hari504504 Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 Its time we again "tested" the Anti-ship version of Brahmos in the Bay of Bengal/Indian ocean to let them know where they might want to stay away from. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/chinas-first-carrier-to-be-commissioned-in-aug/237539-2.html Beijing: China's first aircraft carrier is likely to be commissioned on August 1 and deployed in the disputed South China Sea, boosting its blue water aspirations. "The military authority plans to let the aircraft carrier be commissioned this year," Deputy Commander of Chinese navy Xu Hongmeng said. The yet to be named carrier has taken part in four sea trials in the Pacific since August last year, Shanghai Daily quoted Xu as saying. Experts believe the carrier will be commissioned on August 1, China's Army Day, and will be deployed in the South China Sea, the paper said, adding fighter jets will soon be involved in sea trials which are taking place smoothly so far. The yet to be named carrier has taken part in four sea trials in the Pacific since August last year. Chinese Defence Ministry spokesman said previously that the carrier would be used mainly for scientific research and training pilots for future carriers. Analysts say its deployment in the disputed waters of SCS whose oil rich islands were claimed by China and number of ASEAN countries could stir up more tensions in the region. China apparently was in a hurry to deploy to counter United States big Asia Pacific push strategy rallying countries that have a maritime disputes with Beijing. Since 1985, China has acquired four retired aircraft carriers for study, the Australian HMAS Melbourne and the ex-Soviet carriers Minsk, Kiev and Varyag. The carrier is built upon the unfinished former Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag and is believed to be the first of the three being planned to acquired by the Chinese navy. Experts believe China is in the early stages of building a "blue water" navy in order to challenge American global supremacy at sea. Photographs posted online have shown aircraft and helicopters landing on the deck of the carrier in the port of Dalian in northeast China. Significantly China will be deploying the J-15 fighters, stated to be home made variant of Russia's Su-33 to operate from the carrier. Like its hull, China reportedly procured a prototype of the Su-33 from Ukraine and since then developed its own version with advanced features. But it is unclear how China plan to manage the engines of the aircraft as it still imports them from Russia and Ukraine. Military experts regard J-15 as the most ideal aircraft for the carrier, took part in short-distance take-off and landing exercises late last year, the Beijing-based Legal Evening News reported. The vessel will be capable of carrying around 30 fighters and helicopters and carry a crew of around 2,000, the report said. The Admiral Kuznetsov class aircraft carrier was bought from Ukraine in 1998 as an empty shell and has been refitted for its role as a research and training platform. China claims all weapons and radar systems and other equipment on board were made locally. The news of the carrier deployment follows a week after China announced hefty $ 106.4 billion defence budget this year. Many western defence analysts say that China spends far more on defence than it actually revealed. According to recent report put out by IHS Jane's Defence & Security Intelligence & Analysis, China's military spending is set to double by 2015 touching $ 238.2 billion. (For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
surajmal Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 operating a aircraft carrier is no child's play. It will take them a decade atleast just to understand the strengths and another decade to learn how to incorporate escort ships (a group of destroyers, frigates, subs accompany any carrier). Its no biggie. For the next 2 decades, china owning aircraft carriers is like saudi arabia owning F-15s and eurofighters - its for display only.
anotherhawkeye Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 ^ somehow I feel china would be better than Saudi Arabia.
hari504504 Posted March 9, 2012 Author Posted March 9, 2012 They have 3 more under construction, while the Russians are still @#$#@$ around with the Gorshkov delivery. Aircraft carriers alone are just a big painted target in the sea, would be interesting to see what kind of Carrier group will be deployed
punjabi_khota Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 Aircraft carriers are a relic of the past, and mostly a 'show' of strength. Huge monstrous slow moving elephants of the sea, the third world is about 50 years late on this game. In the age of super fast stealth nuclear powered submarines, these zombies can do shyte.
hari504504 Posted March 9, 2012 Author Posted March 9, 2012 ^ Nuclear power submarines cannot carry a couple of squadrons of fighter aircrafts and thousands of troops. Power projection is the word, they are still relevant as long as they are being escorted by vessels that can protect it. In conventional warfare..they are still a potent piece in the arsenal.
gs Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 Aircraft carriers are a must to protect the crucial sea lanes and have a true blue water navy
Clarke Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 Carriers have historically been great when the battle is between unequals and far away from the stronger nation, from what i recall it was the game changer in Falklands war. China would be wary of using them (if at all) against any US ally in East Asia. When it comes to Indian ocean, lets just say they won't take chances far from their mainland so soon with a newbie. ^ Nuclear power submarines cannot carry a couple of squadrons of fighter aircrafts and thousands of troops. What PK is suggesting is all of that has a single point of failure and there's no disputing that. I'll agree though, it would be interesting to know how capable are the defense mechanisms of this particular carrier and its accompnying fleet.
surajmal Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 US has 11 carriers, they will be adding 2 more over the next few years. And these carriers are 90000-100000 ton class - Behemoths compared to phudi carriers like Chinese and what India is planning. Just to give an idea the kind of awesome infrastructure US has in place, here is a pic of Bremerton naval base The point I'm trying to make is (kinda overlaps with Clarke's point), Chinese won't have the balls to stretch it carrier's legs anytime in the near future because US navy rules the oceans (so pacific is out of bounds). And they won't risk bringing it to Indian ocean through Malacca, so close to andaman's southern tip as well with diego garcia near by. Until they understand what operating a carrier means (they have no naval fighter jets BTW), It is for display purposes only. Gaining Operational readiness could take years by most optimistic estimates.
chainsmoker1985 Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 How many new aircraft carriers Indians are coming up with? I read somewhere that by 2020 India will have 3 more apart from INS Viraat
surajmal Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 Viraat will be retired mid decade if IAC 1 doesn't see any delays. IAC 2 keel will probably be laid around the same time. So for most of the decade starting next year, India will have 2 carriers (Vikramaditya + viraat/IAC 1). IAC 2 will probably become operational around 2020/2021.
hari504504 Posted March 10, 2012 Author Posted March 10, 2012 no navy fighter jets BTW)' date=' It is for display purposes only. Gaining Operational readiness could take years by most optimistic estimates.[/quote'] They have copied the abandoned Su-33 and already testing the J-15s which is supposed to their navy fighter jets.
surajmal Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 They have copied the abandoned Su-33 and already testing the J-15s which is supposed to their navy fighter jets. They still haven't been able to make a decent engine (and you will need a solid engine considering the size of su33 for carrier based operations). Why do you think they are going through with this purchase: http://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html
hari504504 Posted March 10, 2012 Author Posted March 10, 2012 They still haven't been able to make a decent engine (and you will need a solid engine considering the size of su33 for carrier based operations). Why do you think they are going through with this purchase: http://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html J-15s were flying on Russian Engines they probably bought off-the-shelf. But reports suggest some of them are now flying with the Shenyang Liming WS-10H local powerplants. They were already doing sea trials in the middle of last year.. so I reckon they should be ready for the carrier. http://www.airforceworld.com/pla/english/J-15-naval-carrier-based-fighter-china.html
jairamesh Posted March 11, 2012 Posted March 11, 2012 Aircraft Carrier is so yesterday. Nothing more than chest thumping but absolutely useless. The oceans are ruled by submarines, especially nuclear subs. This UK's latest fast-attack submarine, capable of hitting targets 2000km away and state-of-art tech capable at listening in mobile conversations whilst the sub is submerged several miles away from the coast. Basically Aircraft Carriers vs Submarine is mismatch in favour of subs. There is a good reason the US, UK and French are building fewer aircraft carriers and ramping up their submarine numbers.
hari504504 Posted March 11, 2012 Author Posted March 11, 2012 comparing Aricraft Carriers and Submarines are like comparing apples and oranges :facepalm: ACs are expensive to operate.. devastating when positioned offensively..can open an offensive front on an enemy;s land and sea assets on its own. A submarine is limited to a sea patrolling role and firing stand-off weapons like missiles - if we are talking about conventional missiles - has limited effect. Aircraft Carriers are compulsory for any country planning to project its power globally. UK is scrapping its aircraft carriers cause of money issues, and now already their ability to protect the falklands is in question.
jairamesh Posted March 11, 2012 Posted March 11, 2012 comparing Aricraft Carriers and Submarines are like comparing apples and oranges :facepalm: ACs are expensive to operate.. devastating when positioned offensively..can open an offensive front on an enemy;s land and sea assets on its own. A submarine is limited to a sea patrolling role and firing stand-off weapons like missiles - if we are talking about conventional missiles - has limited effect. Aircraft Carriers are compulsory for any country planning to project its power globally. UK is scrapping its aircraft carriers cause of money issues, and now already their ability to protect the falklands is in question. It's question of combat and cost effectiveness, and ACs and Subs might have mutually exclusive roles, but ACs is big fecking waste of money with likes of China and US already possessing Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles (Aircraft killing ballistics, capable sinking a moving carrier outright), and how long before China sells these to Pakistan. So much for your theory of "positioned offensively".:hysterical: Indian most likely aggressors are going to be it's neighbors, Pakistan and China, hence ACs are pointless and expensive to deploy. Also India has no far-off colonies to defend, The only reason India wants to keep running an Aircraft Carrier is to push for seat at Security Council (which btw is a poison chalice, hope they don't get it for India's own good). The navy should focus on defending India's large coastline using Frigates and stealthy nuclear subs (also to spy on it's neighbors). It's incredible how easy it's been for Chinese disguised naval fleeds to park-up close to Indian shores. The Chinese and Americans have nearly 70 subs each in operation!, whilst India has only a puny 15!. India is never going to launch a conventional land attack in a far off land making the need for an Aircraft Carrier redundant. Focus should be on Subs and Unmanned Ariel Vehicles (UAVs).
achilles Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 Don't worry, fellow Indians. We shall soon have our own fleet of outdated and second-hand aircraft carriers :((
hari504504 Posted March 12, 2012 Author Posted March 12, 2012 It's question of combat and cost effectiveness, and ACs and Subs might have mutually exclusive roles, but ACs is big fecking waste of money with likes of China and US already possessing Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles (Aircraft killing ballistics, capable sinking a moving carrier outright), and how long before China sells these to Pakistan. So much for your theory of "positioned offensively".:hysterical: Indian most likely aggressors are going to be it's neighbors, Pakistan and China, hence ACs are pointless and expensive to deploy. Also India has no far-off colonies to defend, The only reason India wants to keep running an Aircraft Carrier is to push for seat at Security Council (which btw is a poison chalice, hope they don't get it for India's own good). The navy should focus on defending India's large coastline using Frigates and stealthy nuclear subs (also to spy on it's neighbors). It's incredible how easy it's been for Chinese disguised naval fleeds to park-up close to Indian shores. The Chinese and Americans have nearly 70 subs each in operation!, whilst India has only a puny 15!. India is never going to launch a conventional land attack in a far off land making the need for an Aircraft Carrier redundant. Focus should be on Subs and Unmanned Ariel Vehicles (UAVs). An anti-ship missile is no brahmastra... doesn't matter if China calls it ridiculous names like " carrier killer"... Aircraft carrier groups always have layers and layers of anti-missile defence systems overlapping... it would take one incredbile/lucky missile to penetrate all that and strike a carrier.. I already said that noone's sailing an aircraft carrier all by itself..its a big target floating in the sea..if you have no idea about the kind of ships that escort an aircraft carrier,you better read up before posting. Submarines also act as escort vessels for the aircraft carriers... Like i said, ACs are offensive weapons..not defensive. And you keep singing the tune of defending the coastline using frigates and subs.. :facepalm: How can you be so sure that we will never launch a land attack ever ? ..in that case we don't even need the ICBMs which are going to be test fired this year..
anotherhawkeye Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 Interesting thread. Keep it coming guys. I for one think that china will be vastly superior to India military wise in a few decades, if there are no black swan events. They are competing with US where India is competing with paki.
Recommended Posts