Skip to comments.Navy ad shows US carrier as own (India)
Posted on 12/05/2010 10:22:20 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
Navy ad shows US carrier as own
Mail Today Bureau | New Delhi, December 5, 2010 |
The Indian Navy may be aspiring to become the most powerful force in the Indian Ocean but for the present, it seems to be riding on Uncle Sam's back.
That seemed to be the message the navy sent out when it released special advertisement supplements in various newspapers on the occasion of Navy Day, which was on Saturday.
A prominent picture in one such advertisement, obviously released from Mumbai, shows a flight of Jaguars and Sea Harriers flying alongside FA-18 of the US Navy over what is supposed to be the aircraft carrier, INS Viraat. There is only one problem - the picture is not of the Indian carrier but an American one.
The photo clearly shows FA-18s on the deck and to cap it all, one can also spot an E-2C Hawkeye airborne surveillance aircraft with its distinct rotodome.
The photo, part of a composite image of four, is carried along with the message of the President, Prime Minister, defence minister, navy chief, the western naval command chief, and the governor of Maharashtra.
The other three pictures in the composite image are quite kosher, displaying Indian warships, a frigate launching a Prithvi missile and a Seaking helicopter.
One of the explanations for this fiasco - which is likely to leave naval officers red-faced - is that the original picture may have been of Viraat but someone photoshopped the American carrier there, presumably because the Indian carrier wasn't "impressive" enough.
This wasn't the only toecurlingly embarrassing faux pas made by the navy. In another advertisement, the navy shows the "unphotoshopped" picture of INS Viraat. But this time, the carrier is shown placed between two gargantuan American carriers, the Kitty Hawk and the Nimitz - as if to emphasise how tiny our carrier is compared with the other two.
Indeed, the difference between Viraat and the American ships is striking. The firepower of Viraat - which has a displacement of 24,000 tonnes - resides in the ageing Sea Harrier aircraft (India has just about a dozen left of these) along with a few Seaking helicopters.
On the other hand, the Kitty Hawk (80,000-tonne displacement) has 40 FA-18s, four electronic support aircraft and four E-2Cs, a small transport aircraft and half-a-dozen helicopters.
The Nimitz (100,000-tonne displacement) can carry an even greater load of aircraft. Both carriers are equipped to carry nuclear weapons.
India will get the Russianmade Gorshkov after refurbishment next year and an indigenously made carrier of around 40,000-tonne displacement in 2015. These will fly the MiG-29K and will be much more capable compared with Viraat.
But self-sufficiency may still be a long way off, if one goes by the Indian Navy advertisements.
So I guess they let the cat out of the bag. 0 is going to outsource the navy.
All kidding aside, when considering India’s large nearby neighbor, I’d be happy if they had more and bigger carriers.
Yup. Imagine being neighbors to China and Pakistan.
Stupid question: since the USN decided to give up on Constellation and Independence, I wonder if anyone considered offering them to the Indians for a firesale price if in return the Indians bought Hornets instead of MiG-29Ks?
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
I suspect someone in the art department was cropping the original picture and took out the wrong ship.
from the description of the US carrier this seems a likely candidate
Indian bureaucrats (of the military and civilian persuasion)-they never fail at trying to set new standards of incompetence.
Question: Enterprise is scheduled for decommissioning in 2013, it may be extended to 2015. Has anyone ever mentioned the possibility of giving her to the Indians? Is it possible for the Indians to handle it, with their planes. Could we provide a training crew(s) for up to a year to help them learn. Strategically, it would seem to be a reasonable idea..cement US India relations, and give the Red Chinese something to think about. Just wondering...please feel free to tell me why it’s a dumb idea, and/or a non-starter.
It’s more or less a non-starter for a host of reasons. For one, how long can a 50+ year old ship serve with a customer?? Two, US carriers require a crew of more than 5,000 personnel. That’s almost three times the complement on the current Indian carrier. It will take a few years for any navy to build up a core of thousands of sailors, technicians and of course pilots for a US-style CVN. Three, few Indian naval bases can take a ship the size of the Enterprise.
The only country which will likely build similar ships is China but that will take at least another decade.
Are there any design/security concerns with giving the nuke plant to another country? Assume that the Indians, recognizing all of the problems you stated, still decided that they wanted to take a shot at making it work..theyw ere willign to risk it...assuming that we'd provide crews to train them..would you be inclined to give them the carrier? Again, strategically it's gonna make the Chicoms think..
About the nuclear plant, I really don’t see many issues here since the Enterprise is not exactly young and besides India is working on nuclear-subs of its own. Being an Indian myself, I don’t think training crews are realistically the issue here. The larger question of what type of carrier fleet India envisages is the point to look at. The Indian navy also faces the carrier vs submarine vs surface ship vs air force debate so will it want E-2Ds, a larger number of escort vessels, refuellers etc. on its limited budget?? There’s no point in getting a 50 year old ship if the IN doesn’t want the whole deal.
Thanks again..I always enjoy your posts...