INS Vikramaditya commissioned

[Dash]

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



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"



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??



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.



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.

All I was trying is to give a reason behind that rumor(for me its a strategic plan) as in this case hard evidence is absent but you went ahead and accused me of giving wrong facts, facts that 'I' never provided!

Its difficult for military professionals to understand how diplomacy and politics works. let me tell you that these are not things that will be declared in public, especially when you talk about Asia and its military balance visa-vis China and US will never directly endorse such a move on records considering it has geopolitical implications. My argument was to point your imagination towards the endorsement of such a proposal and the highest levels and that means it was a done deal if it was a done deal for both parties.

BTW, USS kennedy was also in talks by certain people but I will rest my case here. I have no source honestly.

 

[jhungary]

All I was trying is to give a reason behind that rumor(for me its a strategic plan) as in this case hard evidence is absent but you went ahead and accused me of giving wrong facts, facts that 'I' never provided!

Its difficult for military professionals to understand how diplomacy and politics works. let me tell you that these are not things that will be declared in public, especially when you talk about Asia and its military balance visa-vis China and US will never directly endorse such a move on records considering it has geopolitical implications. My argument was to point your imagination towards the endorsement of such a proposal and the highest levels and that means it was a done deal if it was a done deal for both parties.

BTW, USS kennedy was also in talks by certain people but I will rest my case here. I have no source honestly.

Dude, i have said that many many time, i did not denied if there are people (Even high Ranking US Official) talking about transfer this and that to some other country. We live in a free country. I never said there were no talks about giving or selling Kitty Hawk.

Problem is, talk is talk, and talk is cheap, what the other guy said was literally "US Offered" I can talk about a lot of stuff but if i have to follow them up and offer them to you, it would not be possible.

Is there any talk between US and India in government level about the Kitty Hawk? Probably, i don't know.
And all i know is, no offer were ever made or requested. Hence using the word "US Offered" is plainly and simply wrong.

Just so you know, i have a degree in international politic, i did my share in the battlefield, but that degree put me in staff position within the MIltiary. And my wife was a Military Lawyer.

 

[Nan Yang]

Yes "Barak 8" indo-israel But it will take time to be operational And will be fit in around 2017 till then it will Have to depend on ASOR Russian electronic warfare system fitted on the carrier. Those who participated said the ship's sensors picked up incoming aircraft at a distance of 350 km and, in some cases, even 400 km.Hope that it will be equiped with Barak-8 as soon Possible

Maybe not.

India-Israel joint venture to manufacture missiles fails to take off
India-Israel joint venture to manufacture missiles fails to take off - Times Of India

 

[Dash]

Dude, i have said that many many time, i did not denied if there are people (Even high Ranking US Official) talking about transfer this and that to some other country. We live in a free country. I never said there were no talks about giving or selling Kitty Hawk.

Problem is, talk is talk, and talk is cheap, what the other guy said was literally "US Offered" I can talk about a lot of stuff but if i have to follow them up and offer them to you, it would not be possible.

Is there any talk between US and India in government level about the Kitty Hawk? Probably, i don't know.
And all i know is, no offer were ever made or requested. Hence using the word "US Offered" is plainly and simply wrong.

Just so you know, i have a degree in international politic, i did my share in the battlefield, but that degree put me in staff position within the MIltiary. And my wife was a Military Lawyer.

and I never denied!!. But all I am saying is that that was a part of the plan..

See this reference and let me know if you think the below event was some cheap talk..
there were events like this where this would have been discussed.
After USS Nimitz, it will be USS Kitty Hawk - India - DNA

The five-day exercise would have 20 ships, sources said. Sources said the largest naval exercise in Indian waters would feature surface ships, submarines and maritime aircrafts.
This exercise comes at a time when the Chinese have expressed concerns over the quadripartite meeting between the US, Japan, India and Australia on May 24 and 25 on the sidelines of the ASEAN Regional Forum in Manila. China was annoyed enough to ask all the countries for a formal explanation on the meeting, while reminding them to be "open and inclusive".

The five-sided exercise is taking place also against the backdrop of the first ever Indo-US-Japan bilateral naval exercise in April, which had kicked up concerns about India being sucked into an anti-Chinese alliance.

 

[jhungary]

and I never denied!!. But all I am saying is that that was a part of the plan..

See this reference and let me know if you think the below event was some cheap talk..
there were events like this where this was discussed.
After USS Nimitz, it will be USS Kitty Hawk - India - DNA

The article said nothing about or regarding the the transfer of USS Kitty Hawk. Better yet, the article said nothing about anything. beside US, India, Japan and Australia acknowledge the threat from China and agree on a more multi-lateral co-operation.

They could have said anything in that quadripartite meeting, there are no evidence what so ever suggested that the US is offering an Aircraft Carrier to India, or anything about aircraft carrier were in the talk.

That proof nothing.

 

[Star Wars]

From what i remember the whole Kitty Hawk thing is bogus and a media hype ....

 

[Sergi]

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?

Hahaha couldnt agree more. But I kinda have adiction to try

 

[Sergi]

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?? 


lol

Okie Dokie

Sorry mate I am pretty sure I am not thinking or guessing it. Now you are free to make your opinion on why I said this. I cant go in details about that.

Again when anybody said anything about transferring US tech as is ????
Everything has a substitute. May be not as powerful as original but good enough to get job done. MKIsation isn't new for India.

Wrong I write that all from US point of view. Most of the deals US engaged are of political type or more political than just business. And even for business IN going for 60/65 18s was act to make grounds for 18s for IAFs MMRCA - then said to be mother of all defence deals.

Why kitty ??? Frankly I don't know. It was offered by US side. They could tell you why that and not other.

3. Hahaaha you are countering your own argument. You can count on the fact that the machines that will be or already delivered to India are same as those which participated in evolution trials unless-agreed upon priorly.
I too is saying sensitive tech will be replaced or water down. But given in right hands it can be replaced too. Don't underestimateRussians you are wrong on Apaches. They are custom build for IAF NOT watered down. They will come as is and even with Longbow.

4. Non of Indian problems. Again its the question to be asked to US side.

5. You are free to think what you want. I cant help or change that.
But what I am telling you is part of a discussion initiated by US and NOT India.
India never asked for any carrier to US till date. Only thing IN showed interest in was Catapult. May be in year 2010/11.


With this I rest my argument as I don't have any diplomatic cables to leak and all you want is written proof which I don't have. So lets keep status quo. 

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

I know thats why that was point 4. It was related to tech. Otherwise point 1 and 4 are same. 

Dude, i have said that many many time, i did not denied if there are people (Even high Ranking US Official) talking about transfer this and that to some other country. We live in a free country. I never said there were no talks about giving or selling Kitty Hawk.

Problem is, talk is talk, and talk is cheap, what the other guy said was literally "US Offered" I can talk about a lot of stuff but if i have to follow them up and offer them to you, it would not be possible.

Is there any talk between US and India in government level about the Kitty Hawk? Probably, i don't know.
And all i know is, no offer were ever made or requested. Hence using the word "US Offered" is plainly and simply wrong.

Just so you know, i have a degree in international politic, i did my share in the battlefield, but that degree put me in staff position within the MIltiary. And my wife was a Military Lawyer.

For the person who is having degree in International politics should know people ( officials ) don't talk from their pockets in diplomatic meetings. They sit with a agenda set down by their government/s. Personal opinion is kept out from such things.

And repeating again anything offered in diplomatic meetings is offered by the respective govts and not by the guies.

Reading your post make me feel that can any of your high ranking servicemen offer a carrier to another country without his govt's permission !!! I know you like to say you live in the free country but I am hoping its not that free

 

[jhungary]

Sorry mate I am pretty sure I am not thinking or guessing it. Now you are free to make your opinion on why I said this. I cant go in details about that.

Again when anybody said anything about transferring US tech as is ????
Everything has a substitute. May be not as powerful as original but good enough to get job done. MKIsation isn't new for India.

Wrong I write that all from US point of view. Most of the deals US engaged are of political type or more political than just business. And even for business IN going for 60/65 18s was act to make grounds for 18s for IAFs MMRCA - then said to be mother of all defence deals.

Why kitty ??? Frankly I don't know. It was offered by US side. They could tell you why that and not other.

3. Hahaaha you are countering your own argument. You can count on the fact that the machines that will be or already delivered to India are same as those which participated in evolution trials unless-agreed upon priorly.
I too is saying sensitive tech will be replaced or water down. But given in right hands it can be replaced too. Don't underestimateRussians you are wrong on Apaches. They are custom build for IAF NOT watered down. They will come as is and even with Longbow.

4. Non of Indian problems. Again its the question to be asked to US side.

5. You are free to think what you want. I cant help or change that.
But what I am telling you is part of a discussion initiated by US and NOT India.
India never asked for any carrier to US till date. Only thing IN showed interest in was Catapult. May be in year 2010/11.


With this I rest my argument as I don't have any diplomatic cables to leak and all you want is written proof which I don't have. So lets keep status quo. 


I know thats why that was point 4. It was related to tech. Otherwise point 1 and 4 are same.

1.) You said that as if India is the only market for arms trade, if that is the case, then i think our government will try and pitch the F-35 Deal, not F-18 Super Hornet, why not 65 F-35B for free Kitty Hawk Hull??

2.) US never offered Kitty Hawk to India, they could not tell us why, as there are no way they could offer USS Kitty Hawk beyond 2015. UNless, of course, you want to wait that long

3.) You are wrong, the apache we sold India is AH-64D Block 3, which is 1 grade lower than the deal we just wemt with Taiwan and even Indonesia (AH-64E) and the AH-64D Block 3 is not based on the US own AH-64A but rather Sea Apache by Westland Apache, the British Export version.

Actually, it is safe to say, most to all exported Version will based on RAH-64D instead of AH-64D US is using, you want to know why??

4.) That is an irrelevent question

5.) There were no discussion and everyone in American, some in India (Judging by the thread response) know this so called "Deal" is a hoax, many of the requirment of this deal does not make sense when they made it. And i don't know about you, US will not do stuff that does not make senes.

 

[Sergi]

1.) You said that as if India is the only market for arms trade, if that is the case, then i think our government will try and pitch the F-35 Deal, not F-18 Super Hornet, why not 65 F-35B for free Kitty Hawk Hull??

2.) US never offered Kitty Hawk to India, they could not tell us why, as there are no way they could offer USS Kitty Hawk beyond 2015. UNless, of course, you want to wait that long

3.) You are wrong, the apache we sold India is AH-64D Block 3, which is 1 grade lower than the deal we just wemt with Taiwan and even Indonesia (AH-64E) and the AH-64D Block 3 is not based on the US own AH-64A but rather Sea Apache by Westland Apache, the British Export version.

Actually, it is safe to say, most to all exported Version will based on RAH-64D instead of AH-64D US is using, you want to know why??

4.) That is an irrelevent question

5.) There were no discussion and everyone in American, some in India (Judging by the thread response) know this so called "Deal" is a hoax, many of the requirment of this deal does not make sense when they made it. And i don't know about you, US will not do stuff that does not make senes.

"Offer" NOT "deal". Two different things.
F-35 wasn't in MMRCA in 2008. And similarly its been denied many times by US side that F-35 was ever offered to India. So again its not question for India.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

5. You are free to think what you want. I cant help or change that.
But what I am telling you is part of a discussion initiated by US and NOT India.
India never asked for any carrier to US till date. Only thing IN showed interest in was Catapult. May be in year 2010/11.

The Catapult has been a matter of ongoing discussion for some time already. However it is the EMALS that is the real point of interest to the IN. Consequently, the manufacturers of EMALS have made the required Technical Presentations to NHQ. Another USN operated piece of eqpt. that has had Technical Presentations made for IN is the V-22 Osprey. To this moment, Boeing Vertol has had a Technical Liason Team visiting India off and on to follow up. But the IN has not made up its mind about the Osprey. About EMALS, Dept. of State has to agree, while the Steam CAT is already available. However Steam CATs are not of interest to IN since it is progressively moving away from Conventional Boilers & Steam Turbine propulsion and instead investing in GT propulsion. Which is why the LM GTs from USA are being made under license at HAL, Bangalore. If the IAC-2 and IAC-3 become substantially bigger, then the RR Trent GTs will also get looked at. If EMALS does not come through then the future IACs will remain STOBAR. Issues with Steam CAT is then there has to be an auxiliary boiler just to provide Steam on a GT propelled ship. Also its much larger than the eqpt. required for EMALS and rather more maintenance hungry.

 

[jhungary]

"Offer" NOT "deal". Two different things.
F-35 wasn't in MMRCA in 2008.

For the person who is having degree in International politics should know people ( officials ) don't talk from their pockets in diplomatic meetings. They sit with a agenda set down by their government/s. Personal opinion is kept out from such things.
And repeating again anything offered in diplomatic meetings is offered by the respective govts and not by the guies.
Reading your post make me feel that can any of your high ranking servicemen offer a carrier to another country without his govt's permission !!! I know you like to say you live in the free country but I am hoping its not that free

I don't know about Indian Politican, but US and Australian politician always talk out of their pocket, or put their own feet in their mouth when you talk about International Politic

In 2012, Bob Carr, then Australian Foreign Misinter said that with then US Republican President and in the end, Romney quote bob carr said

His office released the quote, which stated: "America is just one budget deal away from ending all talk of America being in decline."

That is what Bob Carr said, but he wasn't meant to come out like that, that create quite a stir in both Australian and American politics.

That is what Mr carr personal throught but ended up quoting by Romney as what Australia think.

This does happen.

Carr denies criticising US in Romney talks - Yahoo7 Sport

When i mean Deal mean ordeal, the whole incident.

The problem is, F-35 is going to be ready in 2014, they know for sure they can only Offer the Kitty Hawk after 2015, what i was saying is, isn't it better to push the F-35 on Kitty Hawk better than push some f-18 hornet with it, it is not going to deliever in 2008 or 2009 anyway

 

[Sergi]

I don't know about Indian Politican, but US and Australian politician always talk out of their pocket, or put their own feet in their mouth when you talk about International Politic

In 2012, Bob Carr, then Australian Foreign Misinter said that with then US Republican President and in the end, Romney quote bob carr said



That is what Bob Carr said, but he wasn't meant to come out like that, that create quite a stir in both Australian and American politics.

That is what Mr carr personal throught but ended up quoting by Romney as what Australia think.

This does happen.

Carr denies criticising US in Romney talks - Yahoo7 Sport

When i mean Deal mean ordeal, the whole incident.

The problem is, F-35 is going to be ready in 2014, they know for sure they can only Offer the Kitty Hawk after 2015, what i was saying is, isn't it better to push the F-35 on Kitty Hawk better than push some f-18 hornet with it, it is not going to deliever in 2008 or 2009 anyway

Thats when they talk publicly !!!!
Aren't diplomatic meetings held in closed rooms followed by press note. And if I am not wrong politicians just set the target of relations its officials who navigate the deals and proposals.

 

[jhungary]

Thats when they talk publicly !!!!
Aren't diplomatic meetings held in closed rooms followed by press note. And if I am not wrong politicians just set the target of relations its officials who navigate the deals and proposals.

I believe it was a closed room meeting when Mr Carr said that, infact if i remember the detail correctly, the alleged talk happen in a private meeting in one of those Republician billionaire ranch and yet Romney gone public with it

There you go

FOREIGN minister Bob Carr says he wasn't criticising America when he spoke of a nation "in decline" during a private conversation with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Carr says Romney quoted his 'US in decline' remark out of context | News.com.au

 

[Sergi]

The Catapult has been a matter of ongoing discussion for some time already. However it is the EMALS that is the real point of interest to the IN. Consequently, the manufacturers of EMALS have made the required Technical Presentations to NHQ. Another USN operated piece of eqpt. that has had Technical Presentations made for IN is the V-22 Osprey. To this moment, Boeing Vertol has had a Technical Liason Team visiting India off and on to follow up. But the IN has not made up its mind about the Osprey. About EMALS, Dept. of State has to agree, while the Steam CAT is already available. However Steam CATs are not of interest to IN since it is progressively moving away from Conventional Boilers & Steam Turbine propulsion and instead investing in GT propulsion. Which is why the LM GTs from USA are being made under license at HAL, Bangalore. If the IAC-2 and IAC-3 become substantially bigger, then the RR Trent GTs will also get looked at. If EMALS does not come through then the future IACs will remain STOBAR. Issues with Steam CAT is then there has to be an auxiliary boiler just to provide Steam on a GT propelled ship. Also its much larger than the eqpt. required for EMALS and rather more maintenance hungry.

I really don't think we will get EMALS but I would loved to be wrong

Are you sure about V-22 ??? 

I believe it was a closed room meeting when Mr Carr said that, infact if i remember the detail correctly, the alleged talk happen in a private meeting in one of those Republician billionaire ranch

Sorry I am not aware of that incident but I can give you latest example.

Tell me what America know about recent Obama-Sharif talk !!! Do you believe they talk only things mention in press note ???

I am hoping our definitions of diplomatic meetings are same.