Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Navy

arya

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
3,006
Likes
1,531
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Forgive me.but I did not understand anything what you want to know!

If you mean rebel against the Govt, I am afraid that is not just done!

We are not Pakistan!

sir just one thing pls safe the nation and only force can do that ..
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

sir just one thing pls safe the nation and only force can do that ..
I find solace in your confidence and trust in the Forces.

We will do our best within the Constitutional framework and I can assure you that.

Though I will admit, maybe we will not come up to your expectation but then the Constitution is in the hands of the voters, namely, you.

Change it and we will abide to fulfill your trust in us!

Till then, the Constitution as it stands is our Guide and our Gospel!
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

then our ex chief should be in jail they didn't did there job .

Every one played with nation let suprime court send some one to jail .
:confused:



...........
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

What we need is a dual stratagem of applying a sea control philosophy where Pakistan is concerned and a sea denial policy where china is concerned, we do not i repeat do not need a hundred ships to combat any Chinese incursion into the IN a smallish flotilla of around 20-30 state of the art(Nirbhay armed) SSGN's, SSN'S and SSK's patrolling the straits of Malacca backed up by a robust air presence of AWACS, Sukhois(BRAHMOS armed),and Poseidon's from a suitably upgraded and enlarged Andaman base. should be able to inflict unacceptable losses on any PLAN fleet surface or subsurface trying to cross into the IOR.
 

arya

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
3,006
Likes
1,531
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

well china got russia words that . RUSSIA will not help india in case of war .

Well if we indian think they will help us then pls wakeup.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

What we need is a dual stratagem of applying a sea control philosophy where Pakistan is concerned and a sea denial policy where china is concerned, we do not i repeat do not need a hundred ships to combat any Chinese incursion into the IN a smallish flotilla of around 20-30 state of the art(Nirbhay armed) SSGN's, SSN'S and SSK's patrolling the straits of Malacca backed up by a robust air presence of AWACS, Sukhois(BRAHMOS armed),and Poseidon's from a suitably upgraded and enlarged Andaman base. should be able to inflict unacceptable losses on any PLAN fleet surface or subsurface trying to cross into the IOR.
Why would China even sail through the Straits of Malacca? There are 4 or 5 other straits in Indonesia which would only add a day or two's sail to any hypothetical Chinese fleet intervening in the IOR. Is India going to violate the territorial sovereignty of Indonesia and blockade all of them?
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

It is extremely difficult for China to enter the Indian Ocean.

Without access to the ocean, they won't be able to do much.

Even if they do enter the Indian Ocean, they don't have supply bases like the US has to maintain their fleet.

So, we have a "terrain" advantage against China at both land and sea. A very good advantage to have.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Why would China even sail through the Straits of Malacca? There are 4 or 5 other straits in Indonesia which would only add a day or two's sail to any hypothetical Chinese fleet intervening in the IOR. Is India going to violate the territorial sovereignty of Indonesia and blockade all of them?
He isn't talking about blockade.

What we need is a dual stratagem of applying a sea control philosophy where Pakistan is concerned and a sea denial policy where china is concerned, we do not i repeat do not need a hundred ships to combat any Chinese incursion into the IN a smallish flotilla of around 20-30 state of the art(Nirbhay armed) SSGN's, SSN'S and SSK's patrolling the straits of Malacca backed up by a robust air presence of AWACS, Sukhois(BRAHMOS armed),and Poseidon's from a suitably upgraded and enlarged Andaman base. should be able to inflict unacceptable losses on any PLAN fleet surface or subsurface trying to cross into the IOR.
What we need is to build a joint frame work with countries like Singapore, Australia and Malaysia to share maritime intelligence in a NATO like structure. I think the Navy is interested in working towards such a system. It was merely mentioned in an article by an officer though.

Intelligence alone will keep PLAN at bay.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

I'd agree with p2p having a robust international intelligence and mutual defense network is often more damaging than hard military strength , however they work best when both complement each other. i'd also advocate similar treaties with Taiwan, Vietnam , japan and the philipenes. we could even mount a rearguard action on any PLAN expeditionary fleet using japanese, vietnamese, taiwanese or filipino bases. i envisage a couple of SSGN's secretly based around the region could pose a very credible threat to any PLAN Armada and force them to spend valuable intel assets to look behind and not only in front.
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
2,449
Likes
8,413
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Why would China even sail through the Straits of Malacca? There are 4 or 5 other straits in Indonesia which would only add a day or two's sail to any hypothetical Chinese fleet intervening in the IOR. Is India going to violate the territorial sovereignty of Indonesia and blockade all of them?
We don't need to blockade all the Straits. A frigate armed with Nirbhay can cover vast areas. One can strike basically anywhere close to Singapore. Not to mention P8Is armed with Harpoons
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Too bad we don't have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

No idea what we have worked out with Australia, Singapore, Japan etc in secret.

Anyway, we currently have plans of building 3 SSBNs and 6 SSNs. Those 3 SSBN may also double up as SSGNs with the K-14s. We have plans for 6 Scorpenes, 6 P-75I and 12 domestic SSKs. All of this between today and 2030. There is a clause for 3 more Scorpenes on option, no idea if it will be exercised or not. P-75I also should have a 3 or 6 more as options.

Nerpa is currently available on a ten year contract, with an extension clause for 10 more years. A second Akula II is also available.

Overall, our plans for SSKs is quite robust while SSNs and SSBNs are quite modest. Perhaps gives India a credible deterrent + some added teeth for whatever CBG plans we have.
 

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Too bad we don't have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

No idea what we have worked out with Australia, Singapore, Japan etc in secret.

Anyway, we currently have plans of building 3 SSBNs and 6 SSNs. Those 3 SSBN may also double up as SSGNs with the K-14s. We have plans for 6 Scorpenes, 6 P-75I and 12 domestic SSKs. All of this between today and 2030. There is a clause for 3 more Scorpenes on option, no idea if it will be exercised or not. P-75I also should have a 3 or 6 more as options.

Nerpa is currently available on a ten year contract, with an extension clause for 10 more years. A second Akula II is also available.

Overall, our plans for SSKs is quite robust while SSNs and SSBNs are quite modest. Perhaps gives India a credible deterrent + some added teeth for whatever CBG plans we have.
Why do we dream today ? Why did not we dream yesterday? Where are our todays dreams on assemly lines? These are some questions which disturb me !!
 

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

We don't need to blockade all the Straits. A frigate armed with Nirbhay can cover vast areas. One can strike basically anywhere close to Singapore. Not to mention P8Is armed with Harpoons
"Nirbhaya" has become so fearless as not to obey the DRDO scientists.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Why do we dream today ? Why did not we dream yesterday? Where are our todays dreams on assemly lines? These are some questions which disturb me !!
Yup. This is of concern. The Navy and MoD have been quite late in receiving new ships and subs. In the last 3 years we have only received Shivalik class frigates from Indian docks, 5 Talwar class frigates from Russia and the Nerpa among capital cessels. 3 crucial destroyers have been delayed a lot while the rest of our modern fleet is still on paper.
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
2,449
Likes
8,413
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

Yup. This is of concern. The Navy and MoD have been quite late in receiving new ships and subs. In the last 3 years we have only received Shivalik class frigates from Indian docks, 5 Talwar class frigates from Russia and the Nerpa among capital cessels. 3 crucial destroyers have been delayed a lot while the rest of our modern fleet is still on paper.
I believe that we need a ship along the lines of Sejong the great class. Imagine a ship with 128 VLS cells armed with BrahMos and Nirbhay and having AESA radar with BMD capability and then Deploying that ship in the Straits of Malacca. Not even the 5th fleet would be able to force its way through to the IOR

 
Last edited:

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

I believe that we need a ship along the lines of Sejong the great class. Imagine a ship with 128 VLS cells armed with BrahMos and Nirbhay and having AESA radar with BMD capability and then Deploying that ship in the Straits of Malacca. Not even the 5th fleet would be able to force its way through to the IOR

The Americans had plans for a large cruiser with 500 VLS cells. Plans were scuttled after the Soviets fell.

Btw, google Kirov class.
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
2,449
Likes
8,413
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

The Americans had plans for a large cruiser with 500 VLS cells. Plans were scuttled after the Soviets fell.

Btw, google Kirov class.
The Kirov class are my favourite ships ever, I mean a nuclear propelled ship armed to the teeth and the size of HMS Hood of WWII era. Phew!!! But unfortunately only one remains in active service. I would love if we could get our hands on one!!(BTW the Slava class is cool too)
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

The Kirov class are my favourite ships ever, I mean a nuclear propelled ship armed to the teeth and the size of HMS Hood of WWII era. Phew!!! But unfortunately only one remains in active service. I would love if we could get our hands on one!!(BTW the Slava class is cool too)
The Russians are planning on activating 3 more.

Anyway, Arsenal ships,







Packed with LACMs to take out invading forces, primarily meant to target vehicles like tanks, IFVs, trucks etc.
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
2,449
Likes
8,413
Country flag
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

The Russians are planning on activating 3 more.

Anyway, Arsenal ships,







Packed with LACMs to take out invading forces, primarily meant to target vehicles like tanks, IFVs, trucks etc.

I want THOSE:drool::drool:
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Re: Don't have capability/intention to match China force for force: Na

I want THOSE:drool::drool:
Too many eggs in one basket. I remember talking to a retired USN rear admiral who taught military history; he explained that the cost to fill a single VLS with a missile (or quad-packed SAM) was about $2M, so a boat packed with 250 missiles would risk half a billion dollars of ammunition in a larger radar signature. It made more sense to spread all that ordnance across a number of smaller destroyers, each packing sensor suites just as powerful as the larger CG, but with smaller radar signatures and more tactical flexibility (to spread out, pincer, flank, etc.)

The only real advantage an arsenal ship like that would have is more relative fuel efficiency than a number of smaller craft, especially if it was nuclear powered, but a nuclear reactor would simply make it even more expensive than even three or four equivalent destroyers. Finally, the US has been building Burkes for years now, so building additional Burke Flight IIAs (and possibly IIBs) means declining unit costs and economies of scale.

EDIT: To quote my notes from our conversation

The reason you want a bigger ship is not because you want more firepower, it's to fit a bigger sensor and jammer suite. Past a certain point, sensor power doesn't scale up fast enough to justify the increased displacement.
Presumably, he was referring to the fact that a linear increase in sensor power requires a linear increase in displacement, but only increases the square root of the detection range.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top