CV-17 Shandong (002 carrier) Thread I ...News, Views and operations

[Yodello]

Oh... Please stop trying to push the IN down our throats. Following your comments, I think you can take your IN views somewhere else.
You might be shocked at just how much incompetency there is within the IN and Indian military in general.Explosion in submarines, unacceptably high numbers of IAF fighter jet crash, mix and of various parts from all sorts of equipment makers from all over the world etc. Trying to be major military power without even having a domestic industrial base let alone a military industrial base is quite foolhardy.
I heard of an incident last decade, where the IAF placed an order for some equipments to Russia,and the Russian reply was that those particular equipments had been discontinued about 20 years back. Terrible procurement and maintenance ethics I must say, when you don't track of what's going on. I don't expect the Navy to be any better.
If push comes to shove, which we pray never happens, I bet you my right arm that the might and superiority of the PLAN and the Chinese military and their Military Industrial base and maintenance and ethics over the IN and Indian military will be an utter shock to those who like to belittle the PLA.
I think it's just that the western media and also a lot of people in the West like to incorrectly and ignorantly continue viewing China through tinted eyes.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Oh... Please stop trying to push the IN down our throats. Following your comments, I think you can take your IN views somewhere else.
You might be shocked at just how much incompetency there is within the IN and Indian military in general.Explosion in submarines, unacceptably high numbers of IAF fighter jet crash, mix and of various parts from all sorts of equipment makers from all over the world etc. Trying to be major military power without even having a domestic industrial base let alone a military industrial base is quite foolhardy.
I heard of an incident last decade, where the IAF placed an order for some equipments to Russia,and the Russian reply was that those particular equipments had been discontinued about 20 years back. Terrible procurement and maintenance ethics I must say, when you don't track of what's going on. I don't expect the Navy to be any better.
If push comes to shove, which we pray never happens, I bet you my right arm that the might and superiority of the PLAN and the Chinese military and their Military Industrial base and maintenance and ethics over the IN and Indian military will be an utter shock to those who like to belittle the PLA.
I think it's just that the western media and also a lot of people in the West like to incorrectly and ignorantly continue viewing China through tinted eyes.

Completely agree on this one, and don't forget about the recent incident (last week?) when the IN was ready to drop a 3,500 ton frigate from dry dock into the water but ended up throwing it on its side onto the ground and killing 2 sailors. That image of a frigate lying on its side amidst a backdrop of what appears to be a dumping yard they call a dock is the first image I think of when anyone says, "Indian Navy."

 

[Deino]

Still no new images of the painted Type 001A ????

Or will they wait until the paint-job is done and the paint is dry??

Deino

 

[Equation]

I asked you for evidence on your unsupported claim that India carrier training isn't, and I quote, "near the level of China," and you you came back with the above. So, are you saying steam and EMAL catapult R&D equates to Chinese carrier training? Also, are you aware of the fact Indian aircraft carrier Vikramadita was deployed as an operational CV in May, 2014, carrying up to 26 Mig-29K? Fanbois not withstanding, reasonable people would call that carrier training. Unless, of course, you think Su-33s provide carrier training, but Mig-29Ks don't...?

So, Equation, given the above, do you still maintain Indian carrier training isn't "near the level of China?" If so, kindly provide evidence- real evidence and not redirection or obfuscation.

Put a J-15 or any Su-33 type onto an Indian carrier and lets see if they can launch it successfully multiple times like the Liaoning carrier crew did. Remember launching a bigger and heavier fighter such as the J-15 is a lot more difficult than the Mig-29k? So to answer your desperate question to put down the PLAN and PRC government, YES, 'Indian carrier training is NOT near the level of China'. Shall we talk about how's that Indian Catobar system in both steam and EMAL research and development are doing? What about Taiwan? NO? I thought so.

 

[Intrepid]

Remember launching a bigger and heavier fighter such as the J-15 is a lot more difficult than the Mig-29k?

That's nonsense!

 

[Equation]

That's nonsense!

For catobar that's not a problem, but for ski jump ramp it is. And both India and China currently uses ski jump ramp carrier therefore there's a limit to it depending on the size and weight of the fighter plane. Although China will be having their very own catobar system before the Indian does for it's carrier program. Like I always said, it's all about the program.

 

[Intrepid]

The MiG-29 has higher speeds than the J-15 and so it's more complicated to handle. The J-15 has a better thrust-to-weight ratio and less wing load. It is the easier plane, but it is also a larger aircraft and you need a larger vessel to accommodate it.

 

[SinoSoldier]

To be honest I'm not even sure if saying "at this point" would be a fair statement -- that is where my question about quality of experience/competency comes into play.

For example, how much of their past 29 years of their quality of experience is more fundamental, basic experience that cannot be caught up on quickly within a couple of years, and how much of it is more complex, higher end experience and competencies that they may not have even mastered?





I understand you weren't doing a holistic comparison between the two navies, however you were comparing how each Navy might progress with their carrier programmes and competencies, and mentioning the difference in "experience" like it may be a significant factor.

I'm saying that the difference in "experience" may be smaller than you believe, and that a number of other factors also come into play.




Yes, well again, no one is saying past experience doesn't matter.
But if one is trying to judge how much that experience will inform progress going forwards relative to another navy such as IN compared to the Chinese Navy, will depend very much on the quality of their past experience as well as the aforementioned different factors before.


In other words, I'm just pointing out that not all experience is equal and even past years or decades of experience should be put into context of other factors.

As much as I'm willing to provide the benefit of the doubt regarding the discrepancies in the "quality" of training, 29 years is nothing to scoff at, especially when the PLAN has none. I seriously doubt that what India has gained over the 29 years could be "caught up" by the Chinese in a few years' time. What the Indian Navy gains from operating newer vessels like the Vikramaditya and Vikrant would add on to their pre-existing knowledge and expertise while the PLAN has to start from square one.

I also wouldn't question the effectiveness and complexity of Indian carrier operations, since they provided key fire support during the War of 1971 to great effect. Even if the opposite were true, bad experiences provided just as valuable a lesson as do good ones.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Oh... Please stop trying to push the IN down our throats. Following your comments, I think you can take your IN views somewhere else.
You might be shocked at just how much incompetency there is within the IN and Indian military in general.Explosion in submarines, unacceptably high numbers of IAF fighter jet crash, mix and of various parts from all sorts of equipment makers from all over the world etc. Trying to be major military power without even having a domestic industrial base let alone a military industrial base is quite foolhardy.
I heard of an incident last decade, where the IAF placed an order for some equipments to Russia,and the Russian reply was that those particular equipments had been discontinued about 20 years back. Terrible procurement and maintenance ethics I must say, when you don't track of what's going on. I don't expect the Navy to be any better.
If push comes to shove, which we pray never happens, I bet you my right arm that the might and superiority of the PLAN and the Chinese military and their Military Industrial base and maintenance and ethics over the IN and Indian military will be an utter shock to those who like to belittle the PLA.
I think it's just that the western media and also a lot of people in the West like to incorrectly and ignorantly continue viewing China through tinted eyes.

Accidents could be due to a variety of reasons, including and not limited to faulty equipment, lackluster regulations and procedures for quality control, improper or insufficient supply chains for key replacements, or corruption within the brass. They do not necessarily correlate with bad training or inexperience with their equipment.

 

[Blitzo]

As much as I'm willing to provide the benefit of the doubt regarding the discrepancies in the "quality" of training, 29 years is nothing to scoff at, especially when the PLAN has none. I seriously doubt that what India has gained over the 29 years could be "caught up" by the Chinese in a few years' time. What the Indian Navy gains from operating newer vessels like the Vikramaditya and Vikrant would add on to their pre-existing knowledge and expertise while the PLAN has to start from square one.

I'm not making any specific claims here, it was more to demonstrate the point that not all experience is be equal, and that less advanced experience or lower end competencies can potentially be caught up quite quickly relative to higher end capabilities.

I also wouldn't question the effectiveness and complexity of Indian carrier operations, since they provided key fire support during the War of 1971 to great effect. Even if the opposite were true, bad experiences provided just as valuable a lesson as do good ones.

Let's put it this way, 29 years of carrier experience in the Indian Navy is probably different in quality and competency to 29 years of carrier experience in the Russian Navy/Soviet Navy which is in turn different to 29 years of carrier experience in the Royal Navy, and in turn different to 29 years of carrier experience in the United States Navy.

So yeah, I think there very much is a reason to question the effectiveness and complexity of Indian carrier operations, because not all past "experience" is equal.

Accidents could be due to a variety of reasons, including and not limited to faulty equipment, lackluster regulations and procedures for quality control, improper or insufficient supply chains for key replacements, or corruption within the brass. They do not necessarily correlate with bad training or inexperience with their equipment.

That is somewhat debatable.

I think there could be a strong case to be made that high rates of certain kinds of accidents which occur may be reflective of an institutional lack of competency in certain areas that may translate to lack of competency in other related areas.


I personally wouldn't go as far as what yodello described regarding the IN, and I don't want to get into too big of a discussion about the overall Indian Armed Forces or even Indian Navy, but I would say that there are certain events and indicators that would cast some reasonable doubt as to just how competent certain aspects of their capabilities and experience are, and for the Navy I think the complex task of carrier operations is a reasonable one to look upon.

This is not to say they are incompetent, but rather that (again) the quality of experience and competency despite past decades of operating a carrier may not be quite extensive as the description suggests.