Thoughts on India's aircraft carriers?

>>34499749

My thought is that people are going to make fun of it for having a ramp and because I don't know ships, I have no idea why that's supposed to be bad.

>>34499749
why does india put itself at the mercy of arms trade deals

All the mixtures of weapons produce innumerable numbers of munition types, so why india, why?

>>34499792
Israel can't afford to not sell India Tejas components. They're not in the same grapple of multiple alliances as Russia.

>>34499816
>not building your own shit

all this foreign buying will bite you in the ass, at least china made sure they could make their own copies at home

>>34499749

>but India has a much longer and stronger naval tradition, especially regarding logistics, air wings and carrier operations.

If by that you mean a tradition of absolutely terrible maintenance standards, mass accidents in harbour, poor worksmanship, seamanship thats globally mocked and being a complete logistical mess of various systems and very little power projection...

The Chicoms can get annoying, sure. But they are a world ahead of the Indians right now.

>>34499749
It has a very impressive poop deck.

File: whell.png (20KB, 560x407px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 560x407px

>>34499749
why does India need an aircraft carrier?

>>34500037
they had carriers since the 60s and in combat irrc

>>34500037
India and China are most likely going to be major world powers in the next 100 years. Remember how Russia and the United States had massive populations in the WW2 era compared to other countries? Well China and India are going to be that in the 21st century. They're probably going to start looking for resources to support that population, and they'll need a military to back up their ambitions for more territory.

>>34499829
India is building their own shit now

>>34500037
>need

SHALL

>>34500088
BE

File: rakesh.jpg (105KB, 592x720px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 592x720px

>>34500080
>India
>major world power
the horror

>>34500100
POO

>>34500103
That's what Britain and Spain thought 100 years ago when anyone suggested the US would one day become a major power.

File: 1464790806888.png (93KB, 1142x971px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1142x971px

well the chinese have a modernised version of the second worst carrier to ever sail(Admr Kuznetsov)

meanwhile India have the worst carrier ever made(the Kiev class) refitted to be a smaller shittier version of the Admiral Kuznetsov

I'm going to say china marginally

>>34500116
Not even a yank, but by the 1910s America was already recognized as a very serious geopolitical player and the Spanish had been relegated to near-nobody status after being repeatedly humiliated by the Americans and their Munroe doctrine shenanigans. Its why we stopped challenging their power and instead accepted the new state of things and entered a period of concilliatory talks with them during the 1890s.

>>34499749
>Setting aside allies and nukes
You can never set aside allies and nukes.

>>34499785
No fixed wing AEW, lower MTOW, two very important factors in naval aviation.

>>34500116
>>34500225
Reminder that the only reason the other powers were able to catch up to GB re: Navy was the introduction of dreadnoughts, which immediately obsoleted every other class of capital ship afloat.

>>34500225
>Not even a yank, but by the 1910s America was already recognized as a very serious geopolitical player and the Spanish had been relegated to near-nobody status after being repeatedly humiliated by the Americans and their Munroe doctrine shenanigans. Its why we stopped challenging their power and instead accepted the new state of things and entered a period of concilliatory talks with them during the 1890s.

Superpower by 2117?

No, no, no. Just fucking no. The Indians are absolutely abysmal sailors. I have absolute confidence that even the accident prone greenhorn chicoms would have literally zero problems sinking the entire Indian Navy. Read about the officer exchange with the US Navy where one of our guys stayed on their FLAGSHIP and came back with gems like;
>they don't know what the word "clean" means
>they were on water hours with a reverse osmosis unit four times the size of ours.
>they don't know what "workplace safety" means, either
>their weapons were in such poor condition that they had no right to function properly.
>this is their FLAGSHIP.

File: 1470200518521.jpg (133KB, 411x500px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 411x500px

>>34500225
>>34500611
the US was still a recognized Navy before the war of 1812. They really got most of their recognition in the Quasi-American war. There ship building and skill in battle were well respected by British and French sailors. They were also the first to use a submarine in battle as well as use metal ships in battle only 75 years after 1776.

File: 1489012013508.jpg (307KB, 2048x1363px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 2048x1363px

>>34499749
Need some more Rafale?

>>34500770
iirc, the US was the worlds largest economy by 1900 too, by a fairly respectable margin. Especially in our banking sector, which grew at a mega fast pace

>4.5 acres of sovereign poo

>>34500825
Yeah I hope they try launching Rafales off a ramp and watching them crumple

File: 1499701293891.jpg (287KB, 2048x1152px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 2048x1152px

>>34500684
This. At least chink knockoffs look functional. The Kiev "refit" looks so fucking slipshod.

>>34499749
> ramp
Disregarded.

>>34500080
Anon pls..

Is one lifetime really enough for that to happen?

200 years maybe.

File: 1499701561527.jpg (24KB, 762x68px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 762x68px

>>34500907
Nigga please, its even leaking!

>>34500531

That they do, but how much entirely depends on how the carrier is planned to operate.

>>34500937
Yeah or they were cleaning the dedicated shitting deck.

>>34501098
Wait, that wasn't the IS Pajeet, nevermind.

A legit question about military. A thread full of poo jokes, some generalizations about the people supposed charcter and anecdotal evidence.
By that logic Russians werent supposed to win against Germany. Jews can't fight, etc.

All I can think when I see Indian aircraft carriers is how goddamn smelly it would be below deck, I don't think I've met a culture that smells so goddamn bad

>>34501126

Welcome to /k/. Where if it isn't American, it doesn't get any real discussion beyond contempt with pseudo-/pol/ memes.

Someone link the AMA from the U.S. Navy Officer who went over on one of India's ships. What he described was god awful

>>34501178
>All the India hate ITT

How many of you are Chinese? Be honest.

>>34501178
>U.S. Navy Officer who went over on one of India's ships
this?
http://www.paluba.info/smf/index.php?topic=17897.0;wap2

>>34501538
Pakis and White supremacists hate pajeets more than Chinese do.

>>34499749
how is the poop deck?

>>34501126
There are many factors in a war, and no war machine can be summed up to a few stereotypes, especially if those stereotypes are wrong. On the other hand, equipment quality, training, military practices and so on are a hint to the quality of a military and how well it would perform.

>>34501591
Reminds me of that documentary about stripping old ships apart, and one of them contained asbestos so there's this journalist going in with his hazmat suit (well more like closed breathing system and so on), then sees Pajeets working in fucking underwear and scandals right next to him. The best part is that they look at him like he's fucking weird.

>>34501796
After reading the AMA posted above, I'd love a link to that documentary if you have one.

>>34501591
In a naval fight between Russia and India, who would lose the least?

>>34500611
And the fact that the British navy didn't immediately attack every other sizeable fleet on the ocean

>>34501881
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhIaEEW63Sc

Got it.

>>34501916
america

>>34501969
Thanks /k/omerade.

>>34500531

?

How does a ramp prevent you from using fixed wing warning?

?

I'm sorry, I'm not a ship guy and I am definitely not a plane guy.

>>34502649
>How does a ramp prevent you from using fixed wing warning?

it isn't that you CAN'T make a ramp-friendly fixed wing AEW aircraft: it is that maximum take-off weight limitations mean you can't fit a radome much bigger than you could with a heli

a Hawkeye sized radar would be unloftable(afaik the E2 weights 70,000lbs about the same as a fully fueled F14 with 8 AIM-54 missiles)

>>34502649

It doesn't. There's just a prevent opinion that it does.

>>34502938

That's just silly. You can launch a Hawkeye from a carrier ramp otherwise it wouldn't have been offered/consider for either the India carrier program or the British.

>>34500116
rajeesh gtfo

>>34500080
>India 2030
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl0b2LGf9jM

>>34499749
There is no fucking sane reason why these people should has access to any arsenal or military. India is one of the most unstable countries -- packed with thousands of different ethnic speaking and racist backwards people. They make the Arabs, Chinks, and Niggers look like well-cultured civilized people. Poopdians have an inferiority complex: look up their caste system as well a "jagarkapaij" ideology: meaning I only care about my existence for the gods have blessed me to step on others to get ahead. We are living in a really messed up world to let India and Buttfuckistan have nukes... TL;DR if you are white and American, be super rude to any foreigner, do not trust them, do not let them get ahead they will try and cuck you. INB4 pol
>;_;

File: E-2C_Hawkeye_and_Mount_Fuji.jpg (2MB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3008x2000px

>>34502649
>How does a ramp prevent you from using fixed wing warning?
It doesn't but using a ramp severely curtails what you can lift off with in terms of equipment.

With a catapult, you can launch an EWACS aircraft that can fly further, remain on station longer, and carry better equipment, which is a decisive factor in a naval engagement.

IIRC the Russians and the indians prefer the MiG-29K over the Su-33 because of the weight of the aircraft means it can launch with full fuel or armament, but not both from a ramp.

>>34502972
>it wouldn't have been offered/consider for either the India carrier program or the British.

what the fuck am I reading?

lets just assume that did happen(it didn't) and that a sluggish 70,000lb turboprop and can take off in the same way as 26,000 lb STOVL harrier or a piece of slavshit gimped by weight restrictions in the case of India(it can't)


if the E2 was so practical for british carriers why spend nearly $400 million developing an expensive new system like Crowsnest when you can buy three reliable and state-of-the-art E2Cs for $528 million.

File: 1471732891177.jpg (66KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 900x900px

>>34503239
>lets just assume that did happen(it didn't)

British:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/cvf-specs.htm

>Future Organic Airborne Early Warning (FOAEW):

>EH101 (Merlin) helicopter
>V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor
>E-2C Hawkeye

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/uk-airborne-early-warning-study-contracts-assigned-128602/
>DPA and industry sources say the studies will concentrate on the costs and risks of integrating three different mission and radar systems with fixed-wing, rotary wing and tiltrotor platforms. Baseline system is the EH Industries Merlin fitted with the Thales mission system and radar from the Westland Sea King AEW7. The two others are progressively more capable. Both have platforms regarded as generic, but the Northrop Grumman E-2C Hawkeye and Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey are the only available fixed-wing and tiltrotor options.

India:
https://www.livefistdefence.com/2007/03/tale-of-indian-navy-and-e-2-hawkeye.html

>The team that finally met Bedi, told me on February 11, 2005, three days before their meeting, “We did an assessment with the US Navy, and now believe that it is possible to launch the Hawkeye, with appropriate modifications, from the Gorshkov’s angle deck in the absence of a catapult jump. We will present our findings to the Navy next week, constituting a second order level of detail of the assessment we have made.”

>It was a radical suggestion at the time. But how would they work out configuring a Hawkeye for a ski-jump when all American carriers were steam-cat equipped? “For now, we will use existing US Navy performance charts, engineering models, open source information on Gorshkov’s dimensions and meteorological conditions in the Indian Ocean — since we know the dimensions and statistics of MiG-29 fighters used off the Gorshkov, we will use that data as well in our study,” they told me.

Limitations or not.

CON CON

>>34503239
>if the E2 was so practical for british carriers why spend nearly $400 million developing an expensive new system like Crowsnest when you can buy three reliable and state-of-the-art E2Cs for $528 million.

They didn't.

Crownest is the low cost, low risk solution that the Royal Navy knew would not have any hiccups. They wanted something that was cheap to develop and were already experienced at using. Crowsnest is the "good enough" option.

And you are stupid if you think that $528m is the real cost for that system.

>>34503126
>prefer the MiG-29K over the Su-33

Its also because it costs only a fraction of the price.

>>34499749
>should these be more than a match for China's Liaoning and Shandong
NOT. EVEN. FUCKING. CLOSE.

>>34503488

the British one is from when catapults not ramps were planned for QE and for the Indians you curiosity stopped quoting just before the article lets slip that they couldn't launch even a modified and lightened E2 with a meaningful fuel load

>>34503748
>the British one is from when catapults not ramps were planned for QE

Wrong.

>the new carriers could be easily modified to a STOBAR configuration, with a box ski-jump and no catapults, but with arrestor wires. The E-2C Hawkeye demonstrated its ability to launch from a ski-jump during the 1980s and thus the "new" Northrop Grumman E-2D Advanced Hawkeye remained officially a viable choice for MASC, indeed it still had many supporters if the funding can be found. Ironically, the RN first considered purchasing the Hawkeye, in its original E-2A form, way back in the 1960's when it needed a replacement for the Gannet AEW.3 to be carried by the then planned new fleet carrier, CVA-01.

>for the Indians you curiosity stopped quoting just before the article lets slip that they couldn't launch even a modified and lightened E2 with a meaningful fuel load

Like I said, limitations or not the manufacturer believe you could do it. UK considered possible, but did not taken on the technical risks and costs for it when they wanted something that 'just worked'.

>>34503847

the "limitation" of being practically impossible to actually operate from the Vikramaditya even when modified(presumably by removing things the indians don't need like the onboard head) does seem stretch the definition of possible

>>34504022
>practically impossible

From what basis do you assert this? I've already shown you two cases where it has been given considered as possible. You are in denial.

>>34504064

>embarking 3-6 massive aircraft on a modified-Kiev(a design smaller and worse than modified ww2 light carriers) and trying to launch one every 30 mins on its clusterfuck of a deck because you can only get them in the air so fuel starved that they have endurance similar to a point-defense interceptor on full-reheat/afterburner

you're right perfectly feasable

it's a crime the Indians didn't go for this

>>34504179

Don't be facetious.

It was demonstrated that you can launch an E-2 from a ski ramp and so do not need catapults. This is the core and only relevant point.

>>34504249
>(You)

Don't be an evasive faggot. Its a discussion about its continuous practicality, not its feasibility.

>>34504348

Irony.

>Its a discussion about its continuous practicality, not its feasibility.

No. Revisit the discussion:

>>34502938
>Hawkeye cannot takeoff from a ramp carrier.
>>34502972
>It is possible.
>>34503239
>No, it has never been considered and is cannot because [guesstimate work]
>>34503488
>[two examples where it has been considered viable]
>>34503748
>example one is wrong and example two is wrong
>>34503847
>you make a incorrect assertion for example one [quote] and you ignore that it was still considered possible in two with limitations
>>34504022
>it is impossible despite the evidence provided
>>34504064
>why, both cases showed it was possible and was considered viable
>>34504179
>[guesstimate work], sarcasm
>>34504249
>The point still remains that it possible.
>>34504348
>argument is actually about this


My point has remained the same. It has been considered feasible and thus must be practical to be feasible considered.

>>34504518
Not that Anon, but in ww2 they launched b25s from carriers to bomb island.

It was doable in a pitch. But do you see any modern carriers that can carry full on bombers?

Just because it's feasible doesn't mean it's practical. And one of the reasons it's not common is because it's not currently practical.

>>34504582

That's apples to oranges. These aren't done in a pinch, these are studies (QE) and proposals (India) to carrier programs.

The other anon has yet to provide a single source on anything he's said and has been wrong several times.

GIVEN that North G has literally said they've done the work for it with the USN - it is hard to argue that it cannot.

>>34504518
Feasible =/= Practical you inbred nonce. I swear all of you Amerifats are immeasurably dense.

File: 2136264531-sp_action_0803.jpg (24KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 300x225px

>>34504518
>It has been considered feasible and thus must be practical to be feasible considered.

I'm not even sure why i come here expecting cogent and literate discussion on anything.

>>34504753
>>34504771

Bickering over the wording is trivial to the point. It was viable for the British to consider it and viable for the Indians to be offered it.

>>34499749
Sometimes I forget India even has an army

File: 1430619919904.gif (3MB, 390x293px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 390x293px

>>34504775
>I'll confuse the meaning of two very different and semantically distinct words and then try to dismiss this mistake as trivial when confronted

>>34504753
I don't think he's American.

>>34504821

My own retarded command of the English language entirely irrelevant. There's nothing to substantiate that it is "impractical" beyond this faggot's guess work.

>>34499792
>INSAS

>>34501916
The rest of the world

>>34503043
i tried to google "jagarkapaij" but got no results senpai

File: Su-33.jpg (502KB, 1451x1015px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 1451x1015px

>>34503126
>Russians
>prefer the MiG-29K over the Su-33

I was going to to be s smartass because Kuznetsov only a Su-33s and not MiG-29Ks. Then I realized that my information was outdated, as the Su-33s have since reached the end of their lifespans, and the Russian Navy is replacing them with brand new MiG-29Ks with MiG-29M components baked in.

The idea of upgraded Su-33s with modern Su-30SM and Su-35S components on a CATOBAR carrier makes me happy though.

File: leah.gif (1MB, 207x207px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 207x207px

>>34503024
>so many white servants!

>>34499792
Because whenever they try domestic production it fucking sucks.

I think POF might be a better arms plant. They haven't fucked up making g3s.

File: moskwa.jpg (146KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1200x800px

>>34505872
>as the Su-33s have since reached the end of their lifespans
No they haven't. Engines are currently being produced for them, and they went through air frame extension a few years ago when SVP-24 was installed.

>>34500921
Britain went from absolute control over a quarter of the damn planet (in both landmass and population) down to a nation the Argies thought they could push around in barely 50 years. I'll bet no one living in 1910 would have believed the state they'd be in now.