Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
DrRatnadip
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 31 Dec 2016 00:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DrRatnadip » 04 Jul 2017 12:28

ArjunPandit wrote:^^Sadly, but in a non-war envorionment that is how capabilities are created rather than the HAL/DRDO style.


Babudom and bean counting mentality is more responsible delays in defence sector than actual lack of commitment from reserchers.. There is palpable apathy towards providing adequate funding for critical national projects..

As an example I would like to share my personal experience in govt sector.. We wanted to buy an additional laparoscope for surgery dept .. It took 3 years from submitting requirement to actualy getting equipment.. Tendering process was repeated thrice for technical reasons.. mobilizing adequate funds in govt sector is big headache.. :evil:

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 04 Jul 2017 20:51


vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby vina » 04 Jul 2017 21:44

Chinese are smart. They picked up the Varyag hull ( a true carrier hull) and built it out and along with that they went for the Flanker. We went and bought out an excuse of a carrier and paid good money for a sub par plane called the Mig 29K that even the Russians had passed over in favour of the flanker.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 04 Jul 2017 21:51

I think the Russian did the opposite i.e. ordered the MiG-29K which would be the most modern platform with their Navy. They operate a full squadron of new MiG-29Ks.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 04 Jul 2017 22:34

brar_w wrote:I think the Russian did the opposite i.e. ordered the MiG-29K which would be the most modern platform with their Navy. They operate a full squadron of new MiG-29Ks.



Russians choosed the SU-33 in direct competition against the MiG-29K in 1995 -- when they had both the Kuz and the Varyag (under construction.) They ordered the MiG-29K only AFTER we extended welfare to MiG in 2009. The Kuz embarked only four 29Ks to Syria vs 8 Su-33s.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33727
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 04 Jul 2017 22:37

The Su-33 is a failure. That is why the Russkies chose MiG 29s

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 04 Jul 2017 22:41

Chola, the most recent Russian Navy naval fighters ordered have been the 20 or so operational MiG-29Ks (Plus the trainers). They haven't ordered any more advanced naval fighters of late and are unlikely to order a modernized Su-33s in the near future. This makes the MiG-29K, essentially the path forward for them unless they change course. But then they aren't really investing in fighters for Naval Aviation nor do they maintain a signifiant carrier capability out of their one carrier.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15834
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby NRao » 04 Jul 2017 22:45

chola wrote:
brar_w wrote:I think the Russian did the opposite i.e. ordered the MiG-29K which would be the most modern platform with their Navy. They operate a full squadron of new MiG-29Ks.



Russians choosed the SU-33 in direct competition against the MiG-29K in 1995 -- when they had both the Kuz and the Varyag (under construction.) They ordered the MiG-29K only AFTER we extended welfare to MiG in 2009. The Kuz embarked only four 29Ks to Syria vs 8 Su-33s.


The RuN preferred the Su, but they opted for the MiG-29K ONLY because it would have been more expensive to restart the Su line. And they thought they could work through any problems they may face with the MiG-29K. Today they really have neither to talk about. If they can find the funds the naval version of the PAK-FA should be the best option. But ......... They are finding funds to be a very expensive alternative too.

Karan M
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 14485
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Karan M » 05 Jul 2017 00:15

brar_w wrote:I think the Russian did the opposite i.e. ordered the MiG-29K which would be the most modern platform with their Navy. They operate a full squadron of new MiG-29Ks.



lets see
radar issues
fbw issues
structural issues
hydraulics problens
simulators dont work

i guess they look pretty

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 05 Jul 2017 00:30

Karan, I was are of these issues but for good or bad the Russian Navy bought MiG-29Ks instead of new Su-33s. The only brand new squadron worth of fighters they have purchased for carrier ops are the MiG-29Ks. Perhaps it was to give some work to factories producing these aircraft or it was because producing the Su-33 would have been more expensive given flanker factories had already been fulfilling large number of domestic and export orders. I don't know. But my point was that they are sticking with it for now given their relatively tiny Naval fighter footprint and one carrier Navy.

YashG
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 33
Joined: 22 Apr 2017 00:10

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby YashG » 05 Jul 2017 01:27

Guys is it only me or more people here think that Chinese mil hardware choices have something to do with their war philosophy - winning a war without fighting it. PLAN's varyag is not a war grade ship but they still bought it - because in a non war environment varyag is as good as any. Most of the Chinese mil hardware - their planes, ships & missiles have super awesome specs. If its chinese you can expect all kinds of numerical boast points but we rarely see their planes at Airshows.

And of all their amazing weaponry - most of it is not getting sold - that for a country that lives by its exports. And here someone else thinks like me -
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-military-getting-strong-so-why-arent-chinese-weapons-17746
and then again -
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-simple-reason-the-world-isnt-buying-all-chinas-fancy-18857

This doesnt mean that we're doing any better - we're much wose off when it comes to export but atleast we're ready offer our best for exports & extrenal scrutiny ( Think Dhruv )

Most of the Chinese choices also seem number oriented. Say MKI ( less than MKK in numbers but still it brings together the best of Russia, European & Indian tech.) Reverse engineering is good - but it also spooks suppliers who otherwise might have allowed a cross-pollination of systems from a diverse set of suppliers leading to convergence into fairly well rounded systems.

I know we lack on numbers - but some of our systems are examples of great assimilation ( say jugaad :D ). I dont see the same thought process on Chinese side - again is it me or others also assess so.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35362
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby SaiK » 05 Jul 2017 01:28

DrRatnadip wrote:China expected to overtake West in future air operations with big data, AI: expert

According to Chinese expert speed and agility are no longer important.Probably because super duper Chinese 5th gen jet is unable to achieve it.. :P

stupidity.. the biggest data is the current situational awareness. if that is ignored, rest is a toast. big data is a buzz word for missed opportunities in fixing the awareness problem in RT systems. I am big, I know now if, on my dash, I can lock the pinpoint targets.(defeating stealth matters as well)

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15834
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby NRao » 05 Jul 2017 01:54

DrRatnadip wrote:http://en.people.cn/mobile/new/content.html?cI=1002&nI=9236519&aT=m


China expected to overtake West in future air operations with big data, AI: expert

According to Chinese expert speed and agility are no longer important..Probably because super duper chinese 5th gen jet is unable to achive it.. :P


It had nothing to with "5th gen". And I would not laugh at what he stated. Hope India is taking Big Data and AI seriously (they are in the commercial space). Things in that space have got dirt cheap and if India were to continue this lazy approach to procurement, India could be in deep trouble.

What the Chinese have yet to demonstrate is the ability to put everything together.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1003
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 05 Jul 2017 03:17

vina wrote:Chinese are smart. They picked up the Varyag hull ( a true carrier hull) and built it out and along with that they went for the Flanker. We went and bought out an excuse of a carrier and paid good money for a sub par plane called the Mig 29K that even the Russians had passed over in favour of the flanker.



I am sorry the Mig-29K is able to haul much more into the air (compared to its weight) than the Su-33.
The Su-33 was a dead end research and dev project. Basically as the Su-27 family exploded into variations , the Su-33 was accepted without thinking too much long term.

Without a cat , the Su33 was dead before it was born.

The 29K is a better bang for buck.
Have a look at those videos and tell me how much are they hauling into the air (in terms of weapons and load outs)

We so need CATs.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 05 Jul 2017 03:25

The could have cloned the MiG-29K as well, but I guess they were thinking ahead and around the time they chose the aircraft they were also drawing up plans to spend a lot of money on their catapult development program.

schinnas
BRFite
Posts: 1241
Joined: 11 Jun 2009 09:44

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby schinnas » 05 Jul 2017 03:31

NRao wrote:
DrRatnadip wrote:http://en.people.cn/mobile/new/content.html?cI=1002&nI=9236519&aT=m


China expected to overtake West in future air operations with big data, AI: expert

According to Chinese expert speed and agility are no longer important..Probably because super duper chinese 5th gen jet is unable to achive it.. :P


It had nothing to with "5th gen". And I would not laugh at what he stated. Hope India is taking Big Data and AI seriously (they are in the commercial space). Things in that space have got dirt cheap and if India were to continue this lazy approach to procurement, India could be in deep trouble.

What the Chinese have yet to demonstrate is the ability to put everything together.


Chinese are actually ahead of India in putting together large scale computation, big data analytics and AI. Their weather forecast, simulation modeling systems are much more stronger and evolved than us. They also have a larger applied mathematics oriented engineers than India. Cyber security and hacking is another area where they are much more more ahead of India. Networked warfare and cyber warfare are both areas where China can crete a big lead over us if we dont wake up and address the talent problem. It is not a funding problem but a talent problem for us. Government can only solve it with more and more private participation.

While there are several Indians with expertise in big data and AI, most of them don't live in India and the few that do live in India usually work for US or European countries. The ones that work for Indian companies like flipkart, etc., are minuscule by comparison. Things are very slowly changing but not fast enough. Poor quality of education outside of select few colleges is the second biggest issue after brain drain.

In a future with mass manufactured drones that are going to cost a fraction of a 5th gen fighter, it is important for a country to be strong in drone technology, AI and sensors that make the drones much more impactful than super fancy jet engine that can help the drone do a dog fight. A drone with very good sensors, high res camera and an on-board AI computing system that can identify objects and make intelligent decisions is far more cost effective and value for money than a 5th gen jet that can do somersaults better than others.

20 years from now, it is reasonable to expect that drones equipped with best of breed sensors, AI decisioning systems and LGB / missiles and stealth features will form the bulk of any modern airforce.

Just my 2c.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 05 Jul 2017 09:33

Khalsa wrote:
vina wrote:Chinese are smart. They picked up the Varyag hull ( a true carrier hull) and built it out and along with that they went for the Flanker. We went and bought out an excuse of a carrier and paid good money for a sub par plane called the Mig 29K that even the Russians had passed over in favour of the flanker.



I am sorry the Mig-29K is able to haul much more into the air (compared to its weight) than the Su-33.
The Su-33 was a dead end research and dev project. Basically as the Su-27 family exploded into variations , the Su-33 was accepted without thinking too much long term.

Without a cat , the Su33 was dead before it was born.



Let's see,

1) STOBAR is a bigger dead end than a navalized Flanker period -- no matter good the aircraft, STOBAR forces it to launch with a penalty,

2) The MiG-29 is without doubt a dead end -- the MiG-35 notwithstanding. There is a reason the IAF chose the SU-30 for the MKI.

So what do you get when you make decision to go for a MiG-29 on the basis that it supposedly performs better on a STOBAR? (Even its advantages on STOBAR is debatable.)

The Flanker is a far better base platform. It is without doubt far superior to the MiG-29. When CAT launched, you can pretty much compared the two planes by their land variants -- the MiG is inferior by wide margin in every aspect. So the moment you go to catapults the MiG-29K becomes a Shit choice with a capital S.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 05 Jul 2017 09:54

For those who feel that the MiG-29K was the IN's first choice, please read Admiral Arun Prakash:

http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/prakash.pdf

the Indian Navy was seriously examining the Russians’ offer of their 1980s’ vintage helicopter/VTOL carrier Admiral Gorshkov, and a choice had to be made of a suitable aircraft. The obvious options were the Su-33 (a derivative of the Su-27K selected for operation from the 67,500-ton carrier, Kuznetsov), and the Mig-29K. An evaluation revealed that both aircraft would meet our operational requirements. The Su-33, though more capable, being dimensionally larger would not only not fit in the smaller hangar of the 44,500-ton Gorshkov, but would have marginal wing-tip clearances from the island structure during deck launch. It was therefore decided that the Mig-29K would equip the Gorshkov, to be renamed INS Vikramaditya in Indian service.



The IN acknowledged the SU-33 to be the platform (just like the Russians did when they initially chose it over the MiG. But we were tied to it because of the Vikramaditya's shitty design as a carrier onlee.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 05 Jul 2017 10:02

If I were Rajah (Rajah, not a mere babu) of HAL, I would develop carrier versions of the MKI to fly off both Vikrant and the upcoming CATOBAR Vishal. The Russians can f themselves if they complain since they allow the chinis to rip off as many Flanker variants as they want.

DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 854
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 05 Jul 2017 10:23

Mr. Ma Weiming, a top scientist involved in a variety of high level military projects gave a talk at the University of Shanghai recently. He mentioned that Xi Jinping personally ordered a halt in the construction of the next carrier to allow the EMALS vs. Steam competition to finish. He says that the decision will be made by next month, and he's confident that EMALS will win out. But then again EMALS is his baby. Previous reports indicated that the next carrier would be fit with steam catapults because it was ready first and the parts were already ordered, but apparently now they're willing to shelf those plans due to the advantages of EMALS.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15875
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chetak » 05 Jul 2017 10:28

chola wrote:For those who feel that the MiG-29K was the IN's first choice, please read Admiral Arun Prakash:

http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/prakash.pdf

the Indian Navy was seriously examining the Russians’ offer of their 1980s’ vintage helicopter/VTOL carrier Admiral Gorshkov, and a choice had to be made of a suitable aircraft. The obvious options were the Su-33 (a derivative of the Su-27K selected for operation from the 67,500-ton carrier, Kuznetsov), and the Mig-29K. An evaluation revealed that both aircraft would meet our operational requirements. The Su-33, though more capable, being dimensionally larger would not only not fit in the smaller hangar of the 44,500-ton Gorshkov, but would have marginal wing-tip clearances from the island structure during deck launch. It was therefore decided that the Mig-29K would equip the Gorshkov, to be renamed INS Vikramaditya in Indian service.



The IN acknowledged the SU-33 to be the platform (just like the Russians did when they initially chose it over the MiG. But we were tied to it because of the Vikramaditya's shitty design as a carrier onlee.


the size of the lift was the limiting factor.

The Su just did not fit into the lift, even though it was the preferred choice.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 05 Jul 2017 10:32

DavidD wrote:Mr. Ma Weiming, a top scientist involved in a variety of high level military projects gave a talk at the University of Shanghai recently. He mentioned that Xi Jinping personally ordered a halt in the construction of the next carrier to allow the EMALS vs. Steam competition to finish. He says that the decision will be made by next month, and he's confident that EMALS will win out. But then again EMALS is his baby. Previous reports indicated that the next carrier would be fit with steam catapults because it was ready first and the parts were already ordered, but apparently now they're willing to shelf those plans due to the advantages of EMALS.


So they stopped construction on the Type 002 for EMALS?

Good luck, Chinidude. I wish you the same success and timelines as the USS Ford.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 05 Jul 2017 11:12

True,but what were the carriers available? NO western ones just the KIev class cruiser-carriers and the Varyag.The Varyag was in such a sad state that we rejected it.There was a post quoting a Chinese naval constructor who worked on the Varyag.He said that no plans were available,it was a piece of floating junk.China took years to literally rebuild it and costs have never been mentioned.They had to have a working carrier whose design they could copy for later additions to the fleet.Money was no problem. It's why the IN chose the Gorshkov. The point now is rectifying the supposed flaws in the 29Ks and how soon can they be sorted out by the OEM.Since the RuN is also acquiring new ones,surely the problems would've been rectified in that batch,which could replace those aircraft in our inventory which need rectifying.
Otherwise,whatever penalties,etc.,in the agreement must be enforced. We reportedly did so with the first Talwar batch,when there was some software glitch reg. a missile system.The VikA today is not a "sh*tty" vessel. It has enormous offensive capability,far more than the Viraat.

Secondly,"developing" carrier versions of the SU-33 by India alone is simply superfluous,as the design and aircraft already exists.Russia,in comparative exercises felt that MIG-29Ks were better options for now,until their naval variant of the T-50 5th-gen fighter was available.IAC-1 will be too small to accommodate a significant number of SU-33s even if they were available. For argument's sake,even if the MIG-29K was felt later on too maintenance intensive,a second naval fighter can be sought,the Rafale-M being the most relevant (expensive too) in view of the IAF also acquiring it ,reducing support/spares ,weaponry,trg. costs.

This debate can continue in another td.,this one is dealing with the Chinese threat.Their threat today is two-fold,on the ground in the Himalayas and in the IOR with their sudden increase in warships and subs timed to coincide with their aggro in the mountains. The IN requires LRMP,MRP aircraft,plus max. subs operational to stave off the challenge.Sometime ago,we were offered a couple of Kilos/Amurs on lease after the SR tragedy.This would be the fastest way to acquire an interim boost to sub numbers until new suns are inducted. The issue of torpedoes for the Scorpenes must also be taken immediately.Look how our dithering in the MOD affects us in a crisis,suitably orchestrated by the PRC well-knowing our current shortages both in eqpt. and ammo/munitions.

DrRatnadip
BRFite
Posts: 326
Joined: 31 Dec 2016 00:40

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DrRatnadip » 05 Jul 2017 12:00

NRao wrote:
DrRatnadip wrote:http://en.people.cn/mobile/new/content.html?cI=1002&nI=9236519&aT=m


China expected to overtake West in future air operations with big data, AI: expert

According to Chinese expert speed and agility are no longer important..Probably because super duper chinese 5th gen jet is unable to achive it.. :P


It had nothing to with "5th gen". And I would not laugh at what he stated. Hope India is taking Big Data and AI seriously (they are in the commercial space). Things in that space have got dirt cheap and if India were to continue this lazy approach to procurement, India could be in deep trouble.

What the Chinese have yet to demonstrate is the ability to put everything together.


Point taken saar.. In last few days sdre yindoo in me has developed acute aversion to anything chinese.. :twisted:

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6018
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby vina » 05 Jul 2017 12:51

chetak wrote:the size of the lift was the limiting factor.

The Su just did not fit into the lift, even though it was the preferred choice.


That IS the point. By selecting the POS , the burnt out hulk called the Kiev / Adm Gorshkov/VikAd whatever it is called , we have limited ourselves to constraints of the VikAd in terms of the air arm.

The exact same constraints and clearances of the hanger deck of the PoS - VikAd leads to calls to have the LCA Navy to have a folding vertical stabiliser and rudder (from Saraswat's speech/ venting posted here), "rejection" of the E-2 Hawkeye (surely it can't fit into to the Vik'Ads lift/hanger clearances with the antenna on top) etc.

The VikAd is the albatross that will constrain our choices. It is an artificial one . The VikAd itself is (by way of unique machinery and stuff, including aircraft) is a maintenance hog that will suck up a huge amount of the Navy's maintenance and operating budget. IT is an operating nightmare.

We would have been FAR better off in buying out the Varyag (if at all hull building time was a constraint) and used Russia's help in completing it with western machinery (like GE turbines like in the Vikrant ), instead of the failure prone Russian/Ukranian origins stuff.

Too late . Too much water under the bridge. Time to can the VikAd and flush it down within the next 10 years and cut our losses there. Maybe selling it back to Russia is the best home (tell them to take it back along with the Mig 29K) once the Vikrant is operational and we have our own LCA Navy (hopefully the Navy sees sense) and we build copies of it.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15875
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chetak » 05 Jul 2017 13:02

vina wrote:
chetak wrote:the size of the lift was the limiting factor.

The Su just did not fit into the lift, even though it was the preferred choice.


That IS the point. By selecting the POS , the burnt out hulk called the Kiev / Adm Gorshkov/VikAd whatever it is called , we have limited ourselves to constraints of the VikAd in terms of the air arm.

The exact same constraints and clearances of the hanger deck of the PoS - VikAd leads to calls to have the LCA Navy to have a folding vertical stabiliser and rudder (from Saraswat's speech/ venting posted here), "rejection" of the E-2 Hawkeye (surely it can't fit into to the Vik'Ads lift/hanger clearances with the antenna on top) etc.

The VikAd is the albatross that will constrain our choices. It is an artificial one . The VikAd itself is (by way of unique machinery and stuff, including aircraft) is a maintenance hog that will suck up a huge amount of the Navy's maintenance and operating budget. IT is an operating nightmare.

We would have been FAR better off in buying out the Varyag (if at all hull building time was a constraint) and used Russia's help in completing it with western machinery (like GE turbines like in the Vikrant ), instead of the failure prone Russian/Ukranian origins stuff.

Too late . Too much water under the bridge. Time to can the VikAd and flush it down within the next 10 years and cut our losses there. Maybe selling it back to Russia is the best home (tell them to take it back along with the Mig 29K) once the Vikrant is operational and we have our own LCA Navy (hopefully the Navy sees sense) and we build copies of it.


we needed a carrier and this was the only one that was available to us in the whole wide world, period.

It will have to do until we build our own. no amount of analysis or criticism can get us over that simple fact.

Its like owning a house. In the first instance, unless you are stinking rich, get/build what you can afford/is available at that time and something you can do with.

If you read palms, consult astrologers and look for the ideal and dream house, fully vastu compliant and meeting every little need of the wife, kids, relatives and critics, rest assured that you will never ever build/acquire the house.

later, when the pressure is off and resources are available then plan and get the dream house.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 05 Jul 2017 13:12

We have to be thankful for what we have.No point in "ifs and buts" now.IAC-1 will in a few years be with us and we will have two carriers operating the same bird,giving us at least one carrier in a crisis.With tankers available,MKIs and our P-8Is can extend their patrol time and combat radius in the IOR significantly,using our island bases,plus the new base facilities we're supposedly establishing in friendly nations in the IOR.BMos armed MKIs will be particularly lethal,lighter BMos versions,L/2/3 whatever expected in two+ years time.This maybe just one additional reason why the PRC is in such a bleedin' hurry to start a spat in the mountains. With the Bears retd.,and P-8Is capable of only carrying Harpoon,the air-launched anti-ship hreat iss not so severe.Remember that Pak has been using Harpoons for a long time now and would've surely passed it on to the Chinese.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2145
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby tsarkar » 05 Jul 2017 13:33

chetak wrote:
chola wrote:http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/prakash.pdf
the size of the lift was the limiting factor. The Su just did not fit into the lift, even though it was the preferred choice.

Chetak Ji, my understanding was that Su-33 couldn't take off with reasonable fuel/payload in that short take-off & landing length, though I am not as well informed as you or Admiral Prakash.

Lifts are custom built and even Gorshkov got enlarged lifts vis-a-vis original Yak-38 ones.

Original Lifts
Image

New Lifts
Image

For both amidship and rear lifts, there is space in the hanger for accommodating an even enlarged lift.

Image

Image
Last edited by tsarkar on 05 Jul 2017 13:41, edited 1 time in total.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15875
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chetak » 05 Jul 2017 13:37

Philip wrote:We have to be thankful for what we have.No point in "ifs and buts" now.IAC-1 will in a few years be with us and we will have two carriers operating the same bird,giving us at least one carrier in a crisis.With tankers available,MKIs and our P-8Is can extend their patrol time and combat radius in the IOR significantly,using our island bases,plus the new base facilities we're supposedly establishing in friendly nations in the IOR.BMos armed MKIs will be particularly lethal,lighter BMos versions,L/2/3 whatever expected in two+ years time.This maybe just one additional reason why the PRC is in such a bleedin' hurry to start a spat in the mountains. With the Bears retd.,and P-8Is capable of only carrying Harpoon,the air-launched anti-ship hreat iss not so severe.Remember that Pak has been using Harpoons for a long time now and would've surely passed it on to the Chinese.


We were also in a fait accompli position of having all our eggs in the russian basket.

The refit was a good idea but it should have been done in an Ukrainian yard.

Done as it was, in a russian yard it was a complete disaster with many conditions that hobbled us further. This is one of the main reasons that we have now derisked and are buying from multiple sources like the US, France, Israel and of course Russia too.

Live and learn, no??

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60371
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 05 Jul 2017 14:56

I think nikolayev shipyard in ukraine long ago withered away from building large warships. what is the largest warship it has built for ukraine since 1991 ?

so that was really not an option.

they have 1 frigate and 1 corvette. the frigate was delivered in 1993
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian ... hniy_(U130)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60371
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Singha » 05 Jul 2017 15:00

the kind of vessels they are building, i have seen being built at Udupi shipyard on our west coast

http://smart-maritime.com/upload/images ... e/img9.jpg

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 05 Jul 2017 21:46

chetak wrote:
we needed a carrier and this was the only one that was available to us in the whole wide world, period.



Why did we need a carrier just then and there? It always bugged me that we had to rush to put the Viraat out to pasture and even if we had to retire Viraat and needed take time to develop a proper carrier what was the threat at the time that made this impossible?

When we bought the hook, line and sinker on the PoS Gorshkov in 2004, there was no chini carrier in sight for another decade.

We live in an incredibly weak military neighborhood and that includes Pakistan and Cheen. This is not Europe or even East Asia where every other country is a France, Germany or Japan. We run the damned SAARC for goodness' sakes!

Don't think the $3 billion and time effort we spent on the russian PoS did not impact the Navy timelines. Funds had always be scarcest for the naval arm of our miltary. We could have started IAC-1 a decade sooner.

This stupid dhoti shivering "we need the best off the shelf phoren maal available right NOW" mentality because of namely TSP (crushed 3 times) and Cheen (little Emperors who had not fought in 4 decades) has written off all of our natural geo-political advantages as a dominant power in an exveedingly weak neighborhood.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33727
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby shiv » 05 Jul 2017 22:05

As per a "collectors item" copy of Air International (April 2017) that I have the Su-33 was given up when India selected the MiG 29 and China obtained a version to copy as the J-15 from Ukraine. The footprint had been an when the MiG 29 became a competitor.

Nice (in a way) to have competition in one's own country no?

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1003
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Khalsa » 06 Jul 2017 15:33

Welcome move by our dear chinese brothers ;-)

https://twitter.com/NewsX/status/882642222847377408

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Marten » 06 Jul 2017 15:56

They are already allowing pilgrims through the closer HP route. The Nathu La route is literally across the breadth of Nepal!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17659
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby Philip » 06 Jul 2017 19:51

History lesson.Vikrant was kaput. Viraat already a second-hand vessel though in good condition.I remember an admiral involved in the acquisition,speaking to his chief about the excellent state of the vessel just prior to its arrival in India.WE never expected it to soldier along for as long as she did. The Gorky/VikA acquisition was itself delayed,in fact the decision to buy her took aeons! These days the IN was the "cinderella" of the services,making do with crusts of bread and (sea) water.The sagacious chiefs of that era nursed the service along as best they could and had as their goal indigenisation being the only way that they could afford replacements for WW2 era vessels,plus some very valuable assistance from the Soviets providing ships and subs at "friendship" prices.Post USSR,the situ deteriorated.During Adm. Ramdas' period,no new ships appeared at all! It was called the "lost decade".Even maintenance was a problem. One sr. officer/friend in EC,said that we would experience severe problems supporting the "red fleet". Not much later INS Andamans floundered during an exercise,just before Adm. Ramdas ,then FOC-in-C EC took over as CNS too!

Nevertheless,like a phoenix rising from the rust,the Gorky has been transformed into the VikA and long may she serve us ...with great distinction...esp. against the Muddle Kingdom!


DavidD
BRFite
Posts: 854
Joined: 23 Jun 2010 04:08

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby DavidD » 07 Jul 2017 15:39

chola wrote:
DavidD wrote:Mr. Ma Weiming, a top scientist involved in a variety of high level military projects gave a talk at the University of Shanghai recently. He mentioned that Xi Jinping personally ordered a halt in the construction of the next carrier to allow the EMALS vs. Steam competition to finish. He says that the decision will be made by next month, and he's confident that EMALS will win out. But then again EMALS is his baby. Previous reports indicated that the next carrier would be fit with steam catapults because it was ready first and the parts were already ordered, but apparently now they're willing to shelf those plans due to the advantages of EMALS.


So they stopped construction on the Type 002 for EMALS?

Good luck, Chinidude. I wish you the same success and timelines as the USS Ford.


Yes, the project is being delayed, and if EMALS is chosen there'll be further delays as that'll require some redesign of the ship. The EMALS itself is probably in pretty advanced stages, as rear admiral Ma said back in 2011 that his team had completed the design of EMALS. It was installed on land for testing quite a few years ago, and Mr. Ma has been quite vocal in that he believes his system is superior to the American design.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1677
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby chola » 07 Jul 2017 15:51

DavidD wrote:
chola wrote:
So they stopped construction on the Type 002 for EMALS?

Good luck, Chinidude. I wish you the same success and timelines as the USS Ford.


Yes, the project is being delayed, and if EMALS is chosen there'll be further delays as that'll require some redesign of the ship. The EMALS itself is probably in pretty advanced stages, as rear admiral Ma said back in 2011 that his team had completed the design of EMALS. It was installed on land for testing quite a few years ago, and Mr. Ma has been quite vocal in that he believes his system is superior to the American design.


I applaud the decision. Steam stinks. Delay the Type 002 for as long as you want. Take your time with it. Get things right.

We'll both end up with EMALS carriers around the same time :D

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: China Military Watch - Sept' 2016

Postby brar_w » 07 Jul 2017 16:07

DavidD wrote:
chola wrote:
So they stopped construction on the Type 002 for EMALS?

Good luck, Chinidude. I wish you the same success and timelines as the USS Ford.


Yes, the project is being delayed, and if EMALS is chosen there'll be further delays as that'll require some redesign of the ship. The EMALS itself is probably in pretty advanced stages, as rear admiral Ma said back in 2011 that his team had completed the design of EMALS. It was installed on land for testing quite a few years ago, and Mr. Ma has been quite vocal in that he believes his system is superior to the American design.


One has completed more than 500 launches of all class aircraft (F-18, F-35, EA-18, E-2D, C-2, T-45..), is installed on a carrier and has launched dead loads of off it and is on the way to launching real aircraft over the next few months. It is also ordered for 3 carriers (CVN-78,79 and 80). The other, well is in an obscure state of development and isn't even seen on the aircraft carrier (s) under construction. So.. :rotfl:


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anoop, Atmavik, Ganimi_Kawa, gauravsharma, kaushik m, ravikr, rohiths, schinnas and 56 guests