Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

[satishkumarcsc]

You ran away, as any rat would, when confronted.

You never responded, when I precisely narrowed down to your own given link and copy pasted something that you could not.

What an audacity!


View attachment 412879

I ran away? I gave you the IMF data. So what did you reply to that?

And it was proven that you are mathematically challenged. I do not want to waste my time on you.

Well you neither know what economics is nor how it works. So instead of wasting time educating you from the ABC of economics I rather waste my time watching few funny dog videos on youtube.

 

[ashok321]

I ran away? I gave you the IMF data. So what did you reply to that?

And it was proven that you are mathematically challenged. I do not want to waste my time on you.

Yes you did:

after this:

Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

And I reiterate: like a rat jumping the ship in anticipation of an impending danger....

Show me any reply after that.
But worry you not.
Cause liars, and those who shoot & scoot always do this.
Don't worry. Nothing new for me.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Its a very good and rational decision.A 65k tonne carrier will be 5-10 billion dollars.Plus 57 rafales or f-35s will be 10-15 billion dollars.No way can the navy afford this ,particularly 57 new gen aircraft.Even airforce was struggling with rafale price.Navy with lowest budget allocation of the 3 services can't afford this right now.We should have 2 reliable carriers,we dont need supercarriers anyway because our navy will operate with support from land based aircraft and infrastructure in IOR.We need to focus on ASW helicopters and aircraft and above all on huge numbers of submarines.(30 plus)Indian navy should not get obsessed with carriers which are increasingly suspect unless u can spend 50 billion dollars on a CBG like USN,submarines will be vital along with a large numbers of destroyers and frigates.If necessary cruisers.Either airforce or naval air arm needs to have 2 dedicated maritime support squadrons of 5th gen aircraft in the next 10-15 years which can support the fleet.We should also look at acquiring 4 -6 Tu-22 M3 backfire maritime attack bombers.Each of these can carry 8-10 air launched brahmos.A salvo from these 4-6 aircraft will be enough to decimate any fleet that enters IOR.We should also permanently station a brahmos regiment in andaman.

First priority should be submarines and ASW helicopters.And 2 squadrons of rafale-m/5th gen aircraft based in south india.We need 3-4 SSBNs capable of striking chinese mainland quickly.That is more important than carriers.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Yes you did:

after this:

Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

And I reiterate: like a rat jumping the ship in anticipation of an impending danger....

Show me any reply after that.
But worry you not.
Cause liars, and those who shoot & scoot always do this.
Don't worry. Nothing new for me.

Thats why we say you have comprehension problems.

The whole article says that even INS Vikrant will enter service in 2023 but I say it will enter in 2020. Wll cant blame you because u have very poor comprehensive skills.

The INS Vishal will take 15 years because the design is yet to be drawn. But When you said INS Vikrant it is totally wrong.

 

[ashok321]

Thats why we say you have comprehension problems.

The whole article says that even INS Vikrant will enter service in 2023 but I say it will enter in 2020. Wll cant blame you because u have very poor comprehensive skills.

The INS Vishal will take 15 years because the design is yet to be drawn. But When you said INS Vikrant it is totally wrong.

Now its your deflection to save your face.

The dialogue between me and you was pure economic as following:
Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

Why are you changing the tracks now?
I know you tried to fool PDF members with your deception and lies about India's revenue.
But you had hard time defending these things against CIA Factbook/IMF facts & figures.

Do you have any shame left>?

Its a very good and rational decision.A 65k tonne carrier will be 5-10 billion dollars.Plus 57 rafales or f-35s will be 10-15 billion dollars.

Above numbers are inflated:

Gerald Ford 100K tonne, EMALS, nuclear propulsion and other goodies:

https://twitter.com/x/status/839158711948087296

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Now its your deflection to save your face.

The dialogue between me and you was pure economic as following:
Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

Why are you changing the tracks now?
I know you tried to fool PDF members with your deception and lies about India's revenue.
But you had hard time defending these things against CIA Factbook/IMF facts & figures.

Do you have any shame left>?

Well as you have resorted to personal remarks this is going to be my last post to you.

India has the capability to buy, operate and build Aircraft carriers with enough revenue. Our economy is not a fudged one like other countries.

You have no idea about economics or anything. You dont know what internal debt or external debt is. As I told you are just a waste of time.

CIA factbook dosent carry enough weightage as the IMF accounts. And I have showed the central government revenue as 550 billion and that is one thing you cannot dispute.

You know that the payment is not made in a single go and it takes around 10 years for the government to complete payments. If an aircraft carrier is built over a period of 8 years and costs 8 billion it is going to be spread out as 1 billion per year.

That is how it is done. I told you right you do not have the comprehensive abilities to have a meaningful discussion with me.


You have already proven that.

Best you stick to posting news and laying low.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Above numbers are inflated:

Gerald Ford 100K tonne, EMALS, nuclear propulsion and other goodies:

https://twitter.com/x/status/839158711948087296

US shipbuilding industry is more streamlined with economics of scale.It would be the first time we would build such a huge ship,cost overruns are inevitable.It would also have EMALS and nuclear propulsion. 8-10 billion i think.

 

[ashok321]

CIA factbook dosent carry enough weightage as the IMF accounts. And I have showed the central government revenue as 550 billion and that is one thing you cannot dispute.

This is from your own link that you posted:

Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

There is no escape for you.

 

[Han Patriot]

Its a very good and rational decision.A 65k tonne carrier will be 5-10 billion dollars.Plus 57 rafales or f-35s will be 10-15 billion dollars.No way can the navy afford this ,particularly 57 new gen aircraft.Even airforce was struggling with rafale price.Navy with lowest budget allocation of the 3 services can't afford this right now.We should have 2 reliable carriers,we dont need supercarriers anyway because our navy will operate with support from land based aircraft and infrastructure in IOR.We need to focus on ASW helicopters and aircraft and above all on huge numbers of submarines.(30 plus)Indian navy should not get obsessed with carriers which are increasingly suspect unless u can spend 50 billion dollars on a CBG like USN,submarines will be vital along with a large numbers of destroyers and frigates.If necessary cruisers.Either airforce or naval air arm needs to have 2 dedicated maritime support squadrons of 5th gen aircraft in the next 10-15 years which can support the fleet.We should also look at acquiring 4 -6 Tu-22 M3 backfire maritime attack bombers.Each of these can carry 8-10 air launched brahmos.A salvo from these 4-6 aircraft will be enough to decimate any fleet that enters IOR.We should also permanently station a brahmos regiment in andaman.

First priority should be submarines and ASW helicopters.And 2 squadrons of rafale-m/5th gen aircraft based in south india.We need 3-4 SSBNs capable of striking chinese mainland quickly.That is more important than carriers.

Your analysis is spot on. India cannot afford CBGs right now, not when the cost is escalated with so much imports. Sorry to say this but it's true, without indigenous manufacturing capability except maybe for the hull, the subsystems delay and expenditure will screw up the cost. Vikrant is a good example.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

This is from your own link that you posted:

Navy unlikely to expand aircraft carrier fleet in next 15 years

There is no escape for you.

The more you quote me the more you are showing you are a stupid and you lack basic addition skills. Read the whole page not cherry pick stuff. click on that chart and go further down the scale. That is how u read it.

I use a calculator to check these numbers and not blindly believe you.

That is why we call you mathematically challenged person with poor comprehension skills.

 

[Han Patriot]

Its a very good and rational decision.A 65k tonne carrier will be 5-10 billion dollars.Plus 57 rafales or f-35s will be 10-15 billion dollars.No way can the navy afford this ,particularly 57 new gen aircraft.Even airforce was struggling with rafale price.Navy with lowest budget allocation of the 3 services can't afford this right now.We should have 2 reliable carriers,we dont need supercarriers anyway because our navy will operate with support from land based aircraft and infrastructure in IOR.We need to focus on ASW helicopters and aircraft and above all on huge numbers of submarines.(30 plus)Indian navy should not get obsessed with carriers which are increasingly suspect unless u can spend 50 billion dollars on a CBG like USN,submarines will be vital along with a large numbers of destroyers and frigates.If necessary cruisers.Either airforce or naval air arm needs to have 2 dedicated maritime support squadrons of 5th gen aircraft in the next 10-15 years which can support the fleet.We should also look at acquiring 4 -6 Tu-22 M3 backfire maritime attack bombers.Each of these can carry 8-10 air launched brahmos.A salvo from these 4-6 aircraft will be enough to decimate any fleet that enters IOR.We should also permanently station a brahmos regiment in andaman.

First priority should be submarines and ASW helicopters.And 2 squadrons of rafale-m/5th gen aircraft based in south india.We need 3-4 SSBNs capable of striking chinese mainland quickly.That is more important than carriers.

Your analysis is spot on. India cannot afford CBGs right now, not when the cost is escalated with so much imports. Sorry to say this but it's true, without indigenous manufacturing capability except maybe for the hull, the subsystems delay and expenditure will screw up the cost. Vikrant is a good example.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Its a very good and rational decision.A 65k tonne carrier will be 5-10 billion dollars.Plus 57 rafales or f-35s will be 10-15 billion dollars.No way can the navy afford this ,particularly 57 new gen aircraft.Even airforce was struggling with rafale price.Navy with lowest budget allocation of the 3 services can't afford this right now.We should have 2 reliable carriers,we dont need supercarriers anyway because our navy will operate with support from land based aircraft and infrastructure in IOR.We need to focus on ASW helicopters and aircraft and above all on huge numbers of submarines.(30 plus)Indian navy should not get obsessed with carriers which are increasingly suspect unless u can spend 50 billion dollars on a CBG like USN,submarines will be vital along with a large numbers of destroyers and frigates.If necessary cruisers.Either airforce or naval air arm needs to have 2 dedicated maritime support squadrons of 5th gen aircraft in the next 10-15 years which can support the fleet.We should also look at acquiring 4 -6 Tu-22 M3 backfire maritime attack bombers.Each of these can carry 8-10 air launched brahmos.A salvo from these 4-6 aircraft will be enough to decimate any fleet that enters IOR.We should also permanently station a brahmos regiment in andaman.

First priority should be submarines and ASW helicopters.And 2 squadrons of rafale-m/5th gen aircraft based in south india.We need 3-4 SSBNs capable of striking chinese mainland quickly.That is more important than carriers.

Well if we are going for a 65k tonne carrier we would first need a CBG to support it. And I think we do not have any of those ships in place. Proper destroyers and cruisers along with amphibious ships are required. Hell we do not even have a proper Nuclear attack submarine force to be deployed along with it. Just building a carrier wont suffice we need to build a battle group.

So minimal estimate with all kinds of inflations and delays factored in would come to $60 to $70 billion.

 

[ashok321]

The more you quote me the more you are showing you are a stupid and you lack basic addition skills. Read the whole page not cherry pick stuff. click on that chart and go further down the scale. That is how u read it.

I use a calculator to check these numbers and not blindly believe you.

That is why we call you mathematically challenged person with poor comprehension skills.

There is nothing & no need to scroll down and read the worthless.
Thanks for obfuscation though.

There is a following scenario suitably applicable for an Indian like you:

When a Japanese man falls down, gets up, walks away by saying sorry.
When an Indian man (like you) falls down, gets up, walks away and says "I was doing a circus" to save his embarrassment.

Got it?

Now you are ignored!
I have an allergy for snoutbands.
And you are a top notch one!

 

[satishkumarcsc]

There is nothing & no need to scroll down and read the worthless.
Thanks for obfuscation though.

There is a following scenario suitably applicable for an Indian like you:

When a Japanese man falls down, gets up, walks away by saying sorry.
When an Indian man (like you) falls down, gets up, walks away and says "I was doing a circus" to save his embarrassment.

Got it?

Now you are ignored!
I have an allergy for snoutbands.
And you are a top notch one!
View attachment 412891

So you ratted out at last.

 

[ashok321]

US shipbuilding industry is more streamlined with economics of scale.It would be the first time we would build such a huge ship,cost overruns are inevitable.It would also have EMALS and nuclear propulsion. 8-10 billion i think.

Thanks for amending your post from 10-15 billion to 8-10 billion.
Now it seems credible & tenable for any rational mind.