Blackstone
Brigadier
Great looking model, Jeff! Are those AL-31 engines?
J-15 carrier fighter thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Good eye.
Since this is a basic re-release of the original Hasegawa SU-33 model, with new decals and a new paint scheme, but otherwise the same tooling...yes, those are in fact molded like and modeled on the AL-31 engines of the SU-33.
This model even had the Russian ordinance with it with no new retooling for Chinese weapons...but I had other models that included PL-8 and PL-2 missiles in 1/72 scale, and I know that the Kh-29TE is also a weapon used by the PRC, so I was able to add a fairly realistic PLAN load out.
Anyhow, Trumpeter is talking about having a completely retooled model for the 1/72 scale J-15 and I may buy that later just to do a comparison build. But in the end, I am pretty satisfied with how I was able to make the J-15 look.
Blitzo, with regards to buddy refueling, the thing is that the Liaoning only has 3 operational runways and only one of the runways can enable MTOW of aircraft. Compare it to the Nimitz, which has 4 aircraft catapults, all allowing take-off at MTOW of strike aircraft. The buddy refueling is a big deal since it effectively doubles the amount of strike packages the Liaoning can launch at any given time, and by getting more of the squadron into the air faster, it derives greater tactical advantages (faster response time to attacks, increased operational range due to less fuel wasted in waiting for the full squadron to sortie, higher sortie rate due to lower time spent taking off).
About the Mig-29K vs the Su-33, you're right about the need for drop-tanks limiting efficiency at long ranges (~2500 kg worth of drop tanks to match the Su-33, dropping weapons payload to only 3 tons, vs 6.5 tons on the Su-33), but at closer ranges the MiG-29K still has the superior payload potential.
Another thing, the Su-33 is still a bit disappointing as an airframe. It's about 20-25% larger than the Super Hornet, yet despite being heavier and harder to carry on a carrier, it only has 6,500 kg max payload, which is actually less than that of a Su-30. The Super Hornet, despite being both smaller and significantly lighter, can carry about 8 tons of payload.
It still suggests to me that the lack of CATOBAR capability is what limits the Su-33's strike capability and that buddy refueling would be quite critical when it comes to extending the Su-33's effectiveness as a strike fighter.
===
Jeff Head, while the PLAN might be interested in operating J-15s for strike, it doesn't change the fact that it's still being launched off ex-Soviet STOBAR carriers which were intended primarily to provide fleet air defense; the Su-33 on which the J-15 is based wasn't even wired initially for strike missions.
I think the key thing is that the Liaoning is currently being used and deployed as a training carrier. The Chinese Varyag-clone is supposed to be scheduled to arrive before 2020, and a Chinese EMALS-based CATOBAR is also in the works; we've already seen satellite pictures of their EMALS prototypes. What the PLAN is training for, and what their Liaoning is actually capable of, are two separate things.
About the Mig-29K vs the Su-33, you're right about the need for drop-tanks limiting efficiency at long ranges (~2500 kg worth of drop tanks to match the Su-33, dropping weapons payload to only 3 tons, vs 6.5 tons on the Su-33), but at closer ranges the MiG-29K still has the superior payload potential.
Another thing, the Su-33 is still a bit disappointing as an airframe. It's about 20-25% larger than the Super Hornet, yet despite being heavier and harder to carry on a carrier, it only has 6,500 kg max payload, which is actually less than that of a Su-30. The Super Hornet, despite being both smaller and significantly lighter, can carry about 8 tons of payload.
It still suggests to me that the lack of CATOBAR capability is what limits the Su-33's strike capability and that buddy refueling would be quite critical when it comes to extending the Su-33's effectiveness as a strike fighter.
===
Jeff Head, while the PLAN might be interested in operating J-15s for strike, it doesn't change the fact that it's still being launched off ex-Soviet STOBAR carriers which were intended primarily to provide fleet air defense; the Su-33 on which the J-15 is based wasn't even wired initially for strike missions.
I think the key thing is that the Liaoning is currently being used and deployed as a training carrier. The Chinese Varyag-clone is supposed to be scheduled to arrive before 2020, and a Chinese EMALS-based CATOBAR is also in the works; we've already seen satellite pictures of their EMALS prototypes. What the PLAN is training for, and what their Liaoning is actually capable of, are two separate things.
Last edited:
Actually, the magazine scan says that the two forward positions can launch at MTOW with 25 knots of headwind as well.
And A Fomin's figures correspond to 0 headwind take off weight's from a ski jump on the magazine scan, making me think the figures quoted reflect 0 headwind rather than at operational steaming.
I think the PLAN probably made a conscious decision to go for the Su-33 airframe because of its superior range. Range and endurance is arguably one of the most, if not the most important feature on a carrier fighter aircraft, whether its role is strike or CAP.
I think the 6.5 ton limit is not a reflection of limitations in ski jump but rather the structural design of the plane. That is to say, I interpret 6.5 tons as the most the Su-33 can carry under any condition whether it be land based runway or ski jump.
I am interested in seeing if modernization of Su-33 into J-15 may have leveraged some increase in payload. After all, it would have been decades since the original Su-33 was designed and built.
Su-33 "not being designed for strike missions" doesnt' mean much though, considering any modern day fighter's strike capability is only limited by avionics.
Also, if you believe the Kuznetsov class was meant only for fleet air defense, then what about Vikramditya? The Indians clearly intend to operate Mig-29Ks in a strike role. (The PLAN are clealry intending to operate J-15s in a strike role too, we have pictorial evidence of it)
----
I think we need to realize that the way Kuznetsov was used by the Soviets and Russians was for fleet air defense. Whether it was designed and only capable of fleet air defense is another matter.
Common discourse has linked the ski jump as a reason limiting the Kuznetsov class as only being able to provide fleet air defense. Rather, I think that the decision to operate Kuznetsov in a fleet air defense manner was a choice not dependent on whatever imagined MTOW limitations of the ski jump.
The figures you quoted does not seems to include internal fuel, and Su-33 has larger fuel fraction then Super Hornet. If you actually include the fuel, Su-33 can actually carry more load.
So? The Chinese have developed their doctrine around using it for power projection. And they are doing a good job of it. Their aircraft can launch off of the Liaoning with strike packages loaded.
The Russians are going to use the Kuznetsov for power projection after the refit and when adding the Mig-29Ks. The Indians are going to use their two STOBAR carriers (Vikramaditya and Vikrant) and later a third, for power projection with Mig-29Ks. The UK is going to use its Queen Elizabeth carrier for power projection. All of them are STOBAR carriers that employ ski-jumps.
Are those as capable a design as having four cats? No, of course not. Are they designs capable of projecting power and posing a credible threat? Absolutely.
Again...so? The Chinese have wired them to do that and produced new avionics accordingly. The J-15employs Chinese weapons, both air-to-air and air-to-ground. And it can carry a good load of them which any other nation's surface vessels and carriers will have to respect.
Of course it is. It is their first, and to date, only carrier. It must be used to train by default. But never supppose that, if called upon, it would not also be used as an operational carrier used to carry out PRC interests. It has full operational capanbilites.
Yes, and I expect that around 2020 there will be their second carrier that is vary similar to the Liaoning, with some improvements as has been discussed here on SD for years (in fact right here on this thrad), and probably another one after that very similar but introducing their first cats.
Well of course. What the initial angled deck US carriers were capable of and what the Nuimitz carriers are capable of are two different things. But only in scale. The US has used its large carriers for power projection from the get go.
The Chinese are developing the same type of doctrine and working their way up in terms of the amount of capability too. But, make no mistake, one or two Liaoning type carriers, loaded up with 24 J-15s each and supported by some decent AEW capabilitiy (at first helos and then later fixed wing) will be something the US planners...and every other naval planner in the Western Pacific...will take very seriously and view as a very real and credible threat.
Last edited:
I want to go back and ask about something a few posts back.
A J-15 loaded for bear, strike package I'd guess, cannot take off with a full load of fuel and must tank soon or immediately after takeoff to achieve a decent/max range. They also said it would take 1 to 2 J-15s with buddy stores, belly tank and two wing tanks to fuel up one striker. That sounds like a little more than half the airwing is flying gas stations which cannot be recycled until all of the strike package is on its way. And just maybe they need some to be on standby for any of the strikers coming up on bingo fuel for the return trip. That doesn't sound very viable or practica to me. But who knows, I only spent 15 years on carriers, so I could easily be confused.
I'm thinking that CV-16 is really going to be a test/trials/evaluation platform just as the Chinese say. Slow pace of operations, now in the shipyard after only two years in service, and apparently no push to field more operational J-15 airframes. If the test/training/evaluation idea is true then there is no need to quickly produce operational airframes as would be required otherwise.
Maybe CV-16 has some limitations that preclude it from being a truly operational platform excluding national emergencies.
Curious as to what those issues might be?
A J-15 loaded for bear, strike package I'd guess, cannot take off with a full load of fuel and must tank soon or immediately after takeoff to achieve a decent/max range. They also said it would take 1 to 2 J-15s with buddy stores, belly tank and two wing tanks to fuel up one striker. That sounds like a little more than half the airwing is flying gas stations which cannot be recycled until all of the strike package is on its way. And just maybe they need some to be on standby for any of the strikers coming up on bingo fuel for the return trip. That doesn't sound very viable or practica to me. But who knows, I only spent 15 years on carriers, so I could easily be confused.
I'm thinking that CV-16 is really going to be a test/trials/evaluation platform just as the Chinese say. Slow pace of operations, now in the shipyard after only two years in service, and apparently no push to field more operational J-15 airframes. If the test/training/evaluation idea is true then there is no need to quickly produce operational airframes as would be required otherwise.
Maybe CV-16 has some limitations that preclude it from being a truly operational platform excluding national emergencies.
Curious as to what those issues might be?
We simply do not know this. Many people presume this...but there are indications that it may not be so.
I know of no authoritative source that indicates any such thing. Please link to such a source.
I believe you are. We have seen J-15s take off with two ASMs and two AAMs. THose are not huge loads, but they have clearly tested the aircraft with them. I believe such a load could occur, particularly from the rear position with either a full fuel load or something near to it.
As has been stated numerous times on this thread, of course it is going to do training. It has to because it is the Chinese first (and to date, only) one. But it is aslo going to be capable of full operations. The Chinese have made this clear by placing full defensive weapons on it, and by theri workup to date...albeit that workup is slower than what a lot of people would prefer to see.
So? It is occurring according to the PLAN timetable, not ours.
I do not see any.
it certainly will not be as capable as a carrier of 100,000 tons with four cats...but it is going to be capable of projecting power, and doing so with an airwing of 24 J-15s which any naval planner anywhere is going to have to respect and take into account.
Read my post on this thread immediately prior to your own.