New pics of INS Vikramditya

[satishkumarcsc]

People are forgetting a basic fact that in IOR there are 2 major players. India and US. Why? Because if hostilities seem to take place Diego Garcia and the Persian fleet will be put under high alert thus USN should also be brought into the Equation. US has listening posts in Singapore and the taiwan straits. No number of carriers of China can actually face off USN in the IOR. Chinise carriers are specifically there for South china sea and the Pacific ocean. It would be a real rarity for China to enter the IOR with AC

 

[UKBengali]

This is at PPP(Puchasing Power Parity). It's nominal is expected to be around 1.5 times as large.

Ascertaining a GDP in PPP has too many flaws. Yes I am agreeing with the fact that China (Currency Manipulation) is a low cost economy, but at the same time when everything is compared in absolute terms like, number of ACs the US hv and China need to build same numbers then China also need to show the same smartness in achieving the GDP in absolute terms.. Meanwhile, Indian low cost mechanism is far better than China in terms of Quality.. So by 2030, it will surpass the US economy in terms of PPP if the YoY growth rate is 8.5% and at the same time Indian per capita income will remain less than qtr of US.. So this is BS.. China can become the driver of the economy in future only if it changes its expansion policy and stop bullying small countries like Vietnam, Philipines etc and grab their lands.

Again - in Nominal terms, China may cross US not before 2050.. So we sould start focusing on our own economy and hv a better life..

No Look at the following forecast:

Top 10 largest economies in 2020 - Analyst Insight from Euromonitor International

It shows China(although at PPP) is at 28 trillion compared to the US's 22 trillion. Remember as the living standards are still far behind in China in 2020, as opposed to US, China will keep continuing to grow much quicker than the US for decades to come. I think that estimates of US GDP are too optimistic as no-one has taken into account what will happen to the US when it's currency is no longer the world's reserve currency but we can leave that for now.

The reason why I think that China will overtake the US militarily is simply a matter of economics. Whoever has the richest economy, can afford to have the most advanced and largest military.

 

[UKBengali]

People are forgetting a basic fact that in IOR there are 2 major players. India and US. Why? Because if hostilities seem to take place Diego Garcia and the Persian fleet will be put under high alert thus USN should also be brought into the Equation. US has listening posts in Singapore and the taiwan straits. No number of carriers of China can actually face off USN in the IOR. Chinise carriers are specifically there for South china sea and the Pacific ocean. It would be a real rarity for China to enter the IOR with AC

You are right at least for this decade. The Varyag and also the 2 rumoured 60,000+ tonne conventional carriers that China is currently constructing are purely for the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean close to Chinese shores. It is the 100,000 tonne supercarriers that China would almost inevitably produce by the next decade that are designed to be employed in a global role. These battlegroups will only be matched by US equivalents and they will be specifically designed to go and fight(if necessary) anywhere on this planet. As the Chinese economy gradually gets much larger than the US over time, then China can easily afford to produce more supercarriers than the US if it decides it needs to.

 

[Roybot]

You are right at least for this decade. The Varyag and also the 2 rumoured 60,000+ tonne conventional carriers that China is currently constructing are purely for the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean close to Chinese shores. It is the 100,000 tonne supercarriers that China would almost inevitably produce by the next decade that are designed to be employed in a global role. These battlegroups will only be matched by US equivalents and they will be specifically designed to go and fight(if necessary) anywhere on this planet. As the Chinese economy gradually gets much larger than the US over time, then China can easily afford to produce more supercarriers than the US if it decides it needs to.

If China starts building Aircraft carriers like you are speculating, other major countries aren't going to just sit there and watch China amass its military hardware. The main problem for China is that it doesn't have many friends. Unlike the Western countries, NATO, Japan, South Korea, Australia, combined together they will still be militarily and economically superior than China for the next 100 years at least if not more. And not to forget the other smaller countries in the Malay peninsula who are more or less hostile towards China. And I haven't even mentioned India in the picture yet.

 

[brational]

No Look at the following forecast:

Top 10 largest economies in 2020 - Analyst Insight from Euromonitor International

It shows China(although at PPP) is at 28 trillion compared to the US's 22 trillion. Remember as the living standards are still far behind in China in 2020, as opposed to US, China will keep continuing to grow much quicker than the US for decades to come. I think that estimates of US GDP are too optimistic as no-one has taken into account what will happen to the US when it's currency is no longer the world's reserve currency but we can leave that for now.

The reason why I think that China will overtake the US militarily is simply a matter of economics. Whoever has the richest economy, can afford to have the most advanced and largest military.

your link is not working.. by the way, its time for India to build its super carriers as India is going to cross US economy by 2030 in PPP.. and by 2050 it will cross China. I liked it.. Too many super carriers plying in IOR and Rest of the world. The top 10 economies must possess super carriers, whether they hv any coast line. Our MoD and MoF should start focusing on Supercarriers. Supercarriers will help us grow further.. We will anchor them in Africa and get the business deals signed, Later we will move to Europe and so on.. Even we will grab many islands make several foes, but it does not matter. We will Claim Mauritius as ours and decllare Seychelles as a disputed territory and also invade some islands in the east.. Jai Hind.

 

[UKBengali]

If China starts building Aircraft carriers like you are speculating, other major countries aren't going to just sit there and watch China amass its military hardware. The main problem for China is that it doesn't have many friends. Unlike the Western countries, NATO, Japan, South Korea, Australia, combined together they will still be militarily and economically superior than China for the next 100 years at least if not more. And not to forget the other smaller countries in the Malay peninsula who are more or less hostile towards China. And I haven't even mentioned India in the picture yet.

Couple of flaws with your logic.

1. It is dangerous to assume that alliances are permanent. While European(includes Australia, Canada etc) countries by in large will stick with the US, most of the others are simply riding on the coat-tails of the most powerful country in the world currently(the US). When the US is no longer military dominant that they can give a cast-iron guarantee of protection to countries like South Korea and Japan, they would start reassessing their relationship with the US. Japan is smart enough to know that a US that has to sail across the Pacific Ocean is not likely to be much help against a neighbouring giant like China in any conflict. India will hesitate in joining a US-led alliance as it will damage it's relations both with China and other countries. India is likely to follow a very independent foreign policy like Brazil, although it will be hampered somewhat that unlike Brazil it has relatively fewer natural resources to feed it's booming economy. The only way that so many countries will ever join an anti-China alliance is if China starts acting too aggressively but that is unlikely to happen.

2. Total GDP is not a very good estimation of actual power projection capability - this is what we are talking about here. For example the French have a GDP that is around a 1/6th of that of the US but it's total Navy would be no more powerful than one US supercarrier battlegroup. The US has around 10 such battlegroups. Even if all these countries combined are against China, what they can bring in terms of Naval strength will be way less than pure GDP numbers would suggest. Some think that the US navy is as large as the rest of the world combined and there is no way that the US spends as much as all the countries in the rest of the world combined.

 

[brational]

Vikramaditya ka latest pose me koi photu hai kya? Koi 2-4 photu upload kare to maza aa jaye..

 

[WHF]

No as it is around 20,000 tonnes lighter than the VARYAG. The Indian carrier will carry 24 Mig-29s, while the Chinese carrier could easily carry more of much larger J-15.

oh bondu !!! it hardly matters how heavy the bucket is there are different ways of how strength of a carrier is defined.. like wat defensive tech both are using, and for a fact carriers are uder to attack land targets far away from ones shores and if other carrier somes in way of it then theire ways to counter..

Ok so does the chinese carrier handle landing and flying simultaneously, do they have steam, electrict catapults?? else both are same no matter 24 or lagreg no of jets they will have only some of them on air simultaneously and the number would be the same..

if u still dont understand then we indians will do a things extend the carrier by some more meters and fill it with 20 000 tonnes of sand atleast then i guess it will be able to campare iwth the chinese ship, u see both in the same weight class.

 

[AMCA]

No as it is around 20,000 tonnes lighter than the VARYAG. The Indian carrier will carry 24 Mig-29s, while the Chinese carrier could easily carry more of much larger J-15.

It depends on how strong the Carrier Battle Group is.... And Mig 29K is a very potent fighter

 

[GORKHALI]

It depends on how strong the Carrier Battle Group is.... And Mig 29K is a very potent fighter

Thats what am talking and thats why Russia decided to replace Su 33 with Mig 29K... Now Imagine J15 again a replica of Su 33 And am sure its still not up to the standard of orginal Su 33 .Mig29K Is 4++ gen ,while Su 33 is 4+/- gen aircraft .Forget about J15 it not even close to Su 33..

 

[UKBengali]

oh bondu !!! it hardly matters how heavy the bucket is there are different ways of how strength of a carrier is defined.. like wat defensive tech both are using, and for a fact carriers are uder to attack land targets far away from ones shores and if other carrier somes in way of it then theire ways to counter..

Ok so does the chinese carrier handle landing and flying simultaneously, do they have steam, electrict catapults?? else both are same no matter 24 or lagreg no of jets they will have only some of them on air simultaneously and the number would be the same..

if u still dont understand then we indians will do a things extend the carrier by some more meters and fill it with 20 000 tonnes of sand atleast then i guess it will be able to campare iwth the chinese ship, u see both in the same weight class.

Does a Mig-29K have the same loiter time or range of the J-15? Can the Mig-29 carry anywhere near the number of ordance such as the J-15? The answer is no in both cases. J-15 will be much better suited to the huge open expanses of the ocean as compared to a Mig-29K.

And i am sick of trying to explain to people that the Varyag has much more storage space and so has much more capacity to store aircraft than the Indian carrier.

 

[Roybot]

Couple of flaws with your logic.

1. It is dangerous to assume that alliances are permanent. While European(includes Australia, Canada etc) countries by in large will stick with the US, most of the others are simply riding on the coat-tails of the most powerful country in the world currently(the US). When the US is no longer military dominant that they can give a cast-iron guarantee of protection to countries like South Korea and Japan, they would start reassessing their relationship with the US. Japan is smart enough to know that a US that has to sail across the Pacific Ocean is not likely to be much help against a neighbouring giant like China in any conflict. India will hesitate in joining a US-led alliance as it will damage it's relations both with China and other countries. India is likely to follow a very independent foreign policy like Brazil, although it will be hampered somewhat that unlike Brazil it has relatively fewer natural resources to feed it's booming economy. The only way that so many countries will ever join an anti-China alliance is if China starts acting too aggressively but that is unlikely to happen.

Japan would never side with China And it can't ward off China on its own so it has no other option but to take the cover of the American/NATO umbrella. Same goes for South Korea, it will never side with China not unless China does something drastic like unification of the Korean peninsula under the leadership of South Korea. Doubt that is ever going to happen. Taiwan will always be against PRC, cause thats the reason for its very existence after all. Vietnam and Phillipines relationship with China is going downhill as we speak. India will look after its own interest. Worst case scenario, India will at least be a 15-20 Trillion economy by 2030. With an economy that size and ever growing military strength India won't exactly be a push over either. And if China decides to antagonize India, it will surely go in the US camp.

2. Total GDP is not a very good estimation of actual power projection capability - this is what we are talking about here.

For example the French have a GDP that is around a 1/6th of that of the US but it's total Navy would be no more powerful than one US supercarrier battlegroup. The US has around 10 such battlegroups. Even if all these countries combined are against China, what they can bring in terms of Naval strength will be way less than pure GDP numbers would suggest. Some think that the US navy is as large as the rest of the world combined and there is no way that the US spends as much as all the countries in the rest of the world combined.

Isn't that what exactly what you have been going on about all this time? That China will surpass US economy and hence would be in a position to challenge America? For countries like UK, France, Germany, Italy churning out aircraft carriers is no big deal, given their past assistance and the alliance they have with America.

You are seriously under estimating US/NATO alliance countries' naval power and over estimating the growth oh the Chinese navy. Your arguments aren't exactly flawed but very biased imo.

 

[WHITESMOKE]

oh bondu !!! .

Have you used this as Bengali word or Punjabi??? Well if it is Punjabi then it suits much better..

 

[UKBengali]

Japan would never side with China And it can't ward off China on its own so it has no other option but to take the cover of the American/NATO umbrella. Same goes for South Korea, it will never side with China not unless China does something drastic like unification of the Korean peninsula under the leadership of South Korea. Doubt that is ever going to happen.Taiwan will always be against PRC, cause thats the reason for its very existence after all. Vietnam and Phillipines relationship with China is going downhill as we speak. India will look after its own interest. Worst case scenario, India will at least be a 15-20 Trillion economy by 2030. With an economy that size and ever growing military strength India won't exactly be a push over either. And if China decides to antagonize India, it will surely go in the US camp.



Isn't that what exactly what you have been going on about all this time? That China will surpass US economy and hence would be in a position to challenge America? For countries like UK, France, Germany, Italy churning out aircraft carriers is no big deal, given their past assistance and the alliance they have with America.

You are seriously under estimating US/NATO alliance countries' naval power and over estimating the growth oh the Chinese navy. Your arguments aren't exactly flawed but very biased imo.

Japan - you assume a constant geopolitical environment. Japan only has "cover" because the US is the sole superpower. A China that is as strong as the US cannot be deterred from attacking Japan just because it is in alliance in the US. At the end of the day Japan will have to ask itself, will the US risk nuclear destruction in order to save Japan? It will almost certainly conclude no as the Japanese are not even the same race as white Americans. Japan will probably never be allied to the Chinese but more likely will become a neutral state(maybe armed with nuclear weapons for self defence) in order to not to provoke China.

Taiwan - it will be aborbed into China as the Chinese move towards superpower status. Taiwan is only 150 kms from the Chinese coast. The US is 1000's of kms away across the Pacific. Once aircraft like the J-20 are being produced in mass numbers, Taiwan's days are numbered.

And why do you persist in thinking that China is interested in antagonizing India? All it wants is to stop any bullying from the US/West. Unless India joins a US/Nato alliance or attacks China it will have no real bone to pick with India.

 

[Tumba]

Does a Mig-29K have the same loiter time or range of the J-15? Can the Mig-29 carry anywhere near the number of ordance such as the J-15? The answer is no in both cases. J-15 will be much better suited to the huge open expanses of the ocean as compared to a Mig-29K.

And i am sick of trying to explain to people that the Varyag has much more storage space and so has much more capacity to store aircraft than the Indian carrier.

only problem is J-15 cant takeoff with full weapon and full fuel load ...
and Mig - 29k's ferry range is 2,000 km (1,240 mi) / 3,000 km (1,860 mi) with 3 drop tanks ....

and J-15 range is 3000 Km ... and both these fighters carry same range of weapons ... and poor Su-33 cant carry weapon load with full potential coz its a heavier fighter on a 65 Kton carrier,... now tell me whos on advantage ...