INDIA’S DRIVE FOR A ‘BLUE WATER’ NAVY : Dr.David Scott - Page 4

Deltacamelately · 04-19-2008, 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamercube

Sir, that decision is best left to the Ministry of Finance. But you'll find it interesting that in a nation of 1.1 billion people, only around 50 million pay income tax.

GC, Concentrate!
We are a new nation, a new economic power, a new military power, with new ambitions, trying to achieve what other mature nations have achieved in 100-150 years. There has to be some costs to pay.

BUT, and it is a BIG BUT, How can you do all this if you don't have a piece of land under YOUR juridiction, that you can call as YOUR nation?
Social Welfare, good, should be always done.

But would you want to repeat the mistake that you commited in 1962?
You rant that we are the 4th largest military power, well, who are the Top 3 above us?
And amongst them, is there a power with whom we have fought a war and LOST? YES!!!
So we need to keep arming ourselves to the point that the equations is 1-1 or 100-100. Military strengths can not be prorata based. It is always in net comarisons, and there we are lagging. CAN NOT Compromise. Have to spend.
Because this % we are speaking about is a small price we have to pay to ensure that the big pie is intact and in our hand, not others.
Period.

dave lukins · 04-19-2008, 03:41 AM

[quote=Deltacamelately;484858 [B]CAN NOT Compromise[/b]. Have to spend.
Because this % we are speaking about is a small price we have to pay to ensure that the big pie is intact and in our hand, not others. PERIOD..

Absolutley correct Sir. You have hit the nail on the head.

tphuang · 04-20-2008, 00:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adux

World-class warships at Indian prices

dude, 950 million for a destroyer is a lot of money. Check the cost of DDG-51. And paying 650 million for a frigate is a lot too if you compare it to FREMM.

On a comparative note, each 054A costs 200 million and each type 22 costs 12-15 million. That's cheap.

Quote:

This is quite interesting...and I've never heard the reverse happen (China sending its ships into the Indian ocean):

"One milestone was reached in 2000, when a powerful naval flotilla of five capital ships (INS Delhi, INS Kora, INS Sindhuvir, INS Rajput, and INS Kuthar), one submarine and a tanker (INS Aditya) entered and operated in the South China Sea; with elements of it also making port calls in Singapore, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and Indonesia. Indian naval officers described it as part of a “detailed plan to expand the horizons of our maritime diplomacy.”123 This deployment lasted over one month, and was rightly judged by Mehta to be “a quiet show of strategic reach” by the Indian Navy.124 It was also seen as a “challenge” to China in China’s backyard and in an area claimed by China; with China raising a “diplomatic furore” when the plans were first released, but then allowing a friendly enough port call at Shanghai"

lol, you want to challenge inside South China Sea? Seems to be just IN making a routine expedition. You are making too much out of it. 168 + one of the replenishment ships took an entire tour of Europe last year.

saintdeb · 04-21-2008, 04:14 AM

hello friends!!! My first post here...I do hope i don't make childish mistakes!!! Please point out any issues if there are any!!!

Quote:

On a comparative note, each 054A costs 200 million and each type 22 costs 12-15 million. That's cheap.

The comparison should be with a frigate then and not a destroyer. Type 54A is a frigate. Shivaliks have a tag of $650 million. Moreover, this cost includes the entire long term spare costs!!!! India still has to import many of the sensor suites and weapon suites unlike china which adds on to the cost!! Another difference is the difference in propulsion systems and the anti ship missiles. the brahmos compliment itself costs around 20-25 million for just the missiles!!!!!

nebula82 · 04-29-2008, 13:48 PM

Sorry haven’t really had the chance to read all the replies so I’m probably repeating others’ statements. I speed-read the article you posted Adux, thanks very much.

It’s interesting that over the last decade both India & China have placed an increased emphasis on the Navy & Air Force, two previously neglected branches.

I think both countries are making astounding progress in their navies.

If the Indian Navy can stick to the current plan of having three aircraft carriers by 2020 (or was it two? INS Vikramaditya & another indigenous carrier. Think the INS Viraat would've been decommissioned by then) then they will possess a formidable advantage over the PLAN in force projection. But the rapid expansion of the PLAN submarine force and the modernisation of the missiles they carry will be of serious concern to the Indian Navy. I think India’s aircraft carrier advantage is balanced by the PLAN’s considerably bigger submarine fleet.

The Indian Navy’s power projection is second only to the JMSDF, and with the possession of an aircraft carrier, arguably equal or greater. I have no doubt the IN is well on its way to becoming Asia’s best navy but that’s only if the government can get its act together asap. There needs to be a sense of urgency, the same kind the PLA displays.

Thanks & kind regards
Nebula82.

kuku · 04-29-2008, 14:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebula82

Sorry haven’t really had the chance to read all the replies so I’m probably repeating others’ statements. I speed-read the article you posted Adux, thanks very much.

It’s interesting that over the last decade both India & China have placed an increased emphasis on the Navy & Air Force, two previously neglected branches.

I think both countries are making astounding progress in their navies.

If the Indian Navy can stick to the current plan of having three aircraft carriers by 2020 (or was it two? INS Vikramaditya & another indigenous carrier. Think the INS Viraat would've been decommissioned by then) then they will possess a formidable advantage over the PLAN in force projection.

But the rapid expansion of the PLAN submarine force and the modernisation of the missiles they carry will be of serious concern to the Indian Navy. I think India’s aircraft carrier advantage is balanced by the PLAN’s considerably bigger submarine fleet.

The Indian Navy’s power projection is second only to the JMSDF, and with the possession of an aircraft carrier, arguably equal or greater.

I have no doubt the IN is well on its way to becoming Asia’s best navy but that’s only if the government can get its act together asap. There needs to be a sense of urgency, the same kind the PLA displays.

Thanks & kind regards
Nebula82.

Both nations need a strong navy.

Three carriers, two IAC one redone Russian ship

The Indian navy will develop a defensive capability for the submarine launched missile threat and submarines of its own to deal with the situation.

The aircraft carrier is a ship and i think that should make it vulnerable to things which all other ships are vulnerable to, however it can carry aircrafts, something that provides a added advantage nothing else can provide.

Quote:

LIVEFIST
Adm Arun Prakash responds to "Do we really need an aircraft carrier?"

An aircraft carrier's raison d'etre is to provide comprehensive support to
maritime forces, and not the other way round. This support can be to forces operating at sea, as well as ashore. At sea, the support is in all three dimensions. For example: it would take many hours/days of search by LRMP (long-range maritime patrol) aircraft or ASW (anti-submarine warfare) ships to localise a diesel submarine (SSN or SSBN in the very near future) in the Indian Ocean. Thereafter, it will require a force of 6-8 large ASW helicopters operating around the clock to search and locate such an elusive target, and attack it if required. Only a carrier can provide this kind of sustained ASW support within a few minutes of flying time and for as long as required.

If our maritime forces are going to operate within range of enemy air threat, which could be from strike aircraft, or missile-armed LRMP machines, they will require fighter protection within a matter of minutes, and 24x7. Again, only a carrier operating in support of the force can provide this kind of cover.

The carrier's fighters will also make sure that no surface ship (missile armed or otherwise) can get anywhere near 150-200 miles of a maritime force.

Finally, carriers are an invaluable asset in littoral and amphibious warfare, because of their manifold capabilities, including sea-lift as well as heli-lift. Carrier critics will of talk of the size & vulnerability of a carrier. Nothing at sea is invulnerable, and certainly not in war. But carriers, by virtue of their integral aircraft and helicopter force can keep any threat at bay. And if hit, by virtue of their size can absorb far more damage than any other ship. - AP

LiveFist: Adm Arun Prakash responds to "Do we really need an aircraft carrier?"

Do you see a a possibility of IN and PLA-N carrying out direct offensive operations against each other in each others area?

With in the Indian ocean region (which is of concern to the Indian Navy) how much of an effort would it be to provide a carrier group with a decent 24X7 shore based AEW/C&C aircraft support?
(Let us for the sake of taking an example assume a IAF like system.)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
INDIA’S NEW "COLD START" WAR DOCTRINE STRATEGICALLY REVIEWED	Ray	Land Forces	125	06-20-2008 23:33 PM
Any Life Left!?	Bella	Battleships Forum	253	06-10-2008 01:22 AM
World Navies in Review	rickusn	Naval Forces	7	06-14-2007 23:51 PM
UK Drawdown?	rickusn	Naval Forces	19	05-03-2007 11:22 AM
BMD Article	rickusn	Naval Forces	6	02-05-2007 23:04 PM

04-19-2008, 03:41 AM	#47 (permalink)
dave lukins *Military Professional* Join Date: 01-04-07 Location: cheshire uk Posts: 5,174 Country:	[quote=Deltacamelately;484858 [B]CAN NOT Compromise[/b]. Have to spend. Because this % we are speaking about is a small price we have to pay to ensure that the big pie is intact and in our hand, not others. PERIOD.. Absolutley correct Sir. You have hit the nail on the head.

04-29-2008, 13:48 PM	#50 (permalink)
nebula82 Regular Join Date: 03-12-08 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 97 Country:	Sorry haven’t really had the chance to read all the replies so I’m probably repeating others’ statements. I speed-read the article you posted Adux, thanks very much. It’s interesting that over the last decade both India & China have placed an increased emphasis on the Navy & Air Force, two previously neglected branches. I think both countries are making astounding progress in their navies. If the Indian Navy can stick to the current plan of having three aircraft carriers by 2020 (or was it two? INS Vikramaditya & another indigenous carrier. Think the INS Viraat would've been decommissioned by then) then they will possess a formidable advantage over the PLAN in force projection. But the rapid expansion of the PLAN submarine force and the modernisation of the missiles they carry will be of serious concern to the Indian Navy. I think India’s aircraft carrier advantage is balanced by the PLAN’s considerably bigger submarine fleet. The Indian Navy’s power projection is second only to the JMSDF, and with the possession of an aircraft carrier, arguably equal or greater. I have no doubt the IN is well on its way to becoming Asia’s best navy but that’s only if the government can get its act together asap. There needs to be a sense of urgency, the same kind the PLA displays. Thanks & kind regards Nebula82.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)