India eyes USA aircraft carrier technology

[WishLivePak]

8,000 ton destroyers are not yet ready for deployment. Current Indian destroyers are less than 8,000 tons. Bigger the AC the bigger a target it will be. US carriers have like 6 destroyers each carrying anywhere between 60-90 SAM missiles. Plus their AC carry at least 3 AWACS. Indian AC will lack that.

and a bigger kick if one losses an Air Carrier. It'll hurt the morale a lot.

A big carrier brings huge morale, but also takes a bigger morale away when it is lost. Hence, it'd be #1 target for enemy navies.

 

[lavenge lavenge]

Your theories on what Hyuga class destroyers are used for is different from what they are actually used for.

Won't change the fact that they are helicopter carriers with focus on ASW.

This looks like F-18 to you?

Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This was EW version of A-6 intruder. It has been retired.

I was taking about newer version E/A-18 growler which is EW version of F-18.

E/A-18 growler is just a F-18 bristling with EW equipments rather than missiles and bombs.

Your arguments are self-contradictory. USN has aircraft like growler, prowler, hawkeye etc. because they field super carriers. USN fields supercarriers because they intend on sea dominance.

I don't know why IN wants a 65,000 ton AC but if they do then they need assets to protect such a beast which unfortunately the IN lacks at the present. And if you think DRDO will come up with something like prowler or growler within next 10 years then I salute your optimism.

Whatever little requirement IN or any other Navy has for EW is fulfilled by EW pods attached to pylons of normal Aircraft.

It is not mine, but your argument that is self contradictory. Indian navy does not have E-2D hawkeye because it could not fly off from Indian carriers. India does not have a growler like aircraft because it's AC air wings does not have enough aircrafts to dedicate one for EW mission.

You woner why IN want a heavier AC when it could not protect itself, when the very reason that IAC has to rely on helicopter based AWACS and has no dedicated EW aircraft is because it's carriers are not big enough to field them. This is what is called self contradiction.

And BTW, of two equipments ( E-2D and Growler) E-2D is much much more difficult to Engineer.

If it comes to Pass, A MKI or Mig-29K could be divested of all it's armaments and multiple EW pods/higher power output pods mounted on them. It is much easier to convert a normal Aircraft into EW aircraft ,than engineer a world class AWACS.

I already gave the reason, you did not like the answer.

In case you did not know, NO country not even US can mobilise its entire aircraft or navy during war. This is for a simple reason called maintenance which is required. Bigger the vessel the more time it requires for repair. France has a nuclear powered carrier and that thing needs nearly 6 months of refit.

Having smaller but more AC gives IN the safety of numbers. If IN has 4 AC of 28,000 tons each then IN still has two AC in its disposal while the other two are going repairs. This still gives the IN the authority to patrol both the coasts.

What is IN supposed to do if the 65,000 AC is in the dock facing repairs? And the plan is for one 65,000 ton AC and not two 70,000 AC. Check your sources.

No you did not provide any logical reason.

First, There is nothing called as a 28,000 Tonne carrier, unless you count some LPD's capable of hosting museum antique Harriers. A 28,000 tonne carrier with normal aircraft is impossible or would have an air wing in single digits . Even 50,000 tonne is classified as light carrier in Navies.

Second, a 28,000 carrier does not cost half of what a 65000-70000 tonne carrier would cost. So NO, you would not get 4 AIrcraft carriers for price of one 65000 Tonne carrier. You would at most get 4 aircraft carriers of 28,000 tonne class at same cost as 3 Aircraft carrier of 65,000 class.

Third, Number of sailors required to man a 65000 class carrier is only marginally more than what would required for a proper 28,000 Tonne carrier. IN would have to accure much higher expenditure in running them. That too when combined capability of those 4 carriers would be less than one 65000 class carrier.

Fourth, A 65000-70000 tonne carrier is not the "only" carrier planned by IN. It is the "next" carrier that would be constructed once Vikrant get out of the construction docks. When this 65000 Tonne carrier would get out of docks, both Vikramidtya and Vikrant would be still floating. It is only after that construcion of new carrier would start. India would have two STOBAR aircraft carriers and one CATOBAR carrier till at least 2035. After that it would be CATOBAR carriers that would replace Vikrant and Vikramaditya.

and a bigger kick if one losses an Air Carrier. It'll hurt the morale a lot.

A big carrier brings huge morale, but also takes a bigger morale away when it is lost. Hence, it'd be #1 target for enemy navies.

But chances of losing a 20,000 tonne carrier fielding 15 harriers is more than losing a 70,000 Tonne carrier fielding 40 5-th genAircrafts.

 

[Indian Patriot]

and a bigger kick if one losses an Air Carrier. It'll hurt the morale a lot.

A big carrier brings huge morale, but also takes a bigger morale away when it is lost. Hence, it'd be #1 target for enemy navies.

That is why USN is now re-considering its ages old doctrine about AC. Modern AShM are getting more and more lethal. Brahmos has opened the floodgates for long range supersonic cruise missiles. China has gone a step ahead and deployed anti-ship ballistic missile which was a googly for USN. Even now they are struggling to come up with a proper defense against ballistic missiles which travel at 10-15 times the speed of sound, impossible for current air-defense systems to intercept and kill. USN is thus investing in weaponised laser systems. IN lacks the resources.

PLAN is a potential threat to both USN and IN. Which means in a possible future conflict IN will have to negotiate with DF-21.

One more thing about AC is its prohibitive cost. Vikramaditya cost slightly more than 2 billion dollars. USN AC cost anywhere between 10-12 billion dollars. A modern, fully equipped 65,000 ton AC will cost at least 5 billion dollars and that is only the ship. The aircraft it carries are extra charges. That is the reason why every navy cannot afford an AC in its ranks.

 

[IND151]

For near future IAC 1 and IAC 2 will suffice.

We need more nuke subs, 6 SSNs and 6 SSBNs.

We need Larger SSBNs weighing 10,500 Tons +, so that they can carry at least 12 K 4 missiles.

 

[lavenge lavenge]

That is why USN is now re-considering its ages old doctrine about AC. Modern AShM are getting more and more lethal. Brahmos has opened the floodgates for long range supersonic cruise missiles. China has gone a step ahead and deployed anti-ship ballistic missile which was a googly for USN. Even now they are struggling to come up with a proper defense against ballistic missiles which travel at 10-15 times the speed of sound, impossible for current air-defense systems to intercept and kill. USN is thus investing in weaponised laser systems. IN lacks the resources.

PLAN is a potential threat to both USN and IN. Which means in a possible future conflict IN will have to negotiate with DF-21.

One more thing about AC is its prohibitive cost. Vikramaditya cost slightly more than 2 billion dollars. USN AC cost anywhere between 10-12 billion dollars. A modern, fully equipped 65,000 ton AC will cost at least 5 billion dollars and that is only the ship. The aircraft it carries are extra charges. That is the reason why every navy cannot afford an AC in its ranks.

Supersonic AShm are not something new. First anti Shi missile to be fielded was supersonic. Us had and retiried supersonic AShm missiles in 1960's.

Subsonic missiles have their advantages over supersonic missiles. Subsonic missiles are highly manuvarable thus it is easy to have multidirectional saturation attack by using subsonic missiles. Numbers exhaust interceptors available with defender anf multitude in direction beats CIWS.

Anto ship ballistic missiles would never become a reality for same reason that Anti-Tank ballistic missile never became one. They are not manuverable to hit a moving target and require supporet infrastructure that would cost Trillions.

It is basic physics. Higher the velocity, less would be manuverability. even a slight change of a second in missile path would take it miles away from it's target.

BTW, that famed Chinese ASBM DF-21 has never ever been tested against a moving target. It is a hoax and USN is playing along in order to get higher funding.

 

[Indian Patriot]

Won't change the fact that they are helicopter carriers with focus on ASW.

That is your assumption talking. Plus the Japanese are not allowed to field AC because of their WW2 clauses. That is the reason they call it "helicopter destroyer" even though it carries fixed wing aircraft.

This was EW version of A-6 intruder. It has been retired.

I was taking about newer version E/A-18 growler which is EW version of F-18.

E/A-18 growler is just a F-18 bristling with EW equipments rather than missiles and bombs.

And you are optimistic IN will have the same equipment, imported of course.

It is not mine, but your argument that is self contradictory. Indian navy does not have E-2D hawkeye because it could not fly off from Indian carriers. India does not have a growler like aircraft because it's AC air wings does not have enough aircrafts to dedicate one for EW mission.

You are predictably talking in circles. India does not have a growler like aircraft because it lacks the know-how. E-2D depends on wether USN is willing to sell them to India. These aircraft are needed to protect large carriers. Royal Navy does not have growler or prowler yet they are doing absolutely fine.

You woner why IN want a heavier AC when it could not protect itself, when the very reason that IAC has to rely on helicopter based AWACS and has no dedicated EW aircraft is because it's carriers are not big enough to field them. This is what is called self contradiction.

So once IN fields a 65,000 ton AC all the required aircraft, radars, sensors, weapon systems will magically appear?

And BTW, of two equipments ( E-2D and Growler) E-2D is much much more difficult to Engineer.

If it comes to Pass, A MKI or Mig-29K could be divested of all it's armaments and multiple EW pods/higher power output pods mounted on them. It is much easier to convert a normal Aircraft into EW aircraft ,than engineer a world class AWACS.

You cannot take any aircraft and put it in an AC. There are DEDICATED aircraft for that role. You cannot simply put a MKI on an AC because your fancies allow you. IAF does not have a carrier capable Flanker. Russia and China has. So now IN will have to buy additional Flankers for its carrier role. You talk about mounting "higher power outputs" on the Fulcrum. Where is the "higher power" going to come from? Does the Fulcrum have the capability to power them or are they supposed to take off with a generator tied to their belly?

And where are the EW pods and other accessories going to come from? Is DRDO working on it or are we again going to wait for technology transfer?

EW and AWACS are DIFFERENT aircraft. There is a difference between the Hawkeye and the growler/prowler. The AWACS are used to detect airborne missiles, aircraft and surveillance. The EW aircraft are used for suppressing enemy radar, communication and other electronic equipment.

First, There is nothing called as a 28,000 Tonne carrier, unless you count some LPD's capable of hosting museum antique Harriers. A 28,000 tonne carrier with normal aircraft is impossible or would have an air wing in single digits . Even 50,000 tonne is classified as light carrier in Navies.

There is something called 28,000 ton carrier. It is operated by Italy and Spain. Previously operated by India and Thailand. If I am not wrong Brazil too has one.

Only a misguided fellow would call Harrier an antique. It was using these antiques in Falklands war that the RN shot down Argentine supersonic Mirage aircraft. Your knowledge is based on fancy rhetoric instead of facts. How many Harriers have been used in operations and how many have been lost? Which armies still use Harriers? On what basis do you call Harriers "antique"? If Harriers are antique then what are Mig-21, Mig-27 and Jaguars?

Second, a 28,000 carrier does not cost half of what a 65000-70000 tonne carrier would cost. So NO, you would not get 4 AIrcraft carriers for price of one 65000 Tonne carrier. You would at most get 4 aircraft carriers of 28,000 tonne class at same cost as 3 Aircraft carrier of 65,000 class.

Vikramaditya cost 2 billion dollars, HMS Elizabeth costs 6.2 billion pounds. Convert pounds into dollars and do the math.

Third, Number of sailors required to man a 65000 class carrier is only marginally more than what would required for a proper 28,000 Tonne carrier. IN would have to accure much higher expenditure in running them. That too when combined capability of those 4 carriers would be less than one 65000 class carrier.

What about the expenditure of repair, refit and maintenance of a single 65,000 ton carrier never mind the cost of acquisition? And what is the IN supposed to do when the 65,000 carrier is in the docks for repair?

But chances of losing a 20,000 tonne carrier fielding 15 harriers is more than losing a 70,000 Tonne carrier fielding 40 5-th genAircrafts.

And why is that? Because according to you those 40 "5th gen aircrafts" will be shooting down anti-ship ballistic missiles? How many 5th gen aircraft does IAF have, how many 5th gen aircraft does IN have?

All your arguments are based on assumptions that this will happen or that will happen.

[QUOTE="lavenge lavenge, post: 6744554, member: 163903" ] BTW, that famed Chinese ASBM DF-21 has never ever been tested against a moving target. It is a hoax and USN is playing along in order to get higher funding.[/QUOTE]

Yes, you are absolutely right. DF-21 is only a hoax that the USN is playing along only for funds. Very sound and secure logic.

 

[lavenge lavenge]

And you are optimistic IN will have the same equipment, imported of course.

Certainly.

Even Land based AWACS of DRDO are in testing phase and there is no plan to construce Ship borne version of that AWACS.

All AWACS of India atm are imported, and US has already offered E-2D Hawkeye to India.

You are predictably talking in circles. India does not have a growler like aircraft because it lacks the know-how. E-2D depends on wether USN is willing to sell them to India. These aircraft are needed to protect large carriers. Royal Navy does not have growler or prowler yet they are doing absolutely fine.

It is you who is not making any sense. All AWACS atm with India are foreign, and US has even offered Hawkeye for Vikramaditya and Vikrant, if we pay for conversion of CATOBAR hawkeye to STOBAR.

US clears Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for India

And most Navies and Airforce could easily have EW aircraft, if they want or could spare aircraft. Engineering itt is much easier than AWACS.

So once IN fields a 65,000 ton AC all the required aircraft, radars, sensors, weapon systems will magically appear?.

India would get them like it got Mig-29's or N-LCA. It would either buy them or manufactire them. IAC-2 would be inducted in 2025-30 time. By that time we may have N-AMCA.

And there are more choice in CATOBAR aircrafts tham STOBAR. In CATOBAR, we could get F-18. F-35C, Rafale-M but in STOBAR we are struck with Mig-29K's.

You cannot take any aircraft and put it in an AC. There are DEDICATED aircraft for that role. You cannot simply put a MKI on an AC because your fancies allow you. IAF does not have a carrier capable Flanker. Russia and China has. So now IN will have to buy additional Flankers for its carrier role. You talk about mounting "higher power outputs" on the Fulcrum. Where is the "higher power" going to come from? Does the Fulcrum have the capability to power them or are they supposed to take off with a generator tied to their belly?.

Mig-29K is already a Naval aircraft. It does not require any modification in airframe to do that. Learn to read properly.

I throw in MKI as an example because E/A-18 is also used by USAF.

If it comes to Pass, A MKI or Mig-29K could be divested of all it's armaments and multiple EW pods/higher power output pods mounted on them. It is much easier to convert a normal Aircraft into EW aircraft ,than engineer a world class AWACS..

And the extra power required would come from Engine. A Mig-29K when not carrying any BVR or Bombload could spare extra power which it could convert into electricity required to run higher power EM suite.This is what happens in E/A-18 which is just a modified F-18.

There is something called 28,000 ton carrier. It is operated by Italy and Spain. Previously operated by India and Thailand. If I am not wrong Brazil too has one.

They are not proper carriers.

They are classified as LPD's and are participating in India's LPD tender. Harriers could land even on a barge.

Only a misguided fellow would call Harrier an antique. It was using these antiques in Falklands war that the RN shot down Argentine supersonic Mirage aircraft. Your knowledge is based on fancy rhetoric instead of facts. How many Harriers have been used in operations and how many have been lost? Which armies still use Harriers? On what basis do you call Harriers "antique"? If Harriers are antique then what are Mig-21, Mig-27 and Jaguars?

This is height of specious argument. Just because antique peice Harriers bested antique piece Mirage-III does not make them good aircraft.

They are useless against current naval aircrafts like Mig-29K,Su-33, F-18, or Rafale-M.

The fact that you have to throw in examples of Mig-21/27 proves how outdated harriers are.

Vikramaditya cost 2 billion dollars, HMS Elizabeth costs 6.2 billion pounds. Convert pounds into dollars and do the math.

Vikramaditya costed $2 billion in 2004-13 dollars. HMS Elizabeth would cost $9 billion in 2014-17 dollars.

Vikramaditya today would have cost upward of $5 billion today.

What about the expenditure of repair, refit and maintenance of a single 65,000 ton carrier never mind the cost of acquisition? And what is the IN supposed to do when the 65,000 carrier is in the docks for repair?

It's expenditure and refit cost would be much much less than 4 carriers.

And IN would still have Vikramadirta and Vikrant when IAC-2 would be in dock.

nd why is that? Because according to you those 40 "5th gen aircrafts" will be shooting down anti-ship ballistic missiles? How many 5th gen aircraft does IAF have, how many 5th gen aircraft does IN have?

All your arguments are based on assumptions that this will happen or that will happen..

Yes,

Aircrafts can and do shoot cruise missiles along with shooting down aircrafts and bombing ships which could have launched those AShm's in first place thus preventing a situation where your Ship has to defend against AShm.

And all my arguments are based on solid facts. Any observer could attest to that.

Yes, you are absolutely right. DF-21 is only a hoax that the USN is playing along only for funds. Very sound and secure logic.

And why are you shying away from the fact that it has never ever been tested and has some glaring problem in theory and require an infrastructure (targetting and detecting satellites) that would cost trillions.

 

[Indian Patriot]

It is you who is not making any sense. All AWACS atm with India are foreign, and US has even offered Hawkeye for Vikramaditya and Vikrant, if we pay for conversion of CATOBAR hawkeye to STOBAR.

US clears Hawkeye E-2D aircraft for India

And most Navies and Airforce could easily have EW aircraft, if they want or could spare aircraft. Engineering itt is much easier than AWACS.

You are only confirming what I said. US sells will determine wether India has Hawkeye or not.

Modifying aircraft for EW is not the same as modifying a Maruti 800 car. Plus we are talking about carrier capable aircraft here, not the airforce which will operate from land.

India would get them like it got Mig-29's or N-LCA. It would either buy them or manufactire them. IAC-2 would be inducted in 2025-30 time. By that time we may have N-AMCA.

N-LCA is still to be inducted. How many Mig-29s does IN have at present? Why are you walking into "we may", why so much speculation and guess work? You want to discredit DF-21 by calling it a hoax when you are yourself not sure about IN acquisitions.

And there are more choice in CATOBAR aircrafts tham STOBAR. In CATOBAR, we could get F-18. F-35C, Rafale-M but in STOBAR we are struck with Mig-29K's.

India does not currently have either the hornet or even the Rafale. And based on what do you assume India is going to buy F-35C. Has there been any mention of a deal so far? Or are you again talking about your dreams?

Mig-29K is already a Naval aircraft. It does not require any modification in airframe to do that. Learn to read properly.

I throw in MKI as an example because E/A-18 is also used by USAF.

Mig-29 is not an EW aircraft. Learn to talk facts not fantasies. What are the types of EW equipment the Mig-29 can carry according to you. Are any of these in service with India?

You can throw in Boeing Jumbo Jet for example. Hornets are used by USN because they are carrier capable. Learn the difference between carrier based aircraft and land based aircraft. You cannot take a EF Typhoon and take off/land on a carrier just because you want to. If things were so simple and easy DRDO would have allocated the LCA to navy instead of working of a naval variant of LCA.

And the extra power required would come from Engine. A Mig-29K when not carrying any BVR or Bombload could spare extra power which it could convert into electricity required to run higher power EM suite.This is what happens in E/A-18 which is just a modified F-18.

Is the Mig-29 engine designed/ capable of taking the load? Who is going to power the flight-radar and on-board communications then?

"Just a modified" F-18 is not that simple. It's not like painting NAVY on the sides of an F-18. But never mind, feel free to indulge in your fantasies.

They are not proper carriers.

They are classified as LPD's and are participating in India's LPD tender. Harriers could land even on a barge.

I am not sure if harriers can take off or land on a barge but since you have so much knowledge I guess you are right.

This is height of specious argument. Just because antique peice Harriers bested antique piece Mirage-III does not make them good aircraft. .

Yes. Harriers are not good aircraft strictly according to you. You are a genius.

They are useless against current naval aircrafts like Mig-29K,Su-33, F-18, or Rafale-M.

And which of Indian adversary has these aircraft. Pakistan does not have. China does but then where exactly is India supposed to fight naval air battles with China, over Indonesia or Vietnam?

Vikramaditya costed $2 billion in 2004-13 dollars. HMS Elizabeth would cost $9 billion in 2014-17 dollars.

Vikramaditya today would have cost upward of $5 billion today.

In case you forgot Vikramaditya is 40,000 not 28,000 ship. HMS would cost 9 billion dollars according to you. Has the keel of this 65,000 ton AC even been laid or are we still in the negotiation stage? How much will it cost IN when construction work finally starts, 12 billion dollars?

Yes,

Aircrafts can and do shoot cruise missiles along with shooting down aircrafts and bombing ships which could have launched them in first place thus preventing a situation where your Ship has to defend against AShm.

And all my arguments are based on solid facts. Any observer could attest to that.

So 28,000 ton AC cannot fly aircrafts, or what is the problem?

Your arguments are based on ASSUMPTIONS that DF-21 is a hoax and China would not target a single 70,000 ton carrier because your heart says so.

And why are you shying away from the fact that it has never ever been tested and has some glaring problem in theory and require an infrastructure (targetting and detecting satellites) that would cost trillions.

Has the Brahmos being tested in combat? What problem does it have?

Why do you ASSUME that building an anti-ship missile would cost TRILLIONS while building a 65,000 ton AC would cost cheaper when any sensible person would say building a missile is cheaper than building a ship. You talk about infrastructure, what about the infrastructure needed to house and dock a 65,000 ton ship?

Land based anti-ship missiles are not new. If they don't ned to spend "trillions" to target ships like destroyers why so much needed to target an AC which with its flotilla would be easier to detect. And even if your theory is right about money, what makes you think China will not spend "trillions"? Their GDP is four times size of India and their defense budget nearing 200 billion is second only to China.

All your arguments are based on your simplistic assumptions.

 

[lavenge lavenge]

You are only confirming what I said. US sells will determine wether India has Hawkeye or not.

Modifying aircraft for EW is not the same as modifying a Maruti 800 car. Plus we are talking about carrier capable aircraft here, not the airforce which will operate from land.


Mig-29 is not an EW aircraft. Learn to talk facts not fantasies. What are the types of EW equipment the Mig-29 can carry according to you. Are any of these in service with India?

I was always talking facts.

Any aircraft could be easily modifies to be a dedicated EW aircraft, if manufacturer desires so.

They are not designed so because EW suits of most aircrafts fullfill that job. Mig-29 carries indigenous Tarang RWR and ELTA EL/L 8222 jamming pods.

And you comprehension is awful.

Mig-29K is already a carrier capable aircraft. I was taking about modifying it for EW purpose, if there is a need.

Are any of these in service with India?

This is an example of intellectual dishonesty on your part. Discussion was about whether an aircraft could be converted into EW aircraft IF THERE IS A NEED TO DO IT, not whether there is one with IN or not.

N-LCA is still to be inducted. How many Mig-29s does IN have at present? Why are you walking into "we may", why so much speculation and guess work? You want to discredit DF-21 by calling it a hoax when you are yourself not sure about IN acquisitions.

Next AC is still 15 years away. I do not understand how could anyone give anything except "what could" be fielded from it.

How many N-LCA or Mig-29K we have is not evn remotely related to this discussion.

India does not currently have either the hornet or even the Rafale. And based on what do you assume India is going to buy F-35C. Has there been any mention of a deal so far? Or are you again talking about your dreams?.

Now this is retardedness of first order.

I do not understand how absence of of Hornet or Rafel in IN currently is related to discussion of AC that would sail in 2025-30.

We would have to buy/manufacture new aircraft for IAC-2 as Mig-29K at that point of time would have become legacy aircrafts.

In future scenario, only F-35 and to some extent Rafale-M could be fielded from IAC-2. Or we have to construct new aircraft as no one capable of building one is interested.

And US has has offered F-35 to India. It is not my problem that you do not know anything about current affairs.

..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Navy: US offers F 35 to India as India-US Defence Cooperation grows

US pushing to sell radar-evading F-35 fighter jets to India - Firstpost

You can throw in Boeing Jumbo Jet for example. Hornets are used by USN because they are carrier capable. Learn the difference between carrier based aircraft and land based aircraft. You cannot take a EF Typhoon and take off/land on a carrier just because you want to. If things were so simple and easy DRDO would have allocated the LCA to navy instead of working of a naval variant of LCA.

It is not my problem that you have suck weak GK that you don't know that Mig-29K is carrier based aircraft.

Is the Mig-29 engine designed/ capable of taking the load? Who is going to power the flight-radar and on-board communications then?

"Just a modified" F-18 is not that simple. It's not like painting NAVY on the sides of an F-18. But never mind, feel free to indulge in your fantasies.

When an aircraft flies without weapon load, it has lot of spare power which could be converted to electricity be aircraft's engine rather than thrust which would provide power for various EW suits. It is only difference between F-18 and E/A-18.E/A-18 does not carry weapons.

I am not sure if harriers can take off or land on a barge but since you have so much knowledge I guess you are right.



Yes. Harriers are not good aircraft strictly according to you. You are a genius.

Harrier could land on any 5X5 m flat surface. It could easily land on LPD,Barge, AC, anything. IN's harriers landed and took off from container ship during exercise, when Virat was under refit.

South Asia's Nuclear Security Dilemma: India, Pakistan, and China - Google Books

ANd it is a dated legacy fighter like Mig-21 and is retired by all Navies around the world.

And which of Indian adversary has these aircraft. Pakistan does not have. China does but then where exactly is India supposed to fight naval air battles with China, over Indonesia or Vietnam?

FYI, China has Su-33.

And your assumption that an AC would have to duel only with other carrier's air wing is moronic. It would also have to fight Aircrafts of PAF, which has F-16's, if it want to strike Pakistan; which is one of the job of AC.

Has the Brahmos being tested in combat? What problem does it have?

There is difference between combat tested and testing, your small brain could not understand that.

DF-21 has never ever been tested on a moving object, ever. Not even in experimental settings.

Why do you ASSUME that building an anti-ship missile would cost TRILLIONS while building a 65,000 ton AC would cost cheaper when any sensible person would say building a missile is cheaper than building a ship. You talk about infrastructure, what about the infrastructure needed to house and dock a 65,000 ton ship?

Land based anti-ship missiles are not new. If they don't ned to spend "trillions" to target ships like destroyers why so much needed to target an AC which with its flotilla would be easier to detect. And even if your theory is right about money, what makes you think China will not spend "trillions"? Their GDP is four times size of India and their defense budget nearing 200 billion is second only to China.

All your arguments are based on your simplistic assumptions.

You probably do not have capability to differentiate between cost of missile and cost of infrastructure. The cost in TRillions would be cost of thousand of satellite that would be needed to cover whole of Ocean so that an AC could be detected and targetted on high sea.

There are no long range AShcm because, unless a ship is stationary due to being crippled , a AShcm could not hit a ship from long distance.

And DF-21 could be defeated by using countermeasures and could even be intercepted by existing ABM system of Aegis; and unless it is armed with Nukes, it could not cause much damage to AC.

Ever wondered why Chinese are not even showing any signs of putting up infrastructure to support ASBM's or why no one ,including Americans, are shelving their PLANS to have carriers. Probably because they are smart.

It is your argument which are simplistic and borne out of ignorance.

 

[Tshering22]

Former rear admiral Ravi Vohra said the Indian Navy's ultimate objective was a five-carrier fleet comprising a mix of large and small carriers.

Ain't that a little to stretched?

Three active and one reserve was the earlier plan.

 

[Indian Patriot]

I was always talking facts.

Any aircraft could be easily modifies to be a dedicated EW aircraft, if manufacturer desires so.

They are not designed so because EW suits of most aircrafts fullfill that job. Mig-29 carries indigenous Tarang RWR and ELTA EL/L 8222 jamming pods.

And you comprehension is awful.

Mig-29K is already a carrier capable aircraft. I was taking about modifying it for EW purpose, if there is a need.

Your facts are full of delusions.

Your knowledge on aircraft is even worse.

Every aircraft has a radar, so why do they invest in dedicated AWACS? Because on flight radar is not enough. Precisely why there are dedicated aircraft like Prowler.

You are yet to understand what comprehension even means.

Modify Mig-29 with what, how? Are there current examples of Mig-29 taking on the roles of AEW aircraft like the growler or are you again fantasising and assuming things will end up as your daydreams?

This is an example of intellectual dishonesty on your part. Discussion was about whether an aircraft could be converted into EW aircraft IF THERE IS A NEED TO DO IT, not whether there is one with IN or not.

Indian Navy has been operating two carriers for a long time and even now it operates a carrier. Do you mean to say that IN has no interest in defending the INS Virat so they did not bother to "modify" existing aircraft. Or is IN waiting with a screwdriver in hand to modify aircraft only after the 65,000 ton AC is pressed into service?

Next AC is still 15 years away. I do not understand how could anyone give anything except "what could" be fielded from it.

How many N-LCA or Mig-29K we have is not evn remotely related to this discussion.

You don't have any tangible answers so it is not related to this dicussion. How convenient.

If the next AC is 15 years away then how can you be so sure of what it can operate. You are pretty confident it will field this aircraft and that. Where are your sources or are you again hallucinating as usual?

Now this is retardedness of first order.

I do not understand how absence of of Hornet or Rafel in IN currently is related to discussion of AC that would sail in 2025-30.

We would have to buy/manufacture new aircraft for IAC-2 as Mig-29K at that point of time would have become legacy aircrafts.

In future scenario, only F-35 and to some extent Rafale-M could be fielded from IAC-2. Or we have to construct new aircraft as no one capable of building one is interested.

And US has has offered F-35 to India. It is not my problem that you do not know anything about current affairs.

..:: India Strategic ::.. Indian Navy: US offers F 35 to India as India-US Defence Cooperation grows

US pushing to sell radar-evading F-35 fighter jets to India - Firstpost

Being retard comes naturally to your posts.

Care to explain what an aircraft carrier is supposed to do if there are no aircraft on board it? Or are you again hoping that by some magic aircraft will magically appear?http://www.firstpost.com/world/us-m...vading-f-35-fighter-jets-to-india-121339.html

If Mig-29 will become legacy aircraft why are you so adamant that Mig-29 can be modified as AEW aircraft? Do ou even have any idea of the nonsense you are speaking or are you here to troll?

And WHERE exactly is the F-35C supposed to come from, has any deal being finalised? Stop spamming here with your childish day dream fantasies.

And what does your link say, F-35 has been offered. What about the finalisation dates? You little children have no clue what you talk about. There are clauses about F-35 ToT and here you are jumping for the moon. I suggest you read your own links first before coming across as a gullible fool.

It is not my problem that you have suck weak GK that you don't know that Mig-29K is carrier based aircraft.

And what does this nonsensical comment of yours have to do anything with the post?

You talk things out of thin air that Mig-29 can be used as AEW aircraft. So why don't you give an example of your fine GK and show how many AEW Mig-29S are in service with IN.

When an aircraft flies without weapon load, it has lot of spare power which could be converted to electricity be aircraft's engine rather than thrust which would provide power for various EW suits. It is only difference between F-18 and E/A-18.E/A-18 does not carry weapons.

Yes. And you must be an aeronautical engineer to come up with such gibberish.

Forget your nonsense. Explain a simple thing to me, if modifying an aircraft is so easy why the hell has the Mig-29 not being made into AEW aircraft yet? Does Russia have any example of Mig-29 flying as AEW aircraft or they are not educated and smart like you not to know how to modify aircraft?

Harrier could land on any 5X5 m flat surface. It could easily land on LPD,Barge, AC, anything. IN's harriers landed and took off from container ship during exercise, when Virat was under refit.

South Asia's Nuclear Security Dilemma: India, Pakistan, and China - Google Books

ANd it is a dated legacy fighter like Mig-21 and is retired by all Navies around the world.

Harriers are still in operation with USMC, Italy, Spain and yes, IN.
Just like the Mig-21 is still in service with IAF.

And your assumption that an AC would have to duel only with other carrier's air wing is moronic. It would also have to fight Aircrafts of PAF, which has F-16's, if it want to strike Pakistan; which is one of the job of AC.

Your posts like your thoughts is moronic. China has an AC as well or are you suggesting they wont send any AC if there is war?

Why would IN strike Pakistan using navy jets when it is simpler, easier and cheaper flying MKI from mainland India? The only naval target of value is Karachi harbour and Gwadar. These two can be taken out with Brahmos missiles. At most the naval air fleet will have to defend against PAF attacks and that also if IAF does not apply pressure in main cities like Lahore and Islamabad.

IN had a carrier in 1971, how many strike operations did that AC undertake against Pakistan?

There is difference between combat tested and testing, your small brain could not understand that.

DF-21 has never ever been tested on a moving object, ever. Not even in experimental settings.

Your small brain is still to learn the English alphabets properly. It is embarrassing for me to debate with a child like you.

You constantly crib, moan and lie about things you possibly don't even understand.

USN itself is concerned about DF-21 but according to armchair genius like you it is a hoax because the US admirals are your best friends and they like to clarify things with you on Twitter and Facebook. So naturally you have inside information the others lack.

The USN is very concerned about the DF-21D, which is one reason it’s working so hard on ship-borne anti-ballistic missile (ABM) technology. The USN is also working on other countermeasures, including strikes on DF-21 launch sites at the onset of war (potentially delivered from nuclear cruise missile submarines (SSGNs), and electronic warfare.

Should America Fear China's "Carrier-Killer" Missile? | The National Interest

You probably do not have capability to differentiate between cost of missile and cost of infrastructure.

Ok for argument's sake lets assume I do not have the capability to differentiate between cost of missile and cost of infrastructure. But you are a genius aren't you and you know everything there is to know.

So why don't you give a break down of cost estimates and show the total how it exactly adds up to "trillions" (in plural) for China. So don't talk out of your behind, give a break down of the cost estimate and show with proof of numbers that it will cost China TRILLIONS of dollars to operate the DF-21.

The cost in TRillions would be cost of thousand of satellite that would be needed to cover whole of Ocean so that an AC could be detected and targetted on high sea.

Don't give me your idle chatter. I asked for a definite proof supported by facts and numbers that it will cost TRILLIONS of dollars. And also show where and why it will take THOUSANDS of satellites.

Don't give me your nonsense. Give me facts and figures backed by credible sources.

Navies around the world are deploying shore based defenses, they never bothered to launch THOUSANDS of satellites.

Just as a footnote. Ever heard about the Poseidon aircraft? Wonder what that means and what its role is?

There are no long range AShcm because, unless a ship is stationary due to being crippled , a AShcm could not hit a ship from long distance.

So why did India waste time on building a 300 km anti-ship missile? Is IN going to pray and wait till a ship is crippled to fire their missiles or is the Brahmos just for show? Is that why majority of Russian anti-ship missiles have a range upwards of 500 km?

You "genius" proclaim that long-range anti-ship missiles are useless. You are wasting time in India. You should have been to US where they are testing Long range anti ship missiles. Clearly you can tell them it is a waste of time they are doing.

LRASM Missiles: Reaching for a Long-Range Punch

LRASM · Lockheed Martin

And DF-21 could be defeated by using countermeasures and could even be intercepted by existing ABM system of Aegis; and unless it is armed with Nukes, it could not cause much damage to AC.

Ever wondered why Chinese are not even showing any signs of putting up infrastructure to support ASBM's or why no one ,including Americans, are shelving their PLANS to have carriers. Probably because they are smart.

It is your argument which are simplistic and borne out of ignorance.

Is your real name Kapil Sharma?

Your fantasies are so ridiculous it is hard to believe you yourself believe them. DF-21 is a ballistic missile. Do you examples to show where ballistic missiles have been "defeated" (whatever that means) by using countermeasures? If "defeating" ballistic missisles is so easy why is US investing so much in theatre missile defense?

And what signs should the chinese show? Put a HUGE neon sign that says DF-21 is deployed here?

Don't give me this nonsense about infrastructure. You have been making a lot of stupid claims about TRILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of satellites needed for infrastructure to launch DF-21 missiles.

Either back your stupid arguments with numbers and a break down of cost estimates or shut up and do not troll this thread.

And just to show how big a dumb head you are.

The symbol of American power, the aircraft carrier, is at risk; at least that's what some recent reports suggest. In a current article in Defense News, U.S. Vice Admiral Jack Dorsett, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Dominance, states:


The technology that the Chinese have developed and are employing in their DF-21 D missile system has increased their probability of being able to employ a salvo of missiles to be able to hit a maneuvering target.

Aircraft Carriers and Chinese Missiles: Time to Rethink the U.S. Naval Doctrine | EastWest Institute

But don't worry. I am sure a civilian like you knows more about aircraft carriers than the US Vice Admiral does.

 

[lavenge lavenge]

Your facts are full of delusions.

Your knowledge on aircraft is even worse.

Every aircraft has a radar, so why do they invest in dedicated AWACS? Because on flight radar is not enough. Precisely why there are dedicated aircraft like Prowler.

You are yet to understand what comprehension even means.

Modify Mig-29 with what, how? Are there current examples of Mig-29 taking on the roles of AEW aircraft like the growler or are you again fantasising and assuming things will end up as your daydreams?



Indian Navy has been operating two carriers for a long time and even now it operates a carrier. Do you mean to say that IN has no interest in defending the INS Virat so they did not bother to "modify" existing aircraft. Or is IN waiting with a screwdriver in hand to modify aircraft only after the 65,000 ton AC is pressed into service?



You don't have any tangible answers so it is not related to this dicussion. How convenient.

If the next AC is 15 years away then how can you be so sure of what it can operate. You are pretty confident it will field this aircraft and that. Where are your sources or are you again hallucinating as usual?



Being retard comes naturally to your posts.

Care to explain what an aircraft carrier is supposed to do if there are no aircraft on board it? Or are you again hoping that by some magic aircraft will magically appear?

If Mig-29 will become legacy aircraft why are you so adamant that Mig-29 can be modified as AEW aircraft? Do ou even have any idea of the nonsense you are speaking or are you here to troll?

And WHERE exactly is the F-35C supposed to come from, has any deal being finalised? Stop spamming here with your childish day dream fantasies.

And what does your link say, F-35 has been offered. What about the finalisation dates? You little children have no clue what you talk about. There are clauses about F-35 ToT and here you are jumping for the moon. I suggest you read your own links first before coming across as a gullible fool.



And what does this nonsensical comment of yours have to do anything with the post?

You talk things out of thin air that Mig-29 can be used as AEW aircraft. So why don't you give an example of your fine GK and show how many AEW Mig-29S are in service with IN.



Yes. And you must be an aeronautical engineer to come up with such gibberish.

Forget your nonsense. Explain a simple thing to me, if modifying an aircraft is so easy why the hell has the Mig-29 not being made into AEW aircraft yet? Does Russia have any example of Mig-29 flying as AEW aircraft or they are not educated and smart like you not to know how to modify aircraft?



Harriers are still in operation with USMC, Italy, Spain and yes, IN.
Just like the Mig-21 is still in service with IAF.



Your posts like your thoughts is moronic. China has an AC as well or are you suggesting they wont send any AC if there is war?

Why would IN strike Pakistan using navy jets when it is simpler, easier and cheaper flying MKI from mainland India? The only naval target of value is Karachi harbour and Gwadar. These two can be taken out with Brahmos missiles. At most the naval air fleet will have to defend against PAF attacks and that also if IAF does not apply pressure in main cities like Lahore and Islamabad.

IN had a carrier in 1971, how many strike operations did that AC undertake against Pakistan?



Your small brain is still to learn the English alphabets properly. It is embarrassing for me to debate with a child like you.

You constantly crib, moan and lie about things you possibly don't even understand.

USN itself is concerned about DF-21 but according to armchair genius like you it is a hoax because the US admirals are your best friends and they like to clarify things with you on Twitter and Facebook. So naturally you have inside information the others lack.

The USN is very concerned about the DF-21D, which is one reason it’s working so hard on ship-borne anti-ballistic missile (ABM) technology. The USN is also working on other countermeasures, including strikes on DF-21 launch sites at the onset of war (potentially delivered from nuclear cruise missile submarines (SSGNs), and electronic warfare.

Should America Fear China's "Carrier-Killer" Missile? | The National Interest



Ok for argument's sake lets assume I do not have the capability to differentiate between cost of missile and cost of infrastructure. But you are a genius aren't you and you know everything there is to know.

So why don't you give a break down of cost estimates and show the total how it exactly adds up to "trillions" (in plural) for China. So don't talk out of your behind, give a break down of the cost estimate and show with proof of numbers that it will cost China TRILLIONS of dollars to operate the DF-21.



Don't give me your idle chatter. I asked for a definite proof supported by facts and numbers that it will cost TRILLIONS of dollars. And also show where and why it will take THOUSANDS of satellites.

Don't give me your nonsense. Give me facts and figures backed by credible sources.

Navies around the world are deploying shore based defenses, they never bothered to launch THOUSANDS of satellites.

Just as a footnote. Ever heard about the Poseidon aircraft? Wonder what that means and what its role is?



So why did India waste time on building a 300 km anti-ship missile? Is IN going to pray and wait till a ship is crippled to fire their missiles or is the Brahmos just for show? Is that why majority of Russian anti-ship missiles have a range upwards of 500 km?

You "genius" proclaim that long-range anti-ship missiles are useless. You are wasting time in India. You should have been to US where they are testing Long range anti ship missiles. Clearly you can tell them it is a waste of time they are doing.

LRASM Missiles: Reaching for a Long-Range Punch

LRASM · Lockheed Martin



Is your real name Kapil Sharma?

Your fantasies are so ridiculous it is hard to believe you yourself believe them. DF-21 is a ballistic missile. Do you examples to show where ballistic missiles have been "defeated" (whatever that means) by using countermeasures? If "defeating" ballistic missisles is so easy why is US investing so much in theatre missile defense?

And what signs should the chinese show? Put a HUGE neon sign that says DF-21 is deployed here?

Don't give me this nonsense about infrastructure. You have been making a lot of stupid claims about TRILLIONS of dollars and THOUSANDS of satellites needed for infrastructure to launch DF-21 missiles.

Either back your stupid arguments with numbers and a break down of cost estimates or shut up and do not troll this thread.

And just to show how big a dumb head you are.

The symbol of American power, the aircraft carrier, is at risk; at least that's what some recent reports suggest. In a current article in Defense News, U.S. Vice Admiral Jack Dorsett, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Dominance, states:


The technology that the Chinese have developed and are employing in their DF-21 D missile system has increased their probability of being able to employ a salvo of missiles to be able to hit a maneuvering target.

Aircraft Carriers and Chinese Missiles: Time to Rethink the U.S. Naval Doctrine | EastWest Institute

But don't worry. I am sure a civilian like you knows more about aircraft carriers than the US Vice Admiral does.

I have no interest in debating with retards. Goodbye.

 

[Indian Patriot]

I have no interest in debating with retards. Goodbye.

So you do not have any concrete proof to back up your claims that China will suffer a cost of TRILLIONS of dollars by sending THOUSANDS of satellites.

You also lied that long-range anti-ship missiles are useless. The links I shared expose your hollow stupidity.

You lied that DF-21 is a hoax. I shared a link where USN has expressed concern.

Just a friendly advise to you. If you do not have any idea about a topic then do not troll and make yourself look like a fool.

Take care kid.