J-15 carrier fighter thread

[Intrepid]

how disappointing.

I have some flying experience and I know the difference between a stunt and professional aviation very well.

 

[Blitzo]

I have some flying experience and I know the difference between a stunt and professional aviation very well.

Unless you're able to wield that experience and use it to explain a position in a logical and relevant and applicable way for the specific subject at hand, I'm sorry to say your experience doesn't mean that much.

Specifically, please have a go at trying to deduce what the maximum take off weight of a J-15 from a Kuznetsov pattern carrier is, under various headwind conditions, and describe it in terms of the aircraft's internal fuel load and external payload.

 

[FORBIN]

Perhaps you should use that instead for your next book Deino. Just a suggestion.ahn i do since

Not sure so busy it's missing several units equiped with new fighters types especialy J-10B/C, J-16 possible we are probably duped for about 3 Rgts and yes ! but i keep going the datas hunt than i do since décades and fact for all armies

 

[Hyperwarp]

Oh, yes, I'm such a man.

Same here!

 

[Intrepid]

Specifically, please have a go at trying to deduce what the maximum take off weight of a J-15 from a Kuznetsov pattern carrier is, under various headwind conditions, and describe it in terms of the aircraft's internal fuel load and external payload.

I can not deliver the desired numbers. But I know that aircraft engines and a catapult together provide more power than aircraft engines without a catapult. And I know that for the departure the available power is the determining factor.

 

[Blitzo]

I can not deliver the desired numbers. But I know that aircraft engines and a catapult together provide more power than aircraft engines without a catapult. And I know that for the departure the available power is the determining factor.

Those fundamentals are not really the subject of dispute.

It is also not under dispute that a catapult is able to more reliably launch an aircraft into the air at any weight, under a greater variety of environmental conditions than a ski jump of a given equal aircraft weight. It's also not a matter of dispute that a catapult is able to reliably launch other types of aircraft like fixed wing propeller driven AEW aircraft while a ski jump cannot.

What is under dispute is what the maximum take off weight of a fighter aircraft can take off from a ski jump at operationally realistic headwind is, and whether that MTOW would be considered tactically useful aka whether it would be fair to consider that MTOW as "low".

 

[Richard Santos]

You can look at the video of a f-14 or f-18 cat launch from an US carrier, and compare that to a video of a self powered j-15 ramp launch on the Liaoning, to see the cat launch exhibit much higher initial acceleration. The initial engine driven acceleration of the j-15 looks almost languid compare to the catapult driven accelerations of the f-14 and f-18.

Furthermore, even with a ramp and the aircraft leaving with a substantial AOA, the J-15 exhibit a slight but clear sink rate when first leaving the deck edge before beginning to regain altitude again. Cat launch of f-14 and f-18 exhibit no comparable sink at the deck edge even though the aircraft do not rotate until after leaving the deck. This strongly suggest ramp launched j-15 leaves the deck at nearly stall speed, where as cat launched aircraft leave the deck with a significant margin above stall speed.

 

[Blitzo]

You can look at the video of a f-14 or f-18 cat launch from an US carrier, and compare that to a video of a self powered j-15 ramp launch on the Liaoning, to see the cat launch exhibit much higher initial acceleration. The initial engine driven acceleration of the j-15 looks almost languid compare to the catapult driven accelerations of the f-14 and f-18.

Furthermore, even with a ramp and the aircraft leaving with a substantial AOA, the J-15 exhibit a slight but clear sink rate when first leaving the deck edge before beginning to regain altitude again. Cat launch of f-14 and f-18 exhibit no comparable sink at the deck edge even though the aircraft do not rotate until after leaving the deck. This strongly suggest ramp launched j-15 leaves the deck at nearly stall speed, where as cat launched aircraft leave the deck with a significant margin above stall speed.

Unfortunately, that doesn't answer the question -- "what is the maximum take off weight of a fighter aircraft from a ski jump at operationally realistic headwind, and would that MTOW would be considered tactically useful aka whether it would be fair to consider that MTOW as "low"."

Eyeballing "it looks like it takes off near stall and if you add weight to it it probably won't make it so it probably has a limited payload" isn't good enough.

 

[dingyibvs]

You can look at the video of a f-14 or f-18 cat launch from an US carrier, and compare that to a video of a self powered j-15 ramp launch on the Liaoning, to see the cat launch exhibit much higher initial acceleration. The initial engine driven acceleration of the j-15 looks almost languid compare to the catapult driven accelerations of the f-14 and f-18.

Furthermore, even with a ramp and the aircraft leaving with a substantial AOA, the J-15 exhibit a slight but clear sink rate when first leaving the deck edge before beginning to regain altitude again. Cat launch of f-14 and f-18 exhibit no comparable sink at the deck edge even though the aircraft do not rotate until after leaving the deck. This strongly suggest ramp launched j-15 leaves the deck at nearly stall speed, where as cat launched aircraft leave the deck with a significant margin above stall speed.

Does this mean the J-15's MTOW is low?

 

[Hendrik_2000]

You can look at the video of a f-14 or f-18 cat launch from an US carrier, and compare that to a video of a self powered j-15 ramp launch on the Liaoning, to see the cat launch exhibit much higher initial acceleration. The initial engine driven acceleration of the j-15 looks almost languid compare to the catapult driven accelerations of the f-14 and f-18.

Furthermore, even with a ramp and the aircraft leaving with a substantial AOA, the J-15 exhibit a slight but clear sink rate when first leaving the deck edge before beginning to regain altitude again. Cat launch of f-14 and f-18 exhibit no comparable sink at the deck edge even though the aircraft do not rotate until after leaving the deck. This strongly suggest ramp launched j-15 leaves the deck at nearly stall speed, where as cat launched aircraft leave the deck with a significant margin above stall speed.

That is BS what kind of dip are you talking I don't see any dip or sink rate at all See this video at 2:34
This shot here clearly show that the J 15 is slightly above the line connecting the tip of the ramp to the bottom of the wheel proof there is no dip