India’s one aircraft carrier, the INS Viraat, is already past its service life and the Navy has less than ten operational Sea Harrier fighters available for service.
The deal is justifiedBy: Abhishek | 17-Aug-2009Reply | ForwardPersonally i don't think there is anything wrong in getting an old carrier.....Do u even know the cost of a brand-new aircraft carrier...it is definitely something around 8-10 billion.... So, getting an old refitted carrier for abt 2.3 billion is not a bad bargain......The issue is not the cost....it is the delay that will result in inducting goroshkov.......India is moving towards indigenisation of its armed forces...lets hope that we succeed in building the desi carrier on time...that would be an achievement.......remember the chinese so far have failed in the many attempts they made in buiding a carrier themselves....i hope the next carrier we plan would be N-powered....
come india By: suresh | 23-Jul-2009Reply | Forwardi am little confuse why country like india is going for decond hand aircraftcarrier. there are lots of man power and technology within ourself and we should fullly utilise all those thing. there is also scarcity of time that LCA has not entered it final stage. m so worried that there lack a military prepardness of our country. we should odernise our army, navy and airforce with indegenious weapon not a second hand that are imported from other countries.
India depends on Russia for indigenous aircraft carrier tooBy: Suresh Rao | 08-Mar-2009Reply | ForwardScrap the Gorshkov deal ! ! ! Enough of second hand 'hand me downs'. Either we get a brand new Aircraft carrier which will serve full 30 years or nothing at all and the Indian Navy will be non the worse for it.It might be worth the effort and trouble to try for a brand new French "Charles De Gaulle" class nuclear propelled Aircraft carrier rathjer than this 30 year old reliccalled the Gorshkov
Do we need a CarrierBy: SK Suresh | 21-Feb-2009Reply | ForwardA Carrier in the Indian Context is like White Elephant. The defence policy always goes hand in hand with the foreign policy. If India is a peace loving country with no policy towards intervention, why is the Carrier required. Its great expense is completely out of proportion to its usefulness. Instead, with the new low intensity conflict at sea, it would be better to invest in smaller platforms. A Carrier is not worth it, notwithstanding what some foolish Admiral might say about it. From what my friends in the Navy tell me, the Vikrant and Viraat have spent more time in harbour than at sea. Perhaps the CAG could throw some light on the number of days the Carrier has spent at sea and the costs for keeping this useless metal bucket.
Epaper
Newsletter
Stocks
Weather
Horoscope
