Indian CVF?

To say there is no arms race in Asia is dumbfounding to say the least. Nonetheless, I think the point in regards to Indian Defense Spending. Is she must be much wiser than she has been in the past. Because she can’t out spend China/Pakistan. Which, combined with her reluctance to join Western and/or Asians Military Alliances. Puts her in a poor Military Position.

As a matter of fact the Indian Carrier Program is a good example of poor planning.

Obviously i understand, we all have rights to comment upon all affairs around the world. All-out aggressiveness in handling foreign policy is harmful to any nation, along with inducting weapon systems for the sake of inducting them.

The Reuters article you posted is pure propaganda of an age where news must be invented if there is none. There are real security concerns for India and PRC is one of them, the reason being that there are active border disputes with them. There is however no great weapons race as suggested in the news article.

The government of India has a set of responsibilities including addressing security concerns, spending 2.5-3% of GDP on defense is very responsible given the security situation. There is no military industrial complex in India.

How this ties in with the topic CVF’s for India is that Indian leadership gave the Indian Navy a certain set of goals, the Indian Navy in turn asks for a certain set of equipment to fulfill these goals within the budget allotted to them.
Following this news over a period of time to me it seems that there is an approval for 3 aircraft carriers that will operate with two aircraft carrier groups. Many men have sat down and decided on this need, all of them very well experienced in this field and none of them war mongering idiots.

Making the AC’s in domestic shipyards is a decision that has been thought upon by the political leadership and the military, they are following the path they themselves set, difficulties and delays in a new type of project were expected, however there is no chance of a deal with UK at this stage (for a CVF class ship)

I agree that defence spending is not, so far, out of control and that continued diplomacy will hopefully reap rewards for both sides. India is absolutely right to pursue indigenous defence capability wherever possible in that it reduces dependence on foreign equipment and the political costs that inevitably come with such a dependence.

While I appreciate your local knowledge the analysis and opinion expressed in the Reuters piece is mirrored by many similar articles that have appeared in the Indian media. There are many voices expressing the concern that India could be maneuvered into the USA’s policy of containing China.

I used the term ‘military industrial complex’ loosely but Eisenhower’s warning to the American people can be applied just as well to any nation on Earth that purchases military hardware, whether imported or domestic in origin.

Sorry, please do not misunderstand me as I really do have a great deal of respect for your country, it’s independence, history and it’s people. My post was, of course, only my own opinion. I would like to include myself as a friend of India and please understand that my concerns, as a human being, is that the greed of the military industrial complex does not hold back millions in poverty or reduce our civilisations to cinders…I am sure that you can understand my point of view, even if not to agree with it.

A 2012 Reuters report on military tensions in the Himalayas and elsewhere:
“http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/07/30/us-india-china-idUSBRE86T00G20120730

Obviously i understand, we all have rights to comment upon all affairs around the world. All-out aggressiveness in handling foreign policy is harmful to any nation, along with inducting weapon systems for the sake of inducting them.

The Reuters article you posted is pure propaganda of an age where news must be invented if there is none. There are real security concerns for India and PRC is one of them, the reason being that there are active border disputes with them. There is however no great weapons race as suggested in the news article.

The government of India has a set of responsibilities including addressing security concerns, spending 2.5-3% of GDP on defense is very responsible given the security situation. There is no military industrial complex in India.

How this ties in with the topic CVF’s for India is that Indian leadership gave the Indian Navy a certain set of goals, the Indian Navy in turn asks for a certain set of equipment to fulfill these goals within the budget allotted to them.
Following this news over a period of time to me it seems that there is an approval for 3 aircraft carriers that will operate with two aircraft carrier groups. Many men have sat down and decided on this need, all of them very well experienced in this field and none of them war mongering idiots.

Making the AC’s in domestic shipyards is a decision that has been thought upon by the political leadership and the military, they are following the path they themselves set, difficulties and delays in a new type of project were expected, however there is no chance of a deal with UK at this stage (for a CVF class ship)

A 2012 Reuters report on military tensions in the Himalayas and elsewhere:

“http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/07/30/us-india-china-idUSBRE86T00G20120730

The fact is that there is no arms race, if there was one you would not see the current force levels on Himalayan border. I am from that border and I know what I speak off.

The fact is not being a citizen of India you have no say in affairs of India, you can have an opinion, all humans can, don’t come around sounding like you know better than us though, because unlike you we actually live here.

We have been in the neighbourhood since alexander came through Persia, the Mughals came in and so did the Europeans, and we have been neighbours of china for as long as humanity was civilised.

With one war to talk about at times when both nations were going through tough times and by and large there are no hostilities between India and China, there are disputes for which both nations have set up diplomatic forums for discussion. On top of which we have made measures to ensure we have enough strength to protect the border, without which there is no point in talking, till you are protected militarily you do not negotiate border disputes, you make concessions, again something we are well aware of, and are taking care off, don’t label that as an arms race, it’s our sovereign right to have the forces we feel are necessary, a right we will protect with our blood.

The affairs of India are not run by the United States of America, we did not allow USA to set up military bases in the Cold War, and we will not let them come in and dictate to us how we should act in the region, India, dear sir is not a colony or a vassal. We value friends who respect us, not nations that dictate to us, and we do this very jealously.

obviously it was a conflict and both sides were wrong and as it was a military conflict both sides had different expectations, please don’t come inhere of all places and pass a judgement in affairs of history. Especially about Indian policy in Cold War, you will find better avenues to discuss.

Our society has both good and bad, ups and down and we are fully capable of managing them, so don’t tell us where to spend our money and how, that is a decision reserved for Indians and enforced through our diplomatic process.

Thank you for your opinion, but we are not the kid in neighbourhood who is dictated to………

Sorry, please do not misunderstand me as I really do have a great deal of respect for your country, it’s independence, history and it’s people. My post was, of course, only my own opinion. I would like to include myself as a friend of India and please understand that my concerns, as a human being, is that the greed of the military industrial complex does not hold back millions in poverty or reduce our civilisations to cinders…I am sure that you can understand my point of view, even if not to agree with it.

And with that, lets end this debate. Thank you.

The fact is that the Himalayan arms race is just not winnable for India. I have spent a good deal of time in your wonderful country and could definitely identify much better ways to spend the many billions of dollars currently, in my opinion, being wasted on defence!

It is also clear that another arms race is in full swing in the Pacific. Territorial disputes and Obama’s increased military interest in the region make the chances of a conflict breaking out in the near future very high. My concern is that India could be dragged into any such hostilities as a result of both it’s increasing ties to Washington and the militaristic nature of her relationship with China.

Nehru’s policy of non-alignment during the cold war was a wise one that contemporary India would do well not to forget.

The fact is that there is no arms race, if there was one you would not see the current force levels on Himalayan border. I am from that border and I know what I speak off.

The fact is not being a citizen of India you have no say in affairs of India, you can have an opinion, all humans can, don’t come around sounding like you know better than us though, because unlike you we actually live here.

We have been in the neighbourhood since alexander came through Persia, the Mughals came in and so did the Europeans, and we have been neighbours of china for as long as humanity was civilised.

With one war to talk about at times when both nations were going through tough times and by and large there are no hostilities between India and China, there are disputes for which both nations have set up diplomatic forums for discussion. On top of which we have made measures to ensure we have enough strength to protect the border, without which there is no point in talking, till you are protected militarily you do not negotiate border disputes, you make concessions, again something we are well aware of, and are taking care off, don’t label that as an arms race, it’s our sovereign right to have the forces we feel are necessary, a right we will protect with our blood.

The affairs of India are not run by the United States of America, we did not allow USA to set up military bases in the Cold War, and we will not let them come in and dictate to us how we should act in the region, India, dear sir is not a colony or a vassal. We value friends who respect us, not nations that dictate to us, and we do this very jealously.

obviously it was a conflict and both sides were wrong and as it was a military conflict both sides had different expectations, please don’t come inhere of all places and pass a judgement in affairs of history. Especially about Indian policy in Cold War, you will find better avenues to discuss.

Our society has both good and bad, ups and down and we are fully capable of managing them, so don’t tell us where to spend our money and how, that is a decision reserved for Indians and enforced through our diplomatic process.

Thank you for your opinion, but we are not the kid in neighbourhood who is dictated to………

Money has to spent on everything.
Development in itself has many aspects, ignore one and your in trouble. But let not that bother an you. We tried not spending on defense, got a very nice gift in 1962…

The fact is that the Himalayan arms race is just not winnable for India. I have spent a good deal of time in your wonderful country and could definitely identify much better ways to spend the many billions of dollars currently, in my opinion, being wasted on defence!

It is also clear that another arms race is in full swing in the Pacific. Territorial disputes and Obama’s increased military interest in the region make the chances of a conflict breaking out in the near future very high. My concern is that India could be dragged into any such hostilities as a result of both it’s increasing ties to Washington and the militaristic nature of her relationship with China.

Nehru’s policy of non-alignment during the cold war was a wise one that contemporary India would do well not to forget.

Yeah…like spending the cash wisely on development instead of the armed forces.

Money has to spent on everything.
Development in itself has many aspects, ignore one and your in trouble. But let not that bother an you. We tried not spending on defense, got a very nice gift in 1962…

As of today China is looking to be in a much better position than India as far a Carrier Programs go. This is only to grow as the IAC-1 is just going back into the dock and the Vikramaditya has yet to be delivered.

China on the other hand has seen the introduction of the Liaoning. While another Aircraft Carrier is said to be under construction. Further, the PLAN has developed a New Naval Fighter (J-15) and has another more advance 5th Generation (J-31) in development. Plus, most of all China has far greater resources and is committed to use them to build a first class navy.

Not sure why you cannot understand that IN does NOT have the financial resources to build and maintain three carriers right now. IN will not be able to match Chinese ships one for one.

Its a simple fact.

As of today, PLAN is learning how to operate a aircraft carrier, they will first operate one (which will need two ships), then define their requirements for more ships.

For IN there is a perceived need to have two carrier groups, which require 3 carriers so that there is always a aircraft carrier with the carrier groups (some would say 4 are required).
This need to fulfill the goals set for the Navy by the political leadership, if you follow the news and look at the situation logically, its clear that this has been approved.

PLAN might develop 50 aircraft carriers, however the Indian Navy will build ships to its requirements.

There is already the movement to have two carrier groups, which will have three aircraft carriers.
There is a old refurbished carrier, and a new one under construction.
The third one is not going to start construction anytime soon, there are enough resources with the IN to operate these.

Well, it needs to be far smarter with its defense dollars for one….:rolleyes:

Yeah…like spending the cash wisely on development instead of the armed forces.

Not sure why you cannot understand that IN does NOT have the financial resources to build and maintain three carriers right now. IN will not be able to match Chinese ships one for one.

Its a simple fact.

Well, it needs to be far smarter with its defense dollars for one….:rolleyes:

Not sure why you cannot understand that IN does NOT have the financial resources to build and maintain three carriers right now. IN will not be able to match Chinese ships one for one.

Its a simple fact.

Thats not a fleet of carriers, one aircraft carrier which is not operational and another under constuction (i have not seen anything about a new one under construction).
My guess would be that PLAN will first try its hand at operating a aircraft carrier group, which will require 2 carriers, before investing into more.

IAC-2 has the green light, Indian Navy has for long operated Aircraft carriers, and now with the money the plan is to have 2 aircraft carrier groups and three carriers, political approval already exists, it will start as soon as the IAC-1 is out of the shipyard.

As of today China is looking to be in a much better position than India as far a Carrier Programs go. This is only to grow as the IAC-1 is just going back into the dock and the Vikramaditya has yet to be delivered.

China on the other hand has seen the introduction of the Liaoning. While another Aircraft Carrier is said to be under construction. Further, the PLAN has developed a New Naval Fighter (J-15) and has another more advance 5th Generation (J-31) in development. Plus, most of all China has far greater resources and is committed to use them to build a first class navy.

China has a Aircraft Carrier in service now and another one under construction. Which, is to be followed my more examples.

As for the IAC-2 is still in development and hasn’t been given a green light.

Thats not a fleet of carriers, one aircraft carrier which is not operational and another under constuction (i have not seen anything about a new one under construction).
My guess would be that PLAN will first try its hand at operating a aircraft carrier group, which will require 2 carriers, before investing into more.

IAC-2 has the green light, Indian Navy has for long operated Aircraft carriers, and now with the money the plan is to have 2 aircraft carrier groups and three carriers, political approval already exists, it will start as soon as the IAC-1 is out of the shipyard.

What fleet of carriers?
The IAC-2 will be built, there is a requirement of 3 carriers and two carrier groups.
There might be a IAC-3 if the current Gorshkov is not able to function or has to be decommissioned, now that India has poured money into it, there will be an effort to extract 20-30 years of service out of the ship.

China has a Aircraft Carrier in service now and another one under construction. Which, is to be followed my more examples.

As for the IAC-2 is still in development and hasn’t been given a green light.

With China building a Fleet of Carriers? Seems like poor timing? More likely trying to get the handle on the issues with the IAC-1 and assure the Indian Government they have a viable plan for the IAC-2.

What fleet of carriers?
The IAC-2 will be built, there is a requirement of 3 carriers and two carrier groups.
There might be a IAC-3 if the current Gorshkov is not able to function or has to be decommissioned, now that India has poured money into it, there will be an effort to extract 20-30 years of service out of the ship.

About a year ago, when asked about IAC-2, IN Chief had said that (further) aircraft carriers were not the priority right now. Clearly there are other important areas (such as the much delayed P-75i program) which are in dire need of funding. There is much more to a Navy than just three aircraft carrying vessels.

IN has to spend resources on P-75I, base developments (Seabird project and Vizag), nuke subs, more P-8I, etc. P-75I alone will take over $10 bill.

So India will have to make do with Vikramaditya and Vikrant while IAC-2 comes at its own sweet time.

With China building a Fleet of Carriers? Seems like poor timing? More likely trying to get the handle on the issues with the IAC-1 and assure the Indian Government they have a viable plan for the IAC-2.

India has worked and is working with Russia on a number of ship classes besides Gorshkov/Vikramaditya. Let’s not forget about those arguably more succesfull cooperations.

Which, ones are you referring to?

I hardly see such a marriage as a good option for India. Especially, considering that partnership has just got started. Let’s also not forget India’s experience with the Gorshokov / Vikramaditya.

India has worked and is working with Russia on a number of ship classes besides Gorshkov/Vikramaditya. Let’s not forget about those arguably more succesfull cooperations.