What are you trying to argue here? Installing missiles on aircraft carriers does have a big impact. It is an established fact.
They have an impact if you hypothetically weigh one option against another - and those will be different ships.
If designers have both directly on their "to do" request - there is no "options" - both will be fitted.
In case of Vikramaditya - the size of her hangar was predetermined by the hangar of the original ship(Baku). In case of Vikrant - same was set (determined) at the final RfP stage.
p.s. barak-8 isn't really that large of a missile.
Admiral Kuznetsov has a smaller airwing than Liaoning.
Because while they're closely related - they aren't the same ships. You can't change Kuznetsov to be Liaoning. Or to be fair - you can, but for a prohibitive time and financial cost. Same with Vikramaditya and Vikrant.
So India has 2 aircraft carriers for a country with around 800 million people in poverty. Bravo! If you think that is a significant achievement, how about the other 'lesser navies' of Brazil, Argentina, Thailand whom at some point had aircraft carriers? They don't have India's economy, yet they were able to procure carriers. Hmm, maybe India is not so special after all?
I understand that this is a thread for nationalistic fighting, but I am not really interested in it, and only came for the ship discussion.
Fact is, for all intents and purposes, is that IN is a soon-to-be 2 carrier navy. Millions in poverty or no, you have to understand it as such.
All SAMs can do their jobs, but each type of India's Naval SAMs is only installed in each specific vessels, not combined on a single vessel to create a layered defense. Because of that, India's naval air defense is messy, hence it is overrated.
To be fair - the previous generation of Indian warships(Delhi/Shivalik/Rajputs still in service) do in fact carry layered air defenses.
But while it is a downside - it isn't an unique India-specific downside, and is often accepted for warships of this class. Including many Chinese ship classes.
The Indian Navy and military analysts touted the Brahmos missile to be their go to choice for land-attack missions. Brahmos vs CJ-10 or Tomahawk? No need for debate.
Brahmos was tested against land targets. Onyx(close relative) was actually used in combat against them(more to make a statement, but still). And finally - Indians are in this case simply continuing with what is known to work (operation Trident).
All in all - it's worth noting, that Indian military currently doesn't really need that much of naval strike to begin with - it only makes sense for Western Pakistani ports). The last time Indian navy was used for this mission - Eastern Pakistan was still in existence, and majority of targets weren't within reach of any other stand-off weapons.
p.s. you conveniently forgot 3M14E, which Indians have on 14 ships in service (5 more in acquisition).
What are you trying to pull over here? What has the mess of the Indian Navy gotta do with the PLAN? China is not the one proclaiming that they want their carriers to perform power projection. Their carriers are for defending the Chinese coasts and seaways only. Not for blockading another country or bombing another country. It has always been clear and consistent. Why are you so desperate to defend the Indian Navy that you have to resort to gaslighting?
1. Power projection is originally on 3rd place in their missions(after fleet air defense and anti-shipping strike). I.e. it's actually pretty low.
2. Carrier is a sea
control/strike platform, flag or stated goal(coast defense carrier? wow) on it is of no difference. It can fight for sea control in the waters around China. It may fight for sea control
protecting China's territorial integrity(Taiwan gets itchy behind the ear).
Or elsewhere. This is the point of a carrier. "Protecting sea lanes" by China is a
defensive mission from a Chinese standpoint(Chinese trade), but from the Indian one it's actually an offensive mission(naval offensive in Indian ocean, aimed at the destruction of the Indian navy).
Why? You may find some time to read A. Mahan, it's useful for arguments on the use of sea power. And look at the map on top of that.
3. I am not "desperate", nor am I really "protecting" it. I'd prefer to call it having at least some knowledge on the subject.
If you despise
"Jai Hinds" - be above them.
Indian Navy can fight in the Indian Ocean, but China is not interested to fight India there unless India picks a fight. It won't be an easy fight for India that's for sure. Nevertheless, it is actually India that has the intentions to confront China in the South China Sea and blockade the Malacca Straits. Even now with its vastly inferior navy.
Again - spare me the political side of the dispute, I am only interested in the naval aspect here.
It doesn't even matter, say, who will begin. The majority of Chinese SLOCs pass through Malakka and Indian ocean - and it's pretty obvious (and known!) plan of IN to cut them in case of hostilities: in fact, it visibly demonstrated just that last summer - by demonstratively shadowing China-bound commercial vessels.
If India (China, Pakistan, Burkina-Faso) does pick this fight - PLAN will
have to do something, or else what's the point of its current existence; The only way to solve this in given geographical conditions is establishing control of the Indian ocean. The way of establishing control over the body of water is obvious(Mahan again). The mission of the IN, in this case, is obviously the opposite - which is greatly simplified by geography(long and restricting Malakka+Andaman islands; "wall" of neutral nations in-between; significant logistical and military problems of using other straits).
Consequently, for as long as India sees China as a primary military(or political) threat - it'll continue to try to ensure its capability to win this battle. As of now - it technically can.
And, vise versa - until and unless China can somehow solve this problem politically - Indian subcontinent will continue to weigh as a sort of Damocles sword over East Asia-bound trade routs, and it's going to be a possible (undesirable, but possible) scenario for the PLAN. Ongoing
coast defense supercarrier construction is, among others, a way to address that exact problem.
Japanese Navy may be toothless. Russian Navy maybe ghosts of Khrushchev. But I'm betting that both of them do not envy the Indian Navy. If they can construct the Maya-class destroyers, or build the Borei-class SSBNs why should they be envying the Indian Navy?
Dunno. 3 different navies. And I said about Russian naval aviation, not navy. It's an important distinction.
p.s. until and unless we're ending the world, SSBN is more of a pain in the ass for a navy than an actual asset.
