What's new

Varyag update

Why does India need training from US pilots , to fly Russian Mig-29's :what:

Mate..Indian Naval aviators did got trained in US for career landings...we are having the best of both world...US and Russian.

An elite Indian Navy strike-pilot programme that commenced in 2006 to train 32 Indian Navy pilots in batches of four every six months over a period of four years

The following photos show Indian Navy pilots being trained in conventional take-off carrier operations at the US Navy’s Naval Air Training Command at Naval Air Station Kingsville, and other institutes, part of an elite Indian Navy strike-pilot programme that commenced in 2006 to train 32 Indian Navy pilots in batches of four every six months over a period of four years.

The Indian pilots follow an identical training trajectory followed by counterpart pilot cadets in the US Navy. The course begins with six weeks of hardcore aviation preflight indoctrination at the Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida. This includes four weeks of theory, swimming instruction and practice, plus two weeks of flight physiology and survival training.

From Pensacola, the Indian pilots move to Naval Air Station Whiting Field, also in Florida, for 18 weeks of flying Beechcraft T-34 Mentor single turboprop trainers. After this, the pilots move to Naval Air Station Kingsville in Texas to begin the real stuff -- flying jets. But first, there's three months at Kingsville just for classroom and simulator preparation. After weeks of flying the glass-cockpit simulator, the pilots finally strap into a T-45 Goshawk. But for the first two weeks, they're made to fly blind -- called "flying under a blanket" or instrument hood. Learn to trust your instruments more than anything else, that's the point. This completes Phase 1 of the six months course.

Phase 2 will be the real juice they're there for. Weeks upon weeks of tactical combat formation, air combat manoeuvering and air-to-ground weapons delivery. Finally, the real meatball! Training finally ends with a trial by fire -- flight qualification on board an American aircraft carrier. But he's got to perform consistently and deliver immaculate landings on a regular basis to finally get carrier qualified to fly MiG-29Ks and LCA Navy off the INS Vikramaditya and Indigenous Aircraft Carrier.

The first Indian Navy pilot to be carrier qualified (CQ) was Captain Surendra Ahuja, who trapped his T-45C ten times successfully on the USS Enterprise in May 2007. Thus began the Indian Navy's tryst, with tailhook aviation after a lengthy hiatus, and one that will continue long into the future.

You can see the pics of Indian Navy Pilots here

Indian Navy pilots Training in USA


Sorry for the OT..
 
.
The installation of weapon systems including radars would begin in May. The only puzzle left is if they are going to have steam catapults on board now or later.

The casino is supposed to start sea trials in 2011-2012.
 
.
The installation of weapon systems including radars would begin in May. The only puzzle left is if they are going to have steam catapults on board now or later.

The casino is supposed to start sea trials in 2011-2012.

aircraft carrier got skijump, so catapult will be in the second AC.:D
 
.


there should have been more window in the middle of the bridge, dunno what they are planning.
 
.
Some latest pictures;

xm5xfq.jpg


mu93lu.jpg


2my0tw3.jpg
 
. . .
Mate..Indian Naval aviators did got trained in US for career landings...we are having the best of both world...US and Russian.

I don't agree with that assessment. The only reason that all the western countries are now selling military related equipment to India is simply because of money. If India does indeed go for catapult takeoff for the second home build carrier, that will be even more of a nightmare for the supply officers; what are the options? Convert the MiG-29 for catapult? Purchase F-18 or the F-35? Finance the development of the Gripen for catapult?

India should spend its valuable resources for nation building, and leave the defense of the country to capable diplomats. Wars, after all are said and done is the ultimate result of a failure of diplomacy.
 
.
I don't agree with that assessment. The only reason that all the western countries are now selling military related equipment to India is simply because of money. If India does indeed go for catapult takeoff for the second home build carrier, that will be even more of a nightmare for the supply officers; what are the options? Convert the MiG-29 for catapult? Purchase F-18 or the F-35? Finance the development of the Gripen for catapult?

India should spend its valuable resources for nation building, and leave the defense of the country to capable diplomats. Wars, after all are said and done is the ultimate result of a failure of diplomacy.

What Diplomacy?.....there are people in south asia who consider war as a religious duty.

Also, $$$ is not the only criteria in weapon deals. If India can balance
Ruski & Yanks, isn't it good diplomacy by India :azn:
 
. . .
What Diplomacy?.....there are people in south asia who consider war as a religious duty.

Also, $$$ is not the only criteria in weapon deals. If India can balance
Ruski & Yanks, isn't it good diplomacy by India :azn:


Good diplomacy? Not really, that's just politician being lazy (or greedy). Those valuable resources should be spend on the future, not some equipments that are expensive to acquire, maintain and operate. Furthermore, the more politician spend on weapons, the more they have to justify for it. That I believe will make a country more likely to go to war.

The Chinese for a time appears to have focused on their nation building (food production first) and their military were left with what can only be termed as ancient equipments. Look how far they have come.

The Varyag? I think that has every bit to do with some silly notion of national pride then anything else. The only other possible reason for the Chinese to bring that carrier to operational status is possibly for business reason. Who knows, perhaps the Chinese have plans to build carriers for other countries; like Brazil perhaps?
 
.
we focused on increasing production from 1980's to 1996.

then we found that plows can't beat swords. after all a sword can slice the handle of a plow and then kill the farmer pushing the plow. especially when the guy holding the sword is bigger than you, pushes you around, sends carriers across your inner seas and then on top of that bombed your embassy.

weapons are good for the economy only if they are produced in your own country. otherwise they really hold back the economy. purchased weapons from different sources make logistics a nightmare.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom