TrueSpirit
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2009
- Messages
- 1,893
- Likes
- 841
Here's a case in favour of Aircraft Carriers; a 5-year old paper written by IDSA
Aircraft Carriers and India's Naval Doctrine | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
It emphasizes the utility/relevance of Aircraft Carriers & counters every argument against it.
The paper ends with the conclusion
Given the aforesaid considerations, prima facie, the imperative of including carriers in its naval doctrine far outweighs its cost, both financial and operational. It is important to remember that many of the arguments against the carrier mentioned in this paper were used even before World War II. The statistics of the war pertaining to allied forces later disputed these – in comparison to 11 per cent carriers, the allies lost 18 per cent
battleships, 33 per cent cruisers, 36 per cent frigates, 21 per cent sloops and 37 per cent submarines. The post-Cold War global trends of carrier acquisitions are instructive. Despite the fact that only Indian and British carriers went into action in the Cold War-era, France, Italy,
Spain and Thailand did not hesitate to acquire carriers. Like India, China is another major regional power. With the exception of its maritime-territorial claims in the western Pacific, China's emerging vital interests are likely to be similar to those of India. Although China has not yet operationalised a carrier, it is more due to geo-strategic compulsions specific to it, rather than for any reason applicable in Indian context. Furthermore, while such compulsions are likely to persist in the foreseeable future, Beijing has maintained a long-term vision to acquire carriers and has also been working towards it, such as in terms of formal induction in January 2007 of the old Soviet Varyag as Shilang (hull no 83) and the ongoing negotiations with Russia to procure the carrier-capable SU-33 naval aircraft. In the US, the debate was not about the need of carriers, but their optimum numbers to support its global interests. Likewise, the debate in India must be on the number and size of its
carriers, rather than on the platform per se.
Have a look.
Veterans, experts, enthusiasts & fanboys can share their views on how relevant or irrelevant is an Aircraft Carrier for India's maritime security & overall defense preparedness.
Aircraft Carriers and India's Naval Doctrine | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses
It emphasizes the utility/relevance of Aircraft Carriers & counters every argument against it.
The paper ends with the conclusion
Given the aforesaid considerations, prima facie, the imperative of including carriers in its naval doctrine far outweighs its cost, both financial and operational. It is important to remember that many of the arguments against the carrier mentioned in this paper were used even before World War II. The statistics of the war pertaining to allied forces later disputed these – in comparison to 11 per cent carriers, the allies lost 18 per cent
battleships, 33 per cent cruisers, 36 per cent frigates, 21 per cent sloops and 37 per cent submarines. The post-Cold War global trends of carrier acquisitions are instructive. Despite the fact that only Indian and British carriers went into action in the Cold War-era, France, Italy,
Spain and Thailand did not hesitate to acquire carriers. Like India, China is another major regional power. With the exception of its maritime-territorial claims in the western Pacific, China's emerging vital interests are likely to be similar to those of India. Although China has not yet operationalised a carrier, it is more due to geo-strategic compulsions specific to it, rather than for any reason applicable in Indian context. Furthermore, while such compulsions are likely to persist in the foreseeable future, Beijing has maintained a long-term vision to acquire carriers and has also been working towards it, such as in terms of formal induction in January 2007 of the old Soviet Varyag as Shilang (hull no 83) and the ongoing negotiations with Russia to procure the carrier-capable SU-33 naval aircraft. In the US, the debate was not about the need of carriers, but their optimum numbers to support its global interests. Likewise, the debate in India must be on the number and size of its
carriers, rather than on the platform per se.
Have a look.
Veterans, experts, enthusiasts & fanboys can share their views on how relevant or irrelevant is an Aircraft Carrier for India's maritime security & overall defense preparedness.