China Flanker Thread II

[Franklin]

I think this issue will soon be resolved when we have a higher resolution picture or a video of these production J-15's.

The choice for the PLAN is this:

The AL-31's are at this point more reliable then the WS-10's. But the AL-31's that China got are not designed for naval ops so they won't last very long in the salty sea air. But then again all the landing on the Liaoning so far has been done with AL-31 engined planes.

The WS-10H is less reliable then the AL-31 in terms of service life and perhabs a few other things but the engine is especially adapted for naval ops and has a higher thrust then the AL-31.

But i have to say based on the two photo's below i too tend to go with the AL-31.

Here is a photo of prototype 552 with AL-31 to compare.

J-11B with WS-10 engine.

 

[andyhugfan]

That J-15 looks like it fought for 8 years on Iran's side during the '80 with no spare parts...

 

[Equation]

That J-15 looks like it fought for 8 years on Iran's side during the '80 with no spare parts...

The ladies love the rugged look on a plane and the pilot who flew them.

 

[Blitzo]

I think this issue will soon be resolved when we have a higher resolution picture or a video of these production J-15's.

And it's pretty obvious Deino's pictures are of Al-31.


I'm highly confident the first batch will be Al-31s too.

The choice for the PLAN is this:

The AL-31's are at this point more reliable then the WS-10's. But the AL-31's that China got are not designed for naval ops so they won't last very long in the salty sea air. But then again all the landing on the Liaoning so far has been with AL-31 engined planes.

On the contrary, from what I've heard, they're going with Al-31s on the J-15s specifically because whatever WS-10 variant they put on didn't like the corrosion. I believe Su-33s used Al-31s (unmodified?) aboard Kuznetsov too.

The WS-10H is less reliable then the AL-31 in terms of service life and perhabs a few other things but the engine is especially adapted for naval ops and has a higher thrust then the AL-31.

I'm not sure where you got WS-10s are less reliable or has lower service life -- those are all things which WS-10A was meant to improve upon regarding Al-31s, and I see no reason why a nominal WS-10H would degrade those specifications from WS-10A.

The MTBO of 300 hours for WS-10s were from quite a few years ago too. Unfortunately, that statistic is still thrown around by various published "analysts" as if it's still relevant today.


----

I wonder if USN carrierborne aircraft's turbofans are also distinctly modified from land based versions or not.


----

The other reason we're overlooking might not even have to do with engine performance per se. That is to say, if WS-10 and Al-31 both can operate decently in a maritime environment. (I use "WS-10" in a general way to include both WS-10A and WS-10H, if the latter even exists. I'm assuming all WS-10 variants since WS-10A have similar thrust, reliability, MTBO, etc)
The reason I refer to is simply PLAN conservatism. However you cut it, Al-31s are more "mature" than WS-10, simply because they've been in operation longer than WS-10. For example, even if J-11Bs with WS-10 since 2009 have a 99.5% functioning rate, the problem is WS-10's still only been in operation for three or four years, whereas Al-31s have been flying aboard hundreds of aircraft around the world for decades.
Al-31 is a known quantity, most of its issues and challenges and problems would have been encountered and resolved in years past. WS-10, is still the new kid on the block, and even though he's proven himself in mass production aboard all new flankers, he's still got a few years to go yet until he'll be a mature old timer.
This first batch of J-15s will be the PLAN's first carrierborne squadron, and they have a lot of work and practise to do -- Hypothetically, if WS-10A/H/whatever only had a .5% higher mean risk of accidents compared to Al-31, it would be enough for the PLAN to want to use Al-31s instead.

 

[Franklin]

From what i can gather the Russian SU-33 uses the AL-31F unmodified.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

How can we know what will be J-15´s production version? They are still in prototype phase.

Kroko, Kroko I love your knee jerk reaction to any Chinese military advance , as usual mocking, sow doubt, taunting.

But if you bother to see Deino new picture . It sported A Navy color scheme and insignia and most important It has serial number which start with 1 and not the the usual 55 reserve for testing and training unit.

I don't know why you always doubt Chinese military sincerity. They have publicly said that J 15 is in production None other than the chief engineer himself Sun Cong said so

As to your taunt that Chinese fighter dare to shadow the US plane . Over at CDF Stoneybee posted a confirmation that Taiwan radar indeed show Chinese fighter shadowing the US surveillance plane

 

[SinoSoldier]

A bit too early to celebrate, though. The J-15 in this current form is only an initial batch variant, with basic level equipment, avionics, and engines, that will mainly serve to train pilots and to give the carrier an initial air wing. However, when the indigenous carriers are put into construction, the J-15 will be rolling out a new combat variant with enhancements like AESA radar, WS-10A, new ECM, and more.

 

[rhino123]

actually I have a really silly question. Since we all know that China would ultimately have a catapult capable carrier. Is the J-15 now able be launched by catapult? Or are they going to add on this capability in later batches of J-15?

 

[SinoSoldier]

actually I have a really silly question. Since we all know that China would ultimately have a catapult capable carrier. Is the J-15 now able be launched by catapult? Or are they going to add on this capability in later batches of J-15?

It would be extremely unwise not to. China is rumored to have catapults in engineering tests and their carriers might already be in construction. It would be unfortunate if they did not prep ahead of time for catapult operations.

 

[Blitzo]

It would be extremely unwise not to. China is rumored to have catapults in engineering tests and their carriers might already be in construction. It would be unfortunate if they did not prep ahead of time for catapult operations.

I think there are two major differences between STOBAR and CATOBAR carrier fighters. The latter has provision for a nose landing gear attachment to the catapult, as well as additional structural strengthening horizontally to endure the stresses of a catapult launch.

J-15 clearly doesn't have the former, and we've heard nothing about the latter in any rumours, so I expect the first production run of J-15 won't be capable of catapult launch.

There is a caveat though, namely EMALS is supposed to cause less stress on an aircraft than a steam catapult. But I doubt that will allow J-15s to be launched safely and consistently even if they somehow securely added on the required nosewheel hold back gear.

A bit too early to celebrate, though. The J-15 in this current form is only an initial batch variant, with basic level equipment, avionics, and engines, that will mainly serve to train pilots and to give the carrier an initial air wing. However, when the indigenous carriers are put into construction, the J-15 will be rolling out a new combat variant with enhancements like AESA radar, WS-10A, new ECM, and more.

Well we shouldn't sell J-15 too short.
It should still be able to fire AShMs and stand off weapons, probably some PGMs too, in addition to the standard BVR and WVR AAMs. More importantly, its sheer size and weight confers formidable endurance and range, the most of any carrier based fighter ever, and the ski jump, despite what ignorant media outlets repeat, can allow for take offs at or near MTOW.

It might lack AESA, its cockpit might still look like J-11Bs, but those are very bell-and-whistle, very ancillary capabilities. As it is, J-15 will be similar to an APG-73 equipped superbug.

A notional J-15B should definitely improve upon existing capabilities, via better radar, new cockpit, EW suite, and hopefully the new PL-10 as well, but what the PLAN is getting is definitely a very capable fighter -- in fact, as the Russians are about to retire the Su-33, PLAN will soon exclusively field the largest and heaviest carrierborne fighter in the world.


-----

I wonder if the next J-15 variant will seek to be made CATOBAR capable. It actually makes a bit of sense -- the structural modifications shouldn't be too strenuous, and they'll only need to refit the existing plane with newer avionics; the production methods can remain mostly similar. Far less of a modification from J-10A to J-10B and definitely less than J-11B to J-15.
If the first indigenous carrier is CATOBAR, I wonder if SAC will only order enough J-15s to fit two or so Liaoning airwings (say, 2 x 24 = 48) so each airwing can rotate on different deployments, and then have all follow on J-15s be the "B" version, designed for the 002 carriers.
If the first indigenous carrier is STOBAR/001A, we might see more J-15s than expected.