Indian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

luosifen

luosifen

Senior Member
Registered Member
How often do the Indian carriers go on deployment and gain operational experience? I've seen them sail for a few Western exercises but I haven't heard of them going on routine patrols all that much.
 
J

Jason_

Junior Member
Registered Member
Richard Santos said:
A systematic approach to testing involves a series of unit tests with very specific defined objectives before any integrated tests.

Also, whether or not corner reflectors help or hinder assessment of the weapon’s homing performance depends on whether the radar profile of the trail target would otherwise sufficiently resemble the profile of the weapons’ s likely wartime target. This would be all the more true if the missile’s radar and processing software is sophisticated enough to identify the target by its radar profile and aim for a point other than centroid of the reflections. In this case testing the homing performance of the weapon depends on giving the target a specific radar profile, rather than just any radar profile the target by chance happen to have.

If there are two possible interpretations for the choices and behavior of a despised enemy, one gives the enemy capabilities the benefit of the doubt, the other belittles the capabilities of the enemy, always selecting the interpretation that belittles the capabilities of that despised enemy is probably something the Russians did before the Ukrainian invasion.

As you can see, the Russians probably currently see cause to regret their choices.
Click to expand...
I would agree with you 100% if the weapon tested was some new prototype, but it wasn’t. It was Brahmos, a supposedly highly mature weapon that is the IN amd IAF’s only modern anti-ship system. For tests with a weapon in service, one would expect realistic conditions.

If China and India ever go to war, the side that underestimates the opponent won’t be the PLA.
 
by78

by78

General
Richard Santos said:
A systematic approach to testing involves a series of unit tests with very specific defined objectives before any integrated tests.
Click to expand...
What are you rambling on about? Firing a live missile at a target ship at sea is about as 'integrated' as you can get. Brahmos have been in service for a long time, and it's a bit late for your so-called systematic approach with specific and limited test objectives.

Richard Santos said:
Also, whether or not corner reflectors help or hinder assessment of the weapon’s homing performance depends on whether the radar profile of the trail target would otherwise sufficiently resemble the profile of the weapons’ s likely wartime target. This would be all the more true if the missile’s radar and processing software is sophisticated enough to identify the target by its radar profile and aim for a point other than centroid of the reflections. In this case testing the homing performance of the weapon depends on giving the target a specific radar profile, rather than just any radar profile the target by chance happen to have.
Click to expand...
You don't simulate the radar signatures of an adversary's ship by using these primitive and passive reflectors, which are used to merely increase radar returns (i.e. making a small ship appear bigger). Instead, you use
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to simulate the signatures, preferably based on the radar signature data you've collected from an actual adversary's ship. Come on, I thought you had a degree in engineering physics. @Jason_ was absolutely correct in questioning the use of reflectors for a missile that has been in active service for well over a decade.

Richard Santos said:
If there are two possible interpretations for the choices and behavior of a despised enemy, one gives the enemy capabilities the benefit of the doubt, the other belittles the capabilities of the enemy, always selecting the interpretation that belittles the capabilities of that despised enemy is probably something the Russians did before the Ukrainian invasion.

As you can see, the Russians probably currently see cause to regret their choices.
Click to expand...
Huh? Just how and why did you interpret @Jason_'s comment as belittling of a 'despised' enemy's capabilities? How did you make that giant leap, and how did you even know that @Jason_ regards India as a despised enemy?

And just why did you bring Russia into this? What's next? Are you gonna segue into a monologue on why accountants are key to winning wars?

Why do you always wax lyrical and philosophical about irrelevant sundry subjects that are at best tenuously connected to the subject at hand? Please get off your soapbox and take your long-winded soliloquies about your latest hobbyhorse to the appropriate thread.
 
Last edited:
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
Abominable said:
Is that picture from a 1970 camera?

I still don't understand why India needs carriers.
Click to expand...
Planes tend to be important for warfare, and especially for naval warfare.

The question, frankly speaking, shouldn't be why navy x needs carriers.
The question is more like what aviation-less big navies are even good for.
 
A

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
Gloire_bb said:
Planes tend to be important for warfare, and especially for naval warfare.

The question, frankly speaking, shouldn't be why navy x needs carriers.
The question is more like what aviation-less big navies are even good for.
Click to expand...
Those planes can be land based. India even has the Nicobar Islands in the Indian ocean.

As for navies without carriers, how many carriers does Russia have right now?
 
Gloire_bb

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
Abominable said:
Those planes can be land based. India even has the Nicobar Islands in the Indian ocean.
Click to expand...
Nicobar Islands are a chain in one certain part of the ocean. Moreover, all of its airbases are known to just about everyone.

Abominable said:
As for navies without carriers, how many carriers does Russia have right now?
Click to expand...
An excellent, textbook example of a navy of a nation that nowadays isn't really sure what it is needed for.
Hugely accented by the fact that it is that remains of the former second navy on the planet.
But the late Soviet Union knew what it needed its navy for. Modern Russia doesn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top