 India To Get Over 60 Warships, peace loving nation? my foot! |
  |
 Dec 2 2005, 11:17 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT  Group: Full Members Posts: 382 Joined: 11-August 05 Member No.: 7,687 Location: 127.0.0.1  |
NEW DELHI: The Indian Navy is strengthening its ties with key maritime nations in the Indian Ocean region and has long-term plans to get over 60 warships in keeping with its emergence as a major power in South Asia.
Admiral Arun Prakash, the Indian Navy chief, on Friday said the role played by his force in mounting relief operations after tsunami had led to greater respect for the nation and a desire among other naval powers to forge closer ties with New Delhi. "We made a deep impression, much more than we realised, on external observers," Prakash told reporters here ahead of Navy Day Sunday, referring to the relief operations carried out by the Indian Navy in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. The swiftness with which it had mobilised 32 warships, 30 aircraft and over 5,000 personnel for the operations had established the navy as a "powerful instrument of state policy", he remarked. After having conducted joint exercises during this year with the navies of US, Russia and France, the Indian Navy had signed pacts with Thailand and Indonesia to carry out coordinated patrols in regional waters. "We also have good ties with the navies of Singapore and Vietnam and are in the process of establishing closer ties with Myanmar and Malaysia," Prakash said. The navy chief also disclosed that his force had ordered 27 warships ranging from patrol boats to frigates and had "in-principle" clearance from the government for 36 more vessels. "There is probably no other navy with a shipbuilding programme of such magnitude," he said. These vessels, however, would be just adequate to maintain the navy's current force level of about 130 ships. Link Who says this coward nation wants peace with Pakistan and in South Asia? increasing their military power day by day!!. why dont they spend this money on their own people? they already got enuff stuff and they dont stop? what are they trying to do? |
 |
 
|
|
Dec 2 2005, 01:53 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 643 Joined: 28-August 04 Member No.: 4,803 |
Keep Chinese presence out of Indian ocean I suspect. China already has a strong foothold, and a lot of interest in Persian Gulf and beyond, making the Indian Ocean an important basing and transit area. They can't like that too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2005, 03:12 PM
Post
#3
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 5,968 Joined: 11-March 03 From: CLASSIFIED Member No.: 904 |
QUOTE "There is probably no other navy with a shipbuilding programme of such magnitude," he said the indian's might be building more ships (probably of smaller tonnage), but ton for ton, the chinese are probably way ahead of the indians -------------------- "The most excellent Jihad is that for the conquest of self." (Bukhari)
"Acquire knowledge, it enables its prosessor to distinguish right from wrong; it lights the way to heaven. It is our friend in the desert, our company in solitude and companion when friendless. It guides us to happiness, it sustains us in misery, it is an ornament amongst friends and an armor against enemies." (widely attributed to the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh)) |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2005, 04:06 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 112 Joined: 27-November 05 Member No.: 8,204 |
Its Propaganda,60 WARSHIPS not even the U.S can afford that much and they have a budget more than 10 time of Bhindia's. :hitwall:
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2005, 05:36 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Jr. Members Posts: 115 Joined: 26-November 05 Member No.: 8,196 Location: UK |
QUOTE(Kaiser @ Dec 2 2005, 05:06 PM) Its Propaganda,60 WARSHIPS not even the U.S can afford that much and they have a budget more than 10 time of Bhindia's. :hitwall: [right][snapback]713822[/snapback][/right] Care to check just some of the ships in the US navy USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN CVN 72 EVERETT, WA GTS ADM WM M CALLAGHAN (ROS-4) T-AKR 1001 NO HOMEPORT USS ALABAMA SSBN 731 BANGOR, WA USS ALASKA SSBN 732 BANGOR, WA MV ALATNA (RRF-10) T-AOT 81 NO HOMEPORT USS ALBANY SSN 753 NORFOLK, VA USS ALBUQUERQUE SSN 706 PORTSMOUTH, NH USS ALEXANDRIA SSN 757 PORTSMOUTH, NH USNS ALGOL T-AKR 287 NO HOMEPORT USNS ALTAIR T-AKR 291 NO HOMEPORT MV AMERICAN CORMORANT T-AK 2062 NO HOMEPORT SS AMERICAN OSPREY (OPDS) T-AOT 5075 NO HOMEPORT USS ANNAPOLIS SSN 760 GROTON, CT USNS ANTARES T-AKR 294 NO HOMEPORT USS ANTIETAM CG 54 SAN DIEGO, CA USS ANZIO CG 68 NORFOLK, VA USNS APACHE T-ATF 172 NO HOMEPORT USNS ARCTIC T-AOE 8 NO HOMEPORT USS ARDENT MCM 12 BAHRAIN USS ARLEIGH BURKE DDG 51 NORFOLK, VA USS ASHEVILLE SSN 758 SAN DIEGO, CA USS ASHLAND LSD 48 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS AUGUSTA SSN 710 GROTON, CT USS AUSTIN LPD 4 NORFOLK, VA USS AVENGER MCM 1 INGLESIDE, TX Back to the top - B - USS BARRY DDG 52 NORFOLK, VA USS BATAAN LHD 5 NORFOLK, VA SS BEAVER STATE T-ACS 10 NO HOMEPORT USNS BELLATRIX T-AKR 288 NO HOMEPORT USS BELLEAU WOOD LHA 3 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS BENAVIDEZ T-AKR 306 NO HOMEPORT USS BENFOLD DDG 65 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS BIG HORN T-AO 198 NO HOMEPORT USS BLACK HAWK MHC 58 INGLESIDE, TX USS BLUE RIDGE LCC 19 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN USNS BOB HOPE T-AKR 300 NO HOMEPORT USS BOISE SSN 764 NORFOLK, VA USS BONHOMME RICHARD LHD 6 SAN DIEGO, CA USS BOONE FFG 28 MAYPORT, FL USNS BOWDITCH T-AGS 62 NO HOMEPORT USS BOXER LHD 4 SAN DIEGO, CA USS BREMERTON SSN 698 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS BRIDGE T-AOE 10 NO HOMEPORT USNS BRITTIN T-AKR 305 NO HOMEPORT USNS BRUCE C. HEEZEN T-AGS 64 NO HOMEPORT USS BUFFALO SSN 715 PEARL HARBOR, HI MV BUFFALO SOLDIER T-AK 9881 NO HOMEPORT USS BULKELEY DDG 84 NORFOLK, VA USS BUNKER HILL CG 52 SAN DIEGO, CA Back to the top - C - USS CAMDEN AOE 2 BREMERTON, WA USNS CAPABLE T-AGOS 16 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE DECISION (ROS-4) T-AKR 5054 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE DIAMOND (ROS-4) T-AKR 5055 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE DOMINGO (ROS-4) T-AKR 5053 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE DOUGLAS (ROS-4) T-AKR 5052 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE DUCATO (ROS-4) T-AKR 5051 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE EDMONT (ROS-4) T-AKR 5069 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE FAREWELL (RRF-10) T-AK 5073 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE FEAR (RRF-10) T-AK 5061 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE FLATTERY (RRF-10) T-AK 5070 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE FLORIDA (RRF-10) T-AK 5071 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE GIBSON (ROS-5) (MCDS) T-AK 5051 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE GIRARDEAU (ROS-5) (MCDS) T-AK 2039 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE HENRY (ROS-5) T-AKR 5067 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE HORN (ROS-4) T-AKR 5068 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE HUDSON (ROS-4) T-AKR 5066 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE INSCRIPTION (ROS-5) T-AKR 5076 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE INTREPID (ROS-4) T-AKR 11 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE ISABEL (ROS-5) T-AKR 5062 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE ISLAND (ROS-4) T-AKR 10 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE JACOB (MCDS) T-AK 5029 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE JOHN (ROS-5)(MCDS) T-AK 5022 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE JOHNSON (ROS-5) (MCDS) T-AK 5075 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE JUBY (ROS-5) (MCDS) T-AK 5077 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE KENNEDY (ROS-4) T-AKR 5083 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE KNOX (ROS-4) T-AKR 5082 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE LAMBERT (RRF-10) T-AKR 5077 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE LOBOS (RRF-10) T-AKR 5078 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE MAY (ROS-5) T-AKR 5063 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE MENDOCINO (RRF-10) T-AKR 5064 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE MOHICAN (ROS-5) T-AKR 5065 NO HOMEPORT SS CAPE NOME (RRF-10) T-AK 1014 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE ORLANDO (ROS-4) T-AKR 2004 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE RACE (ROS-4) T-AKR 9660 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE RAY (ROS-4) T-AKR 9679 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE RISE (ROS-5) T-AKR 9678 NO HOMEPORT USS CAPE ST GEORGE CG 71 NORFOLK, VA MV CAPE TAYLOR (ROS-5) T-AKR 113 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE TEXAS (ROS-5) T-AKR 112 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE TRINITY (ROS-4) AKR 9711 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE VICTORY (ROS-4) T-AKR 9701 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE VINCENT (ROS-4) T-AKR 9666 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE WASHINGTON (ROS-5) T-AKR 9961 NO HOMEPORT MV CAPE WRATH (ROS-5) T-AKR 9962 NO HOMEPORT USNS CAPELLA T-AKR 293 NO HOMEPORT USS CARDINAL MHC 60 BAHRAIN USS CARL VINSON CVN 70 NORFOLK, VA USS CARNEY DDG 64 MAYPORT, FL USS CARR FFG 52 NORFOLK, VA USS CARTER HALL LSD 50 LITTLE CREEK, VA USNS CATAWBA T-ATF 168 NO HOMEPORT USS CHAFEE DDG 90 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS CHAMPION MCM 4 INGLESIDE, TX USS CHANCELLORSVILLE CG 62 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN USS CHARLOTTE SSN 766 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS CHARLTON T-AKR 314 NO HOMEPORT MV CHATTAHOOCHEE (RRF-10) T-AOT 82 NO HOMEPORT SS CHESAPEAKE (OPDS) T-AOT 5084 NO HOMEPORT USS CHEYENNE SSN 773 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS CHICAGO SSN 721 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS CHIEF MCM 14 INGLESIDE, TX USS CHINOOK PC 9 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS CHOSIN CG 65 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS CHUNG-HOON DDG 93 SAN DIEGO, CA USS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI SSN 705 GUAM USS CLEVELAND LPD 7 SAN DIEGO, CA USS COLE DDG 67 NORFOLK, VA USS COLUMBIA SSN 771 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS COLUMBUS SSN 762 BREMERTON, WA SS COMET (RRF-10) T-AKR 7 NO HOMEPORT USNS COMFORT T-AH 20 NO HOMEPORT USS COMSTOCK LSD 45 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS CONCORD T-AFS 5 NO HOMEPORT USS CONNECTICUT SSN 22 GROTON, CT USS CONSTITUTION CHARLESTOWN, MA USS CORMORANT MHC 57 INGLESIDE, TX SS CORNHUSKER STATE T-ACS 6 NO HOMEPORT USS CORONADO AGF 11 SAN DIEGO, CA USS COWPENS CG 63 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN MV CPL LOUIS J HAGUE JR T-AK 3000 NO HOMEPORT USS CROMMELIN FFG 37 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS CURTIS WILBUR DDG 54 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN SS CURTISS T-AVB 4 NO HOMEPORT USS CURTS FFG 38 SAN DIEGO, CA USS CUSHING DD 985 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN Back to the top - D - USNS DAHL T-AKR 312 NO HOMEPORT USS DALLAS SSN 700 GROTON, CT USS DE WERT FFG 45 MAYPORT, FL USS DECATUR DDG 73 SAN DIEGO, CA USS DEFENDER MCM 2 INGLESIDE, TX USNS DENEBOLA T-AKR 289 NO HOMEPORT USS DENVER LPD 9 SAN DIEGO, CA USS DEVASTATOR MCM 6 INGLESIDE, TX USS DEXTROUS MCM 13 BAHRAIN SS DIAMOND STATE TACS 7 NO HOMEPORT USS DOLPHIN AGSS 555 SAN DIEGO, CA USS DONALD COOK DDG 75 NORFOLK, VA USS DOYLE FFG 39 MAYPORT, FL USS DUBUQUE LPD 8 SAN DIEGO, CA USS DULUTH LPD 6 SAN DIEGO, CA USS DWIGHT D EISENHOWER CVN 69 NORFOLK, VA Back to the top - E - USNS EFFECTIVE T-AGOS 21 NO HOMEPORT USS ELROD FFG 55 NORFOLK, VA USS EMORY S LAND AS 39 LA MADDALENA, ITALY SS EMPIRE STATE T-AP 1001 NO HOMEPORT USS ENTERPRISE CVN 65 NORFOLK, VA SS EQUALITY STATE T-ACS 8 NO HOMEPORT USS ESSEX LHD 2 SASEBO, JAPAN Back to the top - F - USS FALCON MHC 59 INGLESIDE, TX USS FIREBOLT PC 10 LITTLE CREEK, VA USNS FISHER T-AKR 301 NO HOMEPORT USS FITZGERALD DDG 62 SAN DIEGO, CA SS FLICKERTAIL STATE T-ACS 5 NO HOMEPORT USNS FLINT T-AE 32 NO HOMEPORT USS FLORIDA SSGN 728 BANGOR, WA (OVERHAUL ONLY IN NORFOLK,VA) USS FORD FFG 54 EVERETT, WA USS FORT MCHENRY LSD 43 SASEBO, JAPAN USS FRANK CABLE AS 40 GUAM Back to the top - G - USS GARY FFG 51 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN SS GEM STATE T-ACS 2 NO HOMEPORT USS GEORGE WASHINGTON CVN 73 NORFOLK, VA USS GEORGIA SSGN 729 NORFOLK, VA USS GERMANTOWN LSD 42 SAN DIEGO, CA USS GETTYSBURG CG 64 MAYPORT, FL USNS GILLILAND T-AKR 298 NO HOMEPORT USS GLADIATOR MCM 11 INGLESIDE, TX USS GONZALEZ DDG 66 NORFOLK, VA SS GOPHER STATE T-ACS 4 NO HOMEPORT USNS GORDON T-AKR 296 NO HOMEPORT SS GRAND CANYON STATE T-ACS 3 NO HOMEPORT USS GRAPPLE ARS 53 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS GRASP ARS 51 LITTLE CREEK, VA SS GREEN HARBOUR T-AK 2064 NO HOMEPORT SS GREEN MOUNTAIN STATE T-ACS 9 NO HOMEPORT SS GREEN VALLEY T-AK 2049 NO HOMEPORT MV GREEN WAVE T-AK 2050 NO HOMEPORT USS GREENEVILLE SSN 772 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS GUADALUPE T-AO 200 NO HOMEPORT USS GUARDIAN MCM 5 SASEBO, JAPAN USS GUNSTON HALL LSD 44 LITTLE CREEK, VA MV GUS W DARNELL T-AOT 1121 NO HOMEPORT USNS GYSGT FRED W STOCKHAM T-AK 3017 NO HOMEPORT Back to the top - H - USS HALSEY DDG 97 SAN DIEGO, CA USS HALYBURTON FFG 40 MAYPORT, FL USS HAMPTON SSN 767 NORFOLK, VA USS HARPERS FERRY LSD 49 SASEBO, JAPAN USS HARRY S TRUMAN CVN 75 NORFOLK, VA USS HARTFORD SSN 768 GROTON, CT USS HAWES FFG 53 NORFOLK, VA USNS HAYES T-AG 195 NO HOMEPORT USS HELENA SSN 725 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS HENRY J KAISER T-AOT 187 NO HOMEPORT USS HENRY M JACKSON SSBN 730 BANGOR, WA USNS HENSON T-AGS 63 NO HOMEPORT USS HERON MHC 52 INGLESIDE, TX USS HIGGINS DDG 76 SAN DIEGO, CA USS HONOLULU SSN 718 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS HOPPER DDG 70 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS HOUSTON SSN 713 BREMERTON, WA USS HOWARD DDG 83 SAN DIEGO, CA USS HUE CITY CG 66 MAYPORT, FL USS HURRICANE PC 3 SAN DIEGO, CA USS HYMAN G RICKOVER SSN 709 NORFOLK, VA Back to the top - I - USNS IMPECCABLE T-AGOS 23 NO HOMEPORT USS INGRAHAM FFG 61 EVERETT, WA USS IWO JIMA LHD 7 NORFOLK, VA Back to the top - J - USS JACKSONVILLE SSN 699 NORFOLK, VA USS JAMES E WILLIAMS DDG 95 NORFOLK, VA USS JARRETT FFG 33 SAN DIEGO, CA MV JEB STUART T-AK 9204 NO HOMEPORT USS JEFFERSON CITY SSN 759 SAN DIEGO, CA USS JIMMY CARTER SSN 23 BANGOR, WA USS JOHN C STENNIS CVN 74 BREMERTON, WA USNS JOHN ERICSSON T-AO 194 NO HOMEPORT USS JOHN F KENNEDY CV 67 MAYPORT, FL USS JOHN L HALL FFG 32 PASCAGOULA, MS USNS JOHN LENTHALL T-AO 189 NO HOMEPORT USNS JOHN MCDONNELL T-AGS 51 NO HOMEPORT USS JOHN PAUL JONES DDG 53 SAN DIEGO, CA USS JOHN S MCCAIN DDG 56 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN USS JUNEAU LPD 10 SASEBO, JAPAN Back to the top - K - USNS KANAWHA T-AO 196 NO HOMEPORT USS KAUFFMAN FFG 59 NORFOLK, VA USS KEARSARGE LHD 3 NORFOLK, VA USS KENTUCKY SSBN 737 BANGOR, WA USS KEY WEST SSN 722 PEARL HARBOR, HI SS KEYSTONE STATE T-ACS 1 NO HOMEPORT USNS KILAUEA T-AE 26 NO HOMEPORT USS KINGFISHER MHC 56 INGLESIDE, TX USNS KISKA T-AE 35 NO HOMEPORT USS KITTY HAWK CV 63 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN USS KLAKRING FFG 42 MAYPORT, FL Back to the top - L - USS LA JOLLA SSN 701 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS LABOON DDG 58 NORFOLK, VA USS LAKE CHAMPLAIN CG 57 SAN DIEGO, CA USS LAKE ERIE CG 70 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS LARAMIE T-AO 203 NO HOMEPORT USS LASSEN DDG 82 YOKOSUKA MV LAWRENCE H GIANELLA T-AOT 1125 NO HOMEPORT USNS LCPL ROY M WHEAT T-AK 3016 NO HOMEPORT USNS LEROY GRUMMAN T-AO 195 NO HOMEPORT USS LEYTE GULF CG 55 NORFOLK, VA USNS LITTLEHALES T-AGS 52 NO HOMEPORT USS LOS ANGELES SSN 688 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS LOUISIANA SSBN 743 KINGS BAY, GA USS LOUISVILLE SSN 724 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS LOYAL T-AGOS 22 NO HOMEPORT MV LTC CALVIN P TITUS T-AK 5089 NO HOMEPORT Back to the top - M - MV MAERSK CONSTELLATION T-AKR 2053 NO HOMEPORT USS MAHAN DDG 72 NORFOLK, VA USS MAINE SSBN 741 KINGS BAY, GA SS MAJ STEPHEN W PLESS T-AK 3007 NO HOMEPORT USS MARYLAND SSBN 738 KINGS BAY, GA USNS MARY SEARS T-AGS 65 NO HOMEPORT USS MASON DDG 87 NORFOLK, VA USS MCCAMPBELL DDG 85 SAN DIEGO, CA USS MCCLUSKY FFG 41 SAN DIEGO, CA USS MCFAUL DDG 74 NORFOLK, VA USS MCINERNEY FFG 8 MAYPORT, FL USS MEMPHIS SSN 691 GROTON, CT USNS MENDONCA T-AKR 303 NO HOMEPORT USNS MERCY T-AH 19 NO HOMEPORT SS METEOR (RRF-10) T-AKR 9 NO HOMEPORT USS MIAMI SSN 755 GROTON, CT USS MILIUS DDG 69 SAN DIEGO, CA USS MINNEAPOLIS SAINT PAUL SSN 708 NORFOLK, VA SS MISSION BUENAVENTURA (RRF-20) T-AOT 1012 NO HOMEPORT MV MISSION CAPISTRANO (RRF-20) T-AOT 5005 NO HOMEPORT USS MITSCHER DDG 57 NORFOLK, VA USS MOBILE BAY CG 53 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS MOHAWK T-ATF 170 NO HOMEPORT USS MOMSEN DDG 92 SAN DIEGO, CA USS MONTEREY CG 61 NORFOLK, VA USS MONTPELIER SSN 765 NORFOLK, VA USNS MOUNT BAKER T-AE 34 NO HOMEPORT SS MOUNT WASHINGTON (OPDS) T-AOT 5076 NO HOMEPORT USS MOUNT WHITNEY LCC 20 GAETA, ITALY USS MUSTIN DDG 89 SAN DIEGO, CA Back to the top - N - USS NASHVILLE LPD 13 NORFOLK, VA USS NASSAU LHA 4 NORFOLK, VA USNS NAVAJO T-ATF 169 NO HOMEPORT USS NEBRASKA SSBN 739 KINGS BAY, GA USS NEVADA SSBN 733 BANGOR, WA USS NEWPORT NEWS SSN 750 NORFOLK, VA USNS NIAGARA FALLS T-AFS 3 NO HOMEPORT USS NICHOLAS FFG 47 NORFOLK, VA USS NIMITZ CVN 68 SAN DIEGO, CA USS NITZE DDG 94 NORFOLK, VA MV NODAWAY (RRF-10) T-AOT 78 NO HOMEPORT USS NORFOLK SSN 714 NORFOLK, VA USS NORMANDY CG 60 NORFOLK, VA Back to the top - O - USS O'KANE DDG 77 PEARL HARBOR USS OAK HILL LSD 51 LITTLE CREEK, VA USNS OBSERVATION ISLAND T-AGM 23 NO HOMEPORT USS OGDEN LPD 5 SAN DIEGO, CA USS OHIO SSGN 726 BANGOR, WA USS OKLAHOMA CITY SSN 723 NORFOLK, VA USS OLYMPIA SSN 717 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS ORIOLE MHC 55 INGLESIDE, TX USS OSCAR AUSTIN DDG 79 NORFOLK, VA USS OSPREY MHC 51 INGLESIDE, TX Back to the top - P - USS PASADENA SSN 752 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS PATHFINDER T-AGS 60 NO HOMEPORT USS PATRIOT MCM 7 SASEBO, JAPAN USNS PATUXENT T-AO 201 NO HOMEPORT MV PAUL BUCK T-AOT 1122 NO HOMEPORT USS PAUL HAMILTON DDG 60 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS PEARL HARBOR LSD 52 SAN DIEGO, CA USNS PECOS T-AO 197 NO HOMEPORT USS PELELIU LHA 5 SAN DIEGO, CA USS PELICAN MHC 53 INGLESIDE, TX USS PENNSYLVANIA SSBN 735 BANGOR, WA SS PETERSBURG (OPDS) T-AOT 5075 NO HOMEPORT MV PFC DEWAYNE T WILLIAMS TAK 3009 NO HOMEPORT SS PFC EUGENE A OBREGON T-AK 3006 NO HOMEPORT MV PFC JAMES ANDERSON JR T-AK 3002 NO HOMEPORT MV PFC WILLIAM B BAUGH T-AK 3001 NO HOMEPORT USS PHILADELPHIA SSN 690 GROTON, CT USS PHILIPPINE SEA CG 58 MAYPORT, FL USNS PILILAAU T-AKR 304 NO HOMEPORT USS PINCKNEY DDG 91 SAN DIEGO, CA USS PIONEER MCM 9 INGLESIDE, TX USS PITTSBURGH SSN 720 GROTON, CT USNS POLLUX T-AKR 290 NO HOMEPORT USNS POMEROY T-AKR 316 NO HOMEPORT USS PONCE LPD 15 NORFOLK, VA USS PORT ROYAL CG 73 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS PORTER DDG 78 NORFOLK, VA USS PREBLE DDG 88 SAN DIEGO, CA USS PRINCETON CG 59 SAN DIEGO, CA USS PROVIDENCE SSN 719 GROTON, CT MV PVT FRANKLIN J PHILLIPS T-AK 3004 NO HOMEPORT Back to the top - R - USNS RAINIER T-AOE 7 NO HOMEPORT USS RAMAGE DDG 61 NORFOLK, VA USNS RANGE SENTINEL T-AGM 22 NO HOMEPORT USNS RAPPAHANNOCK T-AO 204 NO HOMEPORT USS RAVEN MHC 61 BAHRAIN USNS RED CLOUD T-AKR 313 NO HOMEPORT USNS REGULUS T-AKR 292 NO HOMEPORT USS RENTZ FFG 46 SAN DIEGO, CA USS REUBEN JAMES FFG 57 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS RHODE ISLAND SSBN 740 KINGS BAY, GA MV RICHARD G MATHIESEN T-AOT 1124 NO HOMEPORT USS ROBERT G BRADLEY FFG 49 MAYPORT, FL USS ROBIN MHC 54 INGLESIDE, TX USS RODNEY M DAVIS FFG 60 EVERETT, WA USS RONALD REAGAN CVN 76 SAN DIEGO, CA USS ROOSEVELT DDG 80 MAYPORT, FL USS ROSS DDG 71 NORFOLK, VA USS RUSHMORE LSD 47 SAN DIEGO, CA USS RUSSELL DDG 59 PEARL HARBOR, HI Back to the top - S - USS SAFEGUARD ARS 50 SASEBO, JAPAN USS SAIPAN LHA 2 NORFOLK, VA USS SALT LAKE CITY SSN 716 SAN DIEGO, CA USS SALVOR ARS 52 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS SAMUEL B ROBERTS FFG 58 MAYPORT, FL MV SAMUEL L COBB T-AOT 1123 NO HOMEPORT USS SAN FRANCISCO SSN 711 GUAM USS SAN JACINTO CG 56 NORFOLK, VA USNS SAN JOSE T-AFS 7 NO HOMEPORT USS SAN JUAN SSN 751 GROTON, CT USNS SANTA BARBARA T-AE 28 NO HOMEPORT USS SANTA FE SSN 763 PEARL HARBOR, HI USNS SATURN T-AFS 10 NO HOMEPORT USS SCOUT MCM 8 INGLESIDE, TX USS SCRANTON SSN 756 NORFOLK, VA USS SEAWOLF SSN 21 GROTON, CT USNS SEAY T-AKR 302 NO HOMEPORT USS SENTRY MCM 3 INGLESIDE, TX SS SGT MATEJ KOCAK T-AK 3005 NO HOMEPORT MV SGT WILLIAM R BUTTON T-AK 3012 NO HOMEPORT USNS SHASTA T-AE 33 NO HOMEPORT USS SHILOH CG 67 SAN DIEGO, CA USS SHOUP DDG 86 EVERETT, WA USS SHREVEPORT LPD 12 NORFOLK, VA USS SHRIKE MHC 62 INGLESIDE, TX USNS SHUGHART T-AKR 295 NO HOMEPORT USS SIMPSON FFG 56 MAYPORT, FL USNS SIOUX T-ATF 171 NO HOMEPORT USNS SIRIUS T-AFS 8 NO HOMEPORT USS SIROCCO PC 6 LITTLE CREEK, VA USNS SISLER T-AKR 311 NO HOMEPORT USNS SODERMAN T-AKR 317 NO HOMEPORT MV SP5 ERIC G GIBSON T-AK 5091 NO HOMEPORT USNS SPICA T-AFS 9 NO HOMEPORT USS SPRINGFIELD SSN 761 PORTSMOUTH, NH USS SQUALL PC 7 SAN DIEGO, CA USS STEPHEN W GROVES FFG 29 PASCAGOULA, MS USS STETHEM DDG 63 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN MV STEVEN BENNETT T-AK 4296 NO HOMEPORT USS STOUT DDG 55 NORFOLK, VA MV STRONG TEXAN T-AK 9670 NO HOMEPORT MV STRONG VIRGINIAN T-AK 9205 NO HOMEPORT USNS SUMNER T-AGS 61 NO HOMEPORT USNS SUPPLY T-AOE 6 NO HOMEPORT Back to the top - T - USS TARAWA LHA 1 SAN DIEGO, CA USS TAYLOR FFG 50 MAYPORT, FL USS TEMPEST PC 2 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS TENNESSEE SSBN 734 KINGS BAY, GA USS THACH FFG 43 SAN DIEGO, CA USS THE SULLIVANS DDG 68 MAYPORT, FL USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT CVN 71 NORFOLK, VA USS THOMAS S GATES CG 51 PASCAGOULA, MS USS THUNDERBOLT PC 12 LITTLE CREEK, VA USNS TIPPECANOE T-AO 199 NO HOMEPORT USS TOLEDO SSN 769 GROTON, CT USS TOPEKA SSN 754 SAN DIEGO, CA USS TORTUGA LSD 46 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS TRENTON LPD 14 NORFOLK, VA USS TUCSON SSN 770 PEARL HARBOR, HI USS TYPHOON PC 5 LITTLE CREEK, VA Back to the top - U & V - USS UNDERWOOD FFG 36 MAYPORT, FL MV VALIANT T-AOT 94A NO HOMEPORT USS VALLEY FORGE CG 50 SAN DIEGO, CA USS VANDEGRIFT FFG 48 YOKOSUKA, JAPAN USS VELLA GULF CG 72 NORFOLK, VA USS VICKSBURG CG 69 MAYPORT, FL USNS VICTORIOUS T-AGOS 19 NO HOMEPORT USS VIRGINIA SSN 774 GROTON, CT Back to the top - W - USNS WALTER S DIEHL T-AO 193 NO HOMEPORT USS WARRIOR MCM 10 INGLESIDE, TX USS WASP LHD 1 NORFOLK, VA USNS WATERS T-AGS 45 NO HOMEPORT USNS WATKINS T-AKR 315 NO HOMEPORT USNS WATSON T-AKR 310 NO HOMEPORT USS WEST VIRGINIA SSBN 736 KINGS BAY, GA USS WHIDBEY ISLAND LSD 41 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS WHIRLWIND PC 11 LITTLE CREEK, VA USS WINSTON S CHURCHILL DDG 81 NORFOLK, VA SS WRIGHT T-AVB 3 NO HOMEPORT USS WYOMING SSBN 742 KINGS BAY, GA Back to the top - Y & Z - USNS YANO T-AKR 297 NO HOMEPORT USNS YUKON T-AO 202 NO HOMEPORT USNS ZEUS T-ARC 7 NO HOMEPORT Back to the top - 1st & 2nd - MV 1ST LT ALEX BONNYMAN T-AK 3003 NO HOMEPORT MV 1ST LT BALDOMERO LOPEZ T-AK 3010 NO HOMEPORT USNS 1ST LT HARRY L MARTIN T-AK 3015 NO HOMEPORT MV 1ST LT JACK LUMMUS T-AK 3011 NO HOMEPORT MV 2ND LT JOHN P BOBO T-AK 3008 NO HOMEPORT |
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2005, 10:10 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 643 Joined: 28-August 04 Member No.: 4,803 |
QUOTE(Kaiser @ Dec 2 2005, 05:06 PM) Its Propaganda,60 WARSHIPS not even the U.S can afford that much and they have a budget more than 10 time of Bhindia's. :hitwall: [right][snapback]713822[/snapback][/right] USN continues to maintain a level of around 300 ship naval fleet, including some 100 destroyer/frigate/cruiser, some 60~70 submarines, 22 (I think...) flat-tops, and assortment of landing/logistic support/auxillery ships. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 01:22 AM
Post
#7
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 183 Joined: 28-September 05 Member No.: 7,865 Location: hindia, where urine sells and we drink |
QUOTE(Kaiser @ Dec 3 2005, 03:36 AM) Its Propaganda,60 WARSHIPS not even the U.S can afford that much and they have a budget more than 10 time of Bhindia's. :hitwall: [right][snapback]713822[/snapback][/right] its not propaganda...if u look at the real pic ture u will get it...currently 27 ships including destroyers,frigates and various other class r under contruction....and the rest will be built in future...not sure whether they include the scorpions... -------------------- I am bhangeee, my parents just got appology letter from condomn company
|
|
|
|
 Dec 3 2005, 02:56 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
MAJOR GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 2,641 Joined: 27-October 02 Member No.: 240 |
If 60 indeed then don't expect these ships to as capable as destroyers or bigger ships, the number surely includes small missile boats.
And even if they are 60, they can not afford it, and if they do buy it is good for Pakistan, they will seriously suffer with hunderds of millions people living in poverty hell. While Pakistan in response should invest % same amount of money in education and infrastruture. And i heard that Msuhraff increased higher education budget by mulitple of 26 which is very good and in future would help Pakistan. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 03:05 AM
Post
#9
|
|
 LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 109 Joined: 24-October 05 Member No.: 7,962 Location: Mumbai-India |
QUOTE(USAM @ Dec 3 2005, 02:26 PM) If 60 indeed then don't expect these ships to as capable as destroyers or bigger ships, the number surely includes small missile boats. And even if they are 60, they can not afford it, and if they do buy it is good for Pakistan, they will seriously suffer with hunderds of millions people living in poverty hell. While Pakistan in response should invest % same amount of money in education and infrastruture. And i heard that Msuhraff increased higher education budget by mulitple of 26 which is very good and in future would help Pakistan. [right][snapback]713974[/snapback][/right] Stop worrying about India and get your own house in order. :angry: |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 03:25 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 183 Joined: 28-September 05 Member No.: 7,865 Location: hindia, where urine sells and we drink |
QUOTE(Indiski @ Dec 3 2005, 02:35 PM) Stop worrying about India and get your own house in order. :angry: [right][snapback]713979[/snapback][/right] thts wht i was telling them 4 long... and ofcourse 60 ships comprise of missile boats and other smaller crafts...and all these r from navy budget...stop bothering abt how we survive... -------------------- I am bhangeee, my parents just got appology letter from condomn company
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 07:38 AM
Post
#11
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 6,775 Joined: 8-May 03 From: Parachinar, Pakistan Member No.: 1,647 Location: Parachinar, Pakistan |
QUOTE(Indiski @ Dec 3 2005, 03:05 AM) Stop worrying about India and get your own house in order. :angry:[right][snapback]713979[/snapback][/right] Pretty lame coming from a loser bhindi hangin around in a Pakistani Forum. This is a Pakistani Forum, so i suggest that you go mix with your own, moron! This post has been edited by Dizasta76: Dec 3 2005, 07:39 AM -------------------- ........ when the first drop of a Munafiq's blood drops in the Kaa'bah ........
........ the Black Flags Army shall rise from Khurasan and commence its earth rumbling march toward Damishque. Any force that tries to come in its path, shall be destroyed with ruthless destruction. Awaiting, upon reaching Damishque, the safron and beads of pearls and the Black Turban that shall lead the Salah of Fajr ......... ........ the stones and trees of Lud shall cry out to the Black Flags and tell them of the Munafiqs, Yahuds and Kuffar that are hiding behind them, to come and kill them. That day shall be the day of reckoning, the day of justice, the day when no power shall hold and unfair advantage. The battle shall be fought and won by way of faith ........ ........ it shall be done, as it is said "Kun Faya Koon |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 07:42 AM
Post
#12
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 4,478 Joined: 15-September 03 From: Netherlands Member No.: 2,770 Location: Netherlands |
Acquisition of 60 ships as such says nothing. Some of these 60 are very small and inconsequential, others are major surface combattants. Some are needed to REPLACE hugely aged ships currently in IN service, other may represent addition of new capabilities. So, the question is not the number of new ships to be added but whether these ship aqcuisitions translate to a) maintaining a fleet, b) fleet modernization and/or c) fleet expansion. The first is just replacing old stuff with new stf due to age, with no significant step up in quality or quantity. Modernization refers to a qualitative leap only. Expansion to a quantitative leap or combined qualitative/quantitative leap.
-------------------- RULES AND REGULATIONS:
1.) Refrain from using excessive profanity in any post. 2.) Refrain from using abusive behavior against other members. 3.) No personal attacks. 4.) Do not Spam your posts. 5.) No Raciest Remarks. 6.) Staying within the Forum category. 7.) No post should include Religious hatred/ topics, PDF is a defence forum 8.) Using more than one name. (Traced by IP address) 9.) Posting in wrong froum will either be deleted or moved to correct one 10.) Hatred again Pakistan and its allies including USA is not welcomed http://forum.pakistanidefence.com/index.php?showtopic=34&view=findpost&p=128 |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 08:06 AM
Post
#13
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 183 Joined: 28-September 05 Member No.: 7,865 Location: hindia, where urine sells and we drink |
QUOTE(penguin @ Dec 3 2005, 07:12 PM) Acquisition of 60 ships as such says nothing. Some of these 60 are very small and inconsequential, others are major surface combattants. Some are needed to REPLACE hugely aged ships currently in IN service, other may represent addition of new capabilities. So, the question is not the number of new ships to be added but whether these ship aqcuisitions translate to a) maintaining a fleet, b) fleet modernization and/or c) fleet expansion. The first is just replacing old stuff with new stf due to age, with no significant step up in quality or quantity. Modernization refers to a qualitative leap only. Expansion to a quantitative leap or combined qualitative/quantitative leap. [right][snapback]714040[/snapback][/right] looks like u r the master planner for the navy.... :tongue4: -------------------- I am bhangeee, my parents just got appology letter from condomn company
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 08:56 AM
Post
#14
|
|
|
CADET Group: Jr. Members Posts: 51 Joined: 30-November 05 Member No.: 8,218 Location: europe |
QUOTE(Dizasta76 @ Dec 3 2005, 07:38 AM) Pretty lame coming from a loser bhindi hangin around in a Pakistani Forum. This is a Pakistani Forum, so i suggest that you go mix with your own, moron! [right][snapback]714037[/snapback][/right] If Pakistani forum take it to Pakistan. Why the hell is it in my America? |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 09:38 AM
Post
#15
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 5,052 Joined: 30-August 04 From: Brooklyn, NY Member No.: 4,840 |
QUOTE(Indiski @ Dec 3 2005, 04:05 AM) Stop worrying about India and get your own house in order. :angry: [right][snapback]713979[/snapback][/right] How can we not worry! We've gone to war 3 times! -------------------- “For decades world public opinion has been neither for nor against the Palestinians. It simply ignored us. At least the world is talking about us now.” -George Habash after the hijacking of three airliners at Dawson's Field in Jordan in 1970.
Free Alaska! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 09:44 AM
Post
#16
|
|
|
CADET Group: Jr. Members Posts: 51 Joined: 30-November 05 Member No.: 8,218 Location: europe |
QUOTE(Kim Jong-il Hater @ Dec 3 2005, 09:38 AM) How can we not worry! We've gone to war 3 times! [right][snapback]714087[/snapback][/right] Well actually 4 times remember kargil. Pakistan doesn't need to worry because it knows if it doesn't attack India would not. But that's not true for Pakistan. Pakistan will try to take military action against India the day it is capable of doing it. You know it, I know it! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 09:49 AM
Post
#17
|
|
 MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 685 Joined: 4-July 05 Member No.: 7,279 Location: U.K, England |
QUOTE(europe @ Dec 3 2005, 04:44 PM) Well actually 4 times remember kargil. Pakistan doesn't need to worry because it knows if it doesn't attack India would not. But that's not true for Pakistan. Pakistan will try to take military action against India the day it is capable of doing it. You know it, I know it! [right][snapback]714091[/snapback][/right] You really think Pakistan would try and take India on when it can?! As a Pakistani i doubt that alot. It's always Pakistan on the defensive most of the time. Besides, to be honest...I don't think Pakistan's going to be "capable" anytime soon. I don't think there will be another war, I hope after 4 wars, both sides have realised that it ain't working whatever they're trying! -------------------- If you don't give a damn...We don't give a F*ck!
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 10:59 AM
Post
#18
|
|
 MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 760 Joined: 16-July 05 Member No.: 7,472 |
QUOTE(Str8 Thug @ Dec 3 2005, 09:49 AM) You really think Pakistan would try and take India on when it can?! As a Pakistani i doubt that alot. It's always Pakistan on the defensive most of the time. Besides, to be honest...I don't think Pakistan's going to be "capable" anytime soon. I don't think there will be another war, I hope after 4 wars, both sides have realised that it ain't working whatever they're trying! [right][snapback]714093[/snapback][/right] Conversely do you feel Indian Naval build up is only against Pakistan? -------------------- Per Ardua Ad Astra
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 12:13 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
CADET Group: Jr. Members Posts: 51 Joined: 30-November 05 Member No.: 8,218 Location: europe |
QUOTE(Str8 Thug @ Dec 3 2005, 09:49 AM) You really think Pakistan would try and take India on when it can?! As a Pakistani i doubt that alot. It's always Pakistan on the defensive most of the time. Besides, to be honest...I don't think Pakistan's going to be "capable" anytime soon. I don't think there will be another war, I hope after 4 wars, both sides have realised that it ain't working whatever they're trying! [right][snapback]714093[/snapback][/right] I agree 4 wars is enough. Now lets talk about making the people the two nations got happy. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 02:03 PM
Post
#20
|
|
|
MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 685 Joined: 4-July 05 Member No.: 7,279 Location: U.K, England |
QUOTE(KLAFA @ Dec 3 2005, 05:59 PM) Conversely do you feel Indian Naval build up is only against Pakistan? [right][snapback]714116[/snapback][/right] I don't feel it's solely for Pakistan because what they're saying is too much, they wouldn't need that much for Pakistan. Maybe it's due to Chinas military build up? -------------------- If you don't give a damn...We don't give a F*ck!
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 02:32 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Full Members Posts: 98 Joined: 15-March 05 From: United States Member No.: 6,452 |
I would definitely agree it is because of China's ambitious naval plans. China alreday is making inroads into the Indian ocean basin, so the IN has started to go into over-drive to bring itself up into a state where it can become the dominant power in the indian ocean before china. I'm not sure who will win the race. However, the indian govt appears to be backing the IN now in terms of funding, so it seems there is a concerted effort not to let the chinese simply walk in and make the indian ocean their own little backyard pond.
I've said it before, and i'll say it again, this HAS to concern pakistan. the bigger the IN becomes, the more hemmed in pakistani naval assets will become. Pakistan simply cannot rely on the Gwadar-China connection to shore up its naval presence; pakistan MUST have a good defensive navy in place (i feel since there is not even an adequate defense, its too early to consider an offensive, power-projecting navy). If adequate steps are not taken and soon (say, the next 5 to 10 years) the effectiveness of the PN in ANY conflict (india, or otherwise) could be severely restricted by indian naval action, and that, I think, should worry everyone in islamabad/rawalpindi. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 02:53 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 5,052 Joined: 30-August 04 From: Brooklyn, NY Member No.: 4,840 |
But how can China have a prescense in the India Ocean? The closest they would be is Indonesia! And that's going to be just a submarine base. If China gets a new Naval base in the Middle East, then I'll understand that India needs those ships. But I think India just think that China is going to have some of their ships stationed in Gwadar, which is BS.
-------------------- “For decades world public opinion has been neither for nor against the Palestinians. It simply ignored us. At least the world is talking about us now.” -George Habash after the hijacking of three airliners at Dawson's Field in Jordan in 1970.
Free Alaska! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 03:28 PM
Post
#23
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 4,572 Joined: 13-March 05 From: Chicago Member No.: 6,423 |
QUOTE(europe @ Dec 3 2005, 08:56 AM) If Pakistani forum take it to Pakistan. Why the hell is it in my America? [right][snapback]714069[/snapback][/right] Dude, it's the Internet. People are here from all over the world. Are you saying that America now owns the Internet? Calm the hell down and don't get invloved in lame conversations that the kids on this forum love to talk about. Stick to the subject. Right now the IN needs to replace many of its old ships so acquiring around 60 ships would make some logicial sense. The best Pakistani response would be to induct more submarines and strike aircraft armed with anti-ship missiles. The best strike aircraft and the cheapest would be the JH-7A. One of these aircraft can carry 4 anti-ship missiles and five of these aircraft can launch 20 anti-ship missiles over 150 km away. As for subs, I would like to see the PN go for U-214's, but following the recent earthqauke I say it would be best to build three more Agosta 90B sbs, upgrade the other three to modern standards and then try to go for the Chinese Song class (if enough money is left). I don't see this as a huge threat, but only if the PN takes the proper action required. The IN is trying to modernize before the PLAN makes a heavy presence in the Indian Ocean. I expect the PLAN to make such a presence around 2010. If the PN can boost its strike aircraft and submarine numbers significantly 5 to 10 years from now, then the PN would be alright. However, if not, then we have much to fear. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 06:20 PM
Post
#24
|
|
|
CAPTAIN Group: Full Members Posts: 415 Joined: 11-July 03 Member No.: 1,970 |
QUOTE(crazyinsane105 @ Dec 3 2005, 03:28 PM) Are you saying that America now owns the Internet? Yes. It always has. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2005, 07:18 PM
Post
#25
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 4,572 Joined: 13-March 05 From: Chicago Member No.: 6,423 |
QUOTE(R64 @ Dec 3 2005, 06:20 PM) Yes. It always has. [right][snapback]714251[/snapback][/right] You are probably the biggest moron on this forum yet. The Internet was made for defense purposes by the US, but now anybody can access it if they wish. Nobody really owns the Internet. Yes, powerful corporations can influence the Internet, but NOBODY owns it. Just because the Wright brothers made the first airplane does not mean that they own every single airplane. Now shut up and get back to topic. I hate it when the kids on this forum don't have any common sense at all. |
|
|
|
 Dec 4 2005, 12:00 AM
Post
#26
|
|
 COLONEL Group: Banned Posts: 854 Joined: 22-July 04 Member No.: 4,663 |
QUOTE(ISI2003 @ Dec 3 2005, 02:12 AM) the indian's might be building more ships (probably of smaller tonnage), but ton for ton, the chinese are probably way ahead of the indians [right][snapback]713809[/snapback][/right] Some more reality expected from you! India currently building an aircraft carreir of 38000 ton and planned to make 2 more carrier in future apart from Russian Gorshkov. If you see new programmes like the destroyers P-15A class , stealth frigates P-17 and P-17A , stealth corvetts P-28, large landing ships, nuclear submarine and Scorpene etc and Russian Krivack frigates with their Chinese counterparts, they are not small. -------------------- www.isro.org
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 12:15 AM
Post
#27
|
|
 CADET Group: Jr. Members Posts: 23 Joined: 3-December 05 Member No.: 8,232 Location: india |
this is total backvaas simple propaganda of indian navy
-------------------- nevu yalaru bolimakalu , neem avi nanu ratrik bandhu rashi majha badkan hoti de ,
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 12:40 AM
Post
#28
|
|
 CAPTAIN Group: Full Members Posts: 478 Joined: 11-October 04 Member No.: 5,039 |
QUOTE(bapa_hande_tumchi @ Dec 4 2005, 12:15 AM) this is total backvaas simple propaganda of indian navy [right][snapback]714345[/snapback][/right] Ram Ram Pahuna. Bar ahe ka ? Could be True as there is not time frame specidied but media propaganda can also cause jitters in stomach of potential adverseries. I do remember during Musharf's visit to India during Vajpayee's time he used media shrewedly. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 01:23 AM
Post
#29
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 183 Joined: 28-September 05 Member No.: 7,865 Location: hindia, where urine sells and we drink |
QUOTE(crazyinsane105 @ Dec 4 2005, 02:58 AM) Right now the IN needs to replace many of its old ships so acquiring around 60 ships would make some logicial sense. [right][snapback]714220[/snapback][/right] oldest of indian navy ships Destroyer INS Rajput D51 (30 September 1980) INS Rana D52 (28 June 1982) INS Ranjit D53 (24 November 1983) INS Ranvir D54 (28 October 1986) INS Ranvijay D55 (15 January 1988) guided missile frigate INS Godavari F20 (10 December 1983) INS Ganga F22 (30 December 1985) INS Gomati F21 (16 April 1988) Corvette. INS Khukri P49 23 August 1989. missile corvette INS Veer K40 (26 March 1987 at Poti, former USSR) INS Nirbhik K41 (21 December 1987 at Poti, former USSR) INS Nipat K42 (05 December 1988 at Poti, former USSR) INS Nishank K43 (12 September 1989 at Poti, former USSR) INS Nirghat K44 (15 December 1989 at Poti, former USSR) frigate INS Udaygiri F35 (18 February 1976) INS Dunagiri F36 (05 May 1977) INS Taragiri F41 (16 May 1980) INS Vindhyagiri F42 (08 July 1981) only 2 ships r commissioned in late 70s..all others ships r commissioned in 80s..and i didnt pput the names of the ships commissioned in 90s... so u still say the 60 ship is for replacement..coz to me the above ships r not even neear ddecommissioning :hitwall: now whos is making lame excuses.... -------------------- I am bhangeee, my parents just got appology letter from condomn company
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 12:26 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 5,052 Joined: 30-August 04 From: Brooklyn, NY Member No.: 4,840 |
Isn't Ukraine putting a stealth missile Corvette up on the market? I think Pakistan should invest in smaller stealth boats, mostly missile boats. Have the Oliver Perrys and F-22Ps out at sea fighting the IN, and if they're destroyed, then Pakistan has the missile boats to protect Karachi.
-------------------- “For decades world public opinion has been neither for nor against the Palestinians. It simply ignored us. At least the world is talking about us now.” -George Habash after the hijacking of three airliners at Dawson's Field in Jordan in 1970.
Free Alaska! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 12:30 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 685 Joined: 4-July 05 Member No.: 7,279 Location: U.K, England |
QUOTE(Kim Jong-il Hater @ Dec 4 2005, 07:26 PM) Isn't Ukraine putting a stealth missile Corvette up on the market? I think Pakistan should invest in smaller stealth boats, mostly missile boats. Have the Oliver Perrys and F-22Ps out at sea fighting the IN, and if they're destroyed, then Pakistan has the missile boats to protect Karachi. [right][snapback]714557[/snapback][/right] These missile boats your talking about and the F22-P's, you reckon in the future Pakistans going to be able to launch a Babar off all these? -------------------- If you don't give a damn...We don't give a F*ck!
|
|
|
|
 Dec 4 2005, 01:13 PM
Post
#32
|
|
 GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 7,654 Joined: 3-February 05 From: London UK Member No.: 5,949 |
QUOTE(Kim Jong-il Hater @ Dec 4 2005, 06:26 PM) Isn't Ukraine putting a stealth missile Corvette up on the market? I think Pakistan should invest in smaller stealth boats, mostly missile boats. Have the Oliver Perrys and F-22Ps out at sea fighting the IN, and if they're destroyed, then Pakistan has the missile boats to protect Karachi. [right][snapback]714557[/snapback][/right] I think we need a little more than that..... -------------------- Blessed be the sacred land,
Happy be the bounteous realm, Symbol of high resolve, Land of Pakistan. Blessed be thou citadel of faith. The Order of this Sacred Land Is the might of the brotherhood of the people. May the nation, the country, and the State Shine in glory everlasting. Blessed be the goal of our ambition. This flag of the Crescent and the Star Leads the way to progress and perfection, Interpreter of our past, glory of our present, Inspiration of our future, Symbol of Almighty's protection. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 03:58 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
MAJOR Group: Full Members Posts: 760 Joined: 16-July 05 Member No.: 7,472 |
QUOTE(R64 @ Dec 3 2005, 06:20 PM) Yes. It always has. [right][snapback]714251[/snapback][/right] If you mean the IP addresses held by USA yes u r rite. India and China do not have those many IPs acc to IP ver 5 There is a big chance that in order to accomodate new ip add, ver 6 may become a std. -------------------- Per Ardua Ad Astra
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 04:31 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 5,052 Joined: 30-August 04 From: Brooklyn, NY Member No.: 4,840 |
QUOTE(waz @ Dec 4 2005, 02:13 PM) I think we need a little more than that..... [right][snapback]714581[/snapback][/right] Well it's a cheap way. Also a coastal defense force should be formed, like China. Then the Babur can be launched from land-sea. And then it will take some time before India fighters can find it. But besides the Oliver Perrys and F-22Ps, Pakistan needs ASW frigates. Type 23 possibly? Or South Korean corvettes? -------------------- “For decades world public opinion has been neither for nor against the Palestinians. It simply ignored us. At least the world is talking about us now.” -George Habash after the hijacking of three airliners at Dawson's Field in Jordan in 1970.
Free Alaska! |
|
|
|
|
Dec 4 2005, 05:08 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 4,478 Joined: 15-September 03 From: Netherlands Member No.: 2,770 Location: Netherlands |
QUOTE(crazyinsane105 @ Dec 3 2005, 07:18 PM) You are probably the biggest moron on this forum yet. The Internet was made for defense purposes by the US, but now anybody can access it if they wish. Nobody really owns the Internet. Yes, powerful corporations can influence the Internet, but NOBODY owns it. Just because the Wright brothers made the first airplane does not mean that they own every single airplane. Now shut up and get back to topic. I hate it when the kids on this forum don't have any common sense at all. [right][snapback]714260[/snapback][/right] It is not a matter of ownership but a matter of practical control. Here's some reading on the topic: Who will control the internet? Kenneth Neil Cukier From Foreign Affairs, November/December 2005 Who controls the internet? Why it doesn't matter if the United States is in charge. By Adam L. Penenberg Updated Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2005, at 3:31 PM ET -------------------- RULES AND REGULATIONS:
1.) Refrain from using excessive profanity in any post. 2.) Refrain from using abusive behavior against other members. 3.) No personal attacks. 4.) Do not Spam your posts. 5.) No Raciest Remarks. 6.) Staying within the Forum category. 7.) No post should include Religious hatred/ topics, PDF is a defence forum 8.) Using more than one name. (Traced by IP address) 9.) Posting in wrong froum will either be deleted or moved to correct one 10.) Hatred again Pakistan and its allies including USA is not welcomed http://forum.pakistanidefence.com/index.php?showtopic=34&view=findpost&p=128 |
|
|
|
|
Dec 5 2005, 05:27 AM
Post
#36
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 7,654 Joined: 3-February 05 From: London UK Member No.: 5,949 |
QUOTE(Kim Jong-il Hater @ Dec 4 2005, 10:31 PM) Well it's a cheap way. Also a coastal defense force should be formed, like China. Then the Babur can be launched from land-sea. And then it will take some time before India fighters can find it. But besides the Oliver Perrys and F-22Ps, Pakistan needs ASW frigates. Type 23 possibly? Or South Korean corvettes? [right][snapback]714676[/snapback][/right] Dude your right, an increase of surface combatants is certainly the way to go in combating such developments. Simply relying on a handful of F22's and Oliver Perry class ships will not get us anywhere as we need to deny them access to our waters. Sitting on the coast will not prevent a complete blockade of our ports which are vital to the economy. -------------------- Blessed be the sacred land,
Happy be the bounteous realm, Symbol of high resolve, Land of Pakistan. Blessed be thou citadel of faith. The Order of this Sacred Land Is the might of the brotherhood of the people. May the nation, the country, and the State Shine in glory everlasting. Blessed be the goal of our ambition. This flag of the Crescent and the Star Leads the way to progress and perfection, Interpreter of our past, glory of our present, Inspiration of our future, Symbol of Almighty's protection. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 6 2005, 11:14 AM
Post
#37
|
|
|
CAPTAIN Group: Full Members Posts: 415 Joined: 11-July 03 Member No.: 1,970 |
QUOTE(crazyinsane105 @ Dec 3 2005, 07:18 PM) You are probably the biggest moron on this forum yet. The Internet was made for defense purposes by the US, but now anybody can access it if they wish. Nobody really owns the Internet. Yes, powerful corporations can influence the Internet, but NOBODY owns it. Just because the Wright brothers made the first airplane does not mean that they own every single airplane. Now shut up and get back to topic. I hate it when the kids on this forum don't have any common sense at all. [right][snapback]714260[/snapback][/right] :stupid: Oh, thanks for calling me a "kid". :emot-devil: |
|
|
|
|
Dec 6 2005, 11:08 PM
Post
#38
|
|
 CAPTAIN Group: Banned Posts: 445 Joined: 3-May 05 From: india Member No.: 6,998 |
QUOTE(ajeet @ Dec 3 2005, 07:36 PM) looks like u r the master planner for the navy.... :tongue4: [right][snapback]714048[/snapback][/right] i am sorry to say ajeet but penguin 's naval database is one of the best in the forum . i guess he deserves more respect |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2005, 12:05 AM
Post
#39
|
|
|
GENERAL Group: Senior Members Posts: 4,572 Joined: 13-March 05 From: Chicago Member No.: 6,423 |
QUOTE(chandrahass @ Dec 6 2005, 11:08 PM) i am sorry to say ajeet but penguin 's naval database is one of the best in the forum . i guess he deserves more respect [right][snapback]715549[/snapback][/right] Quite true. His knowledge about naval affairs is quite amazing. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 7 2005, 05:55 AM
Post
#40
|
|
|
LIEUTENANT Group: Banned Posts: 183 Joined: 28-September 05 Member No.: 7,865 Location: hindia, where urine sells and we drink |
i didnt meant to offend any one...i was respondin to this
QUOTE Acquisition of 60 ships as such says nothing. Some of these 60 are very small and inconsequential, others are major surface combattants. Some are needed to REPLACE hugely aged ships currently in IN service, other may represent addition of new capabilities . well i cudnt find any immediate replacements problems...other than 2 ships from late 70s.. -------------------- I am bhangeee, my parents just got appology letter from condomn company
|
|
|
|
 |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 31st July 2010 - 03:01 PM |