China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
kwaigonegin
Colonel
The pod is the same or in the same family as the UPAZ-1A Sakhalin series centreline refuelling pod as seen in this one fitted to this SU-24MK.
Russian and Chinese looking at the refueling pod on a Russian Midas tanker even back in 2005.
Sino-Russia Peace Mission 2005 was the first ever joint military exercise between China and Russia
Refuelling pods aren't a technology new to China, they've developed RDC-1 for H-6Us decades ago, and is big enough to fit centreline on a flanker sized platform.
In fact the pod below that J-15 resembles RDC-1 a bit more than UPAZ-1, I think, but it's too blurry to tell, It lacks the RDC-1's ram air turbine but also the UPAZ-1's sharp and flat edges.
But I think it might very possibly be just an optical illusion, it's too blurry.
In fact the pod below that J-15 resembles RDC-1 a bit more than UPAZ-1, I think, but it's too blurry to tell, It lacks the RDC-1's ram air turbine but also the UPAZ-1's sharp and flat edges.
But I think it might very possibly be just an optical illusion, it's too blurry.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
The basic Flanker airframe was already blessed with enormous internal fuel loads and outstanding range and endurance. The J15 is likely to have also had additional fuel storing measures like wet vertical stabilisers that were employed on MKKs.
It just seems unlikely that the PLAAF would bother adding drop tank capability to the J15 just to add drop tanks since they never bothered with any other Flanker variant they have been operating for the last two decades, and neither have the Russians.
In addition, without cats, the big limiting factor for J15s when it comes to range and payload is going to be MTOW possible with the ski jump, as such, adding drop tanks to the J15 seems singularly pointless.
Now, to be sure, the wet pylon for a buddy refuelling pod would also allow a J15 to hang a drop tank, and a tanker J15 may well want to hang as many drop tanks as they can take off with to maximise fuel available for other birds, so it is entirely possible some of the underwing pylons are also rigged for drop tanks, and we may even one day see J15s tank off with big tanks under their wings and a refuelling pod between the nacelles.
On top of all that, you also have to consider that with the kinds of time pressure SAC must surely be under to get the J15 certified and into production, even if the Liaoning had cats, you would really not expect SAC to be wasting time with drop tank integration at this early stage when such things could easily be left to later in the plane's development cycle and the capacity can be retrofitted to prototype and LRP examples at a later date.
Finally, having a tanker option available from the offset would give the PLANAF pilots an invaluable safety net for when they are operating out at sea, especially when the pilots are new and still learning the ropes of carrier aviation ops. Because if plans go out the window and a J15 is coming home with bingo fuel, being able to send up a tanker to top him up would make a world of difference.
Even if the J15 had enough fuel to get back to the carrier without a top up, having that little extra fuel in the tanks would take the pressure right off of the pilot as he knows he can have a few passes and it won't be a problem, whereas if he was flying on fumes, he may be too desperate to land the first time, and tries to catch the wire when he should have waved off, and that's when bad accidents can happen.
In summary, while it is possible that SAC added drop tank capability for the sake of giving the J15 drop tanks, it just seems very unlikely IMO. Far more likely is that the PLAN fully recognised the limitations the ski jump would place on J15 operations from their own research and from the Russians' operational experience with Su33s, and made buddy refuelling a high priority feature for the J15 so that the planes can utilise their full potential from the get go.
Oh I also agree that it is unlikely the pod is a standard fuel tank, for the same reasons you listed above.
Although I think if J-15 did have some wet hard points it could
A: extend its range, assuming it can launch from the ski jump with MTOW in the first place (or even if it can only launch with a fraction of MTOW, the idea still holds). They'll be sacrificing ordnance for fuel and combat radius, which is what all other non flanker aircraft do anyway.
B: carry more fuel for buddy tanking
But the flanker is already such a fuel heavy platform and we've seen no indicators of SAC modifying other flankers with wet hardpoints so I definitely agree with you.
However I also think that "fuel tank" is just an optical illusion and is just colouration of the port side intake/nacelle. Need higher rez pictures.
Although I think if J-15 did have some wet hard points it could
A: extend its range, assuming it can launch from the ski jump with MTOW in the first place (or even if it can only launch with a fraction of MTOW, the idea still holds). They'll be sacrificing ordnance for fuel and combat radius, which is what all other non flanker aircraft do anyway.
B: carry more fuel for buddy tanking
But the flanker is already such a fuel heavy platform and we've seen no indicators of SAC modifying other flankers with wet hardpoints so I definitely agree with you.
However I also think that "fuel tank" is just an optical illusion and is just colouration of the port side intake/nacelle. Need higher rez pictures.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
J-15S twin seater
J-15S twin seater
According to CJDBY, those photos were taken in December 2012, when the first flight of J-15S occurred. It was an exclusive CJDBY blog leak.
One thing the official blog speculated was that one of J-15S's jobs is to serve as a body refueler onboard the Liaoning. It is definitely possible, seeing how we saw a J-15 carrying one in a recent photo.
Engineer
Major
I also see WS-10.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
- Status