J-15 carrier fighter thread

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Without specifying which (other) enemy fighters the author is talking about, mentioning F-35B and J-15B in the same sentence when talking about "competitive in battles to control air and sea" means they are being compared to each other; this is the most natural interpretation of the sentence, and you would have to do some intellectual twisting to interpret it otherwise.

I would argue that interpreting illogical statements (some of which may be inaccurately translated or even inaccurately transcribed if it is written by someone unfamiliar with military matters) in a manner that makes sense if it is from someone with a more official military background (like a RADM Yin Zhuo) is justified.

In this case, I sincerely doubt Yin Zhuo would say that J-15B is as capable as F-35/B in a general manner given his level of competency, so either he said exactly what was written in the article and he meant it in the manner that you interpreted it as (which would reflect poorly on his competency and which I think is the more unrealistic option), or the alternative is that his statement was misinterpreted or taken liberties with by the writer of this article and written in an inaccurate way (where the fault would be with the writer of the article).... or the third option which is also possible is that the Rear Admiral was just deliberately BSing.


Or in other words -- sometimes intellectual twisting is sensible.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
That said it's a bit odd that he chose to mention F-35B instead of F-35C. I mean at the end of the day all three F-35 variants have the same avionics anyway, but you'd think F-35C would be a much more relevant comparison just for accuracy's sake.

Because the B variant is operational and deployed in Japan
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
They may be competitive against the F/18 in terms of battles to "control air and sea" but they certainly will not be competitive against the F-35B which they will not even see before the F-35B launches an attack. This is why the PLAN needs to have a navalized stealth fighter like J-31 or J-20.
It depends what was meant under this sentence.
But yes, there are a lot of scenarios, in which J-15 will have superior mission qualities to both f/a-18 and f-35. Mostly defensive, but not only.

There's still some loitering interceptor blood in Chinese fighter, back from the very birth of this airframe. Something, what both American fighters lack.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
The B-variant is also the main reason why the A and C variants also sorta suck.
The A and C do not scuj in he least.

The C has a larger wing and can carry more fuel and ordinance. In addition it has stronger landing gear and the arrestor hook so it can maximize all of its capabilities off a US nuclear carrier.

believe me...itdoes not such at all.

The B is designd for us by the Marines off of lare amphibious assault ships that do not have an arrestr systsme so, like the Harrier, they had to have VTOL capabilities, and STOVL. For that reason alone it is a critical player...because it allows those ships now to have supersonic, stealth, 5th gen aircraft for US MArine air support. it also allow those LHAs to become small carriers in the sea control role, with an aicraft that can meet and beat almost any other aircraft they may face it.

Finally the A is maximized for Air Fofrce perations. it s meant to operate off of regular airfields and is optimized for that role wit an internal gun (The A and B rely on a gun pod), and is not enucmbered by the extra weight of the VTOL equipment or the landing gear wiehgt the C has.

All of them are good aircraft and all of them are going to be game changers because they all share the sensor fusion, stealth and capabilities in terms of physics.

Anyhow...just wanted to clairfy that the others do not "suck" in the least.
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
To supplement Jeff - main reason of relative fatness of f-35 family isn't even B version per se, it's lies in large internal fuel storage + volumous internal weapon bays, and all this - on modest sized fighter.
Unlike f-22, these actually allow carriage of heavy, "fat" a2g munitions.

Basically, if not for political reasons - they could just name it F/A-35, it actually deserves it(and not like "a" in hornets' designation makes it into less capable dogfighter).
 

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Actually A-35 is probably a better designation, as pilots who have fought against the F-35 have suggested. Just ask an F-16 pilot.....
 
Top