正文翻譯

Key Note: When compared with Pakistani costal defenses, it's easy to conclude that India's aircraft carriers don't bring much to a fight.

關鍵提示-與巴基斯坦的沿海防御相比，很容易得出這樣的結(jié)論:印度的航空母艦對戰(zhàn)斗沒有太大作用。

The Indian Navy has put out a proposal for its third aircraft carrier, tentatively titled the Vishal due to enter service in the latter 2020s. The 65,000-ton Vishal will be significantly larger than India’s sole current carrier, the Vikramaditya known formerly as the ex-Soviet Admiral Gorshkov, and the incoming second one, the domestically-built Vikrantwhich is expected to enter service later in 2018.

印度海軍提出了建造第三艘航母的計劃，暫名為維薩爾號，預計在2020年后期服役。65000噸的維薩爾號將大大超過印度目前唯一的航母維克拉瑪?shù)賮喬?，也就是前蘇聯(lián)戈爾什科夫海軍上將號，以及即將到來的第二艘國產(chǎn)維克蘭特號，后者預計將于2018年晚些時候服役。

To see why Vishal is a big deal for the Indian Navy, one needs only to look at her proposed air wing — some 57 fighters, more than Vikramaditya — 24 MiG-29Ks — and Vikrant‘s wing of around 30 MiG-29Ks. While below the 75+ aircraft aboard a U.S. Navy Gerald R. Ford-class supercarrier, Vishal will be a proper full-size carrier and India’s first, as the preceding two are really small-deck carriers and limited in several significant ways.

要知道為什么維薩爾號對印度海軍來說很重要，只需要看看她計劃的飛行裝備——大約57架戰(zhàn)機，比維克拉瑪?shù)賮喬柖唷?4米格-29ks，也比維克蘭特號——大約30架米格-29ks。美國海軍杰拉爾德·r·福特級超級航母上的飛機超過75架，而維薩爾號將是一艘真正的全尺寸航母，也是印度的第一艘，因為前兩艘都是真正的小甲板航母，而且在幾個重要方面受到限制。

The Indian Navy is also looking at an electromagnetic launch system for its third carrier, similar to the one aboard the Ford class. India’s first two carriers have STOBAR configurations, in which aircraft launch with the assistance of a ski-jump, which limits the maximum weight a plane can lift into the air. Typically this means that fighters must sacrifice weapons, or fuel thus limiting range, or a combination of both.

印度海軍也在研究第三艘航母的電磁發(fā)射系統(tǒng)，類似于福特級航母。印度最早的兩家航空公司采用短距起飛阻攔降落結(jié)構(gòu)，即飛機起飛時借助滑躍，這限制了飛機能夠升到空中的最大重量。通常情況下，這意味著戰(zhàn)斗機必須犧牲武器或燃料（因為會限制航程），或者兩者都犧牲。

These smaller carriers probably have fewer operational fighters than they do on paper, given that the air wings likely have serviceability rates below 100 percent. Vikramaditya by itself could have significantly less than 24 MiGs capable of flying — and fighting.

這些小型航空母艦上有作戰(zhàn)能力的戰(zhàn)斗機可能比紙面上的要少，因為這些飛機的可用性可能低于100%。維克拉瑪?shù)賮喬栕陨頁碛械木邆滹w行能力和戰(zhàn)斗能力的米格機明顯少于24架。

Now imagine a scenario in which these carriers go to battle.

現(xiàn)在想象一下這些航母參戰(zhàn)的場景。

Most likely, India would attempt to enforce a blockade of Pakistan and use its carriers to strike land-based targets. But Pakistan has several means to attack Indian carriers — with near-undetectable submarines and anti-ship missiles — which must also operate relatively far from India itself in the western and northern Arabian Sea. China does not have a similar disadvantage, as the PLAN would likely keep its carriers close and within the “first island chain” including Taiwan, closer to shore where supporting aircraft and ground-based missile launchers can help out.

最有可能的是，印度將試圖對巴基斯坦實施封鎖，并使用其航空母艦打擊陸基目標。但巴基斯坦有幾種攻擊印度航母的手段——幾乎無法探測的潛艇和反艦導彈——也導致這些航母必須在距離印度相對較遠的阿拉伯海西部和北部行動。中國沒有類似的劣勢，因為PLA海軍很可能將其航母保持在包括臺灣在內(nèi)的“第一島鏈”內(nèi)，更靠近海岸，支援飛機和陸基導彈發(fā)射器可以幫助解決問題。

Thus, Indian carriers would be relatively vulnerable and only one of them will have aircraft capable of launching with standard ordnance and fuel. And that is after Vishal sets sail in the next decade.

因此，印度航母將相對脆弱，只有其中一艘的飛機能夠使用標準的彈藥和燃料起飛。這還是未來十年維薩爾號揚帆起航之后的情況。

To directly threaten Pakistan, the small-deck carriers will have to maneuver nearer to shore — and thereby closer to “anti-access / area denial” weapons which could sink them. And even with a third carrier, the threat of land-based Pakistani aircraft will force the Indian Navy to dedicate a large proportion of its own air wings to defense — perhaps half of its available fighters, according to 2017 paper by Ben Wan Beng Ho for the Naval War College Review.

為了直接威脅巴基斯坦，這些小甲板航母將不得不靠近海岸，從而更接近能夠擊沉它們的“反介入/區(qū)域拒止”武器。甚至有了第三艘航母，巴基斯坦陸基飛機的威脅也將迫使印度海軍將自己大部分飛機用于防御——根據(jù)Ben Wan Beng Ho在2017年為《海軍戰(zhàn)爭學院評論》撰寫的論文，可能需要將其可用飛機中的一半（用于防御）。

“Therefore, it is doubtful that any attack force launched from an Indian carrier would pack a significant punch,” Ho writes. “With aircraft available for strike duties barely numbering into the double digits, the Indian carrier simply cannot deliver a substantial ‘pulse’ of combat power against its adversary.”

他寫道:“因此，從印度航母上起飛的任何攻擊力量都不能帶來重大打擊……由于可供執(zhí)行打擊任務的飛機數(shù)量勉強達到兩位數(shù)，印度航母根本無法向其對手打出實質(zhì)性的戰(zhàn)斗‘波’?！?/p>

Essentially, this makes Indian carriers’ self-defeating, with the flattops existing primarily to defend themselves from attack rather than taking the fight to their enemy. Carriers are also expensive symbols of national prestige, and it is unlikely the Indian Navy will want to risk losing one, two or all three. Under the circumstances, India’s investment in carriers makes more sense symbolically, and primarily as a way of keeping shipyards busy and shipyard workers employed.

從本質(zhì)上說，這使得印度的航母弄巧成拙，因為這些航母的存在主要是為了防御攻擊，而不是與敵人戰(zhàn)斗。航空母艦也是國家威望的昂貴象征，印度海軍不太可能冒險失去一艘、兩艘或全部三艘。在這種情況下，印度對航母的投資更具象征意義，而且主要是作為一種保持造船廠繁忙和造船廠工人就業(yè)的方式。

However, this is not to entirely rule out a carrier-centric naval strategy. Ho notes that Indian carriers could be useful when operating far out at sea and in the western Arabian Sea, effectively as escort ships for commercial shipping and to harass Pakistani trade. Nevertheless, this strategy comes with a similar set of problems.

然而，這并不是完全排除以航母為中心的海軍戰(zhàn)略。他指出，印度航母在遠海和西阿拉伯海航行時可能很有用，可以有效地為商業(yè)航運護航，也可以騷擾巴基斯坦的貿(mào)易。然而，這種策略也帶來了一系列類似的問題。

“In any attempt to impose sea control in the northern Arabian Sea and to interdict Pakistani seaborne commerce by enforcing a blockade of major Pakistani maritime nodes, Indian carrier forces would have to devote a portion of their already meager airpower to attacking Pakistani vessels, thereby exacerbating the conundrum alluded to earlier,” Ho added. “What is more, Pakistani ships are likely to operate relatively close to their nation’s coast, to be protected by Islamabad’s considerable access-denial barrier.”

“任何企圖通過對巴基斯坦主要海上節(jié)點的封鎖，來對北部阿拉伯海實施海上控制，并阻斷巴基斯坦的海上貿(mào)易的做法，都會讓印度航母部隊不得不動用其本來就不足的空軍力量來攻擊巴基斯坦船只，從而加劇了之前提到的難題，”Ho補充說?！案匾氖?，巴基斯坦船只可能會在相對靠近本國海岸的地方航行，受到伊斯蘭堡相當大的拒止壁壘的保護。”

評論翻譯

YouGotRouged?
How many subs/destroyers could india have afforded by not going with an AC. Potential of a world power, instead brains like clam chowder.

如果印度不追求航母，它又負擔得起多少潛艇/驅(qū)逐艦呢？航母代表了世界大國的潛力，不是你這種蛤蜊濃湯一樣的腦子。

StormBreaker
They wouldn’t dare to bring AC into conflict zone else they know the consequence.
In one case they can but that requires a large scale naval march, in which case Indians will find themselves surprised to find PLAN ships In our seas

他們不敢把航母派到戰(zhàn)區(qū)，否則他們會知道后果。
在一種情況下，他們可以，但這需要大規(guī)模的海軍行軍，在這種情況下，印度人會驚訝地發(fā)現(xiàn)，他們在我們的海域看到了中國海軍艦艇。

War ThunderWar
they are more kickbacks and corruption involved in making of an AV than a small boat. You gotta understand the indian elite corrupt mindset.

跟造小船相比，造航母有更多的回扣和腐敗空間。我們必須理解印度精英們的腐敗思維。

V. MakarovV.
There is a limit to all madness. No nation goes shopping for ACs costing billions of dollars without justifying it strategically to the policy makers. However, India's strategic justification for ACs is flawed to begin with. Pakistan wont care how many kickbacks were there in the procurement.
See the scandals with Rafael jets. Its a consistent pattern.

所有的瘋狂都有個限度。沒有哪個國家會在沒有向決策者提供戰(zhàn)略理由的情況下，花費數(shù)十億美元購買航母。然而，印度對其航母的戰(zhàn)略解釋一開始就存在缺陷。巴基斯坦不會關心采購中能產(chǎn)生多少回扣。
看看陣風噴氣飛機的丑聞吧。這是一個一以貫之的模式。

Haris Ali2140
Aircraft Carriers are obsolete. We are going for a death star.

航母過時了，我們在搞殲星艦。

Ashwasthama
What is that?

啥？

Haris Ali2140
images.jpeg

這個。

Haris Ali2140
BTW regarding the original question it a was runor started by fan boys and nothing else.

順便說，這個問題一開始就是外行發(fā)起的謠言，僅此而已。

StormBreaker
But i heard, it was destroyed by a mere millenium falcon

但我聽說，它被一艘小小的千年鷹號飛船摧毀了。

Haris Ali2140
We will build a dozen more.

我們會再造十幾艘。

Baby Leone
India has only one carrier that too imported from some other country,
how could another one would be third?

印度只有一艘航母，就這個還是從外國進口的。
另一艘怎么會是第三艘？

War Thunder
all we need is to clone a baby yoddle

我們只需要克隆一個尤達寶寶。

PradoTLC
There was a plan to relocate all the indians to the moon
any upxe?

有消息說印度要把所有國民遷往月球。
有什么最新進展嗎？

graphican
After developing Zarb, Pakistani land to sea attack missile and Babur-III, submarine-launched sea and land-attack missile, it is in the best interest of Indian floating assets to float 1000 KM away from the Pakistani shoes - and even then there is no guarantee they will float on.

在研制了Zarb（巴基斯坦陸對海導彈）和Babur-III（潛射對海對陸導彈）之后，印度的海上資產(chǎn)漂浮在距離巴基斯坦海岸1000公里遠的地方最符合印度的利益——即便那樣，也不能保證這些資產(chǎn)會繼續(xù)漂浮下去。

Pakistani Fighter
Pakistani jets are Medium weight and Light Weight so range is compromised. Only Thunders (with C802A) and Mirages (Exocet) have anti ship ability. These jets need substantial Escorts against Mig 29Ks. Moreover, they need to stay away from range of Indian vessels' air Defence (especially Barak 8).
Range of Zarb? Babur 3 is stated to be 350km. Also Carrier will be gaurded by Destroyers and Frigates having AD Capability

巴基斯坦戰(zhàn)機是中型和輕型的，因此航程受到影響。只有雷霆(C802A)和幻影(飛魚)有反艦能力。這些戰(zhàn)機需要大量的護航來對抗米格-29K。此外，他們需要遠離印度軍艦的防空范圍(特別是巴拉克8導彈)。
Zarb的射程?Babur-3的射程據(jù)稱有350公里。而且航母將得到具有防空能力的驅(qū)逐艦和護衛(wèi)艦重重保護。

KhanBaba2
The whole purpose of an carrier is to project power. If you are keeping your carriers close to the shore, why have them. Might as well as have the aircraft take off from the shore.
PLAN ships can definitely get into the Arabian sea but they won't be a surprise. PLAN ships cannot enter the Arabian Sea undetected by the Indian Navy.

航母的全部目的是投射力量。如果你們讓自己的航母待在靠近海岸的地方，為什么還要弄航母呢。倒不如讓飛機從岸上起飛。
PLA海軍軍艦肯定可以進入阿拉伯海，但他們不會是一個驚喜。PLA海軍艦艇不能進入阿拉伯海而不被印度海軍發(fā)現(xiàn)。

Ultima Thule
I am not talking about gulf oof malaca but asking about SOUTH CHINA SEA

我說的不是海灣，或者馬六甲海峽，而是南中國海。

KhanBaba2
I meant Strait of Malacca. That is the route our ships take to get to South China Sea.
Aren't you ignoring me.

我說的是馬六甲海峽。這是我們軍艦前往南中國海的必經(jīng)之路。
你沒看到吧。

StormBreaker
I wonder what PLAN ships and subs were doing in indian waters “UNDETECTED”
*SILENCE*
@Mangus Ortus Novem kaisa dia

我想知道有哪艘中國軍艦和潛艇在印度洋“未被發(fā)現(xiàn)”。

KhanBaba2
Sweet dreams.

你做夢。

StormBreaker
We don’t let anyone fight our wars instead we have fought for others !!!
Getting ships on lease is something we will do if the situation arises !!!
And don’t get surprised if in case of a war between pak ind, you see PLAN and PLA causing disturbances on indian fronts !!!

我們不讓任何人幫我們打仗，相反我們還為別人打仗！
如果局勢加劇，我們會租借軍艦！
而且當巴基斯坦和印度之間發(fā)生戰(zhàn)爭，如果你看到PLA海軍和陸軍給印度前線制造騷亂，你們也不要感到詫異！