INS Vishal (IAC- II) Aircraft Carrier - Flattop or Ski Jump

[garg_bharat]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...rowl-around-Andamans/articleshow/51159533.cms

Two days ago.. wake up from your bubble and smell the coffee

And you will fight this with carrier??

ANC needs more air strips due the the length of archipelago.

More sub hunters? Sure.

 

[garg_bharat]

@aditya g, Different countries have different priorities.

IN can and should go for carriers similar to INS Vikrant under construction. This is the kind of carrier that India can support technically and financially, and is adequate for protecting the sea trade.

There is no need to copy American supercarrier or even UK. Look what is happening to UK Pound. Excessive expenditure will crash UK economy.

 

[aditya g]

Agree ... But even the smaller carriers pack a whallop

@aditya g, Different countries have different priorities.

IN can and should go for carriers similar to INS Vikrant under construction. This is the kind of carrier that India can support technically and financially, and is adequate for protecting the sea trade.

There is no need to copy American supercarrier or even UK. Look what is happening to UK Pound. Excessive expenditure will crash UK economy.

 

[garg_bharat]

India should avoid getting into a basis of war with China. I agree that China is an aggressive neighbor. However it is better to work for improving relations rather than annoy.

The fact remains that China has built an industrial engine that India can only dream of. We are too far from becoming an industrial powerhouse. This is reflected in our exports. China's industrial strength is hard to beat in short to medium term.

The foreign policy has to be realistic. Rushing into a war with China because Uncle Sam said so will be height of foolishness.

 

[garg_bharat]

The Hindus have survived two millennium of weakness because they did not rush to meddle into other countries. India needs time, at least a few decades more, to take care of its evolution as a nation. This is the time to look for friendships, not enemies.

 

[shade]

India should avoid getting into a basis of war with China. I agree that China is an aggressive neighbor. However it is better to work for improving relations rather than annoy.

The fact remains that China has built an industrial engine that India can only dream of. We are too far from becoming an industrial powerhouse. This is reflected in our exports. China's industrial strength is hard to beat in short to medium term.

The foreign policy has to be realistic. Rushing into a war with China because Uncle Sam said so will be height of foolishness.

India should avoid getting into a basis of war with China. I agree that China is an aggressive neighbor. However it is better to work for improving relations rather than annoy.

The fact remains that China has built an industrial engine that India can only dream of. We are too far from becoming an industrial powerhouse. This is reflected in our exports. China's industrial strength is hard to beat in short to medium term.

The foreign policy has to be realistic. Rushing into a war with China because Uncle Sam said so will be height of foolishness.

as long as Modi is in PM chair we won't get war.
he knows that no foreign firm will invest in a country that is at war
simultaneously he goes to less known countries like the ExUSSRistan/"Central Asia" countries to make good diplomatic relations
like you said picking up a fight with china atm is ridiculous,they outnumber us in everyway,and are better economically.

 

[archie]

And you will fight this with carrier??

ANC needs more air strips due the the length of archipelago.

More sub hunters? Sure.

That is an example of another country poking the nose in our backyard.

@aditya g, Different countries have different priorities.

IN can and should go for carriers similar to INS Vikrant under construction. This is the kind of carrier that India can support technically and financially, and is adequate for protecting the sea trade.

There is no need to copy American supercarrier or even UK. Look what is happening to UK Pound. Excessive expenditure will crash UK economy.

Fall in pound is not due to excessive military spending as you think.. UK economy is not dependent on its defence spending as it was the case of USSR..

India Needs least 3 carriers for safeguarding our flanks forget expeditionary other than IOR

India should avoid getting into a basis of war with China. I agree that China is an aggressive neighbor. However it is better to work for improving relations rather than annoy.

The fact remains that China has built an industrial engine that India can only dream of. We are too far from becoming an industrial powerhouse. This is reflected in our exports. China's industrial strength is hard to beat in short to medium term.

The foreign policy has to be realistic. Rushing into a war with China because Uncle Sam said so will be height of foolishness.

This clearly shows your childish and short sighted approach.. In real world no one comes to the talking table Unless they know they will be challenged and will be an even fight .. that does not need you to go to war.. but you need to convince and put on the table the capabilities and creation on a perception you will and have the capacity to attack or retaliate ..

No one will donate to a beggar but a knife wielding beggar will be able to get better results.. Thats the crude reality of the world..

That is the same reason none of African countries have any say in world affairs

 

[sasum]

India should avoid getting into a basis of war with China. I agree that China is an aggressive neighbor. However it is better to work for improving relations rather than annoy.

The fact remains that China has built an industrial engine that India can only dream of. We are too far from becoming an industrial powerhouse. This is reflected in our exports. China's industrial strength is hard to beat in short to medium term.

The foreign policy has to be realistic. Rushing into a war with China because Uncle Sam said so will be height of foolishness.

Sanghis, in their ardour to instill hindu-pride in country-men, have lost mental equilibrium. They have started imagining India to be a Superpower in the making and in the same league as China. India will go bust if she enters into arms race with China. We should be happy to keep upper-hand with Pak.

 

[garg_bharat]

That is an example of another country poking the nose in our backyard.



Fall in pound is not due to excessive military spending as you think.. UK economy is not dependent on its defence spending as it was the case of USSR..

India Needs least 3 carriers for safeguarding our flanks forget expeditionary other than IOR



This clearly shows your childish and short sighted approach.. In real world no one comes to the talking table Unless they know they will be challenged and will be an even fight .. that does not need you to go to war.. but you need to convince and put on the table the capabilities and creation on a perception you will and have the capacity to attack or retaliate ..

No one will donate to a beggar but a knife wielding beggar will be able to get better results.. Thats the crude reality of the world..

That is the same reason none of African countries have any say in world affairs

What is the basis of this "even" fight?? Three carriers?

I am all for carriers but when India has the industrial strength for supporting military.

Your approach is more akin to making India laughing stock of the world. Remember 61?

Bravado has to be matched with means.

What you know about UK or even economy in general?? Even superpowers have bankrupted due to high defence spending.

 

[Sam Biswas]

Sanghis, in their ardour to instill hindu-pride in country-men, have lost mental equilibrium. They have started imagining India to be a Superpower in the making and in the same league as China. India will go bust if she enters into arms race with China. We should be happy to keep upper-hand with Pak.

There is little difference between Pak and China. It is a tag team one gets help from USA and the other from Russia. Both have India in their cross hair. It is not a real choice for India. You have to build up your military. Or perhaps you have to surrender to them. UPA was doing that and sending that message to Pak-China. They stopped funding the military and building the defense industry in India killing both simultaneously. Modi is changing the course as his political strategy. Building up the defense industry in India will bring down the cost dramatically. If you continue to buy a 50 million dollar jet like Rafale for 300 million dollar, of course, India will go bankrupt. Modi has the right approach of building up the military and the defense industry in India. This is a winning combination. India already has the ability to build aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. That should tell you your capability and India has to translate that to all areas of defense.

 

[garg_bharat]

You cannot just build a single ship of one class. That is utter waste of design money.

When INS Vikrant was laid, it was clear this will be a three ship class.

When you design INS Vishal with totally different technical parameters (along with a lack of technical knowledge), you are inviting trouble.

This will give you a project that will either never complete or complete at huge cost and time overrun.

I wonder how good a ship defends itself and protects India when it sits in harbor, half completed for 20 years. This is what I see when I think about this ship.

I doubt they have been able to tie the loose ends yet. So there is no proposal to MOD. I doubt there will be one soon.

 

[archie]

What is the basis of this "even" fight?? Three carriers?

I am all for carriers but when India has the industrial strength for supporting military.

Your approach is more akin to making India laughing stock of the world. Remember 61?

Bravado has to be matched with means.

What you know about UK or even economy in general?? Even superpowers have bankrupted due to high defence spending.

I know how and why UK economy is the way it is and the spending is not on defence but its on social welfare and high inter euro immigration since uk has NHS.. So please dont tell me what UK is doing.. they can afford not to have that much of forces since its a NATO partner.. which is not the case with India and we dont have to give up our dominance of IOR region

You cannot just build a single ship of one class. That is utter waste of design money.

When INS Vikrant was laid, it was clear this will be a three ship class.

When you design INS Vishal with totally different technical parameters (along with a lack of technical knowledge), you are inviting trouble.

This will give you a project that will either never complete or complete at huge cost and time overrun.

I wonder how good a ship defends itself and protects India when it sits in harbor, half completed for 20 years. This is what I see when I think about this ship.

I doubt they have been able to tie the loose ends yet. So there is no proposal to MOD. I doubt there will be one soon.

Building the A/C is a learning curve.. may be he designers when he ship was being built say more better choices and modified the next in line ship to match the requirements and better design You do understand that the design accounts for 40 year life span.. many things changes and aircraft's can also change

 

[nitish.sarangi]

Sanghis, in their ardour to instill hindu-pride in country-men, have lost mental equilibrium. They have started imagining India to be a Superpower in the making and in the same league as China. India will go bust if she enters into arms race with China. We should be happy to keep upper-hand with Pak.

Please don't bring Sanghis or Congis debate coz the later's cred don't have a sure footing either. Nothing wrong in aspiring to be a great nation which comes with national pride and love for the motherland. Cynicism has been the tool of leftists to influence the Indian society for long. The opposite ideology is welcome for a change.

And I don't think pragmatism has taken any setbacks in the current regime. Its policy has been to engage China at proper levels which has resulted in relative calm along LAC.

China has been assertive and if India just succumbs to that then its going to look like our willingness to surrender at first sight of aggression. Standing ground and limited counter assertion is the better approach for now.

 

[sasum]

Its policy has been to engage China at proper levels which has resulted in relative calm along LAC.

Your thinking is influenced by medieval mindset. China has territorial dispute with a number of countries. All lesser military powers than India. Has she invaded and occupied their territories? In modern day geo-politics, "(military) might is right" doesn't work. Trade, commerce, industry, education, investment interminably interwined in world geo-politics. Each country big or small is dependant on others for survival and progress. It is all globalized now.
For instance, China claims Taiwan as her territory but dare not invade it. Taiwan is a heavy-weight in IT & Electronics engineering and is a pivot in much of China's export-oriented hardware industry. China knows if she harms Taiwan, she harms herself.
Btw, I find your "relative calm along LAC" view absolutely funny.

 

[sasum]

UPA was doing that and sending that message to Pak-China. They stopped funding the military and building the defense industry in India killing both simultaneously.

It is not exactly that. Manmohan Singh's thinking was if you have a nuclear deterrent in place, you don't need to splurge on mundane military machine and can afford to divert funds for social-welfare schemes and poverty alleviation.
It is a socialist pattern of thinking. I don't know if it is right...but yes it helps to have a robust military-industrial complex. Even if we dont fight a conventional war with Sino-Pak, it will generate employment, can earn foreign exchange from export, has spin-off benefits for civilian sector too !!

 

[garg_bharat]

I know how and why UK economy is the way it is and the spending is not on defence but its on social welfare and high inter euro immigration since uk has NHS.. So please dont tell me what UK is doing.. they can afford not to have that much of forces since its a NATO partner.. which is not the case with India and we dont have to give up our dominance of IOR region




Building the A/C is a learning curve.. may be he designers when he ship was being built say more better choices and modified the next in line ship to match the requirements and better design You do understand that the design accounts for 40 year life span.. many things changes and aircraft's can also change

The immigrants actually add to UK GDP.
Social welfare is common European problem.
UK problem is due to loss in competitiveness, which is reflecting in pound.

You forget that pound was more than 2 to USD in 2007.

A USA style super carrier is much beyond the technical capability of Indian industry at this point.

Our shipbuilding is nothing to write home about.

I think this the reason that foreigners are jumping in joy at the sight of a foreign yard building this carrier.

American policy is remarkably unpredictable. You may contract something with america today only to find your supplies and spares blocked suddenly. American politics is a minefield. Practically india has little influence on American decisions. And the Indian government knows this.

 

[garg_bharat]

The entire logic of building ins vikrant at kochi was not only to learn, but to establish domestic capacity for building such ships.

A ship has to be serviced during its life, which requires spares and infrastructure.

Its nuclear fuel will need to be replaced several times which is a very specialized and hazardous job.

The Indian ssbn project cannot be compared to this project due to size difference in ships.

I think I have said enough. A man's worth is in trueness of his words. Mark my words that this ship will be cancelled.

 

[nitish.sarangi]

Your thinking is influenced by medieval mindset. China has territorial dispute with a number of countries. All lesser military powers than India. Has she invaded and occupied their territories? In modern day geo-politics, "(military) might is right" doesn't work. Trade, commerce, industry, education, investment interminably interwined in world geo-politics. Each country big or small is dependant on others for survival and progress. It is all globalized now.
For instance, China claims Taiwan as her territory but dare not invade it. Taiwan is a heavy-weight in IT & Electronics engineering and is a pivot in much of China's export-oriented hardware industry. China knows if she harms Taiwan, she harms herself.
Btw, I find your "relative calm along LAC" view absolutely funny.

nothing medieval about it, its reality.. I dont know if you are wearing rose tinted glasses where you see world as some sort of paradise where everyone is hunky dory with each other, however world is a lot different.

Why do you think Russia could take over Crimea with Ukaraine just sitting it out (Sanctions are just a gesture from NATO, for the record)? Or China claiming Senkaku, Tibet or south China sea's minerals and oil for itself from within the international waters where Vietnam has a stake? It has disputes with Taiwan but Taiwan has formidable defense forces and is an ally of the US. China is looking out for its interests and so should we.

You cannot just "assume" China is going to play it cool.. There is not going to be a full fledged war but you need to guard your interests and without military might you cant be "assertive".. If we had not invested in deterrence, Arunachal and Sikkim would have been struck out of list of indian states by now.
Just think how would India establish an oil rig in south China sea if chinese subs are lurking there and you have no counter? M not saying they will attack on our survey vessels and make it international incident, but even for "eyeballing", you need to have something of your own gut..

I don't see your humor on LAC's issue.. If you feel China is aggressing LAC then you are pretty much contradicting your own point that china will play cool and not claim territory.

Military is always going to be an important clog in the of geopolitical machine along with political diplomacy, unless a day comes when all countries unite and everyone is a global citizen.. and thats Wishful thinking at best.

A bigger carrier force would help us look out for our interests.

 

[garg_bharat]

nothing medieval about it, its reality.. I dont know if you are wearing rose tinted glasses where you see world as some sort of paradise where everyone is hunky dory with each other, however world is a lot different.

Why do you think Russia could take over Crimea with Ukaraine just sitting it out (Sanctions are just a gesture from NATO, for the record)? Or China claiming Senkaku, Tibet or south China sea's minerals and oil for itself from within the international waters where Vietnam has a stake? It has disputes with Taiwan but Taiwan has formidable defense forces and is an ally of the US. China is looking out for its interests and so should we.

You cannot just "assume" China is going to play it cool.. There is not going to be a full fledged war but you need to guard your interests and without military might you cant be "assertive".. If we had not invested in deterrence, Arunachal and Sikkim would have been struck out of list of indian states by now.
Just think how would India establish an oil rig in south China sea if chinese subs are lurking there and you have no counter? M not saying they will attack on our survey vessels and make it international incident, but even for "eyeballing", you need to have something of your own gut..

I don't see your humor on LAC's issue.. If you feel China is aggressing LAC then you are pretty much contradicting your own point that china will play cool and not claim territory.

Military is always going to be an important clog in the of geopolitical machine along with political diplomacy, unless a day comes when all countries unite and everyone is a global citizen.. and thats Wishful thinking at best.

A bigger carrier force would help us look out for our interests.

Does the Indian government (and unfortunately same with military leadership) has balls to send an Indian carrier to South China sea??

Please ask somebody in position of authority and then reply.

 

[nitish.sarangi]

Does the Indian government (and unfortunately same with military leadership) has balls to send an Indian carrier to South China sea??

Please ask somebody in position of authority and then reply.

I don't have access to anybody in south block or PMO but that does not stop me from putting forth my opinion.
India has balls or not.. very simplistic question on a very complex matter..
Its not a fight club we are talking about.. India's goal is not to beat China in a match but to secure its economic interests and sovereignty in a peaceful/tactful env. Its not in either's interest to wage war but China is not stopping from asserting on its interests, so why shouldn't we.. China is being asked to follow international rules of navigation in international waters, which it is clearly violating.. China is very formidable, so India has to build its own capacity to assert its position..
but to answer your question..

I don't think India would send Carrier to south china without provocation or political diplomatic failure.. more likely India would send subs and survey vessels to scout within international waters.

Navy has ventured before and some confrontations were reported in media:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ip-on-South-China-Sea/articleshow/9829900.cms
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/883003ec-d3f6-11e0-b7eb-00144feab49a.html#axzz41opvt0FU

There are reports of joint patrolling of US and India in south China:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/11/us-a...t-patrols-in-south-china-sea-us-official.html

You don't have to agree with me.. but the defense planners of India, US and Japan.. they sure know what they are doing. US would not have send carriers to senkaku, japan would not have dropped its defensive stance if everything could be solved politically