| Font Size |
"Targeting ships at high seas is not an easy task or as simple as land warfare," Admiral Verma told reporters here on the sidelines of a seminar on aircraft carriers organised by the National Maritime Foundation here.
"There are hundreds and thousands of ships in the sea at any given time. It is extremely important to spot the ship before targeting it. There are limitations in terms of maritime reconnaissance and long-range searches," Verma said when asked about the threat posed by Chinese Anti-ship Ballistic Missile Programme.
He said it was "a complex problem" to use a conventional missile against a moving target at high seas.
Earlier, addressing the seminar, the Navy chief said aircraft carriers were expensive and there were questions on their affordability and survivability due to their large size while at sea.
"Some event talk about carrying out land-based missile attacks against an aircraft carrier. We must weigh this against the difficulties of targeting a mobile target out at sea," he said, noting that carriers can move 600 nautical miles a day, which translates into one million square nautical miles of ocean area which an adversary has to search.
Verma said this was a Herculean task for even the best of navies, satellite and aerial surveillance.
"Should an adversary manage to evade a plethora of air, surface and sub-surface escorts and be capable of hitting a carrier, sinking it or putting a carrier out of action is by no means easy," he said.
He said the sheer size, build philosophy and damage control features provided an aircraft carrier an amazing capacity to absorb damage.
On the huge cost involved in acquiring an aircraft carrier, Verma said the long range of capability a carrier provided a nation with during times of peace and war more than justified the costs.
He said an aircraft carrier provided surveillance cover in nearly two lakh sq nautical miles of ocean area and the airspace above.
Asked about the depleting strength of the Navy's submarine fleet, Verma said at present India had only 16 submarines and the number was likely to go further down due to decommissioning of some ships in the near future.
"At present, the number is 16 submarines. In the coming years, some decommissioning will take place," he said.
Noting that India was successful in stretching the life of not only aircraft carriers, but also other ships, he said those efforts would continue, as it was found to be an effective system for upgrades.
On the delay in Scorpene series missiles, the Navy chief said his force was looking for a second line of production for the submarine, as there "is a requirement for upping speed" of construction.
Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|
indians always showed reluctance in the present scenario wheather it is the field of science,millitary,finance,education .i think our system believes in just show off.they resembles like a roariing lion at a far bt nvr tried to develop their own to put mental pressure on others.
Every day in the north eastern states bordering china you read reports about intrusions etc but central govt officials will say every thing is fine. Our Air force was not able to figure out that one of the UAVs in J&K was ours before they scrabled for it. That is the sorry state of affairs we are in. Our defence procurement strategy to is to buy some high value items like planes,tanks, ships. Half of the systems in these items probably don't even work. It is designed for agents/politicians to make money. As simple as that. Let the Navy Chief know China has come out of this missile just to address the problem that he points out. Ofcourse it will be another 20 years for India to catch on and then buy it from somewhere else.That just indicates our sorry attitude and capabilities. With all the waste, why is India not able to develop one system which is truly world class that no one else has?. Go figure !.
Dear Sir, Victory and defeat are asynchronous. One needs less power to inflict on Chinese navy, for example. Given a Chief postion, I will select the Brahmos and convert it into 20-100KW nuclear attack cruise missiles. A radar evasive stealth fast attack boat which is powered by a small nuclear reactor and carryig a few above spec Brahmos attack missiles. Once you are in the vicinity of a aircraft carrier or a convoy of ships, you fix the approximate GPS posiion and release the missiles. the taret can run but it annot hide.
Dear Sir, One needs less power to inflict on Chinese navy, for example. Given a Chief postion, I will select the Brahmos and convert it into 20-100KW nuclear attack cruise missiles. A radar evasive stealth fast attack boat which is powered by a small nuclear reactor (20KW)carryig a few above spec Brahmos attack missiles. India should go for this kind of attack scenarios. Such small boats can be made numerous and if they survive and reach land, they can launch a Nagasaki on chinese cities. Both way, they are potent and can cause maximum destruction.
Let us not white wash our failings. The Indian Ocean is now the hot bed of international activity from terrorists to pirates, from smugglers to peddlers of merchandise, let alone oil that is still a major commodity. The sea lanes will have to be protected and there is a need of a multidimensional navy. We accept the proposition that hunting and targetting specific ships is difficult. But increase the difficulty by the sheer volume of defences which the attacker will have to endure. This is what is security all about: escaping the chase after the attack. It cannot be a repeat of how we failed to trap the Pak sub that sunk Khukri.
Will they hit you just like that, they will hit you when in war, and when in WAR they can easily trace you. When a missile can accurately hit a fast falling small satellite, a huge ship is no big deal to target.
China has backward missiles, though as an ally of Israel she does obtain some good weapons via Israel. In any case India has not to worry, we are ahead.
U are right. Our missiles is primitives type similar to the fireworks being display during Beijing Olympic. Dont be bother's by our missiles. We are friends.
Another typical humbug statement from another of our defense arm's chief. He says there are many a ship in the sea at a given time and it is rather difficult to isolate a particular one leave alone targeting it! Let me remind him in the event of a declared war which merchant/ fishing ships will venture in the viscinity of the warfaring ones? Or am I dumber than what most give me credit for? May be so. Otherwise why are we running around the globe buying more and more modern & sophisticated weaponry at such heavy costs? Not, surely, for decorations? Please, pray tell if I need my head examined, it is spinning so much of late. All these so called bloody stupid defense chiefs are making me go in whirlwind. Particularly when it comes to China, the tail either wags or goes between the hind legs. Or am I the only one to see it like that - a black sheep? Is there, by any chance, a competition going on for irresponsible statements from higher levels of all of the public offices?
HI guys criticizing huge expense, be understand that the peace is more expensive than a war, you should mind it. Just dont blame the govt. machinery and politicians. India is the only country in Earth that spending less than 3 percentage of her GDP... Be more practical about safty, threat and peace
So who is the threat to India. Why waste so much on defense system.
stop living in a fools paradise
If the Navy Chief is so sure about it, why have offensive systems including missiles on his ships? Surely all are not meant to be use on land-based targets!