Navy needs more Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
It dosen't matter how many CBGs are they but the pilot quality that matters the most! there fore to put a effective CBG will take 5 yrs atleast for India.
Hmm. We created CBGs long time back. Our first war with an active CBG was during the Invasion of Goa in 1961.

That CBG with an aircraft compliment of Harriers which is not effective weapon system for CBG!
The Brits created the first such CBG based on Harriers. IN followed and the US Marines after we did. The Marines still swear by the Harriers and the F-35B is to give the Marines the same capability as the Harrier, but with stealth included.
 

Nirvana

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
343
Likes
152
6 Aircraft carrier have been Planned in Long term but we are long way off before we achieve this

By the end of 2020 we will have INS Vikramaditya and Vikrant in Service , with Viraat Decommisioned
the Planned IAC-2 Will see service in Navy only after 2020

a CBG Should have 2 Destroyers,2 Frigates,1 Corvette,1 SSN,1 Tanker

We don't Possess SSN except recent Induction of Akula -II , Hence to form a lethal CBG we need a Production line of Indigenous SSN To form CBG's

We may have 4 Aircraft carrier's by 2030 forming 4 CBG's if we Possess SSN's - we Need to invest in Carrier's in Long term and Production should not be Halted at IAC-2
 

HeinzGud

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
2,558
Likes
1,070
Country flag
The Brits created the first such CBG based on Harriers. IN followed and the US Marines after we did. The Marines still swear by the Harriers and the F-35B is to give the Marines the same capability as the Harrier, but with stealth included.
Harrier is a subsonic multirole fighter which is not capable enough to hold a superior enemy force i.e. air crafts 4+ and 4++ fighters. However I'm not denying the fact that India has the knowledge to operate a CBG effectively. But my point is that India will have to take time in order to train pilots up to effective standard we should not forget US and England didn't master CBG tactics and skills within months. The same should go with IJN fleet during WW2.
 

noob101

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
394
Likes
104
The Brits created the first such CBG based on Harriers. IN followed and the US Marines after we did. The Marines still swear by the Harriers and the F-35B is to give the Marines the same capability as the Harrier, but with stealth included.
The only reason that the Marines stick by the harriers because they have other assets in the form of f18's form carriers that would support any operations... Sending in wasp class LPD with only harriers would be a slaughter againsit any force with decent air defenses and air force...
 

thakur_ritesh

Ambassador
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
4,435
Likes
1,733
wish the good professor had done a thorough cost analysis which would have made this article worth more than what it is, and what portion of the annual navy budget would go towards all this build up, maintenance, and more.

otherwise articles like these sound good, but dont really cut much ice.
 

Payeng

Daku Mongol Singh
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
2,522
Likes
777
Harrier is a subsonic multirole fighter which is not capable enough to hold a superior enemy force i.e. air crafts 4+ and 4++ fighters. However I'm not denying the fact that India has the knowledge to operate a CBG effectively. But my point is that India will have to take time in order to train pilots up to effective standard we should not forget US and England didn't master CBG tactics and skills within months. The same should go with IJN fleet during WW2.
You know India had operated CATOBAR CV in the past.
 

noob101

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
394
Likes
104
In a war with Pakistan what ever the Army or Air Force strategy is the Navy is going to spend most of its resources in blockade... let say we send 2 CBG to effect a blockade, that will leave us with one more to cover the straits Malacca and the rest of the IOR, everyone seems to think that since we are still a developing nation we can't afford such a large navy. But the current situation is by 2020 we are going to have 3 carriers and 4 large LPD/LPH, if we consider the growth that our economy is going i think that 6 is a reality, we also have to keep in mind that the carriers that the IN is going to operate are not the size of American nuclear CV's. Ours cost considerably smaller and are conventionally powered so cost and maintenance is also less...

Due to our geography Navy is vital, and these plans are meant for after 2030. so I dont see why this cant be done
 

Aditya Mookerjee

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
25
Likes
3
What does the Battle of Midway suggest? In a Naval engagement, involving Aircraft Carriers by both the opposing forces, the side with the most remaining Aircraft carriers, is victorious. This is obvious. So, how should these ships be used? They are basically a floating airbase. A small or medium Aircraft Carrier, can be dealth with, because the the planes carried by these, can be effectively parried by anti-aircraft missiles, on ships. This is, if the aircraft can be identified as a target, early enough. The aircraft has the advantage, because it's radar looks down, on ships. If an aircraft approaches the target at a sufficient altitude and distance, then it will perhaps identify the ship first.
If one looks at the history of Naval Aviation, the advantage of the Aircraft Carrier, has been of a constant particular nature. In the early days of Aircraft Carrier operation, the advantage was not clear to perception. But this advantage is known today, by how the vessel and it's weapons have developed.
No warship in the Second World War, was safe from air attack, because the ships never carried enough anti-aircraft weapons. The warship is an anti-ship platform first. I don't know about current warships. The Destroyer can be an effective anti-aircraft ship, but can the Aircraft Carrier defend itself? I believe the Nimitz class Super Carriers, are not immune to missile attack.
 

bengalraider

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
3,779
Likes
2,666
Country flag
What we need is the best bang for the buck, aircraft carriers are maintenance intensive assets that serve as great power projection platforms but tie down a lot of other assets as part of the CBG i personally believe that as of the moment we do not require more than three full sized carriers and we should not hobble our finances with more of the behemoths, we can however procure and use a couple of LHD platforms like the Mistral as a secondary routine patrol asset that will keep our primary carriers free for power projection. however all said and done India geographically is in an advantageous position and the formation of a "soviet naval aviation type" naval strike force based out of land bases in the Andamans and the southern peninsula would be a much more cost effective and lethal deterrent in a radius of a 1000km or so with the current aircraft we have and are procuring, If we were able to persuade the Russians into selling us around 3 squadrons of backfires we would have the best strategic anti-shipping airfleet in Asia.
what the IN really needs to build fear in the seas is a large and effective SSN/SSK force (i was thinking roughly 45odd boats in total with 30SSK'S and 10SSn's complemented by 5SSBN's) that is wher the money is required now.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top