Rajaraja Chola
BANNED
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2010
- Messages
- 9,051
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Ok.. But y does pakistan follows western system? It can follow system, indigenous to ur region right?
Indian aircraft carrier: More costly, already delayed
- Thread starter IND151
- Start date
Ok.. But y does pakistan follows western system? It can follow system, indigenous to ur region right?
SamranAli
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I think we use both.
Tshering22
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2010
- Messages
- 18,431
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
$3 billion for a brand new carrier ain't bad considering that we paid $2.9 billion for a re-fitted one.
But just hope that it doesn't get delayed further.
But just hope that it doesn't get delayed further.
This is not too confusing, hehe. I guess the part that is confusing is that the thousand/lakh/crore/arab are at the scale of 1000, 100, 100, 100 of the preceding unit.
While in the western countries, the units are thousand/million/billion at 1000, 1000, 1000 consistently and in east Asian countries they are hundred/10k/million/100m, at 100, 100, 100, 100 consistently.
While in the western countries, the units are thousand/million/billion at 1000, 1000, 1000 consistently and in east Asian countries they are hundred/10k/million/100m, at 100, 100, 100, 100 consistently.
Certainly a newly refitted CV would take time and money. Delays are to be expected. The only intriguing aspect related to Indian's choices, IMO, is why not build the second CV (INS Vishal) as nuclear powered.
My guess is that the navy wants to test the nuclear reactor on the subs. first before they go on to integrate it on the ACC. India is still very young in the process of designing and building nuclear reactors for subs. So we can't just jump in and put it on the second ACC we are building. I think by the time all the Arihant class subs are in service the navy would probably decide on making the third ACC nuclear powered.
I can certainly understand that. In most discussions, the more conservative argument wins because it sounds more "reasonable". On the other hand, think of all the cost of building and maintaining the surrounding destroyers etc. in each carrier battle group, it does not make sense to build many smaller scale aircraft carriers.
With INS Vikramaditya as well as the new INS Vikrant you would have two working carrier groups, which places Indian the second most powerful navy in the world.
Case 1: China's navy encounters problems and moves slower than expected then Indian navy is still 2nd strongest in the world
Case 2. China's navy can really build their next two CV group as fast as they planned then Indian navy is outmatched on paper
Adding another CATOBAR at 60k tonnes will not provide benefits in either situation. Again, in my opinion, think long term and spend money on something that would dramatically change the picture between 2030 and 2060 is more reasonable.
With INS Vikramaditya as well as the new INS Vikrant you would have two working carrier groups, which places Indian the second most powerful navy in the world.
Case 1: China's navy encounters problems and moves slower than expected then Indian navy is still 2nd strongest in the world
Case 2. China's navy can really build their next two CV group as fast as they planned then Indian navy is outmatched on paper
Adding another CATOBAR at 60k tonnes will not provide benefits in either situation. Again, in my opinion, think long term and spend money on something that would dramatically change the picture between 2030 and 2060 is more reasonable.
In this matter China has the upper edge, the only thing India needs is two or three ACC with one battle group deployed on each side and the third one in reserve. The IOR is the point of interest for India, and it will be for the coming decade. The Indian navy only needs credible defensive power to project and protect the IOR. Since there is no country in South Asia or the IOR that has a navy to match the Indian navy it would be in India's interest to keep this.
But for China this is different, your actual rival is the US navy and their allies in the SCS. So even if China builds a bigger navy than India, they would most likely focus the majority of their strength towards the US naval fleet in the SCS and the pacific.
As you said China is planning on building larger ACC, while India is steadly increading the size from 40,000 tons to 60,000 tons. And if you take the delays into consideration, China might have larger ACC compared to India.
But for China this is different, your actual rival is the US navy and their allies in the SCS. So even if China builds a bigger navy than India, they would most likely focus the majority of their strength towards the US naval fleet in the SCS and the pacific.
As you said China is planning on building larger ACC, while India is steadly increading the size from 40,000 tons to 60,000 tons. And if you take the delays into consideration, China might have larger ACC compared to India.
Similar threads
