So you do agree with me
I agree with the budget factor, but according to me, bang for buck is a more important factor. We need economies of scale and more indigenisation to compete with China
Yes Andaman and Nicobar are key assets and developing them is indispensable part of our security measures against Chinese expansion, but those islands don't move. We need the carriers to shadow PLAN carrier groups when they roam around in the IOR in peacetime 15-20 years from now. We need to demonstrate capability and intent if we mean to continue calling IOR our backyard.
Misunderstood my question. I know it is a hypothetical scenario. I asked that question to ascertain whether you have unrealistically high assumptions about the capabilities of Indian Navy. There are some fools like that. Thankfully, you are not one of them.
When I asked if Indian Navy was capable of deterring them, I meant without external help. External help, like we got in 1971 war from Soviets.
Supercarriers are meant for peacetime signaling and military diplomacy. If you don't operate a supercarrier in your own backyard by the time China is operating a supercarrier in your backyard, you will not enjoy the confidence of the IOR nations as far as their security is concerned. You loose influence and suddenyl your backyard is not your own anymore.
As for bases, PLAN will be able to sustain some level of deployment in IOR with help from Pakistan and its base in Djibouti as far as peace time is concerned. And this also allows PLAN to position and replenish its assets just before a war starts. Then they won't require those bases during the war.
No matter how heavily armed China's neighbors are, they can't stop PLAN from sailing in international waters and into IOR during times of high tensions such as Doklam crisis.
I understand that the difference might not be much, but it is there. Organizations take time to incorporate change. SOPs evolve over a long period of time and a few exercises with foreign navies has merely given us some exposure and allowed us to incorporate some change based on the equipment we have since inducted and the suitability of the reform to our forces. But some areas, we don't have any experience at all. Such as simultaneously recovering and launching aircraft from an aircraft carrier. Or conducting over the horizon amphibious assaults. Or (Army example) conducting a armoured maneuver with massive attack helicopter support.
And your point of USN having far lower standards than Indian Navy is, sorry to say, nonsense. BS of the highest order. I have not heard a more BS argument this entire week. SJW agenda undercuts professionalism in US military but the effect is not nearly as pronounced and there is already a lot of pushback against this.
Read my question again. I said will a PLAN carrier strike group of tomorrow be comparable to a USN carrier fleet of
today solely by equipment (not training). China will have 5th gen carrier borne aircraft by then and also drones like MQ-25!! By 2040, USN will still hold advantages technologically speaking, but the gap in capabilities will have narrowed considerably.
I agree with you on this. But they might be able to create a decent force simply by imitation, exchange of ideas in military academia and limited international exposure in joint exercises. In recent decades, they have certainly raised their standards above the piss poor level they were at a couple of decades ago. The PLAN of the future might not the best in training, but enough to be a credible threat greater than the likes of Royal Navy (despite Royal Navy's better experience). On the other hand, if they do face a small conflict with, say, Taiwan, they will gain enough experience and incorporate some of those changes faster than we do.
Meanwhile, although we have combat experience, our import-dependence and MoD babudom are our Achilles heels. These are not that much of an issue for PLAN. Our military also has issues with jointness and collaboration with MIC. We don't know if our experience alone is enough to offset these shortcomings. 2001 comes to mind.
And I am saying this is not enough. All I am saying is that we need to expedite this and plan for more than just this. The real problem is lack of indigenisation. Take P 17A for instance. Each frigate is costing us upwards of $1 Billion.
Compare that to a Type 052D destroyer built in China which costs $500 Million. Or a Sejong The Great class cruiser built in South Korea that cost $900 Million about a decade ago. We need higher indigenisation and economies of scale and modular construction in order to build a larger fleet.
BTW, what is P 18A?
