Technical File For The Placing In Service Of Vehicle Type: Fill & Download for Free

Who is about to Overtake Samsung as the largest smartphone seller.?Well That Answer is Pretty Easy!It's Xiaomi.Don't Believe Me ?Well Read it ForYourself.Well This Company sells one of the best budget phones and I already have purchased four phones from Xiaomi.Redmi 1s.Mi 3.Redmi 3s Prime.Redmi 4.Well do you know that one of the most common scams running presently in India and is getting widespread ?Well Let's see,Xiaomi Offers Their Customers one of the best budget Phones, Good Camera, Amazing Battery Backup, Hell Loads of RAM, 1 Year Warranty for Your Phone and 6 months Warranty for your accessories, Shit UI and A F***** Up, money minded and an illogical Customer Care Service that betrays the trust laid upon the company by any customer.No, Please don't rub your eyes, you read it correctly.Last Year, around the same time of the year I bought my third Xiaomi phone, a Redmi 3s Prime, Cost of the phone was Rs. 8,999 a reasonable price for a student like me. I had used the phone hardly for 5–6 months when I got an Update from the developer team. Without Even giving a second thought I pressed the Update Now button. The Updater App Started Downloading the necessary files, and I was waiting for it finish the download process and eagerly waiting to use the updated device!The Download Finished, the Updater App Asked me Reboot To Recovery. I gave Yes and bang the phone starting flashing the Downloaded files.Fast Forward 20 mins, my device was booting and the updates were getting installed, and I was getting all excited and my gaze was on the phone the entire time.Suddenly my device vibrated and it switched off. The happiness on my face turned into perplexed feeling. Then I did something that any average person in such a situation would do. I attempted to restart my device. I kept pressing the Power On Button for the next 30–40 seconds but my phone didn't react. I was shell shocked. I thought may be battery came down to 0. But I realised that before giving Update Now Option, my device had 70% of battery remaining and while downloading I had put the phone for charging so there is no way battery can go down to 0.I tried to Reboot to Recovery, No Response.I tried booting it into Fastboot, again the phone was Idle.Now the perplexed feeling turned into horror. My Device was Not Booting Up. I immediately got in contact with the executive in Mi Service Centre in Coimbatore. He asked me to deposit the phone at the nearest service centre and they will help me with the issue.I was slightly relieved as my phone was under warranty and this damage was caused by the company so I might get a new device.Next day, Bunked My College and Went to the service centre and deposited my phone and grabbed the Job Sheet. I was told that they will have to diagnose the issue and will let me know about the problem the very next day. That sounded a bit odd, that's just a software issue why do they need 1 entire day for that. I reminded myself that they are the experts on this platform and I am just a beginner so let's leave it out for the experts.I returned home and was anxiously waiting for the the day to get over.Fast Forward three days and I didn't recieve a call from their end. I was like is it this big of a problem that they are taking so long. So I called them up and guess what, they didn't even open the back cover of my phone. I scolded them. I was really disappointed by the shody attitude of the service centre authorities. They promised me to tell me the issue within a day!I thought to myself, I waited for three days why not wait for an another one.Fourth Day, No Calls Till 11 in the morning, I was losing my patience. I called them up and enquired them about my phone, they were like Sir We will let you know in half an hour. Again, I calmed myself waited for another 1.5 hrs.Now after this 1.5 hrs I was getting mad, I took out my vehicle went to the shop and spoke to the person who collected my device. He said please give us 5 minutes we will let you know the issue.It turns out they hadn't even open the box in which they had kept my phone. I didn't speak a word.After around 15 minutes the same guy returned with my device and tells me that Sir It's a Motherboard issue you will have to pay 60% of price of the device and get it repaired and Sir Water logging issue is there as well.Guys,Just Pause For a Minute. I would like you remember with what problem did I approache the customer service centre and what did they point out. I went there with a software issue and According to the engineers it was a hardware issue.I was angry and shouted at him, I clearly explained him that I take utmost care that my phone is always dry and I use my phone only when my hand is completely dry. (I actually do). They were not ready to listen, they were adamant and were repeating that it was my fault that the phone got into problem.I was literally shattered because that was my new phone hardly used, and bang I will have to pay ₹ 6,500. I asked them my phone back and decided to solve the problem myself.I know a bit of Custom ROM flashing and stuff, so I logged on to YouTube, searched for some videos and followed the steps.Guys, you know what ?My phone was perfectly alright. No issues with booting. I called them back and scolded the guy who took my phone and told him to fire his engineers sitting inside and doing nothing. I even threatened them to move to consumer court.His Reply: Paathukalaam Sir. ( We will see Sir).I didn't realise why he said so, but in another 10 minutes I got to know why he said so.I tried calling my father and told him that I myself repaired my phone, but he was not able to hear me. I was speaking as loud as possible and he was unable to hear me. I switched on to the speakers and then only I was audible to him. I thought might be some Network issue. I called him again and the problem persisted. They had damaged the microphone of my device.Yes, They did. I will tell how I got to know. First of all I used my phone in the speaker for the next 5 months and when I had enough money to get it repaired from a local shop, they showed me the Microphone portion of the device and it was rubbed badly with a sharp object. Maybe so that I would return for repairing or may be to show their revenge.I was seriously shocked to see such an atrocity done by such a big company. I felt sorry for all those customers who don't know the technical side and pay in the cash/amount the customer service asks for.According to Xiaomi Company's Policy they provide you a 1 year warranty for the device and 6 Months warranty for your accessories but according to the customer service representatives nothing is considered under warranty and every issue is a Motherboard issue and for every issue you will have to pay 60% of the phone price.I am not the only one who faced this issue, You Guys Don't Believe me ?Bullett Shankar's answer to What is the biggest scam you’ve ever seen?Read this answer and don't forget to read the comment box. You will be shocked to see the response of fellow people who faced the same issue and were cheated.Guys, We are giving them this status. Why ? They are a foreign company ruling our markets and making us fools, please share this information with every Xiaomi Customer.I even tweeted to the head of Mi India And That Guy Never replied. I personally messaged him but still he didn't care.Please Fellow Quorans, share this message as far as possible we are being cheated pretty badly and we are being betrayed, you can buy Xiaomi phones but before going to the customer care with an issue just do a bit of research and give it to the customer service and please don't be so gullible. Fight for what is right.Son of A GunnerEdit 1:- I can see many people commenting that I copied the answer. I don't write answers to get upvotes or sympathy it to be popular. I write answers in Quora so that my experience would be a lesson to others who are reading the answers. I don't really care about those who are commenting about me copying my old answer. I wrote this answer so that it's widespread among people and they should know about it. If I was copying my answer why would I even post the link for my old answer. I didn't join Quora to become famous.Edit 2:- People Do Read the Comment box for both the answers. You will get to know so many people have suffered the same issues. Make sure when you buy your next phone.

The Indian Navy has been battle-tested once before, in 1971. When comparing with the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) it is important to look not just at the number of capital ships and submarines but also at the rotary and fixed wing platforms, sensors, missile systems (air defence, cruise, anti ship & ballistic), satellites, fleet support vessels, bases and collaboration with foreign navies. The Chinese leadership since the turn of this century has been focusing on making the PLA, traditionally a land warfare oriented and ground forces dominated organization to one capable of undertaking operations across all domains i.e., developing multi-spectrum capability and becoming an expeditionary force. From being a more than 2 million strong force at the beginning of the century the People's Liberation Army Ground Force in 2020 has around 9,75,000 personnel with emphasis on transforming into a force capable of joint operations with other branches of the PLA and fighting and winning a swift war under informatized/intelligentized conditions. The People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) on the other hand has not seen any cuts in it share of the budget or personnel. On the contrary it is gradually becoming the principal element of the People's Republic of China's (PRC) military power.The primary area of operations of the IN is the Indian Ocean Region i.e., the region from the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Aden in the west to the Strait of Malacca in the East while the east coast of Africa too falls within the Indian maritime area of interest. A secondary maritime area of deployment is the South China Sea and the Western Pacific in conjunction with other regional powers like Vietnam, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan and Australia. India and Vietnam signed an agreement in 2010 which gave Indian Navy ships access to based in Vietnam and an arrangement for logistics support. Indian has access to Vietnam's strategic Nha Trang naval base. In 2018 India and Singapore signed a naval logistics support agreement and the former also gained access to the Changi naval base near the Strait of Malacca. India is also co-developing the Sabang Port in Aceh Province of Indonesia as part of the strategic partnership between the two countries. Other than these partnerships India has also signed reciprocal logistics support agreement with the United States and France granting it access to the French base in Djibouti, where the PLAN also operates a base since 2017. The Indian Navy reportedly also has a radar and surveillance station in Madagascar and is also developing the Agalega island of Mauritius and Assumption island of Seychelles to serve as outposts in the IOR, although the Seychelles project seems to have run into some trouble owing to the island nation's legislature not ratifying it.The primary concern for the Indian naval establishment is the unprecedented pace of Chinese naval build up, it's gradual but still ongoing transition into a Blue water Navy and it's forays into the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and the frequency and quantum of deployment has only increased in recent times. The PLAN first started deploying into the IOR around 2008 with conduct of anti-piracy operations being the stated objective. Since then however the PLAN has also deployed submarines into the region. The 2014 docking of a Chinese submarine at the Colombo Port generated great consternation in New Delhi. The presence of PLAN Type 093 Shang class nuclear attack submarine (SSN) in the IOR in 2013 is believed to have dawned on the national security establishment the vulnerability of the slower Arihant class SSBN to such boats. This led to the kickstarting in 2015 of the Indian Navy SSN programme to build six nuclear attack submarine, something that had been put in the backburner almost a decade ago owing to the paucity of funds and focus on the construction of the nuclear ballistic missile submarines as part of the nuclear triad assured second capability. It is pertinent to keep in mind that original Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) project envisioned the indigenous construction of nuclear attack submarines. However post the 1998 Pokhran-II nuclear tests and India's adoption of no first use nuclear doctrine the emphasis was shifted to SSBN, but based on the same design. This approach is not dissimilar to what the Chinese did with their first Type 092 SSBN that entered service in the late 1980s. It's design was based on the Type 091 Han class SSN that entered service in 1974–75 becoming Asia's first indigeneously built nuclear boats (not counting the Soviet Union since it's primary orientation was towards Europe). The Type 092 Xia class served as a testbed and technology demonstrator for future SSBN development and the next batch of SSBN belonging to the Type 094 Jin class entered service only in the first decade of the 21st century, completing the PRC's nuclear triad. US sources estimate that right Jin class boats would be in service by 2020. The PLAN reportedly also has six to nine Shang class boats in service along with atleast three older Han class. In the pipeline are plans to construct five newer Type 095 Sui class nuclear attack boats and the Type 096 nuclear ballistic missile boats.Successive Chinese boats have displayed improved acoustic signature, reduction in noise level and propulsion. All these point towards China having achieved 'continous deterrence at sea' in this decade itself. Continuous deterrence at sea concept differs from single submarine deterrence patrol in that the former requires multiple submarines and at no time is any leg of the triad not functional. Of course whether the PLAN has achieved effective sea based nuclear deterrence against the United States is not yet confirmed. The JL-2 Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) is said to have a maximum range of 7000 km and upwards. Whether the Type 094 is stelathy enough to evade the sensors and anti-submarine warfare capabilities of the US Navy and go beyond Chinese littoral waters to a location that would bring US population and industrial centers in it's missile range is not yet clear. Maybe that's the reason they are working on the newer Type 096 SSBN. However from their littoral waters the PLAN can strike targets anywhere in the Indian landmass. The PLAN attack submarines of Type 093G class (three are being upgraded) are said to be able to launch YJ-18 and CJ-10 anti-ship and land attack cruise missile from their VLS. On the higher side the number of such cruise missiles onboard a single boat can reach twelve. The CJ-10 reportedly had a range of 1500 (US estimate) to 2000 (Chinese sources) km and can carry a nuclear warhead. The PLAN nuclear submarine programme at this moment is well ahead of it's Indian counterpart. India's first SSBN INS Arihant was commissioned in 2016 and conducted it's first deterrence patrol in late 2018. The second boat INS Arighat is to be commissioned in 2020–21 while the larger S4 and S4* are under construction, with the hulls having been already supplied by L&T. The later two boats would be able to carry eight 3500 km range K4 SLBM or twenty four 750 km range K15 SLBM. As of now the Arihant is only equipped with the K15. The K4 was tested successfully in January 2020 and is now ready for serial production. The follow-on class of the Arihant boats, now simply known as the S5 class will be larger and carry 12–16 long range SLBM, the 5000 km range K5 or the 8000 km range K6 with Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle (MIRV) capability. The S5 class, three of which are to be built is still in the drawing board and won't ‘probably’ be inducted even in the next decade. The existence of the SSN programme was publicly acknowledged by the Navy Chief only in 2017. Another area of concern for India is the transfer of submarine launched nuclear capable cruise missile capability by China to Pakistan. The Chinese are constructing eight AIP-equipped Type 041 Yuan class diesel electric submarines for the Pakistani Navy with four boats to be delivered by 2023 while four are to be constructed in that country via Transfer of Technology (ToT) and delivered by 2028. The PN is working on a submarine launched variant of the 450 km range Babur-III cruise missile with a nuclear warhead thus a sea-based deterrence leg at a lower cost. Chinese assistance to this project cannot be ruled out as it is line with the Chinese strategy of helping Pakistan maintain some semblance of parity and military power balance with India in order to keep the later embroiled in a South Asian rivalry so that it won't emerge as a strategic rival and combative power to China. Whether the strategy has yielded the desired result is another issue but the Chinese are likely to continue with this proxy encirclement and engagement game. Another example of this strategy is the Chinese assistance to the Paksiatni 'Ababeel' MIRV project (not yet operational) apparantly as a counter to India's Agni-V and Agni-VI nuclear capable ballistic missile which can strike large population centres in mainland China.The PLAN conventional attack submarine arm too is not only quantitatively but also qualitatively superior to the Indian submarine arm. It has over 20 Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) capable Type 041 Yuan class boats, 13 Type 039 Song class boats, 12 Russian origin Kilo class (Type 877EKM) boats and around 13 Type 035 Ming class boats in service. The Ming class boats were based on the design of the Soviet Romeo class boats which which were licensed built in China as Type 033 class with reduced noise levels and indigeneous sonars. Around 80 such Type 033 boats were built by the Chinese starting 1963 and many were exported. The most recent export of Ming class submarines was to Bangladesh which acquired two of them and Thailand too has placed orders for three boats. In comparison to sound 55 operational Chinese subs presently India has eight Kilo class submarines, four HDW 209 class submarines and two Scorpene class submarines. Four Scorpene submarines are in the pipeline and all six are set to be in service by 2023–24. Project P75I to build six AIP and Brahmos launch capable boats has remained confined to the files for more than twelve years now. The Request For Proposal (RFP) is yet to be issued. So there's little chance of them getting inducted even in the next decade and we don't know what effect the COVID 19 pandemic will have on our defence procurement. Recently there has been an offer made by Rosoboronexport of Russia to sell three old Kilo class hulls to India as a part of a 1.8 billion USD deal to upgrade three in service Kilos. The mothballed hulls, 30 years old will have to refurbished and fitted with the necessary equipment before being delivered to the Navy. As of now two Kilo class boats, one each at a Russian shipyard and Hindustan Shipyard Limited (HSL) have undergone a second Mid Life Certification and Upgrade (MLCU) while a third is in Russia undergoing a similar procedure. One boat after MLCU has been given to the Myanmar Navy. Two other boats are to be upgraded at an Indian shipyard, probably one of L&T's or Naval Dockyard Mumbai with Russian technical assistance. Two older HDW 209 boats too are to be upgraded in India with technical assistance from Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (TKMS). So more than 50 years after acquiring it's first submarine and despite carrying out maintenance, repair and overhaul work in the boats with Russian assistance since the 1970s India's naval establishment and domestic shipyards are still dependent on their foreign partners for carry out upgrade certification work, leading to frequent cost and time overruns in such projects. India has also operated nuclear attack submarine on lease from Russia. First from 1987–1991 and the present Akula class SSN INS Chakra since 2012.The Chinese submarine arm although much larger than it's Indian counterpart does not actually project a complete picture of the net assessment of the two forces. China views the United States as it's principal rival and with it's stated objective of being able to win wars globally by 2050 it is imperative for then that the US be toppled as the most powerful country on earth. As of now China is struggling to completely impose it's will even in it's neighbourhood and it's military is still technologically distinctly inferior to that of the United States'. So it is highly unlikely that the entire force of the PLAN could in any circumstance brought to bear upon the Indian forces. Presently as per the Indian Navy at any time there is only a single PLAN submarine in the Indian Ocean. The total quantum of deployment in the region remains between 8 and 10 assets. That even with such a miniscule force they are able to occupy the most prominent position in the strategic calculus of the Indian establishment and the nation at large is testament to the overbearing influence of the Chinese on the psyche of the nation's around them and it's ever increasing hard power. There have been reports of Chinese ships entering India's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as confirmed by the Navy Chief in the 2020 Raisina Dialogue and the recent reports of Chinese submarines deploying hydrographic survey vessels to map the Indian Ocean seabed even in India's littoral waters is a grave concern and an indicator of future Chinese designs.Deploying ships in the high seas also require the ability of the Navy to sustain and replenish them. The question is, can the PLAN at this point in time sustain large scale deployments to the IOR. It has a base in Djibouti and it can resupply it's ships at the Paksiatni naval base of Karachi and ‘maybe’ in Gwadar in the future, but in the case of a naval conflict the later is too close to India and moreover despite all the rhetoric it is in no way certain that in the event of a India-China conflict Pakistan would automatically join the war on the Chinese side, because that would leave it vulnerable to Indian aggression. India's Andaman & Nicobar islands, it's so called 'iron-chain' counter to the Chinese 'String of Pearls' strategy, would facilitate easy monitoring and interdiction of Chinese vessels coming through the Malacca Straits. The PLAN can divert it's assets through the Lombock and Sunda Straits turning this into a naval tracking and hunting game. Of course such a scenario assumes everything else to be static but that won't happen in reality. A naval conflict lies further up the escalation ladder and it means a land war across the Himalayas and air war over it has already begun. This could throw the entire post WWII international order into chaos and there is a distinct possibility that such conflict, if it is a prolonged one, is not going to remain solely a India-China conflict. However if the air-land war remains at a level somewhat lower than a full scale naval battle in the IOR and South China Sea in the escalation ladder the navies would still be in stand-off but not at war. A high intensity naval conflict would however also leave Chinese merchant vessels and oil supplies vulnerable to attack by the Indian Navy and vice versa to some extent. Of course if Pakistan decides to join the war on the Chinese side than the position of the Sino-Pak alliance at sea shall be marginally better off but the balance would still be in favour of India unless of course China can somehow deploy the bulk of it's forces to the IOR. In a conflict with a Sino-Pak alliance the service worse off won't be the Navy but the Air Force owing to the interoperability of it's adversaries, China's investment in long range radar and electronic warfare (areas in which it also assists Pakistan), it's own squadron strength and the wartime maintenance and serviceability of it's diverse inventory. An example of interoperability between these two forces is the same 450–500 km detection range L-band radars stationed in Mianwali air base and Kargilik in Sinkiang providing complementary radar coverage of North-West India. It's not a panacea for the tactical superiority IAF but such interoperability is a force multiplier. The regular Shaheen exercises have also helped the PAF gain valuable first hand info on the performance of the Flankers (Su 27, Su 30MKK, Su 30MK2, J11 and J16) which form the bulk of the PLAAF fleet.The Indian Navy fares slightly better in the surface domain as compared to the sub-surface domain. The PLAN maintains a large numerical superiority but the technology gap is not as stark as in the case of submarines. India was the first country in Asia to own and operate aircraft carriers. Presently it has one refurbished Kiev class aircraft carrier INS Vikramaditya and one another carrier, first to be built indigeneously, INS Vikrant at Cochin Shipyard Limited (CSL) to be inducted by 2021. The plans for a follow on larger carrier INS Vishal are still in the design phase with a recent statement by the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) which said that the carrier is not a procurement priority as of now and the focus should instead be on submarines has put a question mark over the future viability of the project. Prioritisation of defence spending by the forces is a part of the CDS' charter of responsibilities and it quite likely that his view shall prevail. That would signal a shift in the traditional Indian Naval doctrine from sea control to sed denial. Prior to the advent of the carrier groups sea control was exercised by large capital ships such as battle cruisers and destroyers but with advancements in naval aviation technology Battle Group centered on an aircraft carrier became the primary sea control tool. A CBG consists of destroyers, guided missile frigates and anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvettes. Probably the CDS views that in light of the rapidly expanding PLAN fleet it would be more prudent to invest the Navy's limited budget in sea denial capabilities instead of expensive projects like aircraft carrier construction and it's associated assets. However all the submarine projects in progress or under consideration were planned prior to the appointment of the CDS. So either the projects were planned without taking into consideration the budgetary restrictions of the Navy or the CDS wants to prioritise naval spending in a manner that is not acceptable to the service itself and it's doctrine. The Navy however is unrelenting in it's push for a third carrier. Even after the CDS' statement the Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) came out in public stating that a third carrier is an absolute necessity for the Navy and there can be no compromise on that regard. After the service was forced to revise the number of assets as laid down by the Maritime Capability Perspective Plan 2012–2027 the Navy categorically stated that there can be no compromise on the acquisition of the INS Vishal. The Navy plans to deploy one carrier each under the western and eastern naval command with one undergoing repair and refit and ready for rotation. The MCPP revision necessitated by the decrease in the service's share of the national defence budget from 18% in 2012 to 13% in 2019 reduced the number of ships from 198 to 175 along with reduction in helicopter and other assets such as the Poseidon P-8I maritime surveillance aircraft and all this at a time when the PLAN on the basis of the number of vessels (not tonnage) has overtaken the USN as the largest maritime force in the world. The former has more than 300 vessels compared to around 290 of the USN. The Chinese shipbuilding industry which is already the largest in the world has allowed the PLAN to leverage the infrastructure, skill and technology in commercial shipbuilding to massively expand it's fleet and also modernize it. A RAND study suggests that in 1996 the PLAN only had 56 ships and only a few of them possessed air defence missiles. This would mean a naval expansion by more than five times in less than 25 years. The PLAN always had a large submarine fleet but the current fleet is much more technologically advanced. The Indian Navy currently has between 130 and 140 ships and the Naval chief stated that 50 ships & submarines and 36 aircraft are on order, and Acceptance of Necessity (AON) has been obtained to initiate procurement of 41 more ships, 6 (down from 10) P8I Long Range Maritime Reconnaissance aircraft (in addition to eight in service and four on order) and 34 helicopters (probably 24 Sikorsky MH 60R mulirole helicopters and 10 Kamov Ka-31 AEW). The ships under construction include the seven P17A Shivalik class frigates, four P15B Visakhapatnam class destroyers etc. Deal for four Russian Grigorovich class frigates (2+2) has also been signed. Some of the new inductions would only come in as replacement of decommissioned older vessels. A hydrographic survey ship is under construction at Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers shipyard in Kolkata and three more are planned. The Navy operates one US amphibious transport dock, renamed INS Jalshawa. However plans for the construction of four Landing Helicopter Docks, a must for expeditionary capability have been pending since 2006. The Navy however does have a few older Landing Ship Tank (LST) and the latest Mk IV Landing Utility Craft. Recently a contract for five fleet support vessel construction was given to a consortium of HSL and strangely enough, Turkish shipyard, TAIS. In a similar time frame the PLAN is slated to have around 430 ships and 100 submarines.The induction of capital ships like destroyers and frigates also require necessitate the acquisition of helicopters which serve as their long range reconnaissance and surveillance platforms.The utility helicopter fleet of the Navy is made up of the vintage Cheetah LUH and the Sea King. The Navy has 14 operational Kamov Ka 31 AEW helicopters and maybe about four operational Sea King helicopters. The number of helicopters on paper might be larger but the unavailability of spares has led to cannibalization of some units. For e.g., of the ten Ka 28 helicopters, only four were operational while the others were cannibalized for spares. In 2016 a ₹ 2000 core contract was signed with Russia for the upgrade all ten helicopters. The Navy also has some (eight with sixteen on order) HAL Dhruv utility helicopters on order. Long term requirements for the force can be gauged from the tender for 111 Naval Light Utility Helicopters and 123 Naval Multi Role Helicopters. There are however six squadrons of Dornier Do-228 maritime surveillance aircraft in service. The Navy's sole operational aircraft carrier can carry upto 30 MiG 29K fighter and the force currently has 44 MiGs. Once the Vikrant is in service these assets would have to be shared among the two carriers and this would require a very high serviceability rate which has never been a area of strength for the fighters. The acquisition of 57 Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter Aircraft (TEDBF) is in it's earliest stage. The PLAN in comparison has hundreds of older Harbin Z8 (license built version of French Aerospatiale AS321 Super Felon) medium lift and Z9 (Eurocopter AS365 Daphne) utility helicopters. The Z8 copters shall be gradually replaced by the Changhe Z18. The PLAN has forayed into the field of naval aviation only in this decade. Their first aircraft carrier was a refurbished Kuznetsov class from Ukraine and a second domestically built carrier, the Shangdong too is in service. A third CATOBAR capable carrier is under construction at Shanghai while there are plans for a fourth. In the long run they might acquire as many as 10 carriers, although Chinese sources only talk about six by 2035 with four nuclear powered ones. The primary deck based aviation aircraft for the PLAN is the J15 which is a reverse engineered variant of the Su 33. The Chinese had acquired a prototype from Ukraine in 2001. The Russians rightly fearing Chinese intentions of reverse engineering their design refused to sell it to them. As of now the weight of the J15 and the STOBAR carriers in service limit the PLAN's carrier based aviation capability. Future Chinese carriers would field the Chengdu J20 carrier-based variant.The most prominent PLAN capital ship in the forseeable future is the Type 055 Renhai class battle cruiser/heavy destroyer. Eight such ships currently under construction. There are around 11 Type 052D Luyang-III class destroyer in device and another 9 under construction. In the frigate department the PLAN has 28 Type 054A Jinkai-II class ships in service while since 2013 it has inducted 41 Type 056 corvettes in service along with Type 056A ASW corvettes with active towed sonar array. The primary supply and replenishment ships of the Navy seems to be the Type 903/903A vessels. Around 10 of them are in service and more are being built. Apart from these the PLAN also has many older variant of destroyers and frigates in service. Since it started it's naval build up in the the 1990s it has launched many different class of destroyers and frigates. This approach seems similar to the Russian approach of induction a platform and then subsequently upgrading it better sensors, weapons systems and propulsion. Any deficiencies in the previous design borne out by active service can be rectified in subsequent upgrades and redesigns and the lessons learnt can also be utilized in the design of modern systems. So none of the assets fielded by PLAN as of now incorporate any quantum leap in technology or any hitherto unknown technology but are large and more numerous than their western counterparts. This is not to say that the PLAN is not a world class navy, it is, but compared to smaller navies like the Royal Navy or the French Navy it's power projection capabilities are quite limited and it also does not possess demonstrated capability in the field of cruise missiles, stealth frigate design etc. Chinese developed radars and engines are have high maintenance requirements and sometimes might not meet their advertised performance parameters. China however is investing heavily in the field of Laser and High Powered Microwave weapons, hypersonic missiles (DF-17) electronic warfare, anti-satellite capability (both Kinetic & Directed Energy), artificial intelligence, unmanned combat drones and underwater unmanned vehicle. China is already a world leader in commercial drones and is also making strides in military drone technology, both reconnaissance and combat. The PLAN has also been investing heavily in the construction of Amphibious Transport Docks and Landing Helicopter Dock. The most prominent them being the Type 075 Landing Helicopter Dock, two of which are under construction. It can reportedly carry around 30 helicopters. There are also five latest Type 071 Yuzhao class ATDs in service which can accommodate over five hundred troops. There are also plans to raise a 100,000 marine force. All these point towards the acquiring of expeditionary capabilities, not just for an operation across the Taiwan Strait but also in line with becoming a global military power by 2050.The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) in 2013 launched the nation's first dedicated military communication satellite GSAT-7 for the Navy. The satellite provides coverage over a wide area in the Indian Ocean Region. Another satellite GSAT-7A was launched as a dedicated asset for the Air Force and the Army. The 2019 Shakti ASAT weapon test might have been a milestone as far as Indian military capability is concerned but the Chinese are well ahead in this field too. Their ASAT capabilities are multi-dimensional ranging from land based kinetic ASAT to airborne and seaborne kinetic ASAT to stationing of killer satellites in orbit (for e.g., one with a robotic arm which can be used to knock another satellite of it's orbit), laser ASAT weapons, Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons or disruption of satellite communication (electronic warfare). India is aware of these PLA advancements and strategies and deterrence capabilities should be developed to counter them. The Chinese also have a much larger constellation of military communication, SIGNIT & geo-imaging satellites. It's Yaogan Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), Electro-Optical and ocean SIGNIT capable constellation consists of 40–50 such satellites which also provide military communication services. The Yaogan 30 constellation alone has 18 satellites on a single orbital plane thereby providing higher revisit rates for a target area. Then there are the Gaofeng earth-imaging satellites which are not dedicated military satellites but they can be used for ocean surveillance purposes. The Beidou constellation provides global coverage. Interestingly apart from the Chinese military the Pakistani Armed Forces are the only users granted access to the navigation system for military usage i.e., it can be used to guide Pakistani missiles, aircrafts, ships and precision guided long range munitions. A satellite launched for Pakistan by China in 2018 from the Taiyuan Launch Centre called the Pakistan Remote Sensing Satellite (PNSS) [along with another satellite known as the P-Technology Evaluation Satellite (TES)] is believed to be an X-band radar imaging satellite could be an Yaogan. The Indian Armed Forces and the civilian space department are yet to substantially leverage India's considerable expertise in remote sensing for military purpose. The establishment of a tri-service Defense Space Agency (DSA) under the Air Force seems to be a step in the right direction. Along with the DSA, a Defense Cyber Agency (DSA) headed by the Navy and an Armed Forces Special Operations Division (AFSOD) under the Army became operational on November, 2019. These steps are in accordance with the recommendations of the Naresh Chandra Committee report submitted to the Prime Minister in 2013. The report had actually suggested setting up dedicated commands. Hopefully the formation of these agencies is the first step towards that objective.Agencies take shape for special operations, space, cyber war.The 2019 People's Liberation Army (PLA) defence white paper calls for the force to protect not just the physical frontiers of China but also the interest frontiers which can be read as securing resources, protecting investments such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) infrastructure and Chinese citizens working in the concerned countries, sea-lanes of communication, allies and even intervention. In any such expeditionary set up the Navy by default becomes the lynchpin and pivot. The 2015 military reforms of the PLA led to the creation of integrated theatre commands. The theatre commands however would function operationally only in the case of a land conflict along it's borders or a sea-air conflict in the Chinese littoral. In case the PLAN mangages to break free of it's strategic encirclement by the US and it's allies and become a global force it would have remain operationally independent of the theatre command structure. Military reforms have also been on the agenda of the government in India and the creation of the CDS is the most prominent step taken by the government till date. It is too early to comment on any would be reforms but one that concerns the Navy is establishment of a Peninsular. The structure and responsibility of the command is not known but any move to make the Navy doctrinally and capability-wise too defensive and the armed forces land-centric has to weighed in carefully for it’s own set of pros and cons. The CDS had suggested that the Peninsular Command (now renamed as Maritime Command) which should start functioning by 2021–22 will have the entire IOR as it's maritime area of responsibility.How is China modernizing its navy? | ChinaPower Project

What can’t the US military do with shotguns in the near future? More than you might think actually. While shotguns have a wider bore diameter than most other small arms, they are volumetrically limited compared to signal pistols and grenade launchers, the shotgun’s more awesome big brothers. For that reason, I’m going to include potential future developments in those areas as well. Shotguns, signal pistols and grenade launchers are all pretty similar anyways, they all throw large projectiles at low velocities using relatively low operating pressures, the differences between them are simply a matter of scale.So where could I see shotguns and other related technologies progressing?Underbarrel shotguns for pistols:Source: (Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games)Presently, shotguns are mostly used for door breaching operations in the military. Essentially a serviceman takes a shotgun, places the gun against an appropriate portion of the door at an angle, then fires. A portion of the door gets destroyed by the shotgun blast and the serviceman kicks the door in. While specialized breaching rounds which break apart on impact are typically used for safety, it is also possible to use standard buckshot if expediency is imperative.The current M1030 breaching round used by US is made of powdered steel and wax. The M26 MASS used by the US Army has a 7.75 inch long barrel.Source: (M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System)So I’d like to think it’s pretty well established that you don’t need a particularly long barrel to breach most doors. All that is necessary is reasonably wide projectile with a fair amount of mass. With that in mind, using a modular under barrel shotgun on a pistol could potentially put breaching shotguns in a more compact and convenient package for a lot of servicemen. Something like this:For the sake of the drawing, just imagine the H&K USP uses a Mil-STD-1913 rail.Pictured is a rough sketch of a 20 gauge break action modular accessory shotgun for pistols. To load it, the pink latch under the barrel is retracted rearwards and the green barrel assembly is pivoted upwards. After inserting a cartridge, the barrel is snapped shut. To cock the weapon, the purple spring loaded striker is pushed forwards with a pair of cocking tabs (not pictured) until it engages the yellow sear. When ready to fire, the blue trigger mounted to one side of the pistol’s trigger guard is unfolded. Simply pulling the unfolded trigger pushes the yellow sear assembly forwards and slightly upwards, allowing the striker to spring forwards and hit the pivoting orange hammer. The hammer’s fixed firing pin is pushed forward into the cartridge’s primer, detonating it and firing the weapon. To remove a spent shell, simply unlatch the barrel and pull the casing out using the cutouts on either side of the barrel. If the spent shell becomes stuck, a clearing rod or stick can be shoved down muzzle to dislodge the stubborn casing. If the weapon misfires, it can be recocked by simply pushing the purple striker forwards again.That’s just an idea for a super compact shotgun which uses the limited space available on a pistol’s rail. One potential variation is rotating the folding trigger assembly 90 degrees so it lies horizontal to the weapon’s frame and doesn’t interfere with the pistol’s trigger guard at all. A real engineer would make a CAD diagram of both designs. I’m not a real engineer and I use MS Paint so you only get one picture.So why 20 gauge? First of all, the ammunition is a little narrower than 12 gauge which should make it an easier profile for holsters to accommodate, the device isn’t terribly different in shape than many pistol mounted flashlights. Tooling for manufacturing 20 gauge is already common as well, so ammunition won’t be difficult for the US military to procure. 20 gauge is also about the most recoil you can expect anybody to handle out of such a lightweight weapon, though it shouldn’t flip vertically too much since the recoil would be pretty much in line with the shooter’s wrist. It also prevents servicemen from putting more powerful 12 gauge ammunition in the firearm and potentially damaging the device or breaking their hands. You have to worry about that sort of thing with some servicemen, accidents happen.With roughly a 4 inch barrel and appropriate ammunition, it should work fine for door breaching. But there’s another reason to pick 20 gauge. I happen to know that 14.5mm artillery simulators fit almost perfectly in 20 gauge shells.Source: (20 gauge Air burst ammo, three second delay. 5 round pack. Sold As Is.)Source: (20 gauge point detonation ammo. Five round pack.)The existing simulators are spin fuzed so rifling in the last inch of barrel would be needed, but the more important part is that the artillery simulators already exist. That means the tooling and production lines for making the projectiles don’t have to be fabricated from scratch. From a system adoption standpoint, that’s a big win.In terms of tactical applications, the artillery simulators can launched into a room for disorientation like a flashbang or used similar to a concussion grenade. There really isn’t enough projectile volume to make an effective fragmentation grenade out of the artillery simulators, but there is certainly enough volume to make an effective white phosphorus munition. White phosphorus makes for an equally good smoke screening agent, inextinguishable fire starter, and antipersonnel incendiary munition.It’s also worth noting that the projectiles used by “12 gauge” Orion flares measure 14mm across making them suitable for a 20 gauge weapon. Again, that means existing tooling can be used to manufacture new ammunition. The signal flares don’t have a heck of a lot of volume for chemical payloads, but they work for their designated role of signalling just fine.None of this is revolutionary, but it does add a layer of flexibility to sidearms which isn’t currently seen.Extending the range and broadening the capability of 12 gauge combat shotguns:One type of ammunition which the US military should look back into is flechettes. Basically they’re little steel darts. When fired from artillery and tank guns, they absolutely shred fleshy things. When tested in shotguns, they’ve often performed inconsistently. This is largely due to designers packing the artillery grade flechettes with their points oriented both backwards and forwards to fit more flechettes inside the shotgun shell. Ever try to play darts by throwing half your darts tail first? It’s really hard. Now imagine shooting darts backwards out of a shotgun; it’s a terrible idea but that’s exactly what most small arms manufacturers have tried to do when making flechette ammunition. The only company I’ve ever seen get flechettes right has been Sabot Designs LLC. The company uses a specialized sabot with thicker flechettes all in a point forward orientation.Source: (12 GA FLECHETTE SHOTGUN ROUNDS FLECHETTE SABOT AMMO)That particular design is worth emulating. Flechettes have good external ballistic performance out to 100 yards and produce minimal recoil for the user. The spread pattern is unlike buckshot or other shotgun ammunition since the flechettes spread rapidly after firing due to turbulence but then stabilize creating a pattern which expands very little thereafter. They also have good performance against Kevlar and other soft body armors. As for terminal performance, they cause lacerations more similar to knives or arrows rather than round wound tracks like buckshot. Flechettes aren’t ideal for every scenario, they possess miserable cover and barrier penetration capabilities, but they do allow a shotgun to flex into a somewhat longer ranged role where slugs would often be used without sacrificing the high hit probability enjoyed by buckshot. Flechette ammunition also weighs less per shell than lead based shot. This means flechette ammunition can be carried at a lower weight penalty to the user.Like the 20 gauge explosive shells seen above, 12 gauge combat shotguns can employ similar projectiles, albeit with slightly higher volume. One example is the FRAG-12 high explosive round (currently stuck in development hell along with its best friend the Atchisson Assault Shotgun).Source: (Auto Assault-12 (AA-12) Full-Auto Machine Shotgun/FRAG-12 High-Explosive Round Combo/Weapon System?)I really want to like the FRAG-12, but its designers think both it and the AA-12 will revolutionize and fundamentally change the nature of infantry combat. They’re wrong. Instead of looking at the two as a package, the military could just field the FRAG-12 on its own since the ammunition is already compatible with existing shotguns in service with the US military. In addition to the applications and potential payloads for the 14.5mm artillery simulators, the “armor piercing” variant of the FRAG-12 lends itself to stopping light vehicles and penetrating some barriers at medium range, things generally reserved for heavier anti-materiel weapons. Remember what I said above about the modular accessory shotgun for pistols not being revolutionary but adding a layer of flexibility? The same applies here. The FRAG-12 simply doesn’t possess the physical volume to host enough explosive and fragmentation material to compete with the payloads of true grenade launchers, but it does increase the number of things a combat shotgun can do in any given environment.Expanding the roles of signal pistols and grenade launchers:To get some insight into the future development of grenade launchers, we should first look back a ways.The idea of dedicated grenade launchers more or less started around World War II. Rifle grenades of the time were inconvenient and really didn’t pan out. The Japanese Type 89 grenade discharger, more commonly called the “knee mortar”, was one early example of a dedicated grenade launcher which enjoyed widespread use.Source: (Type 89 grenade discharger)The knee mortar was a pretty darn good weapon. It was fast to load, could be used for both direct and indirect fire, and was potent against personnel.Near the end of the war, the Germans started producing grenade pistols. Simply put, these were 26.5mm signal pistols fitted with sights and padded stocks.Source: (German WWII Grenade Pistols - The Firearm Blog)Source: (German Grenade Pistol Ammunition (WWII Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 40, December 16, 1943))Between those two concepts and the Rheinmetall made 8 cm PAW 600 antitank weapon, the US military eventually employed the High–Low Propulsion system for use in the 40mm M79 grenade launcher which came into use shortly before the Vietnam War. The High-Low system allows for fairly heavy projectiles to be launched from shoulder fired weapons with reasonably low recoil.Source: (M79 grenade launcher)Source: (High–low system)Source: (File:40mm High-Low Launch System Drawing.jpg)The system worked so well that it was also suitable for the underbarrel M203 grenade launcher.Source: (M203 grenade launcher)That said, the slide loading M203 kind of sucks since it can’t use newer, longer 40mm shells. The US Army is currently phasing out the M203 in favor of the side loading M320 Grenade Launcher Module made by Heckler & Koch.Source: (M320 Grenade Launcher Module)Besides the standard 40mm High Explosive Grenades, newer rounds like the XM1060 40mm Thermobaric Grenade, M583A1 Illumination and M992 Infrared Illumination rounds (which both use burning flares suspended in mid air by a parachute to light up the landscape at night), M397 and M397A1 Airburst Grenades, and a variety of smoke grenades are all currently employed in the US arsenal. All of those grenades could be more widely distributed to US infantry forces. Of particular note is the M992 which isn’t offensive but does enhance the use of night vision goggles.Source: (Army Greatest Inventions 2011 Winners: M992 40mm IR cartridge, 5.56mm M855A1 & M240L - The Firearm Blog)One interesting future technology under current development are reconnaissance grenades. Essentially the ammunition fires a camera attached to a parachute. After being fired, the camera activates and slowly drifts to the ground while transmitting images back to the user. The images can be reviewed to assess an area’s layout by an infantry squad.Source: (SPARCS "camera grenade" offers an alternative to reconnaissance drones)While this sort of technology would seem to overlap with the currently booming drone industry, it’s actually quite different. While drones offer exploration and loitering capabilities, they’re generally bulky and expensive. That means it’s best if the drones can be retrieved after using them. By contrast, the reconnaissance grenades are cheap, compact, and disposable while still providing a basic imagery for troops to navigate by and use to make immediate tactical decisions. In the future, such grenades could also provide three dimensional mapping of an area in addition to imagery.So why isn’t this sort of round (and the visible and infrared illumination rounds) suitable for shotguns? It mostly goes back to volume; combat shotguns will always have inferior payloads to grenade launchers simply due to limitations on the size of the shotgun shell. It’s hard to fit a camera and a parachute inside a little 12 gauge shell. By contrast, grenade launchers like the M320 can keep accommodating longer and longer shells with more diverse payloads. The other reason is energy. While the High-Low system isn’t exactly placid, it’s a lot more gentle than directly expelling projectiles with smokeless powder like shotguns do. Plastic wadding material can help cushion shotgun projectiles to some extent, but grenade launchers will always be able to fire more delicate payloads. Shotgun payloads can be made to be more robust at additional expense, but eventually you get diminishing returns, especially with the economy of scale employed by the US military. Grenade launchers just make more sense in some situations.That said, upscaling shotgun rounds into 40mm rounds is very doable. Flechettes should be of particular interest because their low mass and narrow profile allows lots and lots of the little darts to be packed in a 40mm shell and used for close range defense with minimal recoil. This is a potential improvement over the current M576 40mm grenade which uses buckshot. Lack of barrier penetration for the flechettes doesn’t matter so much for a grenade launcher like it does a shotgun; 40mm high explosive or airburst grenades are already kickass barrier negating rounds.Two of the primary complaints about 40mm grenade launchers are limited range and limited payload (which is amusing in this context since shotguns have even smaller payloads). It’s hard to get grenades very far using the High-Low system without increasing the length of the shell or increasing recoil. The M320 and other break action grenade launchers like the older M79 and HK69A1 can ignore the length issues common to the slide loading M203. Recoil is still an issue though. Payloads are also never as large as troops wish for, bigger booms are always more desirable. We’ll get back to that in a little bit.Remember those German grenade pistols? While the High-Low system turned out to be a wild success for grenade launchers, the Germans actually kept developing the pistol idea as well. Both the Geco LP2 and H&K P2A1 26.5mm signal pistols feature a pair of curious holes in the exact same orientations at the rear of the grip frame.Source: (http://flaregunsales.com/product/german-flare-gun-geco/?age-verified=3681aca6b3)They look a lot like somewhat oddly placed lanyard holes until you realize that there were folding stocks made for the signal pistols.Now that P2A1 is starting to look a bit more like a grenade launcher, a really lightweight grenade launcher at that since the P2A1 itself weighs only 18.8 ounces. But how did the Germans get around the payload restrictions of a 26.5mm projectile? 26.5mm is a lot narrower than 40mm. Signal pistols also propel projectiles directly using gunpowder like a shotgun rather than using the High-Low system seen in 40mm grenade launchers. That means launching heavy grenades should generate a lot of recoil, right?The Germans ignored all those limitations by using rockets.The rounds seen in these pictures are just flares, but I have it on good authority that tear gas rounds were also produced. The German wikipedia page on the HK P2A1 makes reference to the use of tear gas grenades in the pistols with a “conversion kit”. It seems only natural the Germans would want to streamline this system by making the grenades rocket propelled. The bottom line is that anything which uses tear gas can be adapted to fire explosives too and these German made rockets are no exception.Essentially all the rocket ammunition has do is use just enough gunpowder to kick the rocket a little ways out of the shell. From there, the rocket motor takes over and delivers the payload wherever the gun is aimed. That produces minimal recoil and allows for some fairly large payloads on par with 40mm grenades to be used. The benefit over current 40mm offerings is a longer effective range since the rocket can propel the payload for a longer period of time. Now if you’re thinking, “Isn’t that shell a little too long for the signal pistol’s barrel?” that’s because it is.The rocket ammunition sticks about two inches out of the end of the signal pistol’s muzzle. It works because the shell casing supports the rocket while it’s inside the shell and doesn’t need to withstand very much pressure since the initial gunpowder propellant charge is so minimal.As much as I think 26.5mm is a wonderful chambering for small arms, it won’t be adopted by the US military. However, we can take a page from the Germans and start developing rocket propelled grenades for 40mm grenade launchers using longer shell casings. That’ll allow troops to fire larger warheads at longer ranges with less recoil using existing break action grenade launchers (sorry M203, you suck too much). The technology has been around for 30 years, albeit in a smaller package which nobody noticed, there’s no reason to not utilize it and expand the roles which 40mm grenade launchers can fill.As you might have noticed, all the things discussed in this answer don’t represent fundamental changes to the nature of combat; they only expand the capabilities of existing systems and give US servicemen a greater variety of options. But that’s the whole purpose of specialty weapons like shotguns and grenade launchers in the first place. Neither riflemen or specialists operate in a vacuum, they are supposed to mutually support each other to solve a greater variety of problems than either could handle alone. The US has been very successful with this strategy on both an infantry level and on a larger scale through the use of combined arms doctrine where infantry, mechanized forces, air forces, amphibious forces, and naval forces all work in concert with each other. As long as this strategy continues, our warriors will be able to adapt to unexpected changes in combat which may present themselves in the future.