porky_kicker
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2016
- Messages
- 6,030
- Likes
- 44,621
Gen Rawat is a credible general . He has been the target on many hit jobs.
I don't know if he said that or note , I don't care .
Point is India vis a vis china , our aircraft carriers are pretty much useless as of now.
That's the hard truth, unless we can increase the no of the combat ships in the navy which in turn will led to more no of ships in the aircraft carrier group.
A man's punch must match his strength , otherwise he will end up punched to death in the bargain.
Our current carrier group will be hopelessly outnumbered by a corresponding Chinese carrier group. Let not even talk about the no of ashms a Chinese CG can put to bear against IN CG . ( Add to that our ships are underarmed )
Unless our economic power increases and correspondingly the no of combat ships , adding more carriers is waste of money.
Best we increase the no of destroyers , frigates and submarines .
In the worse case scenario only a submarine will have a decent chance to put a chin CG under threat . If we pit our CG against a chin CG we will lose it , simple as that.
So untill our economic power increases best we spend our limited money on assets which can actually deter current and near future threats.
Imagine a submarine firing brahmos salvos at 400-800 km out of nowhere in the Indian Ocean , it will not only put chin CG at risk but also the chin CG will not be able to undertake counter action to supress the submarine threat.
There is no clear distinction between a offensive weapon and a defensive weapon , its the tactics which determines it . If submarine is used in offensive role it is a offensive weapon , if a CG is used in a defensive mode it is a defensive weapon.
Lastly aircraft carriers don't capture islands , marines do via LSTs LSDs LPDs etc .
I don't know if he said that or note , I don't care .
Point is India vis a vis china , our aircraft carriers are pretty much useless as of now.
That's the hard truth, unless we can increase the no of the combat ships in the navy which in turn will led to more no of ships in the aircraft carrier group.
A man's punch must match his strength , otherwise he will end up punched to death in the bargain.
Our current carrier group will be hopelessly outnumbered by a corresponding Chinese carrier group. Let not even talk about the no of ashms a Chinese CG can put to bear against IN CG . ( Add to that our ships are underarmed )
Unless our economic power increases and correspondingly the no of combat ships , adding more carriers is waste of money.
Best we increase the no of destroyers , frigates and submarines .
In the worse case scenario only a submarine will have a decent chance to put a chin CG under threat . If we pit our CG against a chin CG we will lose it , simple as that.
So untill our economic power increases best we spend our limited money on assets which can actually deter current and near future threats.
Imagine a submarine firing brahmos salvos at 400-800 km out of nowhere in the Indian Ocean , it will not only put chin CG at risk but also the chin CG will not be able to undertake counter action to supress the submarine threat.
There is no clear distinction between a offensive weapon and a defensive weapon , its the tactics which determines it . If submarine is used in offensive role it is a offensive weapon , if a CG is used in a defensive mode it is a defensive weapon.
Lastly aircraft carriers don't capture islands , marines do via LSTs LSDs LPDs etc .
Last edited:
