India eyes USA aircraft carrier technology

[Omega007]

@kaku1 ,dude,how dare you question my chica,only I can do that.Find your own bitch to play with.

Our enemies are Pakistan and China, not US. US needs those monster AC for world dominance. Their AC can carry 70 aircraft. I doubt if IN has 70 aircraft in total.

IN should invest in smaller but more AC. 4 AC of 25,000 tons is more valuable than 1 AC of 65,000-75,000 tons. Also bear in mind that ships are not sea-worthy 365 days a year. They need service and repair. Larger the ship, longer the repair time. Instead of putting eggs in one basket it should be more eggs in more baskets.

Don't get me wrong. 65,000 ton AC sounds good on paper. How it works out is a different issue. How many fixed wing jets can it carry, what will be its operations, its area of operations, its role etc. will decide the type and size.

You want a 25k ton AC!!You are that hot (or fat) my shlyukha??

 

[SvenSvensonov]

SM 3 - Aegis Aegis - SM 3!!What the hell are these

I do hope my joke detector isn't broken... but just in-case:

RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aegis Combat System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Viola! AEGIS and SM-3

 

[Indian Patriot]

@kaku1 - If you dont like my opinion you dont have to follow me around.

 

[Omega007]

I do hope my joke detector isn't broken... but just in-case:

View attachment 190077

View attachment 190078

RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 190086

View attachment 190087

View attachment 190090

View attachment 190089

Aegis Combat System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Viola! AEGIS and SM-3

Dude,don't get so serious on me now.Just sit back and enjoy the damn show!!By the way,do you like it or would you like to mention out some improvements.

 

[kaku1]

@kaku1 - If you dont like my opinion you dont have to follow me around.

Follow you?, You are on a forum bro, not in your b'day party.

 

[Indian Patriot]

As I said, your arguments are about aircraft carriers in general, not about EMALS in particular. When you comment "waste of money" on a thread about buying EMALS, the reader assumes that you are talking about EMALS.

About carrier aviation - The IN has more than 50 years of experience in operating carriers, and I am sure they know the risks and challenges, and how to overcome them. Comparing with USN is pointless, because both navies use carriers for very different roles. USN uses their carriers to assault enemy countries and take on their air forces. IN only uses carriers to provide air cover for the fleet.

To make it simple - in the USN, the escorting vessels protect the carrier, and the carrier does the offensive action against the enemy. In the IN, the carrier protects the accompanying ships, and those ships assault enemy ships at sea.

Without a carrier, IN's ships will not have air cover or air defence. So a medium sized carrier is used to provide that. It makes the fleet untouchable by enemy fleets that don't have such a luxury. It gives naval supremacy on the sea, and that is the intention.

In 50 years a lot has changed.

PLAN now has an anti-AC ballistic missile which is feared even by USN despite them having AEGIS, SM-2, SM-3, Hawkeye-2, EA-Prowler etc. India does not have anything comparable.

AC in any navy has the primary role of fleet air defence. Rest are added duties. AC in any navy is the first target also for obvious reasons. AC is the key for power projection. Ask any expert what defines a modern powerful navy and he will reply AC and nuclear submarines.

You are getting me wrong. I have nothing against AC, in fact I support AC. I just hope IN has the required destroyer cover for a gigantic AC.

Follow you?, You are on a forum bro, not in your b'day party.

You don't respond to every comment made in this forum do you "bro"? If you find my opinion odd you are free to ignore and avoid.

 

[kaku1]

I do hope my joke detector isn't broken... but just in-case:

View attachment 190077

View attachment 190078

RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

View attachment 190086

View attachment 190087

View attachment 190090

View attachment 190089

Aegis Combat System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Viola! AEGIS and SM-3

Did the Aegis is a SAM and SM-3 is a combat system?

 

[janon]

AC in any navy has the primary role of fleet air defence. Rest are added duties. AC in any navy is the first target also for obvious reasons. AC is the key for power projection. Ask any expert what defines a modern powerful navy and he will reply AC and nuclear submarines.

Yes, and that should give you an idea how important it is to have aircraft carriers. So your "waste of money" comment is invalid, if you agree that carriers are what define a powerful navy.

 

[kaku1]

You don't respond to every comment made in this forum do you "bro"? If you find my opinion odd you are free to ignore and avoid.

But I find this thread, and I am now commenting. So?

 

[janon]

In 50 years a lot has changed.

I'm sure the Indian naval officers are aware of the changes.

 

[Omega007]

In 50 years a lot has changed.

PLAN now has an anti-AC ballistic missile which is feared even by USN despite them having AEGIS, SM-2, SM-3, Hawkeye-2, EA-Prowler etc. India does not have anything comparable.

AC in any navy has the primary role of fleet air defence. Rest are added duties. AC in any navy is the first target also for obvious reasons. AC is the key for power projection. Ask any expert what defines a modern powerful navy and he will reply AC and nuclear submarines.

You are getting me wrong. I have nothing against AC, in fact I support AC. I just hope IN has the required destroyer cover for a gigantic AC.



You don't respond to every comment made in this forum do you "bro"? If you find my opinion odd you are free to ignore and avoid.

Oh my fat bitch,of course you would have nothing against AC!!I mean you yourself mentioned that you wanted 4 25000 ton ACs in your house!!My fat chica!!

Bye bye my chica,this one is for you. :wink: You keep this wink till we meet again if you start missing me too much.Good night and sweet dreams my shlyukha!!

 

[Indian Patriot]

Yes, and that should give you an idea how important it is to have aircraft carriers. So your "waste of money" comment is invalid, if you agree that carriers are what define a powerful navy.

Read carefully. I said better to invest in 3-4 smaller carriers instead of 1 big one. You guys don't read first and get excited for no reason.

I'm sure the Indian naval officers are aware of the changes.

Yes maybe they are. And I guess they have also found a way to counter DF-21.

 

[Abingdonboy]

After years of neglect, India's Navy is in the midst of accelerated modernization under Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Is it? The IN is under a modernization effort but is this purely down to Modi?

Waste of money for India.

US has belief in supercarriers which are not only huge but also super-expensive to maintain. Plus a super-carrier needs destroyer protection against air-attacks. India does not have that many destroyers to escort them.

Indian ACCs will have adequate protection don't you worry about that, the IN planners are no idiots.

8,000 ton destroyers are not yet ready for deployment.

The P-15A is in service and will be fully operational this year one the BARAK-2 is intergrated with the ship

US carriers have like 6 destroyers each

Nope not true.

Plus their AC carry at least 3 AWACS. Indian AC will lack that.

IAC-1 and INS Vikramditya will have AEW assets (the KA-31, future Indian ACCs will have EMALS and thus will have the E-2D- the exact same AWACS found on USN ACCs)

Compare the size of current AC, excluding Vikramaditya, and then compare 65,000 tonnes. Do you even realise how big a behemoth 65,000 means?

Look up the IAC-2 mate, it is going to be around 65,000 tons and in service in the middle of the next decade, final deisgn reviews are on now.

Plus US AC have at least 3 Hawkeye AWACS and Prowler ECM aircraft. Does India have anything comparable?

They will, see above.

I doubt if IN has 70 aircraft in total.

The IN Fleet air arm has around 150 a/c in service right now, will be around 200-240 by 2022.

4 AC of 25,000 tons is more valuable than 1 AC of 65,000-75,000 tons

This is just nonsense. The INS Viraat is about 28,000 tons and we all now how limited her operations are.

Sorry, no one (especially the IN planners) agrees with your assesement.

 

[Abingdonboy]

You are getting me wrong. I have nothing against AC, in fact I support AC. I just hope IN has the required destroyer cover for a gigantic AC.

Don't you worry about the IN's ability to protect her assets, they know what they are doing

 

[janon]

Read carefully. I said better to invest in 3-4 smaller carriers instead of 1 big one. You guys don't read first and get excited for no reason.

Spare me the reading lessons. You said that in a subsequent post, not the one which I responded to.

That would mean fewer aircrafts per task force. And we don't plan on having so many task forces operating together. Besides, that would mean a lot of crew to train, a lot more repairs and overhauls to be done, a lot more logistical issues, a lot more maintainance and spares, and so on. That would be the real waste of money.

Besides, you are mistaken in your assumption that medium sized carriers are less at risk from aerial attacks than big carriers. It is the opposite - bigger carriers have larger air wings, which form the best and most formidable defence. Smaller carriers are limited in the number and quality of fighters they can carry. Besides, it's not like a bigger ship will be a bigger target - at those scales, size is not that important. A pilot can attack a carrier or a frigate with equal ease/unease.