Hell no, India isn't going to launch any naval invasions of anyone! Their military just isn't set up that way, and they don't have the diplomatic cover to get away with it. And for defense of their islands, carriers aren't a very good solution. Or more accurately, if carriers could be useful, India's carriers as they exist wouldn't be. They aren't particularly good to begin with, and the MiG-29s they operate are just junk against a real opponent.
Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
It's honestly a bit perplexing how forum level drops like a rock in Indian topic, just because it's India.
1. India has modest landing capability, and it performed overseas interventions in the past.
2. India has ongoing, if stalled, LPD program. The requirement is here.
3. Carriers, as tools to temporary bring a lot of concentrated airpower into striking position are the tool to thwart invasion of islands. Like come on, 1942-1944 anyone? That's literally the basis for all great carrier battles, other than Coral Sea. With understanding that Coral Sea was an accident. Moreover, there were almost none(and no succesful) attempts to interfere with anything else. Granted, we're 70 years into missile age, and now there are alternative instruments, but this in no way degrades carriers.
4. Indian mig-29k are on the level of american f-18c/d(and still serving early e/f; which, btw, aren't worse than final e in "pure" a2a), and j-15t - with caveat that they're quite thoroughly upgraded outside of air combat, and these are the capabilities that matter for carrier strike.
They aren't 2020s 4++ aircraft, but ignore them, and you'll be checking your life wests.
5. Rafales are coming. Ironically, more as escorts in this context, as their naval/stand off strike capabilities are below IN migs.
What's the sense? China's mil policy isn't invading Dehli from Himalayas tomorrow, and it isn't realistic in any case. India is far stronger than opponents that can reach it geographically, and is nuclear just to be sure.
For all intents and purposes, India is absolutely safe as local bully, and it's been the case for decades. It's perhaps one of big reasons their defense programs are so ineffective.
Their priorities are, (1)local unrest, (2)clear trade routes, (3)not fail too much when compared to Pakistan, in this order. Yes, last one is unimpressive, but given that gdp difference is >10 times(i.e. India is much better governed even per capita), anything short of demilitarization sort of works for them.
When Pakistan was an actual threat in 1960-70s, Indians did quite well.
Last edited:
As you said, it's not WWII any more, and India's carriers simply aren't up to the task. The only thing that I'll give the MiG-29 is that it carries some pretty decent anti-ship missiles; perhaps better than the ones the Super Hornet carries. But that's the only thing it has going for it. It doesn't have an AESA radar, its AAMs aren't very potent, it has short legs, and it has a very limited air refuelling capability. Couple that with it having to fly off a ski jump, the lack of decent AWACS support, no EW support, and it's just going to be a sitting duck against any competent opponent. The final death knell is that India's carriers just can't operate very many of them. I don't know if INAS 300 is combat operational yet, but if it is, that makes only two MiG-29K squadrons of what 12-18 fighters apiece?
Next, look at the island defense theory. Who out there can reasonably threaten them? It's not going to be countries like Sri Lanka or Malaysia. The only countries that can pull it off are going to be the the US or China. I can tell you right off that China isn't going to start invading some random islands in the Indian Ocean, so India's carriers are going to have to dance with American CBGs. Good luck with that.
How they aren't up to the task? If they can launch sufficient attack wave, they're up for it. Everything else is down to aircraft.
Indian carriers are barely less capable than 001 type, and can together launch ~24 aircraft in one wave(against 001s 14, i.e. 28 for two).
Mig-29 carries good anti-ship missiles, it carries ARMs, it carries good stand off fixed target munitions (Rampage). It has modern jammers, in last Belorussian talisman (barely 2 years old). It even can carry more of those than rafale.
What it doesn't have is AESA and targeting pod - neither terribly relevant for attacking landing operations. And indeed, Rafale(which is in near future) has aesa, targeting pod and longer-range "screw off" weapon.
AESA and AAM don't matter for strike, only to fight their way through (if there is intercept, and it's numerous enough to stop sheer mass of attacking aircraft). Also, things are relative - we still haven't seen PL-15 on carriers, and everything is tied on PL-16. Which is not confirmed operationally.
Against somewhat simpler AAMs, their weapons(RVV-SD and Astra) are perfectly viable.
It's refuelling isn't dissimilar from that SHornets can do. Good enough for immediate refill after take off, doesn't work for anything else. And in this role it's better than Su-33/J-15; 4 tanks is a lot of fuel.
That was cruel against any carrier arm other than US, and 90% applies to China (other than J-15D). 003 isn't operational yet.
Airborne EW doesn't really matter that much in stand off fixed area strikes, though.
Well, attacking landing area v. US is broadly similar to same operations v. non-US.
Not exactly pretty, but there is no magic involved. Yes, it's hard to win against wastly superior force(as Japanese found out in 1944), but this isn't so much about IN carriers at this point. Their capability is here, there's just not enough of it.
I can safely declare that Vikrant and Vikramaditya are far less capable than the Liaoning.
No only are they much smaller but both carriers and the MiG-29K are basically harbor and hanger queens.
There are absolutely no reports from Pakistan, Bangladesh and the rest of India's neighbors like we have of the Liaoning from the Japan, RoC and USN:
India's carrier force isn't even noticed by neighbors and foes because they do not patrol unlike the Liaoning.
Last edited:
We really need to see a chart from an outside power tracking deployments like this for an Indian carrier to make any statement on them being anywhere near a Chinese STOBAR in effectiveness:
I'm pretty confident that we never get such a chart for an Indian carrier because their deployments are exceedingly rare.
I'm pretty confident that we never get such a chart for an Indian carrier because their deployments are exceedingly rare.
This is mostly b/c Japan tends to announce everything(as well as have capability to track everything).
If not for them, we won't have anywhere near this amount of data on China's decks...
i.e. this is the case where abscence of evidence isn't evidence of abscence.
Are they though? I didn't see much data on their deployments and training routine. No one really cares abt them, until they're declared bad by default. But do we have data points for that?
While they're smaller(which is true) 001s are just too much 11435s to be good. Furthermore, not insignificant amount of added deck real estate is eaten by way larger feishas.
For capital ships, absence of evidence is most certainly evidence of absence.
Especially since they also operate to show the flag.
If no one notice your carrier, especially in an body of water like the Bay of Bengal in front your major foe, then it is pretty apparent that it is not doing much.
I have never seen a third party video of an Indian carrier doing anything.
In fairness, the countries around India are less likely to field the number of fishermen, military patrols, etc. to capture imagery of Indian carriers. That being said, I think if the Indian carriers actually did regularly deploy and perform flight sortie training, the Indian MoD would publish that footage. Or an Indian sailor aboard the vessel would publish footage.