Ask anything Thread

ChineseToTheBone

New Member
Registered Member
Not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask but what degree of commonality exists between the J-15D and J-16D exists with respect to EW suites? I know the wingtip RWR system is externally different (not sure about internals?) but are they expected to share jamming pods?
Yankee last month heavily implied the new J-15D has a more capable electronic warfare suite than J-16D mostly due to its consistent need to face Aegis combat systems, which has few peers on land with similar capabilities. Apparently the folding wing design necessitated changes internally, but that does not really answer your question about jamming pods.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-16D is obviously also no slouch either of course, as the platform going all out in training exercises supposedly presented a much greater challenge for Type 055 versus any encounters they had with the EA-18G Growler according to Yankee early this year. He also indicated this comparison obvious comes with the huge caveat that PLAN warships did not face all of the capabilities of the EA-18G Growler.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-15D capability requirements being higher than J-16D capability requirements does make sense in my opinion too. Amongst the four main services of the military not counting the PLARF, only the PLAN has the possibility of fighting a peer military without support from the other services. When operating from the Liaoning and the Shandong, J-15D would also expect to get much less support from early warning assets compared to J-16D operating directly from land bases. Recent information about the J-35 being more capable and more expensive versus the J-35A from discussions by Shilao also helped me reason out the decision, as the PLAN knows it could have a limited numbers of planes to fight with operating from its aircraft carrier battle group and wants to maximize capabilities of their carrier based planes even if as tradeoff costs per unit are higher.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

99PLAAFBalloons

New Member
Registered Member
Yankee last month heavily implied the new J-15D has a more capable electronic warfare suite than J-16D mostly due to its consistent need to face Aegis combat systems, which has few peers on land with similar capabilities. Apparently the folding wing design necessitated changes internally, but that does not really answer your question about jamming pods.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-16D is obviously also no slouch either of course, as the platform going all out in training exercises supposedly presented a much greater challenge for Type 055 versus any encounters they had with the EA-18G Growler according to Yankee early this year. He also indicated this comparison obvious comes with the huge caveat that PLAN warships did not face all of the capabilities of the EA-18G Growler.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

J-15D capability requirements being higher than J-16D capability requirements does make sense in my opinion too. Amongst the four main services of the military not counting the PLARF, only the PLAN has the possibility of fighting a peer military without support from the other services. When operating from the Liaoning and the Shandong, J-15D would also expect to get much less support from early warning assets compared to J-16D operating directly from land bases. Recent information about the J-35 being more capable and more expensive versus the J-35A from discussions by Shilao also helped me reason out the decision, as the PLAN knows it could have a limited numbers of planes to fight with operating from its aircraft carrier battle group and wants to maximize capabilities of their carrier based planes even if as tradeoff costs per unit are higher.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Thank you so much for the detailed reply, very interesting stuff! Greatly appreciate the references to look further into as well :)
 

didklmyself

Junior Member
Registered Member
Can any knowledgeable member recommend to me resources on PLAAF doctrine, training and other non technological aspects?
 

antwerpery

Junior Member
Registered Member
Why is America under counting Chinese nuclear submarine fleet so much? I have to assume that they have better intel than the average PLA watcher, but their official estimates for Chinese SSN numbers by 2040 is 16. Which is a insane undercount, China might have amount in service by 2026 at the rate that they are churning the type 93B out, let alone future type 95 production. By contrast all their other estimates for the other types of warships are more realistic, also likely an undercount, but a lot better than what they are predicting for nuclear submarines.

So what gives?
 

TheWanderWit

New Member
Registered Member
Why is America under counting Chinese nuclear submarine fleet so much? I have to assume that they have better intel than the average PLA watcher, but their official estimates for Chinese SSN numbers by 2040 is 16. Which is a insane undercount, China might have amount in service by 2026 at the rate that they are churning the type 93B out, let alone future type 95 production. By contrast all their other estimates for the other types of warships are more realistic, also likely an undercount, but a lot better than what they are predicting for nuclear submarines.

So what gives?
Where exactly did you see that?
 
Top