at the cost of one vikramaditya aircraft carrier how many airfields can be developed along with fighter squadrons of su-30mki
@Decklander
@Ray
This may help you to understand naval operations
Sea Power
Naval forces are among the most useful of diplomatic tools. Policy makers can send them to over two-thirds of the world's surface at any time without having to obtain advance basing rights or prior permission to conduct naval movements. Having a sound capability for deploying military forces to almost any coastal (littoral) area makes it possible for the United States to provide the tangible leadership that is necessary to facilitate the assembly of coalition forces, or negotiate forward basing rights should the circumstances so require.
While U.S. maritime forces may not be immediately visible offshore, they are a potent deterrent to potential adversaries since such forces can arrive quickly and remain indefinitely. Routine forward deployment provides the President of the United States with "on-call military presence" almost anywhere in the world and furnishes the capability to project military power and show credible resolve without provoking war. This presence also reminds potential adversaries of U.S. military capability and resolve to enforce international law. In this regard, the oceans and US naval forces provide the United States with unparalleled peacemaking capability and promote the rule of law.
The four levels of war include grand strategic, strategic, operational, and tactical.
The grand strategic level of war is the place where the most basic but most consequential decisions are made. Here, a country determines whether it will participate in a war, who its allies and enemies will be, and what it wants the peace following the war to look like. In World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill, and Soviet Premier Josef Stalin were arbiters of the grand strategy that largely dictated the military strategy of the states opposing the German-Italian-Japanese Axis.
The strategic level of war concerns the overall conduct of the war, the approximate forces that will be made available, and the weights of effort in various theaters. To illustrate, the decision to emphasize Europe, rather than the Pacific, in World War II was a strategic decision. Similarly, the decision that Germany would be defeated by land invasion, rather than by blockade or air attack, was strategic. General George C. Marshall, US Army Chief of Staff, and British Field Marshal Sir Alan Francis Brooke were chief architects of American and British strategy in this conflict. Twenty years later, the decision to limit the number of men and aircraft available for us in Vietnam was a strategic decision, as was the decision to limit the air campaign over North Vietnam.
Six discrete strategies have historically been adopted by states for the employment of naval power: fleet battle, blockade, commerce raiding, fleet-in-being, coastal defense, and maritime power projection. In the last half-century two new methods have been added, with a third now in the offing. The first new method to be added was the deterrence of nuclear attack, while the other new method of employing naval forces is making sure friendly air traffic can pass over the sea and hostile military air traffic cannot. The third new method of employing naval forces in war or near-war is that of forward defense from attack by ballistic missiles.
The operational level of war is the next level below strategic. It is primarily concerned with how to achieve the strategic ends of the war with the forces allotted. It is the level which plans are made for the actual employment of land, sea, and air forces and the level where these forces are used the course of a campaign. Generally, a theater commander is concerned with operations, as opposed to strategy. In this sense, General Dwight Eisenhower, General Douglas MacArthur, and Admiral Chester W. Nimitz were operational-level commanders (although strategic and even grand strategic implications certainly were in many of the plans they made and the operation they carried out).
The lowest level of war is the tactical level. This level is where opposing forces physically meet, objectives are unambiguous -- like taking a specific hill with a company, meeting and sinking an enemy ship, or fighting an aerial battle with an opposing fighter. The word "unambiguous" is important, because the men responsible for planning and carrying out tactical movements normally are told by higher authority precisely what they are supposed to do. This decisionmaking from on high is by no means meant to suggest that carrying out tactic orders can be done without enormous mental effort; it merely means that the mental effort can be directed to a reasonably discrete objective, as opposed to the very complex objectives that must be selected and dressed at the operational and strategic level.
Sea Denial and Operations Other Than War
As world attention turned from the old ideological East-West confrontation of the Cold War to the economic disparity between developed free market societies and developing nations, there was a re-emergence of maritime interception operations in situations short of hostilities. There has been no decrease in crises that require military operations other than war. Transoceanic operating and logistic capability permit the United States to take a lead in such operations, often as a member of a multinational coalition.
Since 1989, several multilateral embargoes have been enforced by coalition naval forces. These have been supported by the consensus of the international community, and conducted under international law. Such embargoes are best understood as attempts to maintain world order, peace, and human rights rather than as acts of war. Modern maritime interception operations are typically mandated by resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, and normally allow humanitarian shipments of food and medicine to the civilian population. Naval "visit and search" operations are conducted with respect to international law and custom.
Examples of maritime interception operations include the multinational maritime interdiction operations against Haiti, Serbia/Montenegro, and Iraq. These operations are less than airtight and require time to take effect. However, they are part of the foreign policy process which led to the implementation of democracy in Haiti, motivated Serbia to accept the Dayton Accord, and reduced Iraq's capability for military aggression both before and after the Gulf War. The United States has been at the forefront of this emerging area of modern operational peacemaking.
In the realm of military operations other than war, naval forces also contribute presence and amphibious capability, along with the ability to apply power at varying levels of intensity in "smaller scale contingencies." Maritime forces seek to ensure continued, unhindered and unrestricted use of the sea to further national or shared interests and objectives. The following paragraphs discuss the nature of maritime force employment in peace and war. It must be remembered, however, that the distinctions drawn between peacetime and wartime operations are not clear cut in many instances.
Maritime forces lend themselves well to various peacetime operations, which differ from war time operations in some respects. Although in some situations peacetime operations are designed to influence governments and military forces (presence and deterrence) they are increasingly designed to influence non-national entities, such as criminal organizations and transnational groups. Non-governmental and non-military organizations often have the expertise and the finances to conduct certain operations and may be involved in peacetime operations to varying degrees. Maritime forces should be prepared to deal with these other organizations and recognize the contributions they can bring to an operation. In some contingencies, maritime forces may operate more in a supporting or enabling role, contributing a supply of well-trained and equipped personnel who can adapt and sustain themselves.
Peace-time operations will normally have a varying mix of security, humanitarian, and environmental components, and may be grouped under the following broad headings.
Presence and Deterrence. The presence of maritime forces can avoid confrontation and support political aims without necessarily violating national sovereignty. Maritime forces may strengthen diplomatic efforts by "showing the flag" (presence) in a benign fashion as a general indicator of interest and latent capability, thereby helping to prevent emerging conflicts. Alternately, maritime forces can be deployed as a deterrent against specific actions. Maritime forces can also "shield" states at their request by establishing an at-sea presence within territorial seas, thus providing a "trip-wire" function in threatened areas. These operations are, however, fraught with danger because not all parties may cooperate with or refrain from challenging such deployments. Nevertheless, the use of maritime forces is less intrusive than the use of land based forces.
Peace Operations. This term is used in a generic sense to cover a range of activities, including conflict prevention, peace making, peace keeping, peace enforcement, and peace building. The use of maritime forces in peace operations will usually complement land forces and may involve a considerable range of tasks. These tasks may include monitoring/observing cease-fires, interposition between the maritime forces of belligerents and establishing disengagement zones, providing a neutral venue for supervised negotiations, and preventing forces of the belligerent parties from violating agreements.
Humanitarian Operations. Maritime forces are well suited to support humanitarian aid efforts that relieve or reduce the suffering, loss of life, and damage to property caused by natural or man-made disasters. In particular, military forces are useful to provide a secure environment to allow the humanitarian relief efforts of other organizations to progress as directed by cognizant legal authority. Short notice readiness, flexibility, and mobility allow maritime forces to respond quickly to a disaster, particularly if they have Marines or other troops embarked. Maritime forces can be tailored to supplement or complement the efforts of the host nation, civil authorities, or non-governmental organizations. Maritime forces may provide personnel, equipment, supplies, medical and dental care, security, limited construction and engineering, communication, and transportation support.
Protection of Shipping and Freedom of Navigation. When nations make claims over waters that are contested, challenges to freedom of navigation may arise. In such instances maritime forces can exercise freedom of navigation by traversing or exercising in the contested waters (in accordance with recognized international law). Maritime forces may also protect merchant shipping with flag-state consent that could otherwise be threatened.
Maritime Constabulary Tasks. In the last three decades developments in international maritime law, particularly the extension of national authority further from shore, has resulted in a variety of low intensity constabulary functions. These functions are likely to involve naval forces as well as coast guards and/or civilian maritime agencies. Specific functions may include:
Enforcement of fisheries regulations and EEZ arrangements.
Operations against piracy.
Counter-terrorism.
Interdiction of drugs and other contraband trade.
Interdiction of the slave trade or illegal migration.
Enforcement of environmental regulations.
Control of traffic separation schemes and other maritime traffic management tasks.
Environmental Operations. Maritime forces may also be tasked to respond to oil spills and other environmental disasters. In these cases, maritime forces can be a valuable source of trained and disciplined personnel as well as equipment. Often these operations will be conducted in concert with or in support of other governmental, international, or private agencies whose specific missions include disaster response
.
Embargoes / Maritime Interdiction Operations (MIO). Maritime forces may be tasked to enforce internationally imposed sanctions. Effective enforcement of sanctions may require sophisticated coordination of military operations at sea and in the air. This is especially true in areas of armed conflict or high tension, where the absence of commonly understood and accepted rules of engagement can greatly increase the risks to enforcement units. Assigned tasks may include stopping, inspecting, seizing, and diverting suspect ships and aircraft and establishing and enforcing a maritime exclusion zone for the maritime vessels of one or more parties to a conflict.
Noncombatant Evacuation Operations (NEO). Noncombatant evacuation operations are conducted to move personnel out of an area where deteriorating security conditions place lives at risk. This type of operation is similar to an amphibious raid, involving swift incursion, temporary occupation of an objective, and fast withdrawal after the mission is complete. During a NEO, rules of engagement usually limit the use of force to that required to protect the evacuees and the evacuation force. Maritime forces may have an integral capability to accomplish a NEO without assistance from other forces. If not, ships stationed at sea may provide lift capability and the close, secure staging areas for other forces. By evacuating directly from a secure site to ships outside territorial seas a very low political profile can be maintained. The evacuation force commander must be prepared to deal with the political sensitivity of the situation that will be monitored, if not controlled, from the highest level.
Operations in Wartime
In wartime the activities of the maritime force are normally aimed at achieving sea control and projecting power ashore.
Sea Control. Use of the sea requires a degree of control . Total sea control is rarely possible as long as an adversary continues to threaten forces in the area. Therefore, a degree of sea control is normally established within a designated area for a defined period of time. Sea control must provide security for forces, facilities, and sea lines of communications. Large maritime forces using an area for their own purposes can usually achieve and maintain sufficient sea control, but smaller specialist forces and civilian shipping require sea control to be established by other forces or escorts. Sea denial is a subset of sea control. Sea denial is achieved when maritime forces prevent an opposing force from using the sea for its own purposes. Sea denial is normally exercised in a given area and for a limited time.
Power Projection. Conflicts at sea rarely exist in isolation from a land campaign or the pursuit of territorial objectives. Even when the maritime component is operationally dominant, the ultimate outcome in the theater is likely to depend on success ashore. Maritime forces often must be prepared to operate in the littoral environment to project force ashore as part of joint operations involving naval, air, and land forces. Naval forces are normally the first forces into a crisis area and may comprise the enabling force that allows a joint force access to the region. Naval forces then contribute to operations ashore by conducting operations in direct or indirect support of those land operations. It is important to note that a maritime commander responsible for sea control may find it necessary to plan and execute power projection actions (e.g., maritime air attack of a littoral enemy air field) in order to achieve and/or maintain sea control.
Tasks for Maritime Operations
Although the following tasks are primarily applicable to wartime operations, some, or all, may apply to any maritime operation. All require an ongoing surveillance effort, using both force and external sensors, and good intelligence to create a common tactical picture on which the force can base decisions.
Anti-Air Warfare (AAW). AAW encompasses the threat from all aircraft and airborne weapons, whether launched from air, surface, or sub-surface platforms. Denial of intelligence to the enemy and achieving adequate attack warning are crucial to the AAW battle. AAW is based on the principle of layered defense: defeating air raids using sea- and shore-based aircraft, long- and medium-range surface-to-air missile systems, point defense missile systems, guns, close-in weapons systems, electronic decoys, jammers, and chaff. These layers are necessary to gain early warning, counter the enemy surveillance and targeting effort, destroy attacking aircraft before they can release their weapons and, finally, to destroy or decoy missiles before they can hit friendly forces.
Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW). The ASW protection of a force depends on defense-in-depth and close coordination between maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters, surface ships, and friendly submarines. The complexity of such coordination, and the special environmental factors involved makes the submarine threat one of the most difficult problems to counter.
Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW). Action against enemy surface forces may seek to achieve either sea control or denial. Long range warning from intelligence sources is valuable prior to detection by shore or ship-based fixed-wing aircraft, ship-borne helicopters, or ships' sensors. Once a threatening force is detected its composition and disposition must be ascertained before an attack can effectively be pressed home.
Strike Warfare (STW). Maritime forces contribute to strikes against targets ashore using carrier-based strike aircraft, sea-launched cruise missiles, naval guns, and special operations forces. In maritime air operations, particularly in the littoral environment, air forces work in close cooperation with naval forces to ensure the most effective use of available air assets in strike roles.
Amphibious Warfare (AMW). An amphibious operation is an operation launched from the sea by naval and landing forces against a hostile or potentially hostile shore. Amphibious operations integrate virtually all types of ships, aircraft, weapons, special operations forces, and landing forces in a concerted joint military effort. Amphibious operations are probably the most complex of all joint operations; detailed, specialized knowledge and a high degree of coordination and cooperation in planning, training, and execution are essential for success. Maritime forces will be responsible for: the safe and timely arrival of seaborne forces at an amphibious objective, landing of a force in good order at the right place and time, defense of shipping, and control of ship-to-objective movement. An amphibious force can poise at sea, raiding or landing at a politically decided time and place independent of shore infrastructure.
Command and Control Warfare (C2W). Supported by intelligence, C2W integrates the use of operational security (OPSEC), operational deception (OPDEC), psychological operations (PSYOP), electronic warfare (EW), and physical destruction to deny information to, influence, degrade, or destroy an adversary's C2 capabilities and to protect friendly C2 against such actions.
Special Operations. Maritime Special Operations Forces (SOF) contribute direct and indirect support to sea control and power projection missions. Capable of operating clandestinely, SOF can provide advance force operations, hydrographic and near-shore reconnaissance in advance of a landing, direct action missions, combat search and rescue missions, and the ability to degrade enemy lines of communications.
Mine Warfare (MW). Mine warfare can involve both the offensive use of mines and defensive Mine Counter Measures (MCM). Offensive minelaying operations aim to dislocate enemy war efforts and improve the security of own sea lines of communications by destroying, or threatening to destroy enemy seaborne forces. MCM includes active measures (to locate and clear mined areas), passive measures (routing shipping around high threat
