India launches its 1st indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vikrant

[bloo]

the keel was laid in February 2009
You have to prove that the indian steel mills could supply before that time

The keel of the home-built Indian ship is almost completely constructed from high-quality, indigenously-produced steel.

True but as I said the structure blueprints (including relevant manuals / handbooks) plus good testing equipment will do the analysis.

That is a joke right?
You all have the hmas Melbourne for study, including blueprints of varyag and purchase of design mudules and possibly blueprints for the SAC220 from spain.
And what has Chnia done with it?

It is as demanding if not more because the flexibilities are much less than building from scratch

What is so demanding about a partially refitted AC that is used only for training?
Does it even go to the high seas and how often?
There is no comparison to a ship built from scratch.

that is cheerleaders' viewpoint
Even the blinds can see a rusty floating ironblock that was once towed by tugboats is completely transformed into a self-powered 60K ton aircraft carrier that can navigate to the Pacific.

In fact it must have been even easier to refit for the Chinese as they didn't have to strip it down, as by 98 it was already in that condition.
I don't see any ingenuity, in fact no one does.
And if so why doesn't PLAN remove the title of "training" vessel, if it is such an engineering marvel.

we have some parts which are sources from Ukraine. The Russian element on Liaoning is none to low (aircraft not included)

He said Soviet not Russia.

Liaoning was completely overhauled, floating and power-enabled when we had the inauguration
while your gigantic ironing board is like a 3/8 baked cake presented for celebration

Untrue.
Varyag was only 70% complete and even then it had no weapons, operating systems, engine or a rudder and much of its useful parts were sold for auction.
SO the "overhaul" done was nil as what you all did was refit individual parts that were never integrated in the Varyag so in fact it was much-much less complicated than "overhauling" and is still a shadow of the originally conceived.
Oh now I get it u r just pricking coz we can celebrate something.
So what? We celebrated when the keel was laid and we are celebrating that it is launched and will celebrate even more when the commissioning happens, that won't change the fact that it WILL be completed and we WILL have an AC before Chnia.

Either way, our ironing board is still better than ur paint-over-rusted-tin-can.

It has reason to be diffident. The ship is hardly a symbol of China's prowess in technology. It was bought in 1998 from Ukraine, where it had been rusting half-finished since its first launch a decade earlier. The Ukrainians were told it would be used as a floating casino (they sold it without weapons or engines). But unlike two other ex-Soviet carriers in China that ended up as theme parks, this one was taken to a navy shipyard where, in 2005, it got a telltale coat of Chinese military paint. It was not until July that China confirmed it had been refitting the ship.
............................
Unlike the Soviets, the Chinese appear not to be trying to match the size and capability of America's huge fleet. Officials describe the aircraft-carrier programme partly as a prestige project. China has been acutely conscious of being the only permanent member of the United Nations without a carrier. Its rival India has long had one. Thailand has one too. Japan, another rival, has a carrier for helicopters that could be adapted for fighters.

SCS is the sea territory where Liaoning will operate then.

Coz that is its limit.

see the above answer. You have to be patient for the rolling out of the next CV or CVN
We have a lot of experience in shipbuilding that easily trumps india
your gigantic ironing board is designed by the Italians

Design inputs is not the same as completely designed. well that gets passed you since you are too busy overestimating yourselves and underestimating everyone around you.
Unlike the great China shipbuilders with their numerous ACs and separately purchased blueprints, who are still stuck with a rusted tin can.

Patience is hardly a virtue for you all when we have a designed our own with lesser support.

as I said you have idle capacities in you shipyards which are engaged mostly in government orders
I cant imagine you cannot have rescheduled your manufacturing priorities to allow for the refitting of Gorshkov which is another iconic symbols for cheerleading indians. You are handing your ATM cards to the Russians for the job because of your incapabilites

That should hardly be a reason for your rant.
Every navy project is a priority, we don't see Vikramaditya as an immediately necessary project and if it can be done in a cheaper and less time consuming way then why not.
Definitely our shipyards know about rescheduling priorities more than you.
And please do not mention incapabilities, when China could only paint a tin can and make it a show pony to save face.

These are on paper. indians said tejas was so fantastic and would equipped with 'indigenous" indian engine and a lot of composite material. The indian engine is dead now and your composite materials frame are a lot heavier than stated

Untrue on both counts.
Kaveri is still doing great. and Tejas is still the lightest 4th gen plane.
Unfortunately for you it is wrought on stone.

on forums and on paper only

Maybe for the Chinese.

I can agree with a Navalized version of Rafale/Mig-29, but Tejas is hardly ready to take off from ground, let alone from an ACC. And you know what I mean, don't be bringing in here how many times Tejas has actually been able to fly!!

I am no gonna dignify that with an answer, this year itself has had many articles showing the fast progress of Tejas you should check those out.

I have no problem with IN/IAF being able to detect the missile but shooting it down even head on is no joke! First of all, this is not an arrow that will fly straight, this missile is actually capable of hitting moving targets which means that it does actually has the ability to alter its flight path for various reasons.
Secondly, do you realize what it takes to shoot down a 400-500kg body of mass travelling in excess of MACH 5? Can you imagine the Kinetic energy necessary for an effective engagement? An what happens where there are 8-12 such missiles homing in on an ACC?

Untrue and yes I do realize it very well.
AKG can hit slow moving targets there is no info on it hitting fast moving targets which proves that it has little to no maneuverability.
You should see the articles yourself and please show an article that says that an A2S missile like AKG can maneuver or course correct at mach5 like a cruise missile in dense atmospheric conditions of sea.

As for your second part, you answered your question yourself.
A high velocity less maneuverable target if even hit with minuscle force will send it careening and defelecting.

Or do you think that the missile will stay on the path even after it being hit.
You should see seaRAM tests carried out by the USN where the RIM missile only at speed of around 1-2 mach have been able to destroy much-much faster targets.


The question never arises that fighters will even be able to fire that many missiles, as an escort of awacs alongside a fighter squadron will face off with it. Your theory is moot and overly optimistic at best.

A layer of outer middle and innermost air defense set up completely negates the factor of the fighters even coming inside to shoot that many AKGs.
And u are completely forgetting jamming and decoying capabilities of IN. The AKG itself has to do a course setup as it is not capable of cruise missile type manuevering, before hurtling down to it max speed which leaves it vulnerable to jamming and decoying.

 

[Mav3rick]

IOC 1 was given in 2011,IOC 2 will be given this year,We like to move in a careful manner,IAF doesnt hush to induct the Tejas in IOC stantards,unlike ..........
And you know when the first flight of Rafale TD take place?Google it.

Not a problem, take another 5, 10....25 years with Tejas

 

[gslv mk3]

Not a problem, take another 5, 10....25 years with Tejas

Mean while,try to develop a trainer aircraft on your own

 

[Mav3rick]

SD 10 b as capable as AMRAAM but Russian missiles are inferior?I dont think so.

I think a lot of parameters of SD-10 are derived from Aim-120C and it is suggested that it is 80% as capable as earlier model AIM-120C. We can only truly compare the effectiveness of Russian BVRs when one of them actually hits something in actual combat.

Still believing in these propaganda?PAf didnt have BVRs back then.

That's the common misconception, carefully planted and encouraged by PAF. You know why? Let me give you a hint.....the Mirages in PAF inventory were given the ROSE upgrades, which included the ability to use BVRs, in late 90's.

Mean while,try to develop a trainer aircraft on your own

What's the point, we are shifting our attention towards DRONES for CAP & Bombing Missions.

Oh Come on,we were purchasing lot of arms from France and UK- remember Mirages,Gnats,Alouettes,Jaguars,Hawker Sea Hawk,Sea harriers,Breguet Alize,Sea King,Vijayanta tanks,Swedish and British Howitzers

On & off year, with sanctions here and there and problems in spares and supplies, not to mention costs. Russia was your fallback and sanctuary for Military arms & supplies.

 

[gslv mk3]

What's the point, we are shifting our attention towards DRONES for CAP & Bombing Missions.

You mean on chinese airframes?

 

[gslv mk3]

On & off year, with sanctions here and there and problems in spares and supplies, not to mention costs. Russia was your fallback and sanctuary for Military arms & supplies.

Most stupid thing I've ever heard in this forum.Many of these were manufactured in India,Jaguars are still serving and so is the mirage(and it proved its capabilities in Kargil),Harriers,,Alouettes and Lama are still serving,Gnats were loved by the airmen and thats why IAF asked HAL to build a more capable version(Ajeet),Sea Hawks were used to pound coastal towns in East Pakistan in 1971.

Only one that suffered was the Sea king helicopter.

I think a lot of parameters of SD-10 are derived from Aim-120C and it is suggested that it is 80% as capable as earlier model AIM-120C. We can only truly compare the effectiveness of Russian BVRs when one of them actually hits something in actual combat.

What have SD -10s acheived in combat?

 

[Mav3rick]

I am no gonna dignify that with an answer, this year itself has had many articles showing the fast progress of Tejas you should check those out.

Should have chosen your words more carefully, the words 'Can Not' are more suitable then 'Am Not'! And yet you still posted an answer, albeit negligible in sense

Untrue and yes I do realize it very well.
AKG can hit slow moving targets there is no info on it hitting fast moving targets which proves that it has little to no maneuverability.
You should see the articles yourself and please show an article that says that an A2S missile like AKG can maneuver or course correct at mach5 like a cruise missile in dense atmospheric conditions of sea.

At MACH 5, if it can hit slow moving targets that means it has the ability to move and change its target area. This is more then enough as the Missile will require only a fraction of movement to alter its course dramatically at speeds in excess of MACH 5.

As for your second part, you answered your question yourself.
A high velocity less maneuverable target if even hit with minuscle force will send it careening and defelecting.

Or do you think that the missile will stay on the path even after it being hit.
You should see seaRAM tests carried out by the USN where the RIM missile only at speed of around 1-2 mach have been able to destroy much-much faster targets.

Actually, the Kinetic energy of the missile will annihilate such obstacles in its path without any deflection. It would be like hitting an elephant with a bee. Add to that the ability to evade defensive maneuvers, we got a real potent threat.

The question never arises that fighters will even be able to fire that many missiles, as an escort of awacs alongside a fighter squadron will face off with it. Your theory is moot and overly optimistic at best.

A layer of outer middle and innermost air defense set up completely negates the factor of the fighters even coming inside to shoot that many AKGs.
And u are completely forgetting jamming and decoying capabilities of IN. The AKG itself has to do a course setup as it is not capable of cruise missile type manuevering, before hurtling down to it max speed which leaves it vulnerable to jamming and decoying.

The Missile has exceptional Anti Jamming features. And we all have to be optimistic in a war. I am pretty confident of our ability to be able to fire quite a few of those missiles from 250km's away. Also remember, 250km's is the advertised range of the Missile, for understandable reasons of MTCR consumption. The actual missile may have a longer range and it's actual performance and parameters are highly classified.

 

[gslv mk3]

@Mav3rick
What is official range of cm 400akg?Is China an official member of MTCR?

 

[Mav3rick]

You mean on chinese airframes?

Most likely on Chinese drones manufactured in Pakistan . As long as they are effective against IAF, who cares?

@Mav3rick
What is official range of cm 400akg?Is China an official member of MTCR?

Official advertised range of the missile is 250kms. China is not a signatory of MTCR and neither is Pakistan yet Pakistan does not have any Chinese ICBMs, right?

Most stupid thing I've ever heard in this forum.Many of these were manufactured in India,Jaguars are still serving and so is the mirage(and it proved its capabilities in Kargil),Harriers,,Alouettes and Lama are still serving,Gnats were loved by the airmen and thats why IAF asked HAL to build a more capable version(Ajeet),Sea Hawks were used to pound coastal towns in East Pakistan in 1971.

Only one that suffered was the Sea king helicopter.

You love to mention Kargil and fail to realize that there was no opposing Air Force so IAFs effectiveness there is pointless. I believe your howitzers were more effective!

 

[gslv mk3]

The Missile has exceptional Anti Jamming features. And we all have to be optimistic in a war. I am pretty confident of our ability to be able to fire quite a few of those missiles from 250km's away. Also remember, 250km's is the advertised range of the Missile, for understandable reasons of MTCR consumption. The actual missile may have a longer range and it's actual performance and parameters are highly classified.

How close to Pakistani coast,will the Aircraft carrier operate,and how will the aircraft reach within 250 kms of the aircraft carrier evading detection ?

 

[Mav3rick]

What have SD -10s acheived in combat?

Have they been in combat? And point of this question?

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Most likely on Chinese drones manufactured in Pakistan . As long as they are effective against IAF, who cares?



Official advertised range of the missile is 250kms. China is not a signatory of MTCR and neither is Pakistan yet Pakistan does not have any Chinese ICBMs, right?



You love to mention Kargil and fail to realize that there was no opposing Air Force so IAFs effectiveness there is pointless. I believe your howitzers were more effective!

Well still need a video of the Cm-400 missile to know if it was ever tested.

Well IAF bombing on tiger hill and on the supply lines was more than enough. But you still don't understand that the aerial recon flown by the Jags helped in accurate shelling on the Pakistani NLI positions (I deliberately called them NLI because it is an insult to every soldier there who fought there to satisfy some Generals ego as a Mujahid/******). When the PAF realized this they sent the PAF F 16s to intercept the Jags but when the MiG 29s showed up and after 2 incidents the PAF was effectively grounded because of fear of losing the most potent aircraft in their inventory and lack of spares as you were under sanctions from the US for the Nuclear tests.

 

[gslv mk3]

Most likely on Chinese drones manufactured in Pakistan . As long as they are effective against IAF, who cares?

What did I say,We are developing LCA by taking time,meanwhile you can take time in developing a basic trainer aircraft,And oh,meanwhile we are developing a flying wing UCAV

Official advertised range of the missile is 250kms. China is not a signatory of MTCR and neither is Pakistan yet Pakistan does not have any Chinese ICBMs, right?

Then why should china downplay the range then?RAN 40 L radar on the Aircraft itself has a range of 400km(or that is what is available in public)

You love to mention Kargil and fail to realize that there was no opposing Air Force so IAFs effectiveness there is pointless. I believe your howitzers were more effective!

You are trying to deviate from the point,I said India have good experience with non Russian weapons,and my points prove it
And yes,Kargil-do you think the role of a multirole fighter is just Air to Air ?It proved its mettle in high altitude conditions.What about Gnats?evenStarfighter fell prey to those tiny jets!

Have they been in combat? And point of this question?

How do you think that it is as better as AMRAAM then?Even China still operates R 73 and R 77,IAF is still inducting the same while having Python V and Derby.What does that prove?

Good. More target practice for the DF-21.

Boasting about a Chinese developed weapon system like Pakistan had developed it...So typical.Do you remember what happened last time when you trolled in the GSLV test?

 

[TheFlyingPretzel]

I'm not here to entertain you princess....

You're trying too hard. That's your problem. You're putting in far too much effort.

 

[bloo]

Should have chosen your words more carefully, the words 'Can Not' are more suitable then 'Am Not'! And yet you still posted an answer, albeit negligible in sense

No brother that was not an answer, that was just a retort, you know the answer or are just unwilling to percieve its gist.

At MACH 5, if it can hit slow moving targets that means it has the ability to move and change its target area. This is more then enough as the Missile will require only a fraction of movement to alter its course dramatically at speeds in excess of MACH 5.

DO provide an article that says so?

Actually, the Kinetic energy of the missile will annihilate such obstacles in its path without any deflection. It would be like hitting an elephant with a bee. Add to that the ability to evade defensive maneuvers, we got a real potent threat.

I am sorry but u know nothing about missile flight dynamics.
http://dynlab.mpe.nus.edu.sg/mpelsb/mdts/Control1n.pdf

A missile hitting a ship's surface is so much more different than a barrage of bullets hitting it, unless bullets look like footballs with wide surface areas to you.
Missiles traveling at excess of mach20 can be stopped with with kinetic and/or p-charge missiles with speeds 2-3 times slower than it; so what is a high speed ashm?

Now you are simply making things up.
There is no proof or even a report of AKG having "ability to evade defensive maneuvers". Its not a cruise missile. Its coming from up above with a linear trajectory, its just over hyped.

Oh sure if you consider a missile like Barak 1 or 8 as a bee and AKG as an elephant then it surely fits your theory.
And less u have forgotten it has a 60kg proximity warhead, forget that it even strike for a complete kinetic kill, it'll just blow up the moment AKG is anywhere near effectively disabling it.
If a bunch of warships firing 30mm bullets at muzzle velocities of 800-1000m per second at 5000-10000 rounds per minute is insignificant, then you are surely way over your head.

The Missile has exceptional Anti Jamming features. And we all have to be optimistic in a war. I am pretty confident of our ability to be able to fire quite a few of those missiles from 250km's away. Also remember, 250km's is the advertised range of the Missile, for understandable reasons of MTCR consumption. The actual missile may have a longer range and it's actual performance and parameters are highly classified.

Being sure is not same as being right, your theories are theories at best.

An AWAC escorted by a fighter squadron ahead of the carrier group automatically denies any fighters that have air to surface effectively engaging them.
You don't realize this but in war the primary objective is not the first priority.
Pak fighters will have to engage the IN fighters in BVR combat before even thinking about engaging the ships.
So firing AShMs is not even a real alternative in such a scenario.
Unless you can give an apt reason for such an optimistic scenario to occur, you are wrong.
You are basically saying it will happen without even having a proper explanation to justify ur fantastical concepts

And lets not forget it is still not a cruise missile so it won't fly just over the surface of the water but come hurtling down the sky which effectively makes it easier to locate and in consequence the fighter too will have to stay at such a height making it easier for C4I systems to locate.

As for the range, it is only speculation that too in forums and not even in articles.
Regardless of what it is, destroyers in the IN are continuously getting upgraded, the LR SAM's range will eventually increase just like every other equipment.
EIther way a Barak8 with its C3I abilities and quick engagement can easily take down an AKG.
Its engage a missile as close as 500m.