Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

India loses its edge over China's navy

Discussion in 'Indian Navy' started by OverLoad, Apr 3, 2017.

Tags:
  1. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    It is a US study and Pentagon reports,

    The Ford Class Carriers are the future AC's and looking at the configuration of the carriers development we can clearly say US wants to automatize most of the functions. Navy is rapidly advancing ship-based defensive weapons, electronic warfare applications, lasers and technologies able to identify and destroy approaching anti-ship cruise missile from ranges beyond the horizon. One such example of this includes the now-deployed Naval Integrated Fire Control – Counter Air system, or NIFC-CA. This technology combines ship-based radar and fire control systems with an aerial sensor and dual-mode SM-6 missile to track and destroy approaching threats from beyond-the-horizon. Ship-based laser weapons and rail guns, in addition, could be among lower-cost ship defense weapons as well.

    The MQ-25A Stingray is evolving out of a now-cancelled carrier-launched ISR and attack drone program called Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike system, or UCLASS. A Northrop demonstrator aircraft, called the X-47B, has already performed successful carrier drone take-offs and landings. Accordingly, the ability of the Navy to operate a drone on an aircraft carrier is already progressing.

    The emergence of weapons such as the DF-21D, senior Navy leaders and some analysts have questioned the ability of precision-guided long-range missile to actually hit and destroy carriers on the move at 30-knots from 1,000 miles away. Targeting, guidance on the move fire control, ISR and other assets are necessary for these kinds of weapons to function as advertised. GPS, inertial measurement units, advanced sensors and dual-mode seekers are part of a handful of fast-developing technologies able to address some of these challenges, yet it does not seem clear that long-range anti-ship missiles such as the DF-21D will actually be able to destroy carriers on the move at the described distances. That is for Today.

    But the they are developing and evolving.

    A think tank study from the Center for New American Security maintains that the “United States will be faced with a choice: operate its carriers at ever-increasing ranges – likely beyond the unrefueled combat radii of their tactical aircraft – or assume high levels of risk in both blood and treasure,” the CNAS study explains.

    An April 27th report in the Washington Free Beach earlier cited Pentagon officials stating that China successfully tested a new high-speed maneuvering warhead.

    “The test of the developmental DF-ZF hypersonic glide vehicle was monitored after launch Friday atop a ballistic missile fired from the Wuzhai missile launch center in central China, said officials familiar with reports of the test,” the report from the Washington Free Beacon said. “The maneuvering glider, traveling at several thousand miles per hour, was tracked by satellites as it flew west along the edge of the atmosphere to an impact area in the western part of the country.”

    The Air Force Chief Scientist recently told Scout Warrior that the US expects to have operational hypersonic missiles by the 2020s.
     
  2. NKVD

    NKVD 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    378
    Country Flag:
    India
    My Points From your Post

    The emergence of weapons such as the DF-21D, senior Navy leaders and some analysts have questioned the ability of precision-guided long-range missile to actually hit and destroy carriers on the move at 30-knots from 1,000 miles away. Targeting, guidance on the move fire control, ISR and other assets are necessary for these kinds of weapons to function as advertised. GPS, inertial measurement units, advanced sensors and dual-mode seekers are part of a handful of fast-developing technologies able to address some of these challenges, yet it does not seem clear that long-range anti-ship missiles such as the DF-21D will actually be able to destroy carriers on the move at the described distances. That is for Today.
     
  3. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Yes true that is for today. Future was the question.
     
  4. kaku

    kaku Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    And why not Soviets developed such carrier killers? Or American to destroy Capital Ships of Soviets?

    Different physics of Chinese?

    And BTW, do you know on record PLAN stated this there so called Carrier Killers are actually nukes, that blast above atmosphere for EMP.
     
    GSLV Mk III likes this.
  5. NKVD

    NKVD 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2016
    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    378
    Country Flag:
    India
    Yes Future Have Many things In It Including Defense against Such Type Of Weapons By upgrading Anti- ballistic Defensive Shields And Offensive Doctrine Aswell
     
  6. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Well i took into accounts of the developments US is are doing and investment or R&D they are doing or done in this period.

    And already Ford Class Carriers and Zumwalt Class Destroyers are EMP protected.

    US states that these Ford Class AC's are slated to last till 2110's. But knowing for the fact the cost of R&D required to develop such systems to prevent Anti-Carrier weapons,

    Cost of a Carrier is 10B$ and cost of a Anti-Carrier Weapon is 30M$

    Navy officials explaining that carrier will increasingly have improved electromagnetic, cyber and ISR defenses designed to jam enemy fire or throw approaching anti-ship missile off course

    The commission points out various Chinese tests of hypersonic missiles as well. Hypersonic missiles, if developed and fielded, would have the ability to travel at five times the speed of sound – and change the threat equation regarding how to defend carriers from shore-based, air or sea attacks.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2017
  7. kaku

    kaku Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    Ships are EMP protected, but communication is not EMP protected. And going to require 10-30 min to restore the communication.
     
    GSLV Mk III likes this.
  8. Sancho

    Sancho Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,223
    Likes Received:
    2,453
    The latter is true and most likely China will use it's carriers for defensive operations along their coastlines, just as we will do.
    But China is expanding it's capabilities far away as well and not necessarily so obvious like a carrier would be.
    We already know that Chinese navies subs and surveillance vessels are operating in the IOR. We know that they are building ports in various countries in the IOR to support their subs or possibly surface vessels. We now even read about possible naval installations and even airstrips in the Maldives.
    So it's not far fetched to think China is not interested in our region, just because they don't have enough carriers yet.

    IN obviously tries to counter that with similar approaches, updating forwarded naval ports and air stripes, building a good number of surface vessels and even amphibious capabilities to support our islands, if under attack.
    But we do lack enough capable subs and even with the high capability of P8Is, the numbers are way too low to cover such a large area.

    Imo sub hunting will be the main priority when it comes to deal with Chinese navy and then more subs, Frigates or ASW aircrafts and helicopters will be of more use than fighters.

    On the other hand, if we have to fight a Chinese carrier, does IN have the capability to fight them?
    Not a single long range IN aircraft will be able to carry Brahmos. P8Is, IL 38 and Mig 29Ks are limited to Harpoon and KH35, which makes our subs and Frigates the best choice to fight them.
    IN's carriers will be smaller, can carry less fighters, also less capabable. The fact that we let pride for NLCA cloud our judgement and ignore that it won't be anywhere near to be fight a Chinese carrier or Flanker varients, also shows a problem, because we don't rationally judge the capabilities of the enemy, but claim superiority because or history or past experience and training. In reality however no experience and training will make an NLCA pilot survive a combat against a Flanker. Nor will it help us when we ignore that China is already developing larger CATOBAR carriers with EMALS comparable systems and most likely even naval stealth fighters.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2017
    IndiranChandiran and layman like this.
  9. Agent_47

    Agent_47 Admin - Blog Staff Member MODERATOR

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,054
    Likes Received:
    3,502
    Country Flag:
    India
    It's obvious that a global power is interested to secure it's trade routes. But discussion here is CBG way of sea control/war fighting in the IOR.

    True. But for that they first need a reliable SSN. Also, when you observe IN long term plan they have an extra emphasis on ASW.

    Putting NLCA on a AC is a bad move same as a heavy fighter. Yes, they give you huge range but it also have huge RCS and there will be limited space to operate on deck. IAC1 with rafales/MIG 29 and type 001 with Flanker will be operating in same available numbers.

    As @kaku pointed out. How will a çhinese CBG enter IOR with minimum detection?

    Also, you may have missed a recent news about land based long range anti ship ballistic missile development by DRDO.
     
  10. Sancho

    Sancho Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,223
    Likes Received:
    2,453
    Which as I pointed out might not even of importance for China, rather than using their sub fleet with a proper logistical supply chain in the region. That's easier for them and more effective as a threat for us too, since they are much harder to detect and they can use long range missiles too.

    Which is "land based" so are we planing to let them close enough to our coastlines till our land based assets can be used? Why bother to have own carriers then?
    We fail to understand that having a carrier alone, doesn't make us capable, since the efficiency of a carrier is dependent on the capabilities of it's aircrafts, starting with fighters, over AEW and tanker support. That's why Catobar carriers are so important, not only to get more performance out of the fighters, but also more out of the supporting aircrafts. If you are limited to stobar carriers at least focus on highly capable fighters.
     
  11. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Sancho likes this.
  12. Sancho

    Sancho Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,223
    Likes Received:
    2,453
  13. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Yep it is just a analysis... There are lot of analysis as such... That what makes the forum great, brainstorming ideas.

    For the question of how would they come to IOR, It is not that difficult, though it is tough. And deployment does not need to be done at the time of war. Knowing Chinese how cunning they are they might even deploy their assets in Djibouti in the name of anti-piracy. These are just ideas there is nothing definitive nor conclusive to say this is what is going to happen.
     
  14. Sancho

    Sancho Major Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,223
    Likes Received:
    2,453
    Not to forget that knowing, that a carrier is coming like in 71, doesn't necessarily means we can stop it by sending our own carrier. I would rather send a squad of MKIs with Brahmos to the forwarded Base at A&N, which still offers better deterrence than a similar number of Mig 29Ks on a carrier.
     
  15. layman

    layman Aurignacian STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    11,024
    Likes Received:
    3,038
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Yep, carrier cannot be opposed by a carrier. It needs a structured offense. A Squad of MKI cant do much anyways... But we are speculating now... Sure Brahmos can make a good headway.

    Btw it is just scenarios presented for discussions. Lol
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017

Share This Page