INS Vikramaditya commissioned

[Capt.Popeye]

If I may answer.....

Dude everything is NOT on paper always. eg India doesn't have S-300 officially , Israel isn't a nuclear state and so on


Many things are kept under carpet but some got leaked and always denied by all parties.
As @Capt.Popeye said Yes Kitty hawk was offereed by USA with air elements. That doent mean it was going to be transffered with the Nimitz class techs. And would have strings attached too. Some also say that it was offered so that F-18 could get a boost in MMRCA.

It was rejected by IN
- couldnt afford the total package.
- IN was/is not happy with the strings.
- TOT would have been zero so have to have depend on US for everything.
- cost of operating a N-Carrier is more than conventional one

If you look back to 2008 its the same period when Bush became pro-India and was the same time when Nuclear deal was being dissucssed. India is only country to have that ( for many reasons ) with USA backing it up.

How hard is it for US to decommission and water down a carrier to offer it to India ???
And Russia getting hands on US techs is total BS then why in world US sell india C-17/C-130/Apache/P-8Is ??? Are they outdated ???

2008 was the time when US-Pak relations were on the verge rupture. So all things were possible and it would have been worth billions of dollar deal. So it was total gain for US .... Even more than India.

Hey matey; you are trying hard, but I do not much fancy your chances nevertheless: considering the plethora of (less than meaningful or factual) arguments that got thrown back at me.

That discussion on a possible SALE did not progress beyond the discussion stage and for the reasons that I enumerated and you have amplified further.

Actually that was a period that USA decided to make a paradigm shift in its relations with India; so conceivably it may have been connected with that.
And lastly; not all diplomatic moves get talked about on front-pages if at all they do. Little wonder that Assange and Snowden have become "hot" but "prickly" property !
And this was an infructous palaver which came to naught. So what was there to talk about? 

@Dillinger @Capt.Popeye just heard from a friend of mine the Viky will be sailing with 5 IN escorts/support vessels on its return journey to India later this year....

I do not know about that. Present reports indicate a Talwar Class frigate and a Deepak class FRS will form the Screen until the Red Sea. After that a CBG will form-up (Likely a Delhi class with two other Frigates and Corvettes and INS Viraat as well) these ships are only the Surface Group. But that is also something to do with the pageantry associated with inducting a Capital Ship into the Fleet.

The rest we will hear of by and by.

 

[jhungary]

Listen up now: I have spent enough time (and bandwidth) explaining the lack of facts and infirmities in the arguments that you dished out.

Since BS is unworthy of further meaningful discourse.
Avast there.

So, are so some kind of authority in that field and i have to take whatever you say as a fact?

You explained nothing on the reference i quote, and Actual Navy spoke person goes on the record saying that deal were never even considered by the US

You explained nothing on the fact that Kitty Hawk will be in US until beyond 2015, why the "Alleged: discuss happened 7 years eariler.

You explained nothing on the fact that Kitty Hawk is and still is cutting edge, what is the good for the US to transfer such equipment to an Russian Allied.

All i can hear is US Try to offer it, and India cannot afford it so it was not consider, mate, where is your source to back up this story? Because my source, the US Navy, said the so called "deal", were not even materialised. And it is just a rumor

I gave source vs you said, and til now all 3 question i have ask still not being answer by you. And now you are calling me wasting your time?? Oh my god, you are such a genius.

Yeah, in the end, In 2008, US want to pipe down a carrier that is ready in 2015 or later, free of charge to India by buying some of the Superhornet and if that story make sense to you, i got nothing to say about it.

You say like we American were dumbasses and you Indian are supernatural highly intelligence human being, beacuse simply what make sense to you, does not make sense to us

 

[jhungary]

If I may answer.....

Dude everything is NOT on paper always. eg India doesn't have S-300 officially , Israel isn't a nuclear state and so on


Many things are kept under carpet but some got leaked and always denied by all parties.
As @Capt.Popeye said Yes Kitty hawk was offereed by USA with air elements. That doent mean it was going to be transffered with the Nimitz class techs. And would have strings attached too. Some also say that it was offered so that F-18 could get a boost in MMRCA.

It was rejected by IN
- couldnt afford the total package.
- IN was/is not happy with the strings.
- TOT would have been zero so have to have depend on US for everything.
- cost of operating a N-Carrier is more than conventional one

If you look back to 2008 its the same period when Bush became pro-India and was the same time when Nuclear deal was being dissucssed. India is only country to have that ( for many reasons ) with USA backing it up.

How hard is it for US to decommission and water down a carrier to offer it to India ???
And Russia getting hands on US techs is total BS then why in world US sell india C-17/C-130/Apache/P-8Is ??? Are they outdated ???

2008 was the time when US-Pak relations were on the verge rupture. So all things were possible and it would have been worth billions of dollar deal. So it was total gain for US .... Even more than India.

Dude, you think the deal is there because all you look at is in the Indian side of the story, judging by your point, you never even remotely consider the US side of the story.

1.)You were wrong with the Nimitz Class tech. For a Kitty Hawk class to work with then Nimitz class, they need to have the same communication package, same radar and same Software coding to share information. it's not like WW2 when we can phone each other using a wasp class and a yorktown class. Hence the standard requirment for a Kitty Hawk to work with anY Nimitz Class, you need to share the same technology, it would be more believeable if you are saying US offer a watered down Midway calss or Forrestal Class, that literally the same deal but with technology outdated.

2.) For US, if the basic idea is to allow F-18 to push off sale in India, again, they could have achieve it by offering any US Carrier that was waiting to be recycle in 2008. It could also be done again with USS forrestal (Struck 1995 recycled 2013) or Midway (Struck 1997, currently under refurbishment), USS JFK (Struck 2007, looking for a new home as of 2013) Why US offer Kitty Hawk, a ship that have to stay in Mothball until 2015, to counter a deal in Russia that is ongoing?? Either US betting on Russian deal felt thru by-partially or the US think this is the time frame the Russia need to refeb the Gronzky. Which does not make sense. Anyway, if you were to get Kitty Hawk, it would be an empty hull anyway. So Why we destroy USS America (another Kitty Hawk Class, but pipe down Kitty Hawk??

I would have said if a deal was offer in 2008 to boost sale of F-18, it will be more Believeable if US offer the USS John F Kenndy rather than Kitty Hawk, the JFK were looking for new home since 2007, while Kitty Hawk were not even decom in 2008. JFK were built later than Kitty Hawk, so the condition is better. The cost about the same to the US, they have similiar technology and similiar sizes. I don't see how JFK is any differnet than Kitty Hawk, apart of Kitty Hawk was in Pacific Fleet and JFK is in Atlantic fleet...

3.) You fail to see the problem about russian and tech, i mean what can you get i let you inspect the C-17 (A cargo plane) C-130 (Also a Cargo plane) and for apache, and P8I, it was Built for India, my brother work for boeing (Briefing work for the P8-A Project), and i can tell you what that mean, that means a lot of the sensitive WILL BE REPLACED by off the shelve technology.

The deal with Kitty Hawk is different, we were using the Kitty Hawk, it will not be build for foreign standard. It would have indeginous hardware and software in It.

4.) By saking how hard it is to decommission and waterdown a carrier means you have no idea how to retire an aircraft carrier. Tell you this, in a mothball fleet (Deommissioned) it will take about 150 days to reactivate an carrier, that is from mothball to operational standard. But Once a Carrier is struck, it will take them anywhere from 5-10 years to pass down for recycle. (You have to get rid of all armament and sensetive technology as well as hazardous material before passing down to strip off, which is the exact same procedure it will take if they were to transfer a ship to another country.)

to Give you a few example

USS Forrestal - (Struck 1997, recycle 2013)
USS America - (Struck 1995, expanded as target 2005)
USS Saratoga - (Struck 1994, stricken 2010)
USS Ranger - (Struck 2004, still dismantling as of 2012)
USS Independence - (Struck 2004, stricken 2012)
USS Constellation - (Struck 2003, currently in inactive service status)
USS John F. Kennedy - (Struck 2007, currently on donation)

5.) Something is possible, something is not, i draw the line pretty clear. The US officially never even envision on transferring any Aircraft carrier to any other nation other than USA itself. The prospect of these kind of Rumor is built when some US official shot their mouth off dueing some kind of national meeting. I remember there were some senior member actually speaking of transferrinf F-22 to Australia and Japan, does that mean the deal was actually offered by US? Some official a while back said they should transfer USS Enterprise to other country instead of scrapping it. Does that mean USS Enterprise is actaully looking for its next home??

Indian may think of getting the Kitty Hawk but does that mean US offered it as a solution to them?? 

Thread is about INS Vikky.... not Kitty... chill friends...

lol

Okie Dokie

 

[Dash]

I am listening...go on tell me.

IN wanted to replace its 2 aircraft carriers in 1989. They wanted to have a smaller ship weighing about 29-30000 tons, comprising of Harrier jump jets and helicopters. by nature these ships are for fleet protection. The requirement was that they will build 2 ships of that class. However due to budget constraints this plan was put on hold in 1991, during the economic turmoil.

This project was again revived, but faced stiff opposition from IAF. They put forward the idea and requirement of more Su 30s as they felt that Su 30 would also cover the threat at the sea, shadowing the INs proposal to have 1. A carrier of their own 2. An air wing of their own. I sometimes hate IAF for this, they have done it to IN and they did to IA too when they wanted their own aviation wing.

But IN was destined to realize its dream against the bullying IAF and other xyz reasons, and as a blessing Russia offered Admiral Goroskov for "free", provided India pays for its refit. You can call it a plan or a blessing but the idea of a free carrier was very well accepted by MOD of a cash strapped country,and culminated the era of Goroskov in IN.

And now that you know the story, you can use your own interpretation skills to analyze what happened later

Regards,
Dash

 

[Dash]

@jhungary

You will never find an official source from US DoD or USN regarding the formal sale proposal of sale of Kitty hawk to India. But this was discussed in several meetings between India and US including some other countries too. We can explain the possibility only if you take off your detective cap and willing to wear an analytic one.

@Sergi . Kitty Hawak was a conventionally powered carrier and not a nuclear propelled one.

 

[jhungary]

@jhungary

You will never find an official source from US DoD or USN regarding the formal sale proposal of sale of Kitty hawk to India. But this was discussed in several meetings between India and US including some other countries too. We can explain the possibility only if you take off your detective cap and willing to wear an analytic one.

@Sergi . Kitty Hawak was a conventionally powered carrier and not a nuclear propelled one.

I am more than incline to accept the fact that some US Naval Official mentioned to some governmental offical overseas mentioning the possoibility of sale of the Kitty Hawk. as i said, there are people talking about the same thing when Enterprise goes offline in 2012.

However, that was not what i said originally. What i said is those sale/transfer talk were rumor, there were never an official stance of US to transfer carrier to any nation. Capt. popeye said

Later the US offered the Kittyhawk; but she had little residual life left; the cost of any Life Extension Program prohibitive, cost of operation much more Huge; and then the US was not considered to be a reliable supporting Ally.

US never offer anything, some official may have talking about it, that does not mean the US (as a country), offered anything. For you to claim US offered the carrier for whatever sale. You need to have a memo of understanding made up, not just some afternoon talk between 2 presidents or any 2 governmental official.

As i said, there were talks between US and Australian Governmental official about the possibility of selling F-22 to Australia, that's not the same as US offered (past tense) Australia the sale of F-22.

If that official were acting on behalf of the government, there WILL BE RECORD talking about the selling and transferring of technology, while the Kitty Hawk thing yield neither, the talk cannot be backed up by any channel, an official (The word I use) of the offer thus NEVER exist.

I would have no problem for Capt Popeye if he said "Some US official talked about transferring the Kitty Hawk" But he did not say that, he said "US offered" did you see the different?

And the rumor started when 2 government official from US and India talked about anything regarding the Kitty Hawk. That's why i said the US willingness to transfer the nKitty Hawk is a rumor. It could be an US Navy official talkewd to an Indian official about Kitty Hawk retiring and looking for a new home, India could have throught about acquiring the Hawks, but that does not mean the US Naval official "Offering" the Kitty Hawk right??

 

[satishkumarcsc]

The Kitty Hawk was never offered nor was asked by the Indian Govt. It was a media self styled story to make a fuss about. It never existed in the first place.

If people know whenever the US decommissions a ship it is placed under reserve for a few years before being offered for scrap or sale. So there was no logic in the news right from the beginning.

 

[jhungary]

The Kitty Hawk was never offered nor was asked by the Indian Govt. It was a media self styled story to make a fuss about. It never existed in the first place.

If people know whenever the US decommissions a ship it is placed under reserve for a few years before being offered for scrap or sale. So there was no logic in the news right from the beginning.

That's exactly right and is exactly what i said.

All ship USN retired have to be placed in mothball before actual decommission (Now referred to as Retiring)

Hence no actual point talking about selling a ship that have not serve her mothball tour. American knew about that, that's why we see this news as a Rumor, Indian don't know about this, hence they got taken in by the news.

As i point out over and over again, it's that simple.

 

[Levina]

And now that you know the story, you can use your own interpretation skills to analyze what happened later

Aye aye sir.



Wow!!!

I knew that Goroskov was offered for free.But not about IAF's involvement and its bullying habits.

 

[Dash]

I am more than incline to accept the fact that some US Naval Official mentioned to some governmental offical overseas mentioning the possoibility of sale of the Kitty Hawk. as i said, there are people talking about the same thing when Enterprise goes offline in 2012.

However, that was not what i said originally. What i said is those sale/transfer talk were rumor, there were never an official stance of US to transfer carrier to any nation. Capt. popeye said



US never offer anything, some official may have talking about it, that does not mean the US (as a country), offered anything. For you to claim US offered the carrier for whatever sale. You need to have a memo of understanding made up, not just some afternoon talk between 2 presidents or any 2 governmental official.

As i said, there were talks between US and Australian Governmental official about the possibility of selling F-22 to Australia, that's not the same as US offered (past tense) Australia the sale of F-22.

If that official were acting on behalf of the government, there WILL BE RECORD talking about the selling and transferring of technology, while the Kitty Hawk thing yield neither, the talk cannot be backed up by any channel, an official (The word I use) of the offer thus NEVER exist.

I would have no problem for Capt Popeye if he said "Some US official talked about transferring the Kitty Hawk" But he did not say that, he said "US offered" did you see the different?

Well, it was not rumor first. You need to know that there is a paradigm shift in US-India relation between 2008 and 2013. Today Kr Kerry can come to India and offer joint development of missiles and that goes just more than being on paper. Whether such a scenario will be accepted by both India and US is a different story but it does exist.

If you understand how intergovernmental machinery works then you would also know that everything starts with a informal proposal and then materializes. The sale of every single US machine had been discussed in some meeting or other and in such a meeting USS Kitty Hawk was pitched to India and had India shown interest you would have enough sources today.

Second you said that Kitty hawk was not even decommissioned in 2008, well it got decommissioned in 2009. In one of the meetings(2008) in US-Pivot to Asia by the top officials from, US, Australia, Japan and some other countries who wanted to check the Chinese build up came up with this idea. The Chinese were then building nuke subs and Aircraft carrier. FYI, Australia, in 2009 announced the largest military built up in Asia.This was a result of that meeting by the way.

In the same meeting, when US wanted to deploy more and more CBGs in Asia also wanted an Asian country who had experience in operating a carrier which was "India"! and India was proposed USS Kitty Hawk, for reasons not one but many.

This so called offer or proposal was not not just an offer, but it was a strategic plan by the US-Asia pivot program. Do you think if India had shown interest Kitty Hawk would have been a big deal?
You still need official proof of such a proposal? i am talking about scheme of events that unfolded later on and India was prominent in that plan. which US later confirmed officially by calling India as the Pivot to ASIA.

Forget Kitty Hawk, its that meeting that culminated the journey of more sophisticated assets to India from US, and when Indian members claim this deal, they know we rejected Kitty Hawk but bought so much more from you!!.

Thats the story.. 

Aye aye sir.



Wow!!!

I knew that Goroskov was offered for free.But not about IAF's involvement and its bullying habits.

But the Goroskov didnt come for free, did it? so why say "free" when it was not for free?, Use your imagination! or have yo already?

 

[Dash]

The Kitty Hawk was never offered nor was asked by the Indian Govt. It was a media self styled story to make a fuss about. It never existed in the first place.

If people know whenever the US decommissions a ship it is placed under reserve for a few years before being offered for scrap or sale. So there was no logic in the news right from the beginning.

No official record, but it was offered. Kitty Hawk was a small pawn in the big check mate plan.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

No official record, but it was offered. Kitty Hawk was a small pawn in the big check mate plan.

Then even Lockheed offered the F 35...nothing happened. Well everyone who has been in defence circles know that once the US retires any ship it is placed in reserve mothballed. After a few years only they are decommissioned and scrapped.

The US officially never offered the Kitty Hawk nor did the Indian Govt. never officially request for the Kitty Hawk. The IN Vice-Admiral immediately dismissed these reports when the rumors started spreading.

The Kitty Hawk was a white elephant to begin with. A 50 year old hull which needed a huge crew to maintain and sail her. The IN could not spare that much resources in the first place. That is why I was sure the Kitty Hawk fiasco was a big rumor.

Let me quote my professor for you: "A country which spreads and believes rumors is bound to fail. Just like the French fell to the Nazis by just them spreading rumors."

 

[Dash]

Then even Lockheed offered the F 35...nothing happened. Well everyone who has been in defence circles know that once the US retires any ship it is placed in reserve mothballed. After a few years only they are decommissioned and scrapped.

The US officially never offered the Kitty Hawk nor did the Indian Govt. never officially request for the Kitty Hawk. The IN Vice-Admiral immediately dismissed these reports when the rumors started spreading.

The Kitty Hawk was a white elephant to begin with. A 50 year old hull which needed a huge crew to maintain and sail her. The IN could not spare that much resources in the first place. That is why I was sure the Kitty Hawk fiasco was a big rumor.

Let me quote my professor for you: "A country which spreads and believes rumors is bound to fail. Just like the French fell to the Nazis by just them spreading rumors."

If you go with the reply I have given to Jhungary, you will understand what I men to say, rest I leave it to you.

You may want to go through this link, and towards the end lies my end of explanation..

Forum

 

[jhungary]

Well, it was not rumor first. You need to know that there is a paradigm shift in US-India relation between 2008 and 2013. Today Kr Kerry can come to India and offer joint development of missiles and that goes just more than being on paper. Whether such a scenario will be accepted by both India and US is a different story but it does exist.

If you understand how intergovernmental machinery works then you would also know that everything starts with a informal proposal and then materializes. The sale of every single US machine had been discussed in some meeting or other and in such a meeting USS Kitty Hawk was pitched to India and had India shown interest you would have enough sources today.

Second you said that Kitty hawk was not even decommissioned in 2008, well it got decommissioned in 2009. In one of the meetings(2008) in US-Pivot to Asia by the top officials from, US, Australia, Japan and some other countries who wanted to check the Chinese build up came up with this idea. The Chinese were then building nuke subs and Aircraft carrier. FYI, Australia, in 2009 announced the largest military built up in Asia.This was a result of that meeting by the way.

In the same meeting, when US wanted to deploy more and more CBGs in Asia also wanted an Asian country who had experience in operating a carrier which was "India"! and India was proposed USS Kitty Hawk, for reasons not one but many.

This so called offer or proposal was not not just an offer, but it was a strategic plan by the US-Asia pivot program. Do you think if India had shown interest Kitty Hawk would have been a big deal?
You still need official proof of such a proposal? i am talking about scheme of events that unfolded later on and India was prominent in that plan. which US later confirmed officially by calling India as the Pivot to ASIA.

Forget Kitty Hawk, its that meeting that culminated the journey of more sophisticated assets to India from US, and when Indian members claim this deal, they know we rejected Kitty Hawk but bought so much more from you!!.

Thats the story.. 

But the Goroskov didnt come for free, did it? so why say "free" when it was not for free?, Use your imagination! or have yo already?

lol, did you actually realise you are describing a rumor itself.

Unless you are present in the meeting you are speculated on what happened in that meeting. That is the different between you and me, i go after the truth after facts. Fact that known for sure. But you based the action on a meeting you have not attend vis-a-vis, you are spectculating the concept.

Even in your spectulation, there are a few item that you thought wrong.

Let me listed the fact to you one by one, then gone after what you thought wrong.

Facts.

1.)US will mothball any of its ship, hence a talk of the sale of a ship that was not decommissioned is absurd as it wil lstill need to serve the remaining term in the reserve

2.)While US have a more capable carrier retired in 2007 (The USS John F Kennedy) which the USN is actually looking for home to, USS JFK is a modified Kitty Hawk Class, built later than Kitty Hawk itself. Why Kitty Hawk is purposed but not JFK?

3.) Kitty Hawk does not have capacity to operate 65 Super Hornet. Kitty Hawk is a smaller carrier that standard complement of 40 Super hornet.

4.) There are several more allied in the Asia Pacific that closer to India whom operating or Operated Aircraft Carrier. Thailand, Japan and Australia, especially Thailand and Australia whom operate US aircraft and US Ships. Japan were bounded by National Congress notto have own aircraft carrier. Hpowever, they still do.

When you put all these fact together, you will see US oferring an Aircraft Carrier to India is highly unlikely

now, go over what you said

If you understand how intergovernmental machinery works then you would also know that everything starts with a informal proposal and then materializes. The sale of every single US machine had been discussed in some meeting or other and in such a meeting USS Kitty Hawk was pitched to India and had India shown interest you would have enough sources today.

Actually you are not buying vegetable in supermarket, you just go pick it up anjd p[ay at checkout. Or you don't just talk to the supermarket staff and tell them what you want and they give it to you.

If India want to operate US carrier and ask US for it, they will first need to study their own capability and their logistic support first, where they are going to house it, where you want them to operate and how many complement you want with an US Carrier

If US want to sell/trasnfer a carrier to India, first they need to see if India acceptable for such a delievery, and how this will benefit the US governemnt and US defence indurstry. All these study takes time and money and always generate an official report. I myself done this whe ni was in the US Army doing battle intelligence. How it will affect our AO if we pipe down this and that to Pakistani Army or Afghanistan local militia.

None of the aforeentioned report were ever exist. So even if a sale of Kitty Hawk did mentioned in that meeting, it would be those "In the moment thing" it can hardly called "US offered"

Second you said that Kitty hawk was not even decommissioned in 2008, well it got decommissioned in 2009. In one of the meetings(2008) in US-Pivot to Asia by the top officials from, US, Australia, Japan and some other countries who wanted to check the Chinese build up came up with this idea. The Chinese were then building nuke subs and Aircraft carrier. FYI, Australia, in 2009 announced the largest military built up in Asia.This was a result of that meeting by the way.

First of all, what you hear is, US want to have China in check, and Australia announce a large Military build up after said meeting. So ask yourselves this, why the US not offered it to Australia??

In the same meeting, when US wanted to deploy more and more CBGs in Asia also wanted an Asian country who had experience in operating a carrier which was "India"! and India was proposed USS Kitty Hawk, for reasons not one but many.

Well, not only India have the Carrier operation experience in Asia-Pacific region as i said, and how do you get from US want an country that operating a carrier to US actually proposed the Kitty Hawk is beyond me. Thoase two are not related to each other.

This so called offer or proposal was not not just an offer, but it was a strategic plan by the US-Asia pivot program. Do you think if India had shown interest Kitty Hawk would have been a big deal?
You still need official proof of such a proposal? i am talking about scheme of events that unfolded later on and India was prominent in that plan. which US later confirmed officially by calling India as the Pivot to ASIA.

The problem is, if this is a strategic plan by the US would US be operating the Kitty Hawk itself??

In all, you based your argument in an meeting i don't think you were in, yet i based my argument on facts. There are many question was not answered that would seriously doubt if and ever US did actually offer an aircraft carrier to India.

India may want a US Carrier, that does not mean US is offering it.

So in my poinion, this was a hoax, you are free to believe anything you want, but fact is fact, you can change anything but you cannot change the facts. US Never offer any Carrier to India. That's plain and simple.

 

[Levina]

But the Goroskov didnt come for free, did it? so why say "free" when it was not for free?, Use your imagination! or have yo already?

yeah mom says i have a very good imagination.

But then i know USD 2.35 billions are not peanuts.