time, concentration gradients and other electrochemical conditions within the cell can partially relax. The terminal voltage can consequently rise again.

This phenomenon is commonly described as voltage recovery.

Battery behaviour under load is not determined by stored capacity alone. When a load is removed, the voltage of a battery can gradually recover towards its open-circuit value.

This explains one of the great household battery mysteries:

Why does a battery that failed five minutes ago sometimes work again?

Because failure under load and complete chemical exhaustion are not necessarily the same thing.

The battery has had a rest.

It has not been reborn.

5. Then What Does the Sun Actually Do?

Temperature affects electrochemical processes.

Warming a battery can temporarily increase ionic mobility and alter reaction kinetics. Temperature can also affect internal resistance, allowing a marginal battery to deliver current more readily for a short period.

A warm battery may therefore sometimes perform better temporarily than the same battery when cold.

But this is not recharging.

The Sun has not supplied the battery with the electrical energy required to reverse its normal discharge reaction.

The apparent revival is instead related to the way temperature and electrochemical relaxation affect the battery's ability to deliver current.

Important: Do not deliberately heat ordinary batteries in direct sunlight. Excessive heat can damage batteries, accelerate unwanted reactions and increase the risk of leakage or other failure.

6. A Better Way to Think About It

Imagine a person carrying a heavy suitcase.

After walking some distance, he stops and rests. A few minutes later he can walk again.

Has he acquired new energy from the air?

No.

He has simply recovered sufficiently to make use of some of the energy still available to him.

A tired battery is obviously not a human being, but the analogy helps illustrate the distinction between available power at a particular moment and total stored energy.

The battery is not literally “taking a breath”. But, metaphorically speaking, it can recover some ability to deliver what remains.

7. Why Tapping a Remote Sometimes Works

Now for the second household mystery.

You press the remote.

Nothing.

You press again.

Nothing.

You aim it directly at the television.

Still nothing.

Then someone taps the remote against their palm.

Suddenly:

Click.

The television responds.

It is tempting to think that the tap has somehow awakened the batteries. Usually, it has not.

The explanation is much more mundane — and much more interesting.

The tap may have changed an electrical contact.

8. The Small Metal Contacts Inside the Battery Compartment

Look inside a typical remote-control battery compartment.

You will find metal contacts, often including spring-like contacts designed to press against the battery terminals.

The electrical circuit depends upon these contacts maintaining sufficiently good mechanical and electrical connection.

Over time, several things can happen:

  • The spring may lose some of its tension.
  • A battery may move fractionally in its compartment.
  • The contact surface may become contaminated.
  • Oxidation or corrosion may increase contact resistance.
  • Mechanical tolerances may allow a marginal connection.

Most of the time the contact remains adequate. Occasionally it becomes intermittent.

A small mechanical shock can change the situation.

9. The Tap Is a Mechanical Event

When you tap the remote, you are not sending meaningful charging energy into the battery.

You are shaking the mechanism.

The battery may move by a tiny amount. A spring contact may flex. A contact surface may shift. A marginal electrical connection may suddenly become good enough for current to flow.

And the remote works.

This is particularly convincing because the change can happen almost instantaneously.

Poor contact → mechanical shock → altered contact → lower contact resistance → circuit restored

10. Why This Can Be Mistaken for a Battery Problem

Suppose a remote contains perfectly good batteries but one contact is unreliable. The remote appears dead.

The user assumes:

“The batteries have gone.”

But after tapping, the contact improves.

The remote works.

The user therefore concludes:

“Tapping the remote gave the batteries more power.”

The actual sequence was:

Poor contact → no reliable current → tap → contact improves → circuit restored.

No chemical recharging has taken place.

11. Does Tapping Actually Clean the Contact?

Sometimes mechanical movement can disturb a thin contaminating film or alter the pressure between two surfaces.

But it would be an exaggeration to say that every tap simply “scrapes off the oxide”. Contact physics is more complicated than that.

The important point is that mechanical movement can change contact resistance.

A tiny change in pressure, position or surface contact can be enough to turn an unreliable connection into a reliable one.

That is why tapping can appear to work.

It is also why the effect may disappear again later.

12. The Curious Difference Between “Voltage” and “Power”

People commonly say:

“The battery still has voltage, so it must be good.”

Not necessarily.

A battery can show a respectable voltage when measured with little or no load and yet perform poorly when a device demands current.

The reason is that terminal voltage depends upon both the battery's electrochemical state and the current being drawn through its internal resistance.

A high internal resistance can cause the voltage to collapse under load.

This is why proper battery testing involves more than simply asking whether a cell has some open-circuit voltage.

13. Why a Remote May Behave Differently from a Torch

A remote control normally consumes relatively little power, although it does so in brief electronic pulses when a button is pressed.

A torch, particularly one using an incandescent bulb, can demand considerably more current.

A marginal battery might therefore behave differently in the two devices.

A cell that is incapable of supplying enough current to a torch may still operate a low-power electronic device for some time.

This is another reason why the phrase “dead battery” can be misleading.

Dead for what?

Dead for a high-current application does not necessarily mean absolutely devoid of usable chemical energy.

14. The Myth of the Sun-Recharged Battery

The claim:

“Put a dead ordinary battery in the Sun and it will recharge.”

The science:

No. A conventional alkaline or zinc-carbon primary cell is not designed to be recharged. Resting and warming can sometimes improve temporary voltage delivery, but they do not restore the original chemical energy.

What may actually happen?

  1. The battery has been heavily loaded.
  2. Its terminal voltage falls.
  3. The load is removed.
  4. Electrochemical conditions partially relax.
  5. The battery subsequently becomes warmer.
  6. Internal resistance and reaction kinetics change.
  7. The cell can temporarily deliver current again.

The apparent miracle is therefore temporary recovery, not recharging.

15. The Myth of the Tapped Remote

The claim:

“Tap the remote and the batteries come back to life.”

The science:

Usually, no. A tap can mechanically alter the position or pressure of a battery contact and restore an intermittent electrical connection.

What may actually happen?

Poor contact → mechanical shock → altered contact → lower contact resistance → circuit restored.

The batteries may have been perfectly adequate all along.

16. A Universal Household Habit

It is tempting to classify such practices geographically.

Perhaps people in one country warm batteries in the Sun. Perhaps people elsewhere tap their television remotes.

But household improvisation is a remarkably universal human trait.

Wherever replacement parts cost money, wherever appliances are expected to last, and wherever people have learned to diagnose problems through observation rather than manuals, such tricks emerge.

The underlying principle is not regional.

It is human:

“If something has stopped working, try to understand why before throwing it away.”

Sometimes that instinct produces folklore. Sometimes it produces engineering. And occasionally, as in these two cases, folklore contains a tiny piece of real science hidden inside it.

17. The Larger Lesson

There is a useful scientific lesson here that extends well beyond batteries.

An observation can be correct while the explanation is wrong.

The battery really can work again after being warmed.

The remote really can work again after being tapped.

Therefore, the household observer is not necessarily imagining things.

What may be wrong is the interpretation.

Science does not dismiss the observation.

Science asks:

What mechanism could have produced it?

That is the essence of scientific inquiry.

The torch coming back to life is real.

The Sun recharging an ordinary alkaline battery is not.

The remote responding after a tap is real.

The tap charging the batteries is not.

The difference between those statements is the difference between observation and explanation.

18. Did You Know?

When “Dead” Does Not Mean Chemically Empty

A device's cut-off point is not necessarily the same thing as absolute chemical exhaustion.

As internal resistance rises, a battery can experience a larger voltage drop when current is drawn. The device may therefore switch off while some energy remains chemically accessible within the cell.

That is one reason why the same apparently exhausted battery can occasionally operate a low-power device after failing in a more demanding one.

19. A Word of Caution

Household experiments with batteries should remain firmly within the bounds of common sense.

Do not deliberately heat ordinary batteries in direct sunlight, place them near a flame, short-circuit them, puncture them, dismantle them or attempt to recharge cells that are not specifically designed to be rechargeable.

Attempting to recharge non-rechargeable alkaline batteries can result in leakage or rupture.

If a battery is swollen, leaking, unusually hot or damaged, stop using it and dispose of it according to appropriate local battery-disposal guidance.

And if a remote requires increasingly violent persuasion to work, the correct repair is probably not a larger hammer.

It is a new battery, a clean contact, or a proper repair.

Glossary

Alkaline battery
A common type of primary battery using an alkaline electrolyte, with zinc and manganese dioxide as major electrochemical components.
Primary battery
A battery designed principally for one-way chemical discharge rather than routine recharging.
Secondary battery
A rechargeable battery whose electrochemical reactions can be substantially reversed through an appropriate charging process.
Internal resistance
The effective resistance within a battery that contributes to voltage drop when current flows.
Terminal voltage
The voltage measured across the external terminals of a battery.
Open-circuit voltage
The voltage measured when essentially no external current is being drawn.
Voltage sag
A reduction in terminal voltage when a battery supplies current.
Voltage recovery
The rise in terminal voltage that can occur after a load is removed.
Electrolyte
The ion-conducting medium within an electrochemical cell.
Electrode
A conducting component at which an electrochemical reaction occurs.
Load
The electrical device or circuit drawing current from a battery.
Contact resistance
Electrical resistance arising at the interface between two contacting conductive surfaces.
Oxidation
An electrochemical process involving loss of electrons.
Reduction
An electrochemical process involving gain of electrons.
Electrochemical relaxation
The partial return towards equilibrium of electrochemical conditions after a battery has been subjected to a load or other disturbance.
Internal impedance
A broader electrical measure that can include resistive and reactive behaviour within a battery.

References & Further Reading

  1. Duracell. Battery Frequently Asked Questions. Duracell .
  2. Panasonic. Battery Safety and Operating Guidance. Panasonic.
  3. Panasonic Industry. Alkaline Handbook. Panasonic Industry.
  4. Battery University. How Does Internal Resistance Affect Performance? Battery University.
  5. Battery University. BU-802a: How Does Rising Internal Resistance Affect Performance? Battery University.
  6. Battery University. BU-501: Basics About Discharging. Battery University.

About the Author — From My Perspective

I have always been fascinated by the science hidden in ordinary things.

Long before I began writing about astronomy, physics, technology and the natural world, I was curious about the objects around me — why they behaved as they did, why a particular method appeared to work, and whether the explanation commonly given for it was actually correct.

That curiosity has remained with me.

I am Dhinakar Rajaram, an independent writer and lifelong enthusiast of science, astronomy, technology, music and the many small wonders of everyday life. My interest in astronomy has naturally encouraged me to look beyond appearances and ask what physical principles are operating beneath them.

I am also an amateur astronomer and a licensed amateur-radio operator (VU3DIR). These interests have given me an enduring appreciation for observation, measurement, experimentation and the discipline of asking questions before accepting an explanation.

I do not write as a laboratory scientist claiming professional authority in every field I discuss. I write as a curious observer who enjoys researching a subject, examining the evidence, checking the science and then explaining it in language that an ordinary reader can enjoy.

That is particularly important to me when writing about everyday science. Scientific knowledge should not remain locked inside technical terminology. The battery in a torch, the remote control on the coffee table, the light in the night sky and the music coming from an old recording are all invitations to ask “Why?”

This article grew from precisely that kind of curiosity.

I have seen the familiar practice of warming a supposedly exhausted battery and the equally familiar act of tapping a reluctant remote. Rather than simply accepting either explanation, I wanted to understand what was actually happening. The answer turned out to be more interesting than the myth itself.

That is the kind of science I enjoy sharing: science hiding in plain sight.

If a small household observation can make someone pause, become curious and ask a better question, then the exercise has served its purpose.

My humble opinion.

Dhinakar Rajaram

© இரா. தினகர்

Conclusion

The next time someone places a tired battery in the Sun or gives a reluctant remote a tap, there is no need to laugh at the old household wisdom.

There is a little science hiding inside it.

The Sun may make a marginal battery perform temporarily better, but it does not recharge an ordinary primary cell.

The tap may restore an intermittent electrical contact, but it does not put energy back into the battery.

In both cases, what appears to be a miracle is really a consequence of electrochemistry, temperature, internal resistance and mechanical contact.

Perhaps that is the most charming thing about science.

It does not merely tell us that an old belief is wrong.

Sometimes it tells us why the old belief appeared to work in the first place.

Tuesday, 18 August 2026

Beyond the Border: A Sober Reflection on Major Madhan Kumar's Warning and the New Geography of Warfare

Beyond the Border: A Sober Reflection on Major Madhan Kumar's Warning and the New Geography of Warfare

Beyond the Border: A Sober Reflection on Major Madhan Kumar's Warning and the New Geography of Warfare

An essay prompted by the recent address of Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.), defence veteran and geopolitical analyst

Essay Current Affairs & Defence Reading time: approximately 20 minutes British/Indian English register
Primary address that occasioned this essay
Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.) — YouTube address
Watch the address in full on YouTube
Author's note. This essay was prompted principally by the concerns raised by Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.) in the address linked above. My thinking on the subject has also been informed by the wider public discussion of contemporary defence and geopolitical affairs, including the observations and analyses of Major (Retd.) Gaurav Arya on Operation SINDOOR, unmanned warfare, Pakistan's military capabilities and the changing character of the India–Pakistan security environment. The subsequent examination of Operation SINDOOR, the role and proliferation of unmanned systems, the war in Ukraine, the Iran–Israel confrontation, the economics of saturation, and the changing significance of India's geographical depth is my own analysis, based upon publicly available information. The views, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this essay are entirely my own. They should not be construed as an official military assessment, nor as representing the views of Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.), Major (Retd.) Gaurav Arya, the Armed Forces, or the Government of India.

Foreword

Between 2010 and 2012, I wrote from time to time on current affairs, defence and matters of national security. After an interval of several years, I find myself returning to that field of writing, prompted by a recent address by Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.). His observations regarding the changing reach of contemporary drone and missile warfare, and the consequent implications for India's interior, struck me as deserving of sober consideration and informed public discussion. This essay is my own reflection upon the concerns he has raised, examined in the light of developments in recent theatres of conflict.

The concern is deceptively simple. For generations, distance has been one of India's silent strategic assets. A conflict at the western frontier was, in the popular imagination, a matter principally concerning the frontier itself and the military establishments in its vicinity. The great cities of peninsular and central India, lying hundreds or even thousands of kilometres away, possessed the reassurance of geographical depth.

But what happens when the nature of the weapon changes?

What happens when an unmanned aircraft can travel immense distances, when such aircraft can be manufactured in large numbers, when they are comparatively inexpensive, and when they can be used in conjunction with cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, decoys and electronic warfare?

These are not questions intended to create alarm. Nor are they an indictment of India's air-defence capabilities. On the contrary, I have complete confidence in the competence of our armed forces and in the increasingly sophisticated defensive architecture built by India.

The question, rather, is whether confidence should ever be permitted to become complacency.

Operation SINDOOR: A Record Worth Respecting

Let me state my position without ambiguity. I have complete confidence in India's air-defence capability. Operation SINDOOR demonstrated why such confidence is justified.

During the night of 8–9 May 2025, the Government of India stated that Pakistani forces attempted drone intrusions at 36 locations along the International Border and Line of Control, from Leh to Sir Creek, employing approximately 300 to 400 drones. Indian forces brought down a number of those drones through kinetic and non-kinetic means. The Government further indicated that the scale of the intrusions appeared, among other things, to be an attempt to test Indian air-defence systems and gather intelligence.

That is a significant achievement, and it should be acknowledged without reservation. A country should have confidence in a defence establishment which is capable of confronting a substantial unmanned aerial intrusion and denying it the intended result.

Yet one must be careful about drawing a universal conclusion from a particular engagement.

A successful defence against the attack that occurred does not, by itself, prove that every future form of attack will possess the same character, scale or difficulty.

The Enemy Learns

There is another point which I believe deserves particular emphasis.

An enemy must never be taken lightly.

The people on the other side are human beings, as we are. They observe, study, analyse, improvise and learn. They examine their failures, seek explanations for them and attempt to devise better answers. India has done precisely the same throughout its military history. Every conflict teaches lessons. Every setback produces an enquiry. Every successful defence reveals something about the method employed against us.

Why, then, should we imagine that an adversary will remain permanently confined to the methods that failed yesterday?

Operation SINDOOR was a lesson to India. It was also a lesson to Pakistan. What was intercepted will be examined. What was detected will be studied. What failed will be modified. What proved effective will perhaps be reproduced in another form.

That is the very nature of warfare.

“Confidence in India does not require contempt for an adversary. Indeed, genuine confidence permits us to examine uncomfortable possibilities without either fear or complacency.”

Turkey, Pakistan and the Lesson of Adaptation

There is, however, another development which merits attention, for it bears directly upon the proposition that an adversary ought never to be taken lightly.

During Operation SINDOOR in May 2025, Pakistan employed a considerable number of unmanned systems against Indian positions along the northern and western fronts. The Government of India stated on 9 May that approximately 300 to 400 drones had attempted intrusions at 36 locations extending from Leh to Sir Creek. Preliminary forensic examination of the debris indicated that a number of the drones were ASISGUARD Songar systems of Turkish origin.

Indian media subsequently reported, citing security sources, that Turkey had supplied Pakistan with a substantial number of drones and that Turkish personnel or operators had assisted Pakistani forces in the employment or coordination of these systems. Other reports similarly described Turkish participation in certain drone operations. Such reports ought properly to be treated as source-based reporting rather than as a publicly acknowledged Turkish admission.

The distinction is important. Nevertheless, the demonstrated presence of Turkish-origin unmanned systems in the Pakistani effort is itself significant, for it illustrates how readily modern military technology may pass from one theatre of conflict into another.

The employment of these systems did not produce the result that Pakistan would have desired. India's air-defence systems dealt with the drone and loitering-munition threat effectively. It would be a mistake, however, to conclude that the matter ended there.

An intelligent adversary does not ordinarily abandon a capability merely because its first employment proved unsuccessful. He examines the reasons for the failure, identifies deficiencies and seeks to rectify them. If a particular method of attack is defeated, another method may be sought. If a particular drone proves inadequate, a more capable platform may be procured. If quantity alone does not suffice, greater range, greater endurance, improved navigation, better sensors, electronic resilience or more sophisticated munitions may be introduced.

India has learnt in precisely the same manner. We have studied our own successes and failures; we have altered doctrine and methods after encountering difficulties; we have improved equipment; we have invested in indigenous technologies; and we have sought better systems whenever circumstances have required them. There is therefore little justification for imagining that an adversary will remain permanently at the level at which he was found yesterday.

Indeed, reports emerging after Operation SINDOOR indicated that Turkey and Pakistan were examining or revising arrangements involving further unmanned systems, including the Bayraktar TB2 and AKINCI, together with substantial numbers of loitering munitions. Such reports, being based upon sources rather than upon a publicly disclosed and fully detailed arrangement, ought to be approached with the caution appropriate to defence procurement reporting.

The matter is nevertheless worthy of attention because it illustrates a larger principle: a capability tested in one engagement may subsequently be enlarged, refined and employed in a different manner.

The significance of the Turkish–Pakistani relationship therefore lies not merely in the number of drones that may eventually enter Pakistan's inventory. It lies in the possibility of a continuing process of adaptation, acquisition and technological improvement.

The failure of yesterday's attack may become the starting point for tomorrow's improvement.

The Enemy Learns

There is another point which I believe deserves particular emphasis.

An enemy must never be taken lightly.

The people on the other side are human beings, as we are. They observe, study, analyse, improvise and learn. They examine their failures, seek explanations for them and attempt to devise better answers. India has done precisely the same throughout its military history. Every conflict teaches lessons. Every setback produces an enquiry. Every successful defence reveals something about the method employed against us.

Why, then, should we imagine that an adversary will remain permanently confined to the methods that failed yesterday?

Operation SINDOOR was a lesson to India. It was also a lesson to Pakistan. What was intercepted will be examined. What was detected will be studied. What failed will be modified. What proved effective will perhaps be reproduced in another form.

One example is particularly instructive. During the period surrounding Operation SINDOOR, Pakistan deployed Chinese-made SH-15 155 mm wheeled self-propelled howitzers in positions facing India. Pakistan had already contracted for these systems from China, with deliveries having commenced before the 2025 conflict; their deployment and subsequent emphasis therefore represent not a weapon suddenly supplied after SINDOOR, but an existing capability whose mobility assumed renewed significance during and after the confrontation. The SH-15 is a highly mobile artillery system designed to fire and relocate rapidly — the familiar “shoot-and-scoot” principle. Reports have specifically highlighted this mobility as an advantage in enabling Pakistani artillery formations to reduce their exposure to Indian counter-battery fire. [1]

The significance of such mobility is not difficult to appreciate. A conventional fixed artillery position is necessarily more vulnerable once its firing location has been established. Modern counter-battery radars can analyse the trajectory of an incoming artillery round and help determine the approximate point from which the weapon was fired. The sooner an artillery piece can fire, displace and establish itself at another location, the more difficult it becomes for the opposing force to bring effective retaliatory fire upon it.

The lesson is a simple one: once an adversary finds that a particular method exposes him to unacceptable risk, he will seek greater mobility, concealment, dispersion or survivability.

This is precisely the pattern that we must expect in the development of unmanned warfare as well. A drone formation which proves vulnerable may be altered. A launch method which is detected may be changed. A platform which lacks sufficient endurance may be replaced by one with greater range. Numbers may be increased; signatures may be reduced; navigation may be improved; electronic resilience may be strengthened.

India has learnt in precisely the same manner. We have studied our own successes and failures; we have altered doctrine and methods after encountering difficulties; we have improved equipment; we have invested in indigenous technologies; and we have sought better systems whenever circumstances have required them. There is therefore little justification for imagining that an adversary will remain permanently at the level at which he was found yesterday.

Indeed, this is perhaps the most important lesson that Operation SINDOOR ought to leave behind. The defeat of a particular weapon or tactic does not necessarily end the problem; it may instead compel the adversary to devise a better one.

That is the very nature of warfare.

“Confidence in India does not require contempt for an adversary. Indeed, genuine confidence permits us to examine uncomfortable possibilities without either fear or complacency.”

The Economics and Arithmetic of Saturation

The rise of the inexpensive unmanned aircraft presents a problem which is not entirely technological. It is also economic.

A drone may be comparatively inexpensive, expendable and capable of being produced in quantity. An interceptor missile, by contrast, is a sophisticated and finite military asset. It embodies expensive components, specialised manufacturing, testing, storage, maintenance and logistics.

One must be cautious about assigning a single price to the drone, for military unmanned systems vary enormously in cost, from small improvised aircraft to sophisticated long-range platforms and loitering munitions. The important point is not the precise price of one drone. It is the asymmetry between expendable attacking mass and finite defensive inventory.

The question then ceases to be merely, “Can the drone be destroyed?”

The more important question becomes: “Can the defender continue to destroy the next hundred, and the hundred after those, while retaining sufficient resources for the more consequential missiles which may accompany or follow them?”

The object of a very large drone attack need not necessarily be the destruction of an air-defence system in the conventional sense. It may instead be to compel the defender to expend the resources with which that defence is maintained.

Every incoming system must be detected, tracked, assessed and, where necessary, engaged. The defender must decide which weapon is appropriate, preserve sufficient capacity to address other threats, maintain sensors and communications, replenish inventories and remain prepared for the possibility that the most dangerous weapon has not yet arrived.

Now imagine a mixed attack: unmanned aircraft in large numbers, some of them decoys, some carrying warheads, others intended to complicate the defensive picture, followed by or accompanied by cruise missiles or ballistic missiles.

It would be incorrect to declare that any air-defence network would inevitably collapse under such circumstances. Modern layered air defence exists precisely to prevent such an outcome.

It would be equally unwise, however, to assume that any defensive architecture possesses an unlimited supply of sensors, engagement channels, interceptors, reloads and time.

The problem is therefore not necessarily one of failure. It is a question of capacity.

Israel and the Arithmetic of Saturation

The confrontation between Israel and Iran in June 2026 provides a useful illustration of this distinction.

Israel possesses one of the most sophisticated layered air-defence arrangements in the world. Systems such as Arrow, David's Sling and Iron Dome are integrated with extensive surveillance, command-and-control, intelligence and allied support. Yet even such a formidable architecture operates in the real world of finite inventories and finite time.

The Israeli Ministry of Defence subsequently reported that approximately 86 per cent of ballistic missiles launched from Iran towards Israeli territory were intercepted, together with an exceptionally high interception rate against unmanned aerial vehicles.

These figures are a tribute to Israeli technological and operational capability. They should not be misrepresented as a failure.

They nevertheless illustrate a simple mathematical proposition: when the incoming number becomes sufficiently large, even a small percentage of penetration ceases to be numerically insignificant.

The purpose of this observation is not to suggest that a particular interception percentage will remain constant in a future conflict. Nor does missile defence reduce to a simple percentage calculation. Detection, trajectory, redundancy, weapon type, engagement geometry and many other variables are involved.

The broader point remains sound: mass changes the arithmetic of defence.

Ukraine Has Changed the Meaning of Distance

If Israel teaches us something about the arithmetic of mass, the war in Ukraine teaches us something about the changing value of distance.

Ukraine has developed long-range unmanned systems capable of reaching deep into Russian territory. In March 2025, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy publicly announced that a Ukrainian drone with a stated range of 3,000 kilometres had successfully completed testing. That statement should properly be described as an official Ukrainian claim concerning a tested capability, rather than treated as proof that every operational sortie will achieve that range.

Nevertheless, the broader proposition is no longer theoretical. Ukrainian long-range drone strikes have reached Russian targets more than a thousand kilometres from Ukrainian territory. The continuing development of such systems demonstrates that the traditional assumption that great distance alone places an interior target beyond meaningful aerial threat is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain.

What matters for the Indian discussion is not Russia's geography or Ukraine's particular war. What matters is the technological lesson.

Distance which once amounted to practical sanctuary is becoming increasingly penetrable.

The unmanned aircraft does not place a human pilot at risk. It may, in appropriate circumstances, be produced in substantial quantity. And because an unmanned platform may be comparatively inexpensive in relation to many traditional military systems, the attacker may be prepared to accept losses that would be unacceptable in manned aviation.

And the Technology Can Travel

There is a further consideration which deserves attention, though it must be stated with appropriate caution.

Technologies developed under the pressure of war do not necessarily remain confined to the battlefield on which they were born. Defence industries, suppliers, research institutions and military partnerships create channels through which knowledge and equipment may travel.

Recent reporting has suggested possible Ukrainian interest in cooperation with Pakistan concerning long-range unmanned systems. Other reports have discussed potential supply. At the present stage, prudence requires us to distinguish between a reported possibility, an offer, a prospective technology relationship and a confirmed operational transfer. These are not the same thing.

The strategic point, however, survives that distinction.

India cannot assume that a capability demonstrated in the Ukrainian theatre will remain indefinitely unique to that theatre.

Technology migrates. Experience migrates. Knowledge migrates.

A determined adversary will naturally seek whatever knowledge or equipment may improve his own military position.

What Major Madhan Kumar's Concern Means for India

This, to my mind, is the real significance of Major Madhan Kumar's warning.

The matter is not that one should wake up tomorrow expecting a missile over Madras, Bangalore or Hyderabad. That would be irresponsible speculation.

Nor is the suggestion that India's air defence is inadequate. The evidence of Operation SINDOOR points in the opposite direction.

The issue is that the strategic value of geographical depth may be diminishing.

For a long time, distance itself was a form of defence. An adversary seeking to attack the Indian interior required aircraft capable of travelling great distances, surviving air defences, delivering weapons and returning safely. The cost and complexity of such an operation created formidable barriers.

The drone alters that equation.

A relatively inexpensive unmanned system may be expendable. It may be possible to launch many of them. It may be possible to improve them by rapid iteration. And it may be possible to combine them with other systems so that the defender is required to answer not one problem but several at once.

This is why the question of India's interior cities merits discussion before, rather than after, the technology has become commonplace in our own neighbourhood.

A Layered Defence Requires a Layered Answer

There is a temptation, whenever a new threat appears, to ask for a single new weapon with which it may be defeated. Modern warfare does not generally permit such simplicity.

The answer to the proliferation of inexpensive unmanned aircraft is more likely to be a family of complementary capabilities: radar and electro-optical detection, electronic warfare, guns, short-range interceptors, counter-drone systems, fighter aircraft where appropriate, directed-energy systems as they mature, and higher-end missiles reserved for the threats against which they are actually required.

What matters is not merely the excellence of one weapon but the depth of the entire defensive architecture.

The objective should be to ensure that a cheap drone does not automatically oblige the defender to spend the most expensive available interceptor.

That is not a criticism of missile technology. It is a recognition that different threats require different economic and technological responses.

Preparedness Is Not Alarmism

There is sometimes a reluctance to discuss such matters in public because of the fear that citizens may become alarmed. That concern is understandable.

But the alternative cannot be silence.

A mature democracy should be capable of discussing defence preparedness without descending into panic. Equally, it should be capable of discussing vulnerabilities without allowing every such discussion to be interpreted as a declaration of weakness.

The purpose of examining the concerns raised by Major Madhan Kumar is therefore not to undermine confidence in India but to ensure that confidence is accompanied by foresight.

Not Fear, but Preparedness

The subject with which I began this essay is therefore a rather simple one.

Can India's interior remain confident that the distances separating it from a hostile border will, by themselves, guarantee the degree of security upon which earlier generations could reasonably rely?

I do not think we should assume so.

That conclusion does not require us to doubt India's armed forces, nor does it require us to predict an attack upon any particular Indian city. It requires only that we recognise a basic truth of military affairs: the adversary learns, technology evolves, weapons become cheaper and more numerous, and the geography of warfare consequently changes.

India has learnt from its wars. We have altered our doctrine, strengthened our capabilities, improved our industry and developed new technologies. There is no reason to suppose that an adversary will behave otherwise.

We should therefore neither fear the enemy nor underestimate him.

Major Madhan Kumar's address, in my humble view, raises precisely this distinction.

The lesson of Operation SINDOOR is that India possesses formidable defensive capabilities. The lesson of Ukraine is that distance is becoming less protective. The lesson of Israel and Iran is that even exceptional defensive systems must operate within the arithmetic of finite inventories and sustained attacks. The lesson of the drone itself is that an inexpensive weapon, employed in quantity, may impose a disproportionately expensive burden upon the defender unless the defence possesses suitably layered and economical responses.

And the lesson of history is perhaps the simplest of all:

An enemy must never be taken lightly. He is human. He learns — just as we do.

This essay is therefore not intended to induce disquiet among the reading public, nor to suggest that catastrophe is imminent.

It is intended to make the modest and defensible point that the character of aerial warfare has altered, and that the protective value once attributed to geographical distance may no longer be taken for granted.

India must continue to invest, innovate, produce, adapt and prepare.

Not because we doubt our strength. But because we respect the future.

And because, in matters of national security, it is far wiser to prepare for a possibility than to discover its consequences after the possibility has become a reality.

Not fear, but preparedness.

My humble opinion.

Did You Know?

Ukraine's stated 3,000-kilometre drone capability: On 17 March 2025, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated officially that a Ukrainian long-range drone with a stated range of 3,000 kilometres had successfully passed testing. This should be understood as an official Ukrainian statement about a tested capability, not as a guarantee that every operational sortie achieves that range.

Operation SINDOOR: India's Ministry of External Affairs reported approximately 300–400 drone intrusions attempted at 36 locations along the western frontier on the night of 8–9 May 2025.

Operation Rising Lion: Israel's Ministry of Defence later reported an 86-per-cent interception rate against Iranian ballistic missiles during the June 2025 operation.

Glossary

Air-defence architecture: The complete arrangement of sensors, command-and-control systems, weapons, communications, personnel and procedures employed to detect, identify, track and defeat hostile aircraft, missiles and unmanned systems. A modern air-defence architecture is normally composed of several complementary layers rather than a single weapon system.

Ballistic missile: A missile which, after its powered phase, follows a predominantly ballistic trajectory governed substantially by gravity and its initial velocity. Ballistic missiles may travel at very high speeds and present distinctive detection and interception problems compared with aircraft or conventional cruise missiles.

Counter-battery radar: A radar system designed to detect hostile artillery, rocket or mortar fire and, by analysing the trajectory of an incoming projectile, estimate the location from which it was fired. Such systems are an important element of modern counter-battery warfare.

Counter-UAS (C-UAS): Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems; the collection of technologies, equipment and procedures used to detect, identify, track, disrupt or defeat unmanned aircraft. Depending upon the system, this may include radar, electro-optical sensors, electronic warfare, guns, interceptor missiles and other means.

Cruise missile: A guided missile which generally flies through the atmosphere for most or all of its journey, often at relatively low altitude and with sustained aerodynamic flight. Unlike a ballistic missile, a cruise missile does not normally follow a predominantly ballistic trajectory.

Decoy: An object, signal or unmanned system intended to resemble, imitate or otherwise complicate the detection and identification of a genuine military target. Decoys may be employed to divert defensive resources, confuse sensors or obscure the identity of more valuable incoming weapons.

Directed-energy weapon: A system which employs concentrated electromagnetic energy, rather than a conventional projectile or explosive warhead, to damage, disable or defeat a target. High-energy lasers are an example of a directed-energy technology being investigated and developed for air-defence and counter-UAS applications.

Electronic warfare: The use of electromagnetic energy to protect one's own systems, disrupt or deceive an adversary's electronic systems, or exploit the electromagnetic environment. In the context of drone warfare, electronic warfare may be employed to interfere with communications, navigation or control links.

Engagement channel: The capacity of an air-defence system to deal with a particular number of targets simultaneously or within a given period. This depends upon sensors, command-and-control systems, available weapons and the characteristics of the defensive network.

Geographical depth: The physical distance between a nation's frontier or principal area of conflict and important centres, infrastructure and population centres in its interior. Historically, such distance could provide substantial protection against many forms of attack.

Geographical sanctuary: A term used in this essay to describe the protective value once provided by great physical distance from the immediate theatre of conflict. The argument of the essay is that increasingly long-range unmanned systems may reduce, though not necessarily eliminate, that protective value.

Interceptor: A defensive weapon intended to destroy or disable an incoming aircraft, missile, drone or other hostile object before it reaches its intended target. Interceptors vary greatly in size, range, speed, guidance method and cost.

Layered air defence: A defence architecture employing several complementary systems operating at different ranges and against different classes of threat. Such a structure may combine long-range, medium-range and short-range systems with guns, electronic warfare, surveillance and other counter-UAS measures.

Loitering munition: An unmanned weapon designed to remain airborne, or “loiter”, for a period while searching for or awaiting a suitable target before carrying out an attack. It combines characteristics of an unmanned aircraft with those of a guided munition.

Mass drone attack: The employment of a large number of unmanned aircraft in a coordinated or successive attack. A mass attack need not constitute a technically autonomous “swarm”; the term is therefore broader than swarm warfare.

Missile saturation: A condition in which the number, timing or variety of incoming missiles places exceptionally heavy demands upon the defender's sensors, engagement channels, interceptors, command-and-control network and available time.

Proliferation: The spread of a military technology, weapon, system or related expertise from one country, organisation or theatre of conflict to others. In contemporary warfare, developments in unmanned systems may spread through commercial, industrial or defence partnerships.

Resilience: The capacity of a military system or infrastructure to continue functioning despite disruption, damage, electronic interference, loss of individual components or repeated attack. Resilience is an important element of national air-defence planning.

Saturation attack: An attack employing such numbers, combinations or successive waves of weapons that the defender is placed under exceptional pressure in respect of detection, tracking, decision-making, engagement channels, interceptor stocks and time.

Shoot-and-scoot: A field-artillery operating principle in which a mobile artillery system fires a prescribed mission and then rapidly changes position before counter-battery fire can locate and engage it. Mobility therefore becomes an important part of the weapon's survivability.

Swarm: A term commonly used for the coordinated employment of numerous unmanned systems. In its stricter technical sense, a swarm may involve significant levels of networking, communication, cooperation or autonomous behaviour among the individual systems. A large number of drones operating independently is not necessarily a true autonomous swarm.

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS): The complete system associated with an unmanned aircraft, including the aircraft itself, its control equipment, communications links, operators and other supporting components.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV): An aircraft which operates without a human pilot physically aboard. The term is widely used for remotely operated or otherwise unmanned aircraft employed for reconnaissance, surveillance, communications, combat and other purposes.

Counter-battery warfare: The detection and engagement of an adversary's artillery, rocket or mortar systems, normally in response to hostile fire. Counter-battery operations depend heavily upon radar, acoustic, optical, electronic and other forms of detection and targeting.

Strategic depth: The extent to which a nation's geographical space, infrastructure, military dispositions and supporting resources provide room for absorbing, responding to or recovering from an attack. Strategic depth is broader than geographical distance alone.

References & Further Reading

  1. Primary address: Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.), defence veteran and geopolitical analyst, whose address occasioned this essay — Watch the address on YouTube .
  2. Government of India — Ministry of External Affairs: Special briefing concerning Operation SINDOOR, 9 May 2025, including the statement that approximately 300–400 drones attempted intrusions at 36 locations extending from Leh to Sir Creek — Ministry of External Affairs .
  3. Government of India — Operation SINDOOR and Turkish-origin systems: The Government of India's briefing concerning the examination of recovered drone components and the preliminary identification of Turkish-origin ASISGUARD Songar systems.
  4. India — Chief of Defence Staff, General Anil Chauhan: Public remarks concerning the performance of Indian air defence during Operation SINDOOR and the absence of damage to Indian military or civilian infrastructure from the Pakistani drones and loitering munitions employed during the operation.
  5. Office of the President of Ukraine: Statement of 17 March 2025 concerning successful testing of a Ukrainian long-range drone with a stated range of 3,000 kilometres. The statement is cited in this essay as an official Ukrainian claim concerning a tested capability and not as a guarantee of operational range on every sortie. President of Ukraine .
  6. Ukraine and long-range unmanned warfare: Contemporary reporting concerning Ukrainian drone strikes reaching deep into Russian territory and the continuing development of long-range unmanned systems.
  7. Israel Ministry of Defence: Assessment of the performance of advanced Israeli systems during Operation Rising Lion, including the reported interception rate against Iranian ballistic missiles and unmanned aerial systems. Israel Ministry of Defence .
  8. Turkey and Pakistan: Indian and international reporting concerning Turkish-origin unmanned systems employed by Pakistan during Operation SINDOOR, reported Turkish assistance, and subsequent reporting concerning further Turkey–Pakistan cooperation in unmanned systems. Such reporting should be read with the distinction between intelligence or source-based reports and publicly acknowledged official statements.
  9. Bayraktar AKINCI: Publicly available information concerning the Turkish unmanned combat aircraft and its reported operation by Pakistan. The reference is relevant to the essay's discussion of the progressive acquisition of more capable unmanned systems.
  10. Chinese SH-15 artillery system: Publicly available defence reporting concerning Pakistan's acquisition and employment of the Chinese-made SH-15 155 mm wheeled self-propelled howitzer, including its mobility and the associated “shoot-and-scoot” operating principle.
  11. Counter-battery warfare: General military literature concerning the use of counter-battery radar and associated sensor systems to identify the approximate point of origin of artillery fire through analysis of projectile trajectories.
  12. Counter-UAS and layered air defence: Publicly available technical and defence literature concerning the integration of radar, electro-optical sensors, electronic warfare, guns, missiles and other means for the detection and defeat of unmanned aircraft.
A note on sources: This essay distinguishes, wherever practicable, between information formally stated by governments or military authorities, independently reported events, and claims attributed to unnamed or security-related sources. Defence reporting can contain information that is incomplete, subsequently revised or not publicly verifiable. Readers are therefore encouraged to consult the original sources where available and to treat source-based claims with appropriate caution.

About the Author

I am Dhinakar Rajaram, a Chennai-based writer with long-standing interests in science, technology, astronomy, history, music and contemporary affairs. Between 2010 and 2012, I wrote periodically on current affairs, defence and matters of national interest. After a long interval, I have returned to the subject with this essay, prompted by the observations of Major Madhan Kumar (Retd.) and by the rapid changes taking place in the character of modern warfare.

I write as an independent civilian observer. I do not claim to speak on behalf of the Armed Forces, the Government of India, or any defence establishment. My purpose is simply to examine matters of public importance, consider the available evidence, and place my own observations before the reader in the hope that they may contribute, however modestly, to informed discussion.

Language & translation: I have written this essay in the formal British/Indian English in which I was educated and which characterised much of the public writing and broadcasting of an earlier generation. A translation facility may be enabled on the blog's side panel where available. Machine-translated versions may contain inaccuracies in terminology, nuance or proper nouns; the English original should therefore be regarded as authoritative.
Scientific temper and civic responsibility: I regard informed public discussion, reasoned examination and the willingness to question assumptions as part of the spirit of inquiry and reform envisaged by Article 51A(h) of the Constitution of India. This essay is offered in that spirit.
© Dhinakar Rajaram 2026  ·  © இரா. தினகர் 2026
Published on the Dhinakar Rajaram blog.

The Dying Tube Light’s Last Gasp

The Dying Tube Light’s Last Gasp — Ballasts, Starters, and a Vanishing Household Jugaad The Dying Tube Ligh...