Why is India building aircraft carriers and submarines that can be easily destroyed using anti-ship missiles?

为什么印度要建造容易被反舰导弹击沉的航母和潜艇？

以下是Quora读者的评论：

Craig Mowbray, Inquisitive, creative, irreverent, flaneur

I have been reading all the answers to this question with great interest and and decided to join in all the fun;)

Forgive me if I don’t resort to vast quantities of intricate detail as I would like to take a slightly more distanced take on the matter and avoid arguing over intricacies.

So, in answer to your question

“India: Why is Indian Navy building Aircraft carriers and Submarines which can be easily destroyed using anti-ship missiles?”

我一直以极大的兴趣阅读这个问题的所有答案，并决定凑个乐子。

如果我没有提供大量复杂的细节，敬请原谅，因为我不想太过复杂地讨论这个问题。

那么，我来回答你的问题：

“印度：为什么印度海军要建造可以轻易被反舰导弹摧毁的航空母舰和潜艇?”

Why?

Well basically because they can and what’s more they deserve it!

India is a strong, confident and technically proficient nation with a proud military history. It has great expectations and has a desire to be taken seriously, a force to be reckoned with on the world stage. It rightly considers itself a future global power with a seat at the top tables of influence. The commissioning and deployment of such vessels will be a clear illustration and manifestation of this intent

Irrespective of the strategic and tactical aspects of their proposed military application, the political and diplomatic advantages of their presence will be enormous to India moving forward. This together with the various non tangible benefits associated with such projects, for instance national pride, cannot be underestimated. Luckily India has both the industrial facilities, expertise and most importantly will to achieve its aims. The industrial, scientific and general learnings from their manufacture will assist India not only in other military projects but offshoot commercial ventures as well and will go a long way to projecting national status at home and abroad.

为什么?

就是因为他们有能力呗，而且更重要的是他们应该拥有！

印度是一个强大、自信、技术娴熟的国家，拥有令人自豪的军事历史。它对自己的未来有很大的期许，希望得到认真对待，希望在世界舞台上成为一股不可忽视的力量。它理所当然地认为自己是未来的全球强国，在全球影响力排行榜上占有一席之地。这类船船舰的服役和部署就是这一意图的明确说明和表现。

不管他们的军事用途在战略和战术方面表现如何，他们的存在将给印度带来巨大的政治和外交优势。这一点以及与这些项目有关的各种无形利益，例如民族自豪感，是不可低估的。幸运的是，印度既有工业设施、专业知识，最重要的是，它还有实现目标的意愿。从制造业中获得的工业、科学和综合知识不仅将帮助印度在其他军事项目上，而且还将帮助印度在商业上取得进展，这对提升印度的国家地位大有裨益。

Deployment

How will India deploy them? This will already have been resolved, so rest assured, the carriers will be protected by a corresponding carrier group. It will probably take the form of a layered approach with Pickets and AEW aircraft forming the outer perimeter, ASW frigates set inboard of this and then AAW ships close to the carrier to provide air detection and cover. Plus the odd sub or two and some of the ships maybe have a dual role and having ASuW capacity. Not forgetting all the aircraft on the carrier and the necessary supply ships in attendance. Pretty impressive.

部署

印度将如何部署？这个问题已经解决了，所以请放心，航母将受到航母群的保护。可能会采取一种分层的方式，哨兵和AEW飞机形成外围，ASW护卫舰在里面，然后AAW船只靠近航母提供空中侦察和掩护。再加上一两艘潜艇和一些可能具备双重作用、拥有随载能力的舰艇。别忘了航母上所有的飞机和必要的补给船。令人印象非常深刻。

Rahul Kardam, Entrepreneur, Web-Developer and an investor at heart.

I'd like to answer the part "easily destroyed using an anti-ship missile".

Till some years back I used to think the same. Then one day I happened to visit INS Viraat when it was berthed in naval dockyard in south Mumbai . There the naval officer explained that an aircraft carrier is protected by a multitude of assets. The first is the carriers own aircraft flying protective sorties which can engage an incoming enemy missile as far as 200 km away. The next is the the carriers own anti aircraft missiles capable of engaging enemy missiles upto 50 Km away. And they typically fire two missiles not just one. In case the enemy missile is still able to evade carrier's missiles, then aircraft carriers have a multitude of gattling cannons which start churning out bullets in the tune of thousands per minute, which create a sort of iron wall within 500 meters of the aircraft carrier.

I still did not believe that this much of protection would be enough.

Then one day I saw 

( a single aircraft carrier was the only formidable naval asset US had just after Japan attacked Pearl Harbour and that was USS enterprise (while other carriers had been put out by Japanese navy). Long story short , USS Enterprise lived the world war 2 and survived, despite taking multiple poundings from Japanese.

The concept of carrier battle groups exsted since WWII . Dozens of warships  have protected the central carrier with their anti aircraft anti missile batteries. The Carrier is pretty much like a dinosaur which can take a lot of beating. Just one single missile , even if it had a straight shot at it, would not be able to sink it.

我想回答“反舰导弹很容易摧毁”这部分。

几年前我也是这么认为的。后来，机缘巧合，我去了维拉特号，当时它停泊在孟买南部的海军造船厂。海军军官解释说，一艘航空母舰会受到许多军事设施的保护。首先，航空母舰拥有飞行的御防飞机，可以打击200公里外的敌方导弹。其次航母拥有防空导弹，能够对抗50公里外的敌方导弹。他们通常会发射两枚导弹，而非一枚。如果敌人的导弹躲过了航母的导弹，那么航母还有大量的加力炮，它们会以每分钟数千次的速度发射子弹，在航母500米范围内形成一堵铁墙。

我仍然不相信这么多的保护就足够了。

然后有一天我看到

(美国在日本袭击珍珠港后拥有的唯一令人生畏的海军装备，就是企业号航空母舰，其他航空母舰已经被日本海军淘汰)。长话短说，尽管遭受了日本人的重重打击，美国企业号军舰还是经受住了第二次世界大战的考验。

航母战斗群的概念自二战以来就一直存在。数十艘军舰用防空和导弹系统保护了中央航空母舰。航母很像恐龙，可以承受很大的打击。仅靠一枚导弹，即便是直接击中航母，也不可能击沉航母。

Abhishek Kb, studied at Bachelor of Engineering in Computer Science and Engineering

Aircraft carriers are not a easy target,they wil be having heavy escorts(cruisers,destroyers etc) and they themself will be equipped with bunch of defensive tools,

Coming to submarines they are the difficult target to destroy before submarine gets spotted it could destroy that ship .They can penetrate into enemy waters without their notice & can carry an ambush over enemy teritory.

In the war of 1971 'INS VIKRANTH' played a vital role and helped to maintain supremacy in east cost of India & caused a huge damage to eastern pak naval fleet​        

And now a days defence systems are highly advanced like we have anti torpedo units ,air to air missiles etc , So Aircraft Carriers & Submarines are not waste of money they are the BEAST's of the sea.

And maintaining the aircraft carrier is not an easy job for the country it needs a stable economy ,thats the main reason for Pak not to have an aircraft carrier(pak admiral himself agreed that they cannot afford aircraft carrier)Lol

航空母舰不是随便就能击中的目标，他们会配备徐国护航舰(巡洋舰，驱逐舰等)，航母本身也会配备大量的防御工具。

在潜艇被发现之前，是很难摧毁的目标。他们可以悄无声息地潜入敌人的水域，可以对敌人的驻地进行伏击。

在1971年的战争中，“维克兰号”发挥了至关重要的作用，帮助印度维持了在东海岸的霸权，给东巴基斯坦海军舰队造成了巨大的破坏。

现在的防御系统非常先进，比如我们有反鱼雷装置，空对空导弹等等，所以航母和潜艇并不是浪费钱，它们是海洋上的野兽。

航母的养护对国家来说并非易事，需要稳定的经济作为基础，这是巴基斯坦没有航母的主要原因(巴基斯坦海军上将也承认他们买不起航母)，哈哈

Chaitanya Ramesh, studied at The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

Mainly because such anti-ship missiles are unproven.

Such missiles have never been used in a full scale combat situation. Without actual use in combat, it is impossible to tell whether such missiles would change the face of naval warfare or just be ineffective gimmicks.

Soviet naval doctrine was indeed against carriers since they felt these were missile-magnets. But there were several other factors too.

The Soviet Navy, unlike its US and UK counterparts, did not play a major role in WW2. After that, during the Cold War, the Navy had the least priority among the 5 Armed Forces of the USSR, resulting in it getting minimum finance. Now aircraft carriers and aircraft themselves are extremely expensive. Thus, the Soviet Navy was forced to develop alternate tactics.

主要是因为这种反舰导弹的威力未经证实。

这种导弹从未在全面战斗中使用过。如果没有在战斗中真的投入使用，就不可能判断这种导弹究竟是不是噱头。

苏联海军的确反对航母，他们觉得航母是导弹磁铁。但除此之外还有其他因素。

与美英海军不同，苏联海军在二战中并未扮演重要角色。在那之后，冷战期间海军在苏联的5支武装力量中地位最低，导致它得到的资金最少。航空母舰和飞机造价都非常昂贵。因此，苏联海军被迫发展替代战术。

译文来源：三泰虎 http://www.santaihu.com/48541.html  译者：Joyceliu

Also, look at military naval history.

Prior to WW2, the dominant thought among naval circles was that submarines had been made obsolete by ASIDIC - an early version of sonar (which sends sound waves into water, enabling ships to locate submarines). Actual combat in WW2 proved that despite the deployment of ASIDIC, submarines were still extremely useful and were definitely not obsolete.

In contrast, many dismissed aircraft carriers as showpieces with only a marginal role in naval warfare (the dominant ships then were battleships). During WW2 however, it was aircraft carriers which became the dominant factor for Navies and the battleship was relegated to secondary roles.

还有，看看海军的历史。

在第二次世界大战之前，在海军圈子里占主导地位的想法是，潜艇已经被ASIDIC淘汰了。二战的战况证明，潜艇仍然非常有用，绝对没有过时。

相比之下，许多人认为航空母舰在海战中只是一个边缘角色(当时占主导地位的是战列舰)。然而，在二战期间，航空母舰成为海军的主导因素，战列舰被降为次要角色。

Thus, it is impossible to say whether a technology is effective or not without use in warfare. And as I said, these anti-ship missiles have never been used in combat before.

Even if initially successful, there is no reason why counter-measures cannot be developed. In fact, one such counter-measure actually exsts.

These are Close-In Weapons System (CIWS). This is basically a computer-controlled machine gun, firing a huge number of rounds per minute, which tries to shoot anti-ship missiles before they damage the ship.

因此，一项技术若未在战争中验证，就无法判断其究竟是否有效。正如我所说，这些反舰导弹以前从未在战斗中使用过。

即使最初取得了成功，也没有理由不能制定出相应的措施。事实上，这样的应对措施确实存在。

这些是近距离武器系统(CIWS)。基本上是一台计算机控制的机关枪，能够在反舰导弹破坏舰艇之前每分钟发射出大量子弹。

Amit Gujar, like the cat, curiosity will kill me too

By your reasoning the following should also be excluded:

Tanks: easy targets for multiple medium barrel guns, aircrafts, enemy tanks, etc

And cost of making one is a few 100 times than of the device used to destroy one.

Aircrafts: easy targets for SAMs and enemy aircrafts.

Helicopters: Can be brought down by even a grenade launcher. Plus many other guns.

Soldiers: can be decapitated by a single bullet. Cost of bullet far far less than expense incurred on soldiers.

I am sure if you can think of counter reasons why above equipment is necessary, them air craft carriers and submarines are necessary.

根据你的推理，下列情况也应排除在外：

坦克：是容易被多管炮、飞机、敌人坦克等攻击的目标

而且制造一架坦克的成本是用来摧毁一个设备的100倍。

飞机：对地对空导弹和敌方飞机来说是容易攻击的目标。

直升飞机：甚至能被榴弹发射器击落。很多枪也能做到。

士兵：一颗子弹就能取其姓名。子弹的成本远远低于士兵的花费。

我相信，如果你能想到上述设备是必要的反对理由，那么航空母舰和潜艇就是必要的。

Veerappan Laxman, Engineer, Gamer, Dreamer, likes History, Science, Technology and Peace. Dislikes Politics, Terrorism, Viole...

Short Answer: Power Projection especially since we sit right next to the World's ship jugular.

Long Answer : Compared to which is only open to the Pacific and is bound by regional neighbours like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, South East Asian Nations and foreign powers like US - we have a far larger access to the most important naval region in the World - even more so in coming century - nearly half the World's ship passes through the Indian Ocean - so the ability to project our power - which is symbolized by the AC - is absolutely vital to our strategic interests.

So basically, it's just our requirements based on our situation in the geo-political scene is very different from 's.

简而言之：实力的展示，尤其是因为我们就位在世界航运要道的旁边。

长篇幅的答案：与相比，只毗邻太平洋，拥有日本、韩国、台湾、东南亚国家等邻国及美国等外国势力—而我们距离世界上最重要的海军区域更近—在未来的世纪更是如此—近一半的全球航运通过印度洋，所以展示我们实力的能力—以航母为象征—是绝对至关重要的战略利益。

所以基本上，这是我们基于地缘政治的需求，与非常不同。

Pratik Mane

Aircraft carriers and sub marines aren't that vulnerable like you think.They are loaded with highly sophisticated tactical systems to misguide the missiles coming to them and also detect the source of their launches in order to eliminate the roots in no time.

There must be an ideology and clever engineering behind building such costly and gigantic ships.

They wouldn't have produced such type of ships unless they were clear with all saftey precautions.

航空母舰和潜艇并不像你想的那么脆弱。他们装载了高度复杂的战术系统，能误导向他们飞来的导弹，并探测它们的发射源，以便在短时间内捣毁窝点。

建造如此昂贵而庞大的船只背后肯定有一种意识形态和巧妙的工程设计。

除非他们清楚所有的安全预防措施，否则他们不会生产这种类型的船。

Nikhil, lives in India

By your logic. Why do we buy cars when we know that they can be destroyed in a single accident ? 

Everything can be destroyed . An aircraft can crash , which doesn't mean you say , what's the point in buying a plane when you know it can crash someday. 

Some things are necessary to project power and safeguard our territory. Carriers perform humanitarian missions also. You can't send a missile boat to a hurricane hit area to rescue people.  Carriers are useful in war and peace time. Missiles are useful only in war. And carriers are well defended. 

Hence we are building aircraft carriers . And we are giving them the best possible protection.

根据你的逻辑，我们知道汽车有可能在事故中被摧毁，为什么还要购买汽车呢？

一切都可能被毁。飞机可能会坠毁，这并不意味着你能说，买飞机有什么意义。

对展示实力和保卫我们的领土而言，有些东西是必要的。航空母舰也执行人道主义任务。你不能派导弹艇去飓风灾区救人。航母在战争和和平时期都很有用。导弹只有在战争中才有用。航母受到很好的保护。

因此，我们正在建造航空母舰。我们会给他们最好的保护。

Mitu Kumar, Proud to be INDIAN, working for developed India

is USA ,France , britian fool to have heavily invested in the construction of aircraft carrier from the very begng.  US navy has largest number of aircraft carrier and that too nuclear powered which are more expensive than the conventional ones. 

Aircraft carriers are the means to project power in the region and in the world . they carry carrier based fighters  which can strike the part of area near the vicinity of carrier. 

you must cite the example of INS Vikrant which took part in indo-pak war 1971 and sent its fighters in the war in the Bangladesh .it made a huge impact.

美国、法国、英国对建造航母投入巨资。美国海军拥有数量最多的航空母舰，而且核动力航母比常规航母更昂贵。

航空母舰是在地区和世界上展现实力的手段。他们携带的舰载机可以打击航母附近的区域。

你必须列举1971年“维克兰特”号航母的例子，它参加了印巴战争，并派出舰载战斗机参加了孟加拉国战争，产生了巨大的影响。

Amit Kumar, Follower of national developments

With growing stature of India, it ought to strengthen its defences, securing major lines of communication(which are sea lanes) and enhance its presence in areas around itself and beyond. India’s geosrategic position has been the reason for naming the ocean as Indian Ocean. And hence comes the need of strong navy. And submarine and aircraft carrier forms a major part of fill above requirements.

Now to the question, if they are easily targetable by anti-ship missiles.

Aircraft carriers are like moving islands for the country. Just 5 countries have aircraft carrier which are very heavy investment and employ most sophisticated technology. Defence development tried to keep it nearly undetectable on radar with its minimum signature and stealth deployment. Simultaneously, it has its own defence systems. India has been develo anti missile technology indigenously as well as with Israel. Destroyer ships too assist the carrier in protecting the seas as well as themselves.

Coming to submarines.

They provide nuclear deterrence and possibility of second line of attack. They are not easily detectable being under water and use of tech. Nuclear launch capable submarines is the reply to attack threats of nuclear weapons. Just 4 other countries have such capability.

随着印度地位的提高，它应该加强防御，保护主要的通信线路(即海上航线)，并加强其在周边地区和其他地区的存在。印度的地理位置是印度洋之所以被命名为印度洋的原因。因此印度需要强大的海军。其中，潜艇和航空母舰正是强大海军的重要组成部分。

现在的问题是，它们是不是很容易被反舰导弹击中。

航空母舰就像是国家的移动岛屿。全世界只有5个国家拥有航空母舰，投资额非常庞大，使用了最先进的技术。国防研发希望降低其信号并配备隐形设备，令雷达无法探测到航母。同时，它有自己的防御系统。印度一直在自主研发反导弹技术，同时也在与以色列合作。驱逐舰也帮助航母保护海洋及他们自身。

至于潜艇。

他们提供核威慑和第二轮攻击的可能性。它们在水下不容易被探测到。核潜艇的发射能力是对核武器攻击威胁的回应。目前全世界只有4个国家有这样的能力。

Samved Iyer

Never forget that aircraft carriers show how much power you can project away from your own land.

You may think that aircraft carriers are very vulnerable to attacks. Sure they are, but they are never alone. Several warships accompany it for its protection.

And since aircraft carriers are so huge, they can be used for transporting very easily. Fighter jets of Navy can easily project dominance over the ocean.

That is why they are so important. Infact, very large types of aircraft carriers are called supercarriers and they are even more formidable since they have a larger capacity to carry aircrafts and forces. INS Vishal which is being developed by Indian Navy, will be a supercarrier.

永远不要忘记，航空母舰能让你展示在远离自己国土的地方投射出多大的实力。

你可能认为航空母舰很容易受到攻击。当然是，但他们从不孤单。为了保护航母，时刻都有军舰随行左右。

而且因为航空母舰十分庞大，它们可以用于运输。海军的战斗机可以很容易地在海洋上占据优势。

这就是为什么它们如此重要的原因。事实上，非常大的航空母舰被称为超级航母，它们更为可怕，因为它们有更大的能力来运载飞机和军队。印度海军正在开发的Vishal号就将成为一艘超级航母。

Dhananjay Gandage

We need 3 aircraft  carriers one each in Arabian sea and bay of Bengal while one can be under refit as it is constantly  required.

in addition land based sukhois and LCAs  and rafales when they come will serve as a backup

we also need to scale up the order of MIG 29K from 45 to at least 90

So that while 60 aircrafts will alwez b at sea 30 will b as back up landbased 

also explore if no of sukhoi can be increased from 270 to 300

No of LCA should be increased to 180 from present requirement of 120

In short we need at least 100 aircrafts each on the western and the eastern sea fronts as a back up for carrier battlegroups 

India has a peninsula to target penninsular  india  through carrier based aircrafts any CBG should come at least up to 1000 kms near the land mass. In that scenario they will b sitting ducks for these land based aircrafts as range of all above aircrafts is at least more 2000kms.

Plus land based anti ship ballistic missiles. Develop agni  missiles as land based anti  ship ballistic missile variants as well by modifying their guidance system with a range of at least 3500 kms

I.e. just upto agni  3 should be modified to anti ship ballistic missile variant and station them in each coastal state on east and west and also in andaman and lakshwaseep islands

This will make Indian ocean and indian  navy impregnable

我们需要3艘航空母舰，阿拉伯海和孟加拉湾上各部署一艘，而还有一艘可以轮流靠港整修，因为航母经常需要整修。

此外，陆基的苏霍伊、LCAs和阵风战机将作为支援。

我们还需要把MIG 29K的订单从45架增加到至少90架。

因此，当60架飞机在海上飞行时，还有30架可以作为备用机。

另外，苏霍伊的数量是否能从270架增加到300架。

轻型战斗机的数量应该从现在的120架增加到180架。

简而言之，我们需要至少100架飞机分别在西海和东海作为航母战斗群的后盾

印度有一个半岛，为了通过舰载机瞄准印度，任何CBG都应该至少接近陆地1000公里。在那种情况下，他们将成为这些陆基飞机的活靶子，因为这些飞机的射程至少都超过2000公里。

加上陆基反舰弹道导弹。研发烈火导弹，作为陆基反舰弹道导弹的改型，并修改他们的制导系统，射程至少达到3500公里。

也就是说，烈火3应该被修改为反舰弹道导弹，并将其部署在东部和西部的每个邦以及安达曼和拉克什瓦泽普群岛。

这将使印度洋和印度海军坚不可摧。

Shumayel Liton

It's merely a matter of strategy. Some countries choose to invest in the gun and some in the bullet. India has chosen to invest in the gun. But it is true that these days aircraft carriers and frigates are sitting ducks in the ocean. With hypersonic antiship technologies getting inducted, these ships will find themself blown up without even detecting incoming missiles.

这只是战略问题。有些国家选择把钱投入在枪支上，有些国家选择把钱投入在子弹上。印度选择了投资枪支。但是，现在的航空母舰和护卫舰确实是海上的活靶子。随着高超音速反舰技术的引入，这些舰艇在发现自己被炸毁时都无法探测到来袭的导弹。

Kamal Bakhtiani

Do you think destroying an Aircraft carrier or Submarine is as easy as shooting someone across the LOC, an Aircraft carrier has so many Fixed wings and helicopters, missiles, torpedoes, guns, experienced personnel.

你认为摧毁一艘航空母舰或潜艇就像向实际控制线对面的人开枪那么容易吗？一艘航空母舰拥有无数固定翼、直升机、导弹、鱼雷、大炮和经验丰富的人员。