Like your point but how much money we can expect to spend on CV?
We are hearing 50,000 more ground troops been deployed to Ladakh. I won't blame GoI want to show a firm position, as long as it got a real strategy. In the mean time we will see many, many more assets be acquired for IAF, soon. And carrier is only number 3 or 4 priority in Navy - as fully agreed to your point: there are SSN, SSBN, and even the un-filled "hole" for air wing on Vikrant.
Yes, finding the money is the dilemma.
There are numerous demands on the defence budget and deciding priorities is a serious job. As far as the Navy goes
1.The submarine arm will receive the topmost priority if we consider our strategic nuclear weapons programme. I am taking about SSBN's and SSN's. The third and the most survivable leg of our strategic deterrent force needs to be operationalised as early as possible. This will send a message to the Chinese that they cannot destroy our nuclear weapons in a surprise first strike.
2.Even the conventional submarines whether with AIP or not will be needed to deter Chinese submarines from coming too close to our shores. Pakistan of course is the obvious enemy. There were reports that an Kilo class Indian Navy sub tailed an Pak Navy Agosta class sub without being detected and managed to collect crucial information on the acoustic signature of their sub. The new Scorpene is a generation ahead of the Kilo(Naval sources will be in a better position to make an judgment). So the utility of conventional subs is not in doubt. I believe that gradually all Indian conventional submarines will have AIP. Only very old subs may miss it.
Aircraft Carriers have not outlived their utility but due to their high cost they are not easy to fund. Many believe that instead of building an heavy or super heavy carrier (65000 to 100,000 tonnes displacement) and spending billions of dollars on it a couple of medium sized carriers of around 50,000 tonnes displacement will be a better strategy. Hypothetically speaking if we assume that an anti ship ballistic missile is able to down the super carrier our loss will be greater. On the other hand hand if out of two medium sized carriers one goes down. the other surviving carrier can compensate to an extent. We would be spreading the risk. There are a lot of assumptions being made. The US is a super power with enormous resources and can spend a lot of money on super carriers. We need not follow the same strategy.
In the end it all depends on what our economy can support. If we manage to grow above 10% for at least a decade, then we can also dream big. But the reputation of of our PSU shipyards is not good. Either they totally transform themselves or the private sector should step in in a big way to increase the productivity. How can we think of competing with the Chinese in shipbuilding if we don't increase the efficiency of our shipyards. There has been some progress in areas like modular shipbuilding and installing high capacity Goliath Cranes etc, but clearly not enough. An important asset like the Pipavav Ship Building Yard with the second or third longest Dry Dock in the world is lying idle. Is it not a waste of national resources. If Reliance cannot run it, let L&T or MDL take it over. We will have an alternative to Cochin Shipyard for building aircraft carriers.
