Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 22 May 2013 21:31

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4662 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 117  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 06:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 8167
Location: Illini Nation
Manish_Sharma wrote:
NRao wrote:
Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place?


Because big powers are bothered if another power places their 7th, 5th, 2nd or whatever fleet in their backyard. If Russia, China etc. were to park their fleet in Cuba, only US will be bothered no other small country around has a need to be bothered, unless these small nations pretend to be bothered to please the unkil.

Who else will be bothered? Myamar, Sri Lanka......... nope too small to bother.


Multiple points:

1. You are like my wife, you quote only part of what I tried to make as a point.

OK. Granted India should be bothered by this US thinking.

Now, what about the following:

Quote:
China has been doing exactly the SAME things for years!!!!!


2. As I stated, combined with a very weak "look East policy", Indian inaction is ore bothersome. The US is bothered by Chinese expansionism, but India is not in "India's backyard"?

A topic that is supposed to be us vs. China is being portrayed as one vs. India?

IF India took care of her backyard, why would anyone poke their nose?

3. On Cuba: The US will be bothered. And, they will act. Will India act? I certainly hope so. I hope India asserts and prevents anyone from make decisions in the IOR (without Indian participation?)

But, like China, the US too seems to be occupying a vacuum created by India. Being bothered is not a policy that one can act on. Nor is griping about it.

IF this has actually taken place, it is to a great extent because of Indian inaction (NOT policy).

4. SL/Myanmar/etc: IF they were bothered they would act.

Just BTW, they all have subscribed to Chinese actions.

However, I welcome this. India wakes up ONLY when there is some cataclysmic event - Kargil. India NEEDS a Kargil every year. Sad, but true.

I would like to know what are your views on China and her pearls. TIA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 07:08 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 324
Found this picture on the Indian Defence Forum, along with a bunch of other pictures of the Vikramaditya. This was the only picture with a view of the flight deck. But I don't think this is the Vik, it looks like the Kuznetsov. Am I mistaken?


- The name at the back of the ship doesn't look like Vikramaditya, I could be wrong cause it's hard to read.

- The Russian Naval Flag instead of the IN flag?

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 07:35 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7520
Thats the RuN aircraft carrier Kuznetsov


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 07:41 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 324
Austin wrote:
Thats the RuN aircraft carrier Kuznetsov


Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 07:44 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7520
USN presence in our backyard would be bodyblow to Indias strategic Interest , it would allow them to monitor all IN ship movement from close quarters and worst it would help them keep a tab on IN SSBN patrols in the east , mapping/monitoring of ocean floor for sensitive data for military use.

US presence in this part of the world or its desire to make it at Bangladesh coincides with IN SSBN force coming up and likely to be based in East plus the recent Chakra deployment there ....it would unnerve PLAN for sure but IN will be more harmed by this if the news is true.

The first few ships USN would deploy there would be Surtass LFA to map Ocean Floor and data on submarines in guise of helping Bangladesh find Oil and Gas in the region :lol:

I recollect how they deployed these ships outside major Chinese submarine base in Intl waters and the PLAN sent a gun boat to intimidate it.

http://www.surtass-lfa-eis.com/


Last edited by Austin on 01 Jun 2012 08:00, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 07:46 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7520
Anurag wrote:
Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.


Easy way to paint it is the 4 prominent phased array antenna which Vikramaditya does not have ,there are many others but thats the easiest one to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 08:11 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 324
Austin wrote:
Anurag wrote:
Thanks Austin! It's funny, took me one glance to lay my suspicion but folks on that forum are convinced it's the Vik because it's put along side actual pictures of the Vik.

People are strange.


Easy way to paint it is the 4 prominent phased array antenna which Vikramaditya does not have ,there are many others but thats the easiest one to see.


You're right. Btw, what does the Vik have for antennas and how many?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 09:43 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25508
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
look at the vast MASS of defensive weapon just on the rear left corner - 1 x AK630, 1 RBU (yeah we could use RBU for Vikky as well), 2 x kashtan gun systems, 5 revolver VLS for SAMs and what looks like another kashtan fwd near where the waist deck ends.

must be equivalent or more along the right side upto the island area.

in a more airwing oriented ship, these overhang areas could be used to extend the store rooms or workshops along the side of the double-height hangar deck.

a good balanced armament for the vikky would
- 2 x RBU
- 48 x Barak1 SAMs in 3 units of 16 each
- 6 x AK630
- decoy launchers of all types
- kevlar armour and liners around all vital areas - nimitz style
- degaussing of the hull
- 2 x triple TT varunastra HWT launchers near the tail 8)
- maximal hangar , living and workshop space to pack in the airwing


Last edited by Singha on 01 Jun 2012 09:48, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 09:44 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 1116
NRao wrote:

Multiple points:
1. You are like my wife, you quote only part of what I tried to make as a point.

Sorry NRao ji, just was quoting the central part of your post, saving bandwidth no ulterior motives.

OK. Granted India should be bothered by this US thinking.

Now, what about the following:

Quote:
China has been doing exactly the SAME things for years!!!!!


With China relationship is more black & white than with unkil. In case they make a base whole BR would have a consensus that its an enemy action and there is possiblity of war with China but not so much with unkil.

As has been posted before on BR about how unkil is providing porkis with daily update of India Naval movements.
Chinese gave nukes to porkis but unkil provided the delivery platforms initially until the chinese missiles came along.
Unkil has provided porkis with 500 plus BVR missiles for their F 16s.
The thing is relation with US is much into grey area, In the country their anti-India actions have tendency to slip under the radar quite easily and even if something gets highlighted it is shouted down with their supporters in DDM, politicos etc.

With US' much advanced technology/sensors they will be able to spy on us much more effectively than chinese.

In the event of war even with porkis god knows how much more underhand support to porkis they'll provide. I mean world may come to know about it 50 years later when archives are opened that Indian Shishumar Sub was actually torpedoed by US and not by a porki sub.
In case chinese are there at the time of war, Navy and AF would be very clear to take out their radar stations, ships etc. no grey area here.


2. As I stated, combined with a very weak "look East policy", Indian inaction is more bothersome. The US is bothered by Chinese expansionism, but India is not in "India's backyard"?

A topic that is supposed to be us vs. China is being portrayed as one vs. India?

IF India took care of her backyard, why would anyone poke their nose?

3. On Cuba: The US will be bothered. And, they will act. Will India act? I certainly hope so. I hope India asserts and prevents anyone from make decisions in the IOR (without Indian participation?)

Now here you are taking 180 degree turn, your first sentence in previous post was: "Why would India be bothered by this - IF it took place?" as long as their are people with your kind of support for US are there in GoI, media and commoners how could India act? You started your post protesting against the 'protest against US naval base'.

But, like China, the US too seems to be occupying a vacuum created by India. Being bothered is not a policy that one can act on. Nor is griping about it.

IF this has actually taken place, it is to a great extent because of Indian inaction (NOT policy).

Now just like Cubans won't allow US to make a base in their port, there will always be neighbouring countries which won't allow India to make a base. Even if current bangaladeshi govt. allows us to make a base, Khaleda Zia comes back and will ask us to leave.

Why is 'our friend US' so bothered about a vaccum in Bangaladesh? They have all the coverage against panda in Taiwan, what advantage in Bangladesh? If they are so concerned they should provide us with tech and provide ships for free to keep an eye. Anyway why should India make a base in Bangladesh? We are having our own coastline touching them, we can keep an eye from there itself.


4. SL/Myanmar/etc: IF they were bothered they would act.

Just BTW, they all have subscribed to Chinese actions.

However, I welcome this. India wakes up ONLY when there is some cataclysmic event - Kargil. India NEEDS a Kargil every year. Sad, but true.

I would like to know what are your views on China and her pearls. TIA.

As far as the 'pearls' are concerned, I think they are just that 'pearls', can be easily crushed at the start of hostilities. Let's say how many Brahmos/Nirbhays or Tejases can go to take out radar stations and ships they'll be sitting ducks. I guess coco islands radar eye can be called part of these pearls, few brahmos and that's it.

I'll equally be worried about IN ships in Vietnam, not much into basing few ships so near chinese. I'd rather go Karnad way, just provide Vietnamese Prithvis, Brahmos & 4 squadrons of Tejas for free and let panda get the taste of their on medicine.

My answers are in maroon bold.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 10:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Posts: 940
Location: USA
Austin wrote:
USN presence in our backyard would be bodyblow to Indias strategic Interest , it would allow them to monitor all IN ship movement from close quarters and worst it would help them keep a tab on IN SSBN patrols in the east , mapping/monitoring of ocean floor for sensitive data for military use.

US presence in this part of the world or its desire to make it at Bangladesh coincides with IN SSBN force coming up and likely to be based in East plus the recent Chakra deployment there ....it would unnerve PLAN for sure but IN will be more harmed by this if the news is true............


This is a very serious issue and we need to respond to this swiftly and comprehensively.

If this happens anytime soon there are several steps we can take to maintain a balancing action.
We should not hesitate in deploying a Brahmos AShM, LACM facilities at Zopuitlang in Mizoram and Bengal immediately. Also, Expansion of Aizwal base should be done with priority.

K-15/Shourya based AShBM that we were chewing sometime back should also be given a high priority.

We can get a decent number of Tu-22M3.

Create better infrastructure in Bengal and house Littoral Guided missile Corvettes there on patrol.

Installing better Radar/Snooping stations in Mizoram and Andaman.

The fearing of offending someone should not deter us from having options balancing any advanced deployments.

Having a Fleet 100KM form Indian Landmass is something we should not take friendly for granted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 12:54 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 1454
Location: NullPointerException
Elements on USN based in the BoB is a hostile act and should be considered as such.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 13:04 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 25508
Location: havildar-major, 1st JSOC munna detachment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... leet_ships

looking at the huge inventory spread across japan, korea and guam it seems unlikely that BD will be home for a major AAW SAG, submarine or aviation task force as these facilities would make more sense in east asia.

what they could trying for is
- a fuel, food and R&R righs aggrement for fleet ships to call in a replenish
- perhaps a USMC presence with a couple of MEU type ships under the guise of natural disaster training, anti-terrorism, anti-piracy, interoperability and usual apple pie stuff.
for sure there will be ELINT assets on such ships coming and going.

the US by throwing money, business ops , honeytraps using blondes on foreign trips , swiss account details and green cards will quickly be able to co-opt BD political and business elite into whatever 'cause' is the cause of the hour. china can hardly compete as a attractive place to send the kids to or make money from. US has all the levers and their hands around swiss bank account gonads.

submarines would already be sneaking around under BOB to spy on our naval exercises, comms and missile tests nothing new there.

imo we seeing the endgame in the chinese intrusion into BD and Myanmar, both are being capped, roll backed and eliminated by Khan. but the big problem is Khan seems to have no intention to leave now :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 13:20 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7520
IOR and BOB is our zone of special interest and any foreign power in there be it US or China or other is a serious dent in our security and geo-strategic interest.

Having US or other power establish base in BOB would be akin to inviting a thief to stay in our house to take care of a rowdy neighbor , the thief will kill us first and then the rowdy neighbour. ..... which is to say it will kill our own geostrategic and security interest in this region before it does of China.

Its a pity if being a $2 trillion economy we cant engage our own neighbour and cannot create a confidence in them to depend on us for any help ...something seriously wrong in our foreign and economic policy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 15:48 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 18 Sep 2011 02:13
Posts: 247
Austin wrote:
Its a pity if being a $2 trillion economy we cant engage our own neighbour and cannot create a confidence in them to depend on us for any help ...something seriously wrong in our foreign and economic policy.


No it is a matter of only interests, India has engaged or tried to engage all her neighbors including Bangladesh as far as it permits with her soft power image, but they decided to move into the lap of China to counter Indian influence fuelled by distrust. Now they are ready to move to USA's lap ditching China, same can be said about Burma which the US is trying a lot to influence now, once considered a Pariah. Now, the problem is India's soft power image, surely she will raise the issue but the policy of non interference in each other's internal affairs might be the blocker!!! Having said that, Bangladesh was/is a really valuable asset and it continues to divide India into 2 halves, it would of been good if the soft power image was given up in favor of securing strategic interests.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2012 16:06 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 17500
Location: NowHere
just happened to see this old link.,but dam good made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyRVuCKiCDE

2 part video.. it must have been linked here some 6 months back


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2012 07:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 1116
Sometime back it was discussed on BR that how during 1971 war, porkis had removed fuel from many ships, as it saves the ship from sinking inspite of being hit by missiles if there is no fuel in the tanks.

Can't we instead of retiring Viraat, place it near the "Bombay High" removing engines and fuel. Put on ak 630s, Akashs, Baraks, AADs for anti air and few helicopters, RBU 6000, torpedoes for ASW operations.

Since the removal of engines+fuel will make Viraat will make it quite lighter, it can even be towed by other ships from time to time. This will not only safeguard the Bombay High but also Mumbai Port and City, and the ship won't sink inspite of taking few hits.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2012 15:41 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 7504
Location: India
Nice idea,but the cost of refitting an old warship with a suspect hull is far less cost-effective than designing and bulding a new air defence cruiser which has a considerable weaponload of SAMs of various types,plus some LR SSMs and ASW helos.The vulnerability of carriers in today's world has led some analysts to advoate a return to the "arsenal ship" concept,where a battlecruiser sized surface ship ,stealthily shaped and equipped with hundreds of missiles in VL silos ,would complement both the strike force of a carrier task force,but also fleet air defence and BMD defence as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2012 18:15 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17
Posts: 1116
^^Philip how much tonnage this cruiser would be?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2012 19:20 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Sep 2000 11:31
Posts: 1070
Manish_Sharma wrote:
^^Philip how much tonnage this cruiser would be?


My guess is 12,000 to 15,000 T. I think it will be expensive for IN


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2012 20:28 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 767
Concept of arsenal ship has passed after events of 9-11 simply because it costs too much to arm a vessel with that many missiles' (what are you going to do when it gets taken out in USS cole type incident?) and it is simply a lot easier, cheaper and quicker to deliver that much payload from a air launched platforms.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 00:17 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24
Posts: 952
John wrote:
Concept of arsenal ship has passed after events of 9-11 simply because it costs too much to arm a vessel with that many missiles' (what are you going to do when it gets taken out in USS cole type incident?) and it is simply a lot easier, cheaper and quicker to deliver that much payload from a air launched platforms.


The nearest thing to an AS in the USN is the converted Ohio class SSBN=>SSGNs which carry up to 154 Tomahawk missiles. More stealth and greater payload.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 01:06 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Posts: 11841
Location: Holding Jannat Ki Chabbi
http://www.voanews.com/content/panetta- ... 46345.html
Panetta: US to Put More Warships in Asia
Quote:
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says the United States will shift the bulk of its warships to the Asia-Pacific region in the coming years as part of a new military rebalancing to guarantee a strong and continued U.S. presence in the region. U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Saturday the United States will move 60 percent of its naval fleet to the Asia-Pacific by 2020. Currently, its fleet of 285 cruisers, destroyers, littoral combat ships and submarines is evenly divided between the Atlantic and Pacific theaters.
Panetta laid out the plan in a speech Saturday to regional allies at the 11th International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) Asia Security Summit: The Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore."Our approach to achieving the long-term goal in the Asia-Pacific is to stay firmly committed to a basic set of shared principles, principles that promote international rules and order to advance peace and security in the region," said Panetta.The country's scaled back defense budget will shrink Pentagon spending by $487 billion over the next decade, but Panetta said the United States will use its resources to enhance the technology of its weapons systems and replace old ships with new, more advanced ones.
No China challenge
He said the U.S. was also committed to building a healthy, stable and reliable military-to-military relationship with China.Beijing has balked at a larger U.S. presence in the rapidly developing region, but Panetta sought to dispel perceptions that the rebalancing is a way of challenging China's increasing power.
"I reject that view entirely. Our effort to renew and intensify our involvement in Asia is fully compatible, fully compatible with the development and growth of China," said Panetta.]
China has been seen as flexing its military muscle in the region in recent years, by among other things, stirring up territorial disputes over the resource-rich South China Sea. Although the Philippines, Vietnam and several other countries stake claims to the area, China claims it as its own.Panetta said China was a key to developing a peaceful, prosperous and secure Asia-Pacific by "respecting" the maritime rules that have governed the region for decades. Among other topics, Panetta underlined a key treaty alliance with South Korea, emphasizing that the U.S. military presence there would not be reduced despite a drop in the overall size of its ground forces in the coming years.On military-to-military ties, the U.S. defense secretary said the United States would enhance its cooperation with Thailand, which hosts an annual military exercise called Cobra Gold. Last year, the U.S. Pacific Command conducted 172 military exercises with more than 20 different countries and plans to increase the number and size of these events in the Asia-Pacific.China respects the presence and interests in the Asia-Pacific and hopes it will play a positive role in this region. We also hope the U.S. will respect China's interests and concerns in this region," said Liu.
The U.S. defense secretary will now go on to Vietnam and India. On the latter stop, he is expected to discuss ways to deepen the defense partnership with New Delhi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 01:13 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1260
Location: GSLV launch pad sweeping team
This, of course, is the same hero who made himself famous with:

Hindustan Times: US slips, calls India a ‘threat’
Quote:
Panetta put his foot in the mouth as he departed from prepared text during a speech at a shipyard in Connecticut, where he said, "we face the threats from rising powers -China, India, others - that we have to always be aware of and try to make sure that we always have sufficient force protection out there in the Pacific to make sure they know we're never going anywhere."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 01:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 7504
Location: India
The arsenal ship envisaged by US analysts would be complementary to a carriers air power.Its size would be around 20000t I imagine.Perhaps smaller than the Kirov class .Given the limitations (combat radius and payload) of naval strike fighters operating from the carrier,arsenal ships packed with long range missiles add to the fleet's firepower.It is more expensive putting such a weaponload into a sub.The Ohio's were a lucky conversion.Perhaps more SSBNs being pensioned off in the future can be similarly converted .New strategic "flying wing" stealth bomber designs are also being contemplated ,so that a variety of delivery platforms are available,not putting all eggs in one basket.

The IN's best option is to lease/buy a couple of Oscar (Kursk) class SSGNs,with their 20 large missile silos,each of which can hold at least 3 K-15s.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 04:32 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24
Posts: 952
@Philip ^^^. Once India has mastered and operationalized the K-15 based SSGN, there is nothing to stop us from using it as a bigger and bigger platform for the AS concept. Instead of cutting the hull like the Ohios, we can simply have silos that accommodate canisters (A4SLx16 or K-15 x 64 whatever).

This will be much cheaper and avoid any future Vik problems of underestimating conversion costs, underfunded shipyards that divert fund to building infrastructure and create delays.

The SSGN is at the heart of the US' AirSea Doctrine. Four of those big boys routinely turn up in Guam.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 04:35 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24
Posts: 952
PratikDas wrote:
This, of course, is the same hero who made himself famous with:

Hindustan Times: US slips, calls India a ‘threat’
Quote:
Panetta put his foot in the mouth as he departed from prepared text during a speech at a shipyard in Connecticut, where he said, "we face the threats from rising powers -China, India, others - that we have to always be aware of and try to make sure that we always have sufficient force protection out there in the Pacific to make sure they know we're never going anywhere."


The man puts in too many hours flying. I would not read anything into it. He misspoke not unlike Obama who called Nazi concentration camps in Poland "Polish Death Camps".

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... secretary/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 07:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 17500
Location: NowHere
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3AMB7ZFF3Q
@3:40, that is one of the shortest take off I have seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 09:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1260
Location: GSLV launch pad sweeping team
Cosmo_R wrote:
PratikDas wrote:
This, of course, is the same hero who made himself famous with:

Hindustan Times: US slips, calls India a ‘threat’


The man puts in too many hours flying. I would not read anything into it. He misspoke not unlike Obama who called Nazi concentration camps in Poland "Polish Death Camps".

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... secretary/


Your example is not analogous at all. The latter is a grammatical error while the former requires intent.

When denouncing Iran's nuclear program, I have never heard a single developed country denounce Iran and Israel's nuclear program in the same sentence. That is a proper analogy and I've never seen anyone misspeak like that.

Just so we're absolutely clear, after the November 2011 'misspeak' there was a second 'misspeak' in January 2012:

IBN Live: US Defence Secretary counts India as a challenge yet again
Quote:
Washington: For the second time in less than two months, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has said that the country is facing challenges from rising powers in Asia - China in particular and also includes India in 21st century.

He must fly a LOT. :roll:

How many times does the Defense Secretary of a superpower need to misspeak before India gets a hint?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 09:45 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 17500
Location: NowHere
I think he will fail to cross sword with a pawn.. and India will continue to focus on getting at least one of her pawn become a queen. Panetta's move is now documented, and well known. He can be ignored, as silly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 09:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1260
Location: GSLV launch pad sweeping team
Yes, I am glad the message leaked.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 15:26 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 10 Sep 2008 13:15
Posts: 120
Location: Middle East
Todays Times of India
Quote:
Navy creates new post to harness space-based capabilities
NEW DELHI: The Navy has created a new post of assistant chief of naval staff (communications, space and network-centric operations) with an eye on the future in which space-based military capabilities will play a critical role in all conflicts.

Rear Admiral Kishan K Pandey has taken over as the first ACNS (CSNCO) at Navy HQs here. The move also comes ahead of the planned launch of India's first military satellite, a naval communications and surveillance satellite, this year.

"Communications technology in tandem with space-based capabilities play a pivotal and transformational role in modern warfare. Recognising the critical need to harness these technological capabilities, the Indian Navy has been taking rapid steps to seamlessly integrate all combat platforms and terrestrial nodes through state-of-the art communications and space systems towards network-centric operations," said an officer.

"In addition to making platforms and infrastructure for network centricity, the Navy has also made organisational changes to create and efficiently manage the transition to seamless network-centric capabilities. The creation of the new post is a step in the process to migrate from a 'Platform Centric Navy' to a ' Network Enabled Navy'," he added.

For nearly five years, Rear Admiral Pandey, a communications and electronic warfare specialist, has been spearheading various prestigious projects at the Directorate of Naval Signals related with building the critical network-centric capabilities.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 16:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 7520
INS Teg

http://www.shipspotting.com/photos/big/ ... 571255.jpg
http://www.shipspotting.com/photos/big/ ... 571258.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 20:42 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31
Posts: 767
Philip wrote:
The arsenal ship envisaged by US analysts would be complementary to a carriers air power.Its size would be around 20000t I imagine.Perhaps smaller than the Kirov class .Given the limitations (combat radius and payload) of naval strike fighters operating from the carrier,arsenal ships packed with long range missiles add to the fleet's firepower.It is more expensive putting such a weaponload into a sub.The Ohio's were a lucky conversion.Perhaps more SSBNs being pensioned off in the future can be similarly converted .New strategic "flying wing" stealth bomber designs are also being contemplated ,so that a variety of delivery platforms are available,not putting all eggs in one basket.

The IN's best option is to lease/buy a couple of Oscar (Kursk) class SSGNs,with their 20 large missile silos,each of which can hold at least 3 K-15s.


There is a reason many in USN and RN resisted arming SSNs or converting SSBN for cruise missiles', it is waste of resources it is much cheaper still to use B-52 for this and plus they give away their location when they fire these missiles. Against any threat that has competent ASuW capability this strategy would be off very little use (what will this modified super Oscar do if P-3 Orion happens to be flying around while it is firing these missiles) , unless the subs where to operate under IAF cover.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 20:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 May 2009 23:07
Posts: 302
Lets put the events in better order so that it makes more sense :D

1. For the second time in less than two months, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has said that the country is facing challenges from rising powers in Asia - China in particular and also includes India in 21st century.
2. Panetta: US to Put More Warships in Asia
3. US Eyes Bangladesh for basing USN 7th Fleet

I don't think its a "misspeak'', rather they are showing their true colors/intent :D
Afterall he is not a junior level/irresponsible person.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 21:45 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24
Posts: 952
@PratikDas^^^: "How many times does the Defense Secretary of a superpower need to misspeak before India gets a hint?"

I give up, how many?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 21:48 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1260
Location: GSLV launch pad sweeping team
Once is one too many. You're welcome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2012 22:07 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Posts: 1260
Location: GSLV launch pad sweeping team
Sameer_shelavale, the choice of Darwin in Australia, for positioning upto 3000 troops, the availability of Diego Garcia and finally Bangladesh would provide a triangulation of points for regular US naval traffic.


Last edited by PratikDas on 04 Jun 2012 02:39, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2012 01:25 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Posts: 12090
PratikDas wrote:
Sameer_shelvale, the choice of Darwin in Australia, for positioning upto 3000 troops, the availability of Diego Garcia and finally Bangladesh would provide a triangulation of points for regular US naval traffic.


Add Qatar for the 4th fleet to this combination and they have matrix on the Indo China ocean region.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2012 02:34 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jun 2005 10:26
Posts: 1218
Location: Atop Orthanc, cursing, "Damn it where are those backfires??"
Philip wrote:
Nice idea,but the cost of refitting an old warship with a suspect hull is far less cost-effective than designing and bulding a new air defence cruiser which has a considerable weaponload of SAMs of various types,plus some LR SSMs and ASW helos.The vulnerability of carriers in today's world has led some analysts to advoate a return to the "arsenal ship" concept,where a battlecruiser sized surface ship ,stealthily shaped and equipped with hundreds of missiles in VL silos ,would complement both the strike force of a carrier task force,but also fleet air defence and BMD defence as well.


I agree with this - it is time India starts thinking BIG. About 3 Cruisers @ 15000 tons equipped with 96 Barak ER/AAD/PAD + 16 K15/Nirbhay + Brahmos/Klub, plus a squad of long ranged Bombers (Tu-22 will do). Need the ability to take the fight into the enemy's backyard. SSGNs and SSNs as well.

3 X CVF
3 X CG
8 X Destroyers
16 X Frigates
30 X Corvettes

I see this as the core surface combatant group for the IN circa 2030. I believe this is bound to happen as India's role in the world grows. The missile cruisers will come after the rest are consolidated and indigeneous ship building skill are well established. A typical CBG will consist of 1 Carrier + 1 Cruiser + 2 Destroyers + 1 Frigate + Support + SSN.

The submarine fleet will increasingly focus on more SSNs and SSBNs (at least a dozen combined) and about 12-15 SSKs. Large numbers of MPAs are a must as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2012 05:37 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2011 09:42
Posts: 706
Location: Tibet / Balochistan
Cross post from Indian Space Program Discussion. Navy to get its own dedicated comm sat this month.

Roperia wrote:
It seems the GSLV is ready! :)

First satellite for armed forces to be ready in a month | TOI

Quote:
NEW DELHI: The armed forces are finally set to get their first-ever dedicated military satellite, a naval surveillance and communications one, as part of their long-standing quest to effectively harness the final frontier of space.

The geo-stationary naval satellite has "already been shipped out'' for its launch that will take place "within a month or so", government sources said.

A not-too-subtle indicator of the space event in the offing was also the creation of a new post of assistant chief of naval staff (communications, space and network-centric operations) at the Navy head-quarters over the weekend.

Though tight-lipped about the "over-the-sea" satellite's launch, the Navy on Sunday said Rear Admiral Kishan K Pandey, a communications and electronic warfare specialist, had taken over as the new ACNS (CSNCO) in keeping with its endeavour to transform from a "platform-centric Navy'' to a "network-enabled Navy''.

The satellite, with an over 1,000 nautical mile footprint over the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) stretching from Africa's east coast right till Malacca Strait, will enable the Navy to network all its warships, submarines and aircraft with operational centres ashore through high-speed data-links.

There is an urgent need to keep real-time tabs over the rapidly-militarizing IOR, where China is increasingly expanding its strategic footprint, as well as on troop movements, missile silos, military installations and airbases across land borders.

The long-delayed naval satellite is to be followed by ones for the Army and IAF for "over-the-land use''. In absence of dedicated satellites, the armed forces have so far depended on "dual-use'' Indian satellites as well as lease of transponders on foreign ones for their navigation, communication, surveillance and reconnaissance purposes.

There are around 300 dedicated or dual-use military satellites orbiting around the earth at present, with the US operating over 50% of them, followed by Russia and China.

China, in particular, is pursuing an extensive military-space programme that even extends to advanced ASAT (anti-satellite) capabilities with "direct-ascent" missiles, hit-to-kill "kinetic" and directed-energy laser weapons.

DRDO, on its part, contends it can quickly fashion ASAT weapons, if required, by marrying the propulsion system of the over 5,000-km Agni-V missile tested recently with the "kill vehicle" of the almost-ready two-tier BMD ( ballistic missile system) system it has developed.

But India is still some distance away from effective ASAT capabilities. The government is also not yet willing to establish a tri-Service Aerospace Command on the lines of the Strategic Forces Command which handles nuclear weapons.

The naval satellite is a step in the right direction. The Navy has already tested the "ship-end'' of the new space era dawning through the massive Tropex (theatre-level readiness and operational exercise) held in January-February. The network-centric operations were tried with both the Eastern and Western Fleets, backed by fighters, spy drones and helicopters, out at sea.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4662 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 117  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Parikshit, pgbhat and 24 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group